text
stringlengths 4
2.78M
| meta
dict |
|---|---|
---
abstract: |
We examine the pattern of star birth in the Orion Nebula Cluster (ONC), with the goal of discerning the cluster’s formation mechanism. Outside of the Trapezium, the distribution of stellar masses is remarkably uniform, and is not accurately described by the field-star initial mass function. The deconvolved, three-dimensional density of cluster members peaks at the Trapezium stars, which are truly anomalous in mass. Using theoretical pre-main-sequence tracks, we confirm the earlier finding that star formation has accelerated over the past $10^7$ yr. We further show that the rate of acceleration has been the same for all masses. Thus, there is no correlation between stellar age and mass, contrary to previous claims. Finally, the acceleration has been spatially uniform throughout the cluster.
Our reconstruction of the parent molecular cloud spawning the cluster shows that it had a mass of $6700\,\,{M_\odot}$ prior to its destruction by the Trapezium. If the cloud was supported against self-gravity by mildly dissipative turbulence, then it contracted in a quasi-static, but accelerating manner. We demonstrate this contraction theoretically through a simple energy argument. The mean turbulent speed increased to its recent value, which is reflected in the present-day stellar velocity dispersion.
The current ONC will be gravitationally unbound once cloud destruction is complete, and is destined to become a dispersing OB association. We hypothesize that similarly crowded groups seen at the centers of distant OB associations are also unbound, and do not give rise to the Galactic population of open clusters. Finally, accelerating star formation implies that most clumps within giant molecular complexes should have relatively low formation activity. Sensitive infrared surveys could confirm this hypothesis.
author:
- 'E. M. Huff and Steven W. Stahler'
title: |
Star Formation in Space and Time:\
The Orion Nebula Cluster
---
Introduction
============
The origin of stellar groups is one of the abiding mysteries of astronomy. Infrared and radio observations have demonstrated that these aggregates are born within cold molecular clouds (Lada & Lada 2003). We also know that young groups come in three varieties – T associations, open clusters, and OB associations. Yet we have little notion as to what distinguishes the progenitor cloud for each type.
The statistics of stellar births on the Galactic scale indicates that most stars originate in OB associations (Roberts 1957; Miller & Scalo 1978). These populous groups form inside clumps within giant molecular complexes (Blitz 1993). The parent clump must have attained a high density at the formation site of the massive O and B stars, since the youngest of these are almost always found in crowded stellar fields (e.g., Stahler [[*et al. *]{}]{} 2000). But how did the cloud attain such a high density? More generally, what forces drove its evolution as it was producing the association?
By far the best-studied young OB association is the Orion Nebula Cluster. Over a thousand members are seen only in the near-infrared (Ali & Depoy 1995). However, a comparable number are optically visible ([[*e.g.*]{}]{}, Prosser [[*et al. *]{}]{}1994), since much of the parent cloud is now dispersed. Foreground neutral gas is largely confined to a relatively thin layer (O’Dell [[*et al. *]{}]{}1992), while gas ionized by $\theta^1$ Ori C and its massive companions is being driven outward (Gordon & Churchwell 1970; O’Dell 1994). Behind this hemispherical blister of stars and ionized gas lies a dense, massive wall of molecular gas, still creating new stars (see, [[*e.g.*]{}]{}, Genzel & Stutzki 1989).
In this paper, we examine anew both the present morphology of the cluster and its past record of star formation. Our goal is to elucidate, as much as possible, the properties and dynamical history of the parent cloud body. This contribution is the latest in a continuing investigation of stellar groups and their origin. Palla & Stahler (1999; hereafter Paper I) found that star formation in this region has been accelerating over time, a result seen generally, albeit at a reduced level, in other nearby groups (Palla & Stahler 2000; Paper II). In a study of pre-main-sequence binaries, Palla & Stahler (2001) showed that the companion to BM Ori is no older than $10^5$ yr. It thus apears that the centrally located Trapezium stars were formed relatively recently. Here, we wish to provide a fuller account of the region’s evolution in both space and time, and to draw implications for stellar group formation generally.
Our main results may be readily summarized. The Trapezium stars are truly anomalous within the group, with a total mass equivalent to hundreds of ordinary stars. Excluding the Trapezium, the distribution of stellar masses is nearly uniform throughout the remaining cluster. The fractional increase with time in the stellar population has also been the same at all locations. In other words, the acceleration in starbirth, which occurred over some $10^7$ yr, was a [*global*]{} phenonemon, and resulted in a remarkably homogeneous membership, except at the very center.
We hypothesize that this rise in star formation activity was stimulated by large-scale contraction of the ONC parent cloud. The gas density must have increased in a quasi-static, but accelerating manner. We explore a simple model, in which the cloud was supported against self-gravity by turbulent pressure. The energy associated with this turbulent motion is continually dissipated by internal shocks. In our model, the mean turbulent speed [*increases*]{} with time because of gravitational compression. Energy dissipation from shocks also increases, which allows faster contraction. In summary, our model illustrates how accelerating contraction, along with a concurrent rise in star formation, is a natural and generic consequence of support from internal turbulence.
Section 2 below presents our analysis of the present-day ONC stellar distribution. In Section 3, we utilize pre-main-sequence stellar ages to infer the star formation history throughout the region. Section 4 offers our physical interpretation of this history in terms of the parent cloud and its evolution. Finally (§5), we discuss the implications of this study, both for the ONC and for stellar group formation generally.
Current Stellar Population
==========================
Density Variation
-----------------
Our empirical dataset comes from the important study by Hillenbrand (1997). Combining her own observations with the existing literature, Hillenbrand obtained both optical spectra and $V$- and $I$-band fluxes for 934 stars within 2.5 pc of the Trapezium. A comparable number of stars are detectable only at near-infrared wavelengths (Ali & Depoy 1995). The optical spectra yielded spectral types, which in turn gave effective temperatures. Observed $V$-$I$ colors were then employed to find individual extinctions. A bolometric correction to the $I$-magnitudes, together with the extinction, then gave stellar luminosities. In this manner, the stars were placed in the theoretical HR diagram, [[*i.e.*]{}]{}, the $L_\ast$-$T_{\rm eff}$ plane.
Figure 1 shows the positions of a large subsample, 705 stars, from the full, optically visible set. These are the objects that, according to Hillenbrand, have a membership probability exceeding 67 percent. These probabilities were assessed from earlier proper-motion studies, principally that of Jones & Walker (1988). As is well known, the stars are crowded toward $\theta^1$ Ori C, whose own position is central in the plot. The conspicuous gap in stars just to the east of the Trapezium coincides with the Dark Bay, familiar from optical photographs of the region ([[*e.g.*]{}]{}, Pogge et al. 1992).
What is the true, three-dimensional distribution of these stars? It has long been accepted that the visible population is contained within an ionized blister of gas, located in front of OMC-1, itself a portion of the extended Orion A cloud (Zuckerman 1973). Wen & O’Dell (1995) used the distribution in H$\alpha$ emission to map out the ionized front surface of OMC-1. They found that the main ionizing source, $\theta^1$ Ori C, is situated only 0.2 pc from this rear wall. (See their Figure 3.) This distance is small compared to the full cluster diameter of 5 pc. Hence we may assume, with little loss of precision, that the ONC morphology is hemispherical.[^1]
Working within this model, we first azimuthally average the projected stellar distribution, again choosing $\theta^1$ Ori C as our origin. In Figure 2 we show this empirical distribution as a function of the radius $r$. The quantity displayed is the number of stars enclosed at each $r$-value. This cumulative number is then converted to a fraction of the total stellar population, and denoted as $f_\ast (r)$.
We fit these data by adopting a simple form for the three-dimensional stellar number density throughout the hemisphere: $$n_\ast (r)\,=\, n_c\,\left[1\,-\,{r\over r_1}\,+\,
\left({r\over r_2}\right)^{\!\!2}\right]^{\!-1} \,\,.\eqno(1)$$ For each choice of the scale lengths $r_1$ and $r_2$, we project this density onto the plane of the sky and compute the cumulative number fraction $f_\ast (r)$. We then vary $r_1$ and $r_2$ until our model $f_\ast (r)$ best matches the empirical curve. Note the negative sign preceding the term containing $r_1$; this choice is necessary to match the relatively rapid rise in the observed $f_\ast (r)$ away from the origin. Note also that the central density $n_c$ is unconstrained by this matching procedure.
The smooth curve in Figure 2 shows the best-fit $f_\ast (r)$, obtained by selecting and . To estimate the central density, we integrate equation (1) over the entire hemisphere and equate the total number of stars to the observed 705. We thus find . This result is close to that given by Herbig & Terndrup (1986), who surveyed the inner 0.5 pc in radius. Both numbers are dwarfed by the density of $5\times 10^4$ pc$^{-3}$ found in the high-resolution, near-infrared study of McCaughrean & Stauffer (1994). Their high value was obtained by counting stars within 0.05 pc of $\theta^1$ Ori C, a distance comparable to that of the other Trapezium members.
It is interesting that the stellar number density falls off as $r^{-2}$ for . Of course, we forced this result mathematically through our adopted functional form of $n_\ast (r)$. We were guided in this choice by previous authors, who noted that the [*projected*]{} areal density falls approximately as $r^{-1}$ (see, [[*e.g.*]{}]{}, Scally & Clarke 2001). How robust is this result? We have generalized equation (1) to include an exponent $2+\epsilon$ in the term involving $r_2$. We then varied $\epsilon$ along with $r_1$ and $r_2$ in our matching procedure. An acceptable fit, in the least-squares sense, could only be obtained for $\epsilon$ ranging from -0.1 to +0.4.
If this $r^{-2}$ falloff continued to very large radii, the cumulative, projected starcount would increase as $r$. According to Figure 2, the rise is actually slower, both observationally and in the theoretical fit. We are seeing the effect of a finite boundary, corresponding to 2.5 pc in radius. Outside this boundary, no stars are counted.[^2] Of course, the stellar population does not truly vanish, but there is a steeper falloff in this vicinity, as the central group blends into the larger Orion Ic association (Herbig & Terndrup 1986).
Figure 3 displays the reconstructed, three-dimensional density $n_\ast (r)$. One notable feature here is the central dip. However, the results of McCaughrean & Stauffer (1994) indicate that this falloff, which occurs for , is not real. The true stellar density climbs steeply toward the center. At visible wavelengths, this interior population is lost in the brilliant glare of the Trapezium. It is at least partially recovered in high-resolution, near-infrared imaging. (See also Hillenbrand & Carpenter 2000.) The dashed curve in Figure 3 is a pure $r^{-2}$ profile. Extended inward, its rise is suggestive of that found empirically within 0.05 pc.
Mass Distribution
-----------------
We turn next to the spatial distribution of stellar masses in the present-day cluster. To obtain a full sampling of masses among the optical population, we need to consider the sensitivity limit of the original survey. Here we are concerned with spectroscopic observations, which are needed to place stars in the HR diagram.
According to Hillenbrand (1997), her observations are complete to . (See upper panel of her Figure 6.) A typical ONC star is of spectral type M2, for which . The bolometric correction needed to extrapolate from the $V$-band to $M_{\rm bol}$ is $-1.8~{\rm mag}$ (Hillenbrand 1997; Appendix C). For the representative extinction , and the distance modulus of 8.4 mag, we find that the limiting $I$-magnitude corresponds to a luminosity of $0.1\ {L_\odot}$.
We may now address the completeness of stellar masses. Suppose we limit our investigation to stars with ages less than $1\times 10^7$ yr. Then the lowest stellar mass for which we have complete data is that whose pre-main-sequence track descends to 0.1 ${L_\odot}$ at $t = 1\times 10^7$ yr. Inspection of Figure 1 from Palla & Stahler (1999) shows that this critical mass is $0.4\ {M_\odot}$. When discussing stellar masses and ages, we will henceforth limit our attention to the restricted sample of 244 stars with .
It is important to note that the failure to account for survey completeness may lead to puzzling and erroneous results. For example, Hillenbrand (1997) observed that lower-mass stars in both Orion and other regions are younger, on average, than their high-mass counterparts. This age discrepancy was noted again by Hartmann (2004), and led him to reject the pre-main-sequence tracks themselves as reliable age indicators. However, the lower-mass population is incompletely sampled in all surveys. The missing objects are precisely those of lower luminosity, and hence greater ages. Within our more carefully defined sample, we find no age-mass correlation (see §3 below).
We now wish to explore both the distribution of masses and how this distribution varies spatially in the cluster. A simple but instructive exercise is to divide the cluster into two groups of equal population. The inner group lies within a circle of radius 0.88 pc, centered on $\theta^1$ Ori C. The outer group is in the surrounding annulus. We rank stars in each group by mass, and calculate the fraction of the group at or below every mass-value. To construct the figure, we find, for each mass in one group, that mass in the other group which represents the same cumulative fraction. (Such a [*quantile-quantile plot*]{} is a common statistical tool for comparing populations; see Evans et al. 2000).
Figure 4 shows the result. The vast majority of stars match up, [[*i.e.*]{}]{}, the two populations are essentially identical. (The step-like character of the empirical curve is an artifact of the discrete spectral typing.) Above , however, the two populations differ radically. The inner group contains objects which are more massive than any found outside. Naturally, the Trapezium stars are part of this exceptional subgroup. Figure 4, which displays masses on a logarithmic scale, shows vividly how the Trapezium is truly anomalous. If we ignore its central region, the cluster appears to be homogeneous in terms of membership.
Another way to demonstrate this point is presented in Figure 5. The dashed curve in both panels represents the cumulative mass fraction, [[*i.e.*]{}]{}, the fraction of the total cluster mass contained in each radius $r$. The solid curve is the cumulative number fraction. If we include the Trapezium ([*left panel*]{}), the mass fraction immediately rises above the number fraction. If we omit the Trapezium ([*right panel*]{}), the mass and number fractions are nearly identical from the center outward. In other words, increasing the number of stars by a certain fraction gives the same fractional increase in mass, at all radii. The distribution of individual stellar masses must therefore be similar throughout the cluster. Clearly, we are not seeing mass segregation in the traditional sense.
It also follows that the local mass distribution is essentially the same as the global one. Paper I (§4) asserted that the ONC stars roughly follow the field star initial mass function. The top two curves of Figure 6 show that the two distributions actually differ in a significant way. The solid curve displays the cumulative mass function ${\cal N}_\ast (M_\ast)$, [[*i.e.*]{}]{}, the number of stars with masses up to the value $M_\ast$. For comparison, the dashed curve shows the same quantity calculated from the field star initial mass function (Scalo 1998). (This and the other dashed curves are normalized to the total population in each age range). It is apparent that the ONC is deficient in members with . A similar discrepancy appears in the analysis of Hillenbrand (1997), although she used different pre-main-sequence tracks and a different field-star initial mass function. (See the upper panel of her Figure 15.) The remaining curves of Figure 6 concern the temporal development of the cluster, and it is this subject that we now consider.
Star Formation History
======================
The distribution of pre-main-sequence ages provides the essential record of star formation in any group. Palla & Stahler (1999) used this technique to show that production of stars within the ONC began some $10^7$ yr in the past and has been accelerating to the present. We now go one step further, and combine stellar ages and [*locations*]{}. In other words, we assess the evolution of the region both temporally and spatially.
The four panels of Figure 7 display maps of the ONC at various epochs. Within each time interval (given in the caption), the panel shows all stars from the sample of 244 that were born during that interval. The small symbols denote low-mass objects , while the larger ones represent those of intermediate mass . We have omitted the three innermost Trapezium stars, which would not be resolved in these plots. None of these three have reliable ages, although they were probably formed within the most recent epoch (Palla & Stahler 2001). Note that the lowest-mass Trapezium star, BM Ori, has 7 ${M_\odot}$, and is thus included in the final map.
It is apparent that the earliest star formation, which occurred some $10^7$ yr in the past, was diffuse spatially, and did not exhibit crowding toward the future site of the Trapezium. Intermediate-mass stars also began forming early, and were also spread throughout the region. As expected, the entire population increased dramatically within the last few Myr. No star formation is occurring now within the volume occupied by the visible stars, since molecular gas has been driven off. If, however, the cluster extends into the wall of OMC-1, then starbirth is undoubtedly continuing apace in that embedded region.
The ONC stars have transverse velocities of several km s$^{-1}$ (Jones & Walker 1988). Over $10^7$ yr, they would have moved tens of parsecs, well out of the area shown. How, then, can we identify their present positions with their birth sites? The reason is that [*the stars have not been moving on ballistic trajectories*]{}. They have been subject to the gravitational pull from other cluster members and, much more significantly, from the ambient molecular gas. In other words, they were trapped in local potential wells until recently, when the nearby gas was ionized and dispersed. If this dispersal occurred $10^5$ yr ago, then the stars subsequently moved only a few tenths of a parsec.
We also arrive at this picture of the stellar motion by following the consequences of the alternative view. Suppose that all stars were born in the most crowded region, near the present-day Trapezium. Suppose further that they drifted away from their birth sites at constant speed. Then we would see today an age gradient, in the sense that the older stars would be farther from the center. Figure 8 plots the mean stellar age at each projected radius, along with the rms dispersion. The mean age does not increase outward, but remains constant to within the statistical errors. Under the drift hypothesis, furthermore, proper motion vectors would tend to point outward for more distant members. This effect is also not seen; the vectors are randomly oriented (Jones & Walker 1988).
A plot of the mean age versus stellar mass is also of interest, especially in light of the previous claims for a correlation (Hillenbrand 1997; Hartmann 2004). Figure 9 shows the result. When we limit ourselves to the sample of 244 stars, the mean pre-main-sequence age is essentially independent of mass, at least for . For higher masses, the mean age does systematically fall, in apparent agreement with the earlier claims.
However, this falloff only reflects the diminishing pre-main-sequence lifetime of more massive objects. The dashed curve displays this lifetime, [[*i.e.*]{}]{}, the contraction time from the birthline to the zero-age main sequence, as a function of mass. Above $2.5~{M_\odot}$, a significant fraction of the stars have already reached the main sequence. However, all stars in the sample are assigned [*pre*]{}-main-sequence ages, according to their positions on the HR diagram. The main-sequence stars thus have ages which are too young. Since the relevant fraction increases with stellar mass, there is a spurious correlation of age with mass.
Returning to the global evolution, the sequential maps of Figure 7 demonstrate that star formation is accelerating, but they do not tell us the spatial pattern of that acceleration. Is the increase of stellar births predominantly near the center? Has the acceleration process perhaps moved inward over time? Such details are important if we are to discern the physical processes at play in group formation.
It is again instructive to divide the cluster into two groups of equal population, as we did when constructing Figure 4. This time, we compare the star formation histories of the inner and outer portions of the cluster. The result is shown in Figure 10. Here we display the fraction of stars in each group that have at least the indicated ages. In other words, we are showing that portion of each group formed at any time. The two curves are nearly identical.
What we have found is that the acceleration did not occur locally. Nor did it sweep across the parent cloud. In fact, there is no known mechanism by which low-mass star formation in one region can stimulate formation in another, distant region. The accelerating star formation occurred globally. This process must have been stimulated by contraction of the parent cloud.
We mentioned previously that the present-day distribution of masses differs somewhat from the canonical initial mass function. Returning to Figure 6, we find that this distribution changed substantially as time progressed. Here, the series of lower curves shows the cumulative mass function ${\cal N}_\ast$ at the indicated times. Thus, the bottom curve represents the number of stars with mass less than any $M_\ast$ which are older than 5 Myr. Relatively few stars have the requisite age. The figure shows, not surprisingly, that their mass spectrum also does not resemble the standard initial mass function.
What determines the upper mass cutoff at each epoch? It is tempting to hypothesize that no relatively massive stars existed long ago because there had not yet been sufficient time to form them. However, the figure itself suggests an alternative explanation. The open circles show the masses for which the pre-main-sequence lifetime equals the age in question. (Compare the dashed curve of Figure 9.) At all times, the maximum mass is fairly close to this limit. In other words, more massive stars could have indeed formed, but they already would have joined the main sequence. If such objects were (erroneously) assigned contraction ages, the latter would necessarily be less than the corresponding time.
Physical Interpretation
=======================
Cloud Mass
----------
We have seen how the present number density of stars, $n_\ast (r)$, peaks at a very high central value. Since the parent cloud was only recently dispersed, its own density must have similarly peaked. The gas itself was not smoothly distributed, but consisted of clumps, many of which already contained the stars we see today. Averaging over such clumps, what might have been the radial falloff in density and the total cloud mass, just prior to dispersal?
A second clue comes from the observed proper motions of stars. Jones & Walker (1988) found the vectors to be randomly oriented in the sky; the component in any direction has a mean magnitude of . The spread in proper motion magnitudes is relatively small, about 0.2 km s$^{-1}$.[^3] If the stars were indeed trapped in the gas before dispersal, then we may interpret their speed as the one-dimensional velocity of the cloud gas. The observed randomness in orientation of the stellar velocities implies that the corresponding gas motion was similarly random. That is, the internal bulk motion of the cloud was turbulent. We equate the stellar proper velocity in any direction with $V_{\rm turb}$, the one-dimensional turbulent speed.
It is conventional to model the momentum transfer associated with such turbulent motion as arising from the pressure of an ideal gas. Then our cloud is effectively a self-gravitating, isothermal sphere. Because of the central peak, it is specifically the singular isothermal sphere, with a density given by $$\rho (r) \,=\, {V_{\rm turb}^2\over{2\,\pi\,G\,r^2}} \,\,, \eqno(2)$$ and a total mass of $$M_{\rm cloud} \,=\, {{2\,V_{\rm turb}^2\,R}\over G} \,\, \eqno(3)$$ inside the radius $R$. For a cluster radius of 2.5 pc and the $V_{\rm turb}$-value taken from the stellar data, we find that . Note that we have taken the cloud to be a full sphere, whose foreground half produced the visible stars. For comparison, the total mass of these stars is only $480\ {M_\odot}$ for the sample of 244, and $580\ {M_\odot}$ for the larger group of 705.[^4]
Turbulent Dissipation
---------------------
Our estimate of the ONC cloud mass rests on the assumption that self-gravity balanced turbulent pressure just prior to dispersal. How well is this assumption supported by observation? It has long been known that the line widths of optically thin tracers yield fluid velocities consistent with virial values, over a large range of masses and sizes (Larson 1981; Myers & Goodman 1988). This finding is generally interpreted to mean that clouds are indeed supported by internal, turbulent motion.
Motivated by the observations of superthermal linewidths, a number of theorists have modeled, through direct numerical simulation, the dynamics of turbulence in a magnetized cloud gas. (See V${\acute{\rm a}}$zquez-Semadeni [[*et al. *]{}]{}2000 for a review of such calculations.) Although the simulations adopted a variety of assumptions concerning the impressed turbulence, the results have been qualitatively consistent. In the absence of persistent driving, the turbulence decays rapidly, typically within a few crossing times. This time is set by the average eddy speed and the size of the computational box. Mac Low (1999) has determined the energy dissipation rate from a suite of MHD simulations. His essential conclusion is $$\dot\epsilon \,=\, -\eta\,{V_{\rm turb}^3\over\lambda} \,\,.\eqno(4)$$ Here, $\dot\epsilon$ is the energy loss rate per unit mass of gas, $V_{\rm turb}$ the average (rms) eddy speed, and $\lambda$ the dominant wavelength of the impressed turbulence. The empirical, nondimensional coefficient $\eta$ was found to be about 0.4 in these simulations.
These important experiments are actually finding [*two*]{} results; both may not be applicable to real molecular clouds. The first, and more basic, finding is that MHD turbulence is dissipative. Even incompressible modes (Alfvén waves) quickly transfer energy to compressive waves, which steepen and shock (Goldstein 1978; see also the discussion in Stone et al. 1998). This result is physically compelling, even if the actual dissipation in the simulations is numerical in origin.
The second result, more problematic astrophysically, is that the turbulence quickly decays. Here we must bear in mind that all the simulations are local. Any global compression of the cloud due to self-gravity cannot be modeled. But that very compression should supply energy and help sustain the turbulence. Indeed, if the mean eddy speed is to match the virial value at all times, as observations suggest, then that speed should [*increase with time.*]{} Furthermore, if the cloud contraction is mediated by turbulent dissipation, then this contraction naturally accelerates.
Accelerating Contraction
------------------------
Let us illustrate these considerations through a simple, heuristic model, inspired by our reconstruction of the ONC cloud. The total energy, gravitational plus thermal, of the cloud in the recent past is that of the bounded, singular isothermal sphere. For a cloud of mass $M_{\rm cloud}$ and radius $R$, this energy is given by $$E\,=\,-{1\over 4}\,{{G\,M_{\rm cloud}^2}\over R} \,\,.\eqno(5)$$
What was the cloud structure at previous times? The strong central peak in density was presumably attained just prior to the formation of the Trapezium, [[*i.e.*]{}]{}, within the last $10^5$ yr. It is reasonable to assume that the cloud’s density contrast monotonically increased with time to that point. If the turbulent velocity was also spatially homogeneous during earlier epochs, then the cloud evolved through a sequence of isothermal spheres, culminating in the singular configuration.
The evolution is driven by self-gravity, mediated by the energy loss from turbulence. This bulk motion continually drives internal shocks, which themselves radiate energy at a [*local*]{} rate given by equation (4). If the largest eddy has a size $\lambda$ comparable to the cloud diameter, then the mass-integrated heat equation is $${{dH}\over{dt}} \,=\,
-\eta\,{M_{\rm cloud}\,V_{\rm turb}^3\over{2\,R}}\,\,.\eqno(6)$$ The quantity $H$ is the cloud enthalpy, equal to . Here, $P_\circ$ is the bounding pressure, and $V$ the cloud volume. As we show in the Appendix, it is this quantity whose decrease yields the cloud’s total, shock-generated luminosity. We regard $\eta$ as a free parameter, whose value we expect to be less than that found in the current local simulations.
For the singular isothermal sphere, the enthalpy is $$H\,=\,-{1\over{12}}\,{{G\,M_{\rm cloud}^2}\over R} \,\,.\eqno(7)$$ Pending a more detailed calculation that tracks the cloud’s changing internal structure, we simply adopt this expression for all times, and substitute it into equation (6). After utilizing equation (3) as well, we find an expression for the decrease of $R$ with time: $${{dR}\over{dt}} \,=\, -{{3\,\eta}\over{\sqrt{2}}}
\sqrt{{{G\,M_{\rm cloud}}\over R}} \,\,,\eqno(8)$$ which integrates to yield $$R \,=\, R_\circ
\left(1\,-\, {{9\,\eta}\over{2\,\sqrt{2}}}\,{t\over t_\circ}\right)^{2/3}\,\,.
\eqno(9)$$ Here, $R_\circ$ is the present cloud radius. Equation (8) yields the cloud radius for each past epoch, [[*i.e.*]{}]{}, for negative values of $t$. The quantity $t_\circ$ is defined to be $$t_\circ \equiv \sqrt{{R_\circ^3\over{G\,M_{\rm cloud}}}} = 7.2\times 10^5\,{\rm yr} \eqno(10)$$
Equation (8) verifies that the cloud contracts in an accelerating fashion. Indeed, it undergoes a kind of diluted free fall. The time scale for this process, some multiple of the free fall time $t_\circ$, is set by the (still unknown) parameter $\eta$. As the cloud contracts, the speed $V_{\rm turb}$, which is related to $R$ through equation (3), accelerates [*upward*]{}. This conclusion is in striking contrast to the current numerical results (see V${\acute{\rm a}}$zquez-Sendani et al. 2000 for a review), which show the turbulent speed to fall with time. The difference stems from our basic assumption, motivated by the molecular line studies ([[*e.g.*]{}]{} Myers & Goodman 1988), that the cloud is nearly in virial equilibrium at all times.
Discussion
==========
Extending our earlier investigations of other systems, we have documented empirically the acceleration of star formation in the ONC. We have shown that this process occurred at all stellar masses, so that there is no present-day correlation between stellar age and mass. Furthermore, the acceleration was not confined to the cluster’s central region, but was global in character. We then surmised, on theoretical grounds, that the parent cloud itself underwent an accelerating contraction, again of a global nature, prior to its recent dispersal.
It is tempting, of course, to relate these two phenomena. Somehow, the contraction of the ONC parent cloud must have stimulated the formation of individual dense cores. This picture is self-consistent only if the dense cores themselves quickly collapsed to stars. Such rapid evolution is at odds with the traditional view that dense cores evolve over a time of order $10^7$ yr through ambipolar diffusion (Shu et al. 1987). One intriguing possibility is that ambipolar diffusion itself is enhanced by cloud turbulence (Nakamura & Li 2005).
If star formation generally accelerates, then most molecular clouds should exhibit relatively low rates of starbirth. Where are these quiescent objects? Recall that most stars form within OB associations. The associations themselves are produced by cloud clumps within giant complexes, like the parent entity of the ONC. We suppose that these clumps evolve with time, gaining mass from their surroundings until they undergo accelerating contraction. Only the most massive clumps produce luminous clusters, as was found in the careful study of the Rosette complex by Williams et al. (1995). But if the picture advocated here is correct, then sensitive infrared surveys should reveal lower levels of star formation activity in the remainder of the clump population.
We have stressed that the Trapezium stars are truly anomalous in mass. More specifically, Figure 4 shows that, for objects below about $3 \, M_{\odot}$, the ONC population is spatially homogeneous, but that its central region contains an unusual number of more massive objects. This central concentration could not have been the result of dynamical relaxation in the brief interval since the dispersal of the parent cloud (Bonnell & Davies 1998). These facts argue for an alternative formation mechanism for massive stars.
Both Bonnell [[*et al. *]{}]{}(1998) and Stahler et al (2000) have advocated coalescence models. The first authors pictured the merging units to be bare stars and their disks, while the second group invoked dense cores already containing young stars, which subsequently merge. Within the context of a globally contracting cloud, we see how such cores, squeezed by the ambient pressure to sizes smaller than the canonical 0.1 pc, would first coalesce in the central region. Theoretical modeling of this phenomenon would be a welcome contribution.
Finally, our study bears on the eventual fate of the ONC and similar groups. We have found that under 10 percent of the parent cloud mass consisted of stars, just prior to gas dispersal. Including obscured sources within OMC-1 raises this figure. Even with this addition, the fraction is low enough that the stars themselves cannot be bound solely by their mutual gravity. They will disperse into space, forming a typically distended OB association.
It has long been noted that many distant associations appear to contain tight stellar clusters at their centers (see, e.g., Garmany & Stencel 1992). If the ONC is typical in terms of star formation efficiency, then these groups will similarly disperse. In contrast to this view, a number of theorists have proposed that bound clusters originate at the centers of OB associations (Adams 2000; Kroupa et al. 2001). However, their calculations assume that a large fraction (e.g., one third) of a clump’s mass is converted to stars before dispersal. In the traditional virial theorem analysis, the fraction necessary to produce a bound system is one half (Hills 1980). Our analysis of the ONC, the nearest rich cluster, indicates that these are overestimates. The origin of bound clusters must lie elsewhere.
In a future study, we plan to follow in more detail the evolution of a cluster-forming cloud. We will track theoretically both the early growth of such entities within a giant complex, as well as the structural changes that accompany their final, accelerating contraction. We also hope to connect quantitatively the rate of star formation at any epoch with the corresponding cloud evolution. Such a calculation would be an important first step toward understanding the larger issue of star formation efficiency on galactic scales.
This project has been aided by illuminating discussions with James Graham, Alessandro Navarrini, and Jon Swift. S. S. was partially supported by NSF Grant AST-9987266.
Heat Equation for an Isothermal Cloud
=====================================
Consider a mass element within a contracting, isothermal cloud of temperature $T$. The Lagrangian changes in specific entropy, thermal energy, and mass density are related by
$$T\,\Delta s \,=\, \Delta\epsilon_{\rm therm} \,-\,
{P\over\rho^2}\,\Delta\rho$$
When we integrate over all such mass elements, the lefthand side of this equation becomes $$T \Delta S=-L\Delta t$$ where $S$ is now the total entropy, and where the luminosity $L$ is assumed to arise from optically thin radiation. If we further invoke mass continuity, in the form $${{\Delta\rho}\over\rho} \,= -\left({\hbox{{\syvec\char114}}}{{\hbox{\tenbsy \char'1}}}{\bf v }\right) \Delta t$$ then we find $$-L\,\Delta t \,=\, \Delta E_{therm}+\Delta t \int\!{{dm}\over\rho}P\left({\hbox{{\syvec\char114}}}{{\hbox{\tenbsy \char'1}}}{\bf v} \right)$$ where $E_{\rm therm}$ is the total thermal energy.
We recognize $dm/\rho$ as the volume element $d^3{\bf x}$. If we do an integration by parts and evaluate the surface term, then the second righthand term in equation (A4) becomes $$P_\circ\,\Delta V-\Delta t\int\!d^3{\bf x} \left({\bf v}{{\hbox{\tenbsy \char'1}}}{\hbox{{\syvec\char114}}}P\right)$$ where $\Delta V$ is the total change in cloud volume. For the pressure gradient ${\hbox{{\syvec\char114}}}P$, we employ Euler’s equation $${\hbox{{\syvec\char114}}}P = -\rho\,{\hbox{{\syvec\char114}}}\Phi_{\rm grav}-\rho D{\bf v}/Dt$$ where $\Phi_{\rm grav}$ is the gravitational potential. Further manipulation transforms equation (A4) into $$-L \Delta t = \Delta E_{\rm therm} + P_\circ \Delta V +\Delta K \,+\, \Delta t\,
\int\!d^3{{\bf x}}\,\left({\bf v}{{\hbox{\tenbsy \char'1}}}\rho\,{\hbox{{\syvec\char114}}}\Phi_{\rm grav}\right)$$ Here, $\Delta K$ is the change in the bulk kinetic energy: $$K \equiv\, \int\!dm\,{v^2\over 2}$$ Since we are not considering a rotating or pulsating cloud, we will henceforth set $K$ equal to zero.
The remaining volume integral appearing in equation (A6) equals the change in $E_{\rm grav}$, the gravitational potential energy. (See Tassoul 1979, p. 147, eq. (127), but note his sign error.) We thus find $$-L\Delta t =\ \Delta E_{\rm therm} + \Delta E_{\rm grav} +
\Delta (P_\circ V)$$
Dividing by $\Delta t$ yields the desired heat equation: $$L = -{{dH}\over{dt}}$$ where the generalized enthalpy . Note, finally, that for a monatomic gas, , where $a_T$ is the isothermal sound speed. When evaluating $E_{\rm therm}$ for the singular isothermal sphere, we have employed this relation, identifying $a_T$ with the turbulent velocity $V_{\rm turb}$.
Adams, F. C. 2000, , 542, 964. Ali, B. & Depoy, D. L. 1995, , 109, 709. Blitz, L. 1993, in [*Protostars and Planets III*]{}, ed. E. H. Levy & J. I. Lunine, (Tucson: U. of Arizona Press), p. 125. Bonnell, I. A., Bate, M. R., & Zinnecker, H. 1998, , 298, 93. Bonnell, I. A., & Davies M. B. 1998 , 295, 691. Evans, M., Hastings, N., & Peacock, B. 2000 [*Statistical Distributions, 3rd ed.*]{} (New York: Wiley). Garmany, C. D. & Stencel, R. E. 1992, AAS, 94, 211. Genzel, R. & Stutzki, J. 1989, ARAA, 27, 41. Goldstein, M. L. 1978, , 219, 700. Gordon, M. A. & Churchwell, E. 1970, å, 9, 307. Hillenbrand, L. A. 1997, , 113, 1733. Hillenbrand, L. A. & Carpenter, J. M. 2000, , 540, 236. Jones, B. F. & Walker, M. F. 1988, , 95, 1755. Kroupa, P., Aarseth, & Hurley, J. 2001, , 321, 699. Lada, C. J. & Lada. E. A. 2003, , 41, 57. Larson, R. B. 1981 , 194, 809. Mac Low, M.-M. 1999 , 524, 169. Miller, G. E. & Scalo, J. M. 1978, , 90, 506. Myers, P. C. & Goodman, A. A. 1988 , 326, 27. Nakamura, F. & Li, Z.-Y. 2005, , 631, 411. O’Dell, C. R. 1994, , 216, 267. O’Dell, C. R., Walter, D. K., & Dufour, R. J. 1996, , 399, L67. Palla, F. & Stahler, S. W. 1999, , 525, 772 (Paper I). Palla, F. & Stahler, S. W. 2000, , 540, 255 (Paper II). Palla, F. & Stahler, S. W. 2001, , 553, 299. Pogge, R. W., Owen, J. M., & Atwood, B. 1992, , 399, 147. Prosser, C. F., Stauffer, J. R., Hartmann, L., Soderblom, D. R., Jones, B. F., Werner, M. W., & McCaughrean, M. J. 1994, , 421, 517. Roberts, M. S. 1957, , 69,59. Scalo, J. 1998, in [*The Stellar Initial Mass Function*]{}, ed. G. Gilmore, I Parry, & S. Ryan (Cambridge University Press), p. 32. Shu, F. H., Adams, F. C., & Lizano, S. 1987, ARAA, 25, 23. Stahler, S. W., Palla, F., & Ho, P. T. P. 2000, in [*Protostars and Planets IV*]{}, ed. V. Mannings, A. P. Boss, & S. S. Russell, (Tucson: U. of Arizona Press), p. 327. Stone, J. M., Ostriker, E. L., & Gammie, C. F. 1998, , 508, L99. Tassoul, J.-L. 1979 [*Theory of Rotating Stars*]{}, (Princeton: Princeton U. Press), Chapter 6. Vazquez-Semedani, E., Ostriker, E. C., Passot, T., Gammie, C. F. & Stone, J. M. 2000, in [*Protostars and Planets IV*]{}, ed. V. Mannings, A. P. Boss, & S. S. Russell, (Tucson: U. of Arizona Press) p. 3. Wen, Z. & O‘Dell, C. R. 1995, , 438, 784. Williams, J. P., Blitz, L. & Stark, A. A. 1995, , 451, 252. Zuckerman, B. 1973, , 183, 863.
[^1]: The full cluster morphology may be spherical. If so, the many near-infrared sources imaged by Ali & Depoy (1995) and by Hillenband & Carpenter (2000) plausibly represent the rear half of the sphere, [[*i.e.*]{}]{}, that fraction partially embedded in the OMC-1 wall.
[^2]: A singular isothermal sphere truncated at radius $R$ has a projected surface density which varies as $r^{-1}$ times the correction factor
[^3]: There is a potential problem in calculating this dispersion for a sample of stars chosen by a membership criterion based on the proper motions themselves. However, Jones & Walker (1988) noted that the calculated dispersion is insensitive to the precise membership criterion.
[^4]: Hillenbrand (1997) claims that her sample extends below a true turnover in the luminosity function. Hence, our total mass estimate for the visible stars should be reasonably accurate.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
[**Amplitude Variations in Pulsating Red Giants. II. Some Systematics**]{}
[**John R. Percy**]{}
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, and Dunlap Institute of Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of Toronto, Toronto ON Canada M5S 3H4, [email protected]
[**Jennifer Laing**]{}
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of Toronto, Toronto ON Canada M5S 3H4, [email protected]
[**Abstract**]{} In order to extend our previous studies of the unexplained phenomenon of cyclic amplitude variations in pulsating red giants, we have used the AAVSO time-series analysis package VSTAR to analyze long-term AAVSO visual observations of 50 such stars, mostly Mira stars. The relative amount of the variation, typically a factor of 1.5, and the time scale of the variation, typically 20-35 pulsation periods, are not significantly different in longer-period, shorter-period, and carbon stars in our sample, and they also occur in stars whose period is changing secularly, perhaps due to a thermal pulse. The time scale of the variations is similar to that in smaller-amplitude SR variables, but the [*relative*]{} amount of the variation appears to be larger in smaller-amplitude stars, and is therefore more conspicuous. The cause of the amplitude variations remains unknown.
AAVSO keywords = AAVSO International Database; photometry, visual; pulsating variables; giants, red; period analysis; amplitude analysis
ADS keywords = stars; stars: late-type; techniques: photometric; methods: statistical; stars: variable; stars: oscillations
[**1. Introduction**]{}
Percy and Abachi (2013) showed that, in almost all pulsating red giants (PRGs), the pulsation [*amplitude*]{} varied by a factor of up to 10, on a time scale of 20-40 pulsation periods. The authors were initially concerned that the variation might be an artifact of wavelet analysis, but it can be confirmed by Fourier analysis of individual sections of the dataset. Similar amplitude variations were found in pulsating red supergiants (Percy and Khatu 2014) and yellow supergiants (Percy and Kim 2014). There were already sporadic reports in the literature of amplitude variations in PRGs (e.g. Templeton [*et al.*]{} 2008, Price and Klingenberg 2005), but these stars tended to be the rare few which also showed large changes in period, and which may be undergoing thermal pulses (Uttenthaler [*et al.*]{} 2011). Furthermore: it is well known that stars such as Mira do not repeat exactly from cycle to cycle. Percy and Abachi (2013), however, was the first [*systematic*]{} study of this phenomenon. Since these amplitude variations remain unexplained, we have examined the behavior of more PRGs, to investigate some of the systematics of this phenomenon.
We have analyzed samples of [*large-amplitude*]{} PRGs, mostly Mira stars, in each of four groups: A: 17 shorter-period stars; B: 20 longer-period stars; C: 15 carbon stars; D: 8 stars with significant secular period changes (Templeton [*et al.*]{} 2005). The stars in groups A, B, and C were drawn randomly from among the 547 studied by Templeton [*et al.*]{} (2005) and which did not show significant secular period changes. As did Templeton [*et al.*]{} (2005), we used visual observations from the American Association of Variable Star Observers (AAVSO) International Database. We did not analyze stars for which the data were sparse, or had significant gaps. Note that Templeton [*et al.*]{} (2005) specifically studied Mira variables, which, by definition, have full ranges greater than 2.5 in visual light – an arbitrary limit.
The purposes of this paper are: (1) to present our analyses of these 50 PRGs, and (2) to remind the astronomical community, once again, that the amplitude variations in PRGs require an explanation.
[**2. Data and Analysis**]{}
We analyzed visual observations from the AAVSO International Database (AID: Kafka 2017) using the AAVSO’s VSTAR software package (Benn 2013). It includes both a Fourier and wavelet analysis routine; we used primarily the latter. For each star, we noted the Modified Julian Date MJD(1) after which the data were suitable for analysis – not sparse, no significant gaps. From the WWZ wavelet plots, we determined the maximum (Amx), minimum (Amn), and average (Ā) amplitude, the number of cycles N of amplitude increase and decrease, and the average length L of these cycles. See Percy and Abachi (2013) for a discussion of these quantities and their uncertainties; N and therefore L can be quite uncertain because the cycles are irregular, and few in number, especially if they are long. This is doubly true for the few stars in which the length of the dataset is shorter than average. The maximum and minimum amplitudes are also uncertain since they are determined over a limited interval of time.
We then calculated the ratio of L to the pulsation period P, the ratio of maximum to minimum amplitude, the difference $\Delta$A between the maximum and minimum amplitude, and the ratio of this to the average amplitude Ā. The periods were taken from the VSX catalog, and rounded off; the periods of stars like these “wander" by several percent, due to random cycle-to-cycle fluctuations. All this information is listed in Tables 1-4. In the “Notes" column, the symbols are as follows: “s" – the data were sparse in places; “g" – there were one or more gaps in the data (but not enough to interfere with the analysis); “d" – the star is discordant in one or more graphs mentioned below, but there were no reasons to doubt the data or analysis; asterisk (\*) – see Note in Section 3.2. Note that the amplitudes that we determine and list are “half-amplitudes" rather than the full ranges i.e. they are the coefficient of the sine function which fit to the data.
[**3. Results**]{}
We plotted L/P, Amx/Amn, and $\Delta$A/Ā against period for each of the four groups of stars A,B,C, and D. There was no substantial trend in any case, except as noted below (Figures 1-3). We therefore determined the mean M and standard error of the mean SEM, for each of the three quantities, for each of the four groups. These are given in Table 5. We also flagged any outliers in the graphs, and reexamined the data and analysis. If there was anything requiring comment, that comment is given in Section 3.2.
In stars which are undergoing large, secular period changes, possibly as a result of a thermal pulse, the size and length of the amplitude variation cycles is marginally larger, but this may be partly due to the difficulty of separating the cyclic and secular variations. Note that cyclic variations in amplitude are present during the secular ones in these stars.
We also found that, for the shorter-period stars, Ā increased with increasing period (Figure 4), but this is a well-known correlation. The very shortest-period PRGs have amplitudes of only hundredths of a magnitude. There was no trend in amplitude for the longer-period stars.
The [*relative*]{} amount of variation in amplitude is slightly larger in shorter-period, smaller-amplitude stars (Figure 5). This is consistent with the results of Percy and Abachi (2013), as discussed in Section 4.
The Ā for the carbon stars are systematically lower than for the oxygen stars (Figures 2 and 3). Again, this is well-known; in the oxygen stars, the visual amplitude is amplified by the temperature sensitivity of TiO bands, which are not present in carbon stars. Note also that the carbon stars have longer periods, since they are in a larger, cooler, and more highly evolved state.
{height="7cm"}
{height="7cm"}
{height="7cm"}
{height="7cm"}
{height="7cm"}
{height="7cm"}
[**3.1 Stars with Secular Amplitude Variations**]{}
Although our main interest was in the cyclic variations in pulsation amplitude, the secular variations in amplitude are also of interest, though they have already been studied and discussed by other authors, as mentioned in the Introduction. We performed a quick wavelet analysis of the 547 Miras in Templeton [*et al.*]{}’s (2005) paper, to identify stars in which [*secular*]{} amplitude variations might dominate the cyclic ones. Of the 21 stars whose period varied secularly at the three-sigma level or greater, four (T UMi, LX Cyg, R Cen, and RU Sco) seemed to show such secular amplitude variations. There were no other stars in Templeton [*et al.*]{}’s (2005) sample which showed [*strong*]{} secular variations. Note that, in each case, cyclic amplitude variations were superimposed on the secular ones.
[**3.2 Notes on Individual Stars**]{}
This section includes notes on two kinds of stars: the ones for which the data or analysis required comments, and ones which appear to be outliers in some of the graphs that we have plotted.
[*R Cen*]{}: this star has a secular decrease in amplitude, and period, so it is not surprising that the star is discordant in some of the relationships; see also Templeton [*et al.*]{} (2005).
[*T Dra:*]{} this star has unusually large cyclic variations in amplitude.
[*R Lep*]{}: this star has unusual large variations in mean magnitude.
[*RZ Sco:*]{} this star, with a relatively short period, has a secular change in period, but only at the 3$\sigma$ level (Templeton [*et al.*]{} 2005).
[*Z Tau*]{}: this star is exceptional in that it is an S-type star. Also: its light curve shows non-sinusoidal variations, and flat minima suggestive that the variable may have a faint companion star. Indeed, SIMBAD lists two faint stars within 5 arc seconds of Z Tau. This star is discussed by Templeton [*et al.*]{} (2005).
[**4. Discussion**]{}
Percy and Abachi (2013) obtained a median value of L/P = 44 for 28 monoperiodic smaller-amplitude PRGs. They calculated the median, in part because there were a few stars with very large values of L/P. We have reanalyzed those stars, and realized that Percy and Abachi (2013) adopted a more conservative definition for amplitude variations. Figure 6 shows an example of this: for the smaller-amplitude PRG RY Cam, Percy and Abachi (2013) estimated N = 1.5 whereas, based on our subsequent experience, we would estimate N = 6.7. Based on our reanalysis, the L/P values are now strongly clustered between 20 and 30, with a mean of 26.6. This is consistent with the values which we obtained for shorter- and longer-period PRGs.
The values of $\Delta$A/Ā, obtained by Percy and Abachi (2013), for smaller-amplitude (1.0 down to 0.1) variables, are typically about 0.5 to 2.0. This is consistent with the trend shown in Figure 5. The amplitude variations are relatively larger and more conspicuous in small-amplitude stars.
Templeton [*et al.*]{} (2008) call attention to three other PRGs with variable amplitudes. The amplitude variations in RT Hya are the largest (0.1 to 1.0) and are cyclic (L/P = 40). The amplitude variations in W Tau are almost as large (0.1 to 0.6) and are also cyclic (L/P = 24). Those in Y Per are less extreme (0.3 to 0.9) and also cyclic (L/P = 29). These three stars therefore behave similarly to PRGs in our sample.
There are therefore at least three unexplained phenomena in the pulsation of PRGs: (1) random, cycle-to-cycle fluctuations which cause the period to “wander"; (2) “long secondary periods", 5-10 times the pulsation period; and now (3) cyclic variations in pulsation amplitudes, on timescales of 20-30 pulsation periods. PRGs have large outer convective envelopes. Stothers and Leung (1971) proposed that the long secondary periods represented the overturning time of giant convective cells in the outer envelope, and Stothers (2010) amplified this conclusion. Random convective cells may well explain the random cycle-to-cycle period fluctuations, as well. The amplitude variations might then be due to rotational modulation, since the rotation periods of PRGs are significantly longer than the long secondary periods according to Olivier and Wood (2003).
[**5. Conclusions**]{}
Significant cyclic amplitude variations occurs in all of our sample of 50 mostly-Mira stars. The relative amount of the variation (typically Amx/Amn = 1.5) and the time scale of the variation (typically 20-35 times the pulsation period) are not significantly different in the shorter-period and longer-period stars, and in the carbon stars. The time scales are consistent with those found by Percy and Abachi (2013) in a sample of mostly smaller-amplitude SR variables, but the [*relative*]{} amplitude variations are larger in the smaller-amplitude stars. As was previously known: the average amplitudes increase with period for the shorter-period stars, and the carbon stars have smaller visual amplitudes than the oxygen stars.
[**Acknowledgements**]{}
We thank the AAVSO observers who made the observations on which this project is based, the AAVSO staff who archived them and made them publicly available, and the developers of the VSTAR package which we used for analysis. This paper is based, in part, on a short summer research project by undergraduate astronomy and physics student co-author JL. We acknowledge and thank the University of Toronto Work-Study Program for existing, and for financial support. This project made use of the SIMBAD database, maintained in Strasbourg, France.
[**References**]{}
Benn, D. 2013, VSTAR data analysis software (http://www.aavso.org/node/803)
Kafka, S. 2017, observations from the AAVSO International Database (https://www.aavso.org/aavso-international-database)
Olivier, E.A., and Wood, P.R. 2003, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**584**]{}, 1035.
Percy, J.R., and Abachi, R. 2013, [*J. Amer. Assoc. Var. Star Obs.*]{}, [**41**]{}, 193.
Percy, J.R., and Khatu, V.C. 2014, [*J. Amer. Assoc. Var. Star Obs.*]{}, [**42**]{}, 1.
Percy, J.R., and Kim, R.Y.H. 2014, [*J. Amer. Assoc. Var. Star Obs.*]{}, [**42**]{}, 267.
Price, A., and Klingenberg, G. 2005, [*J. Amer. Assoc. Var. Star Obs.*]{}, [**34**]{}, 23.
Stothers, R.B., and Leung, K.C. 1971, [*Astron. Astrophys.*]{}, [**10**]{}, 290.
Stothers, R.B. 2010, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**725**]{}, 1170.
Templeton, M.R. [*et al.*]{} 2005, [*Astron. J.*]{}, [**130**]{}, 776.
Templeton, M.R. [*et al.*]{} 2008, [*J. Amer. Assoc. Var. Star Obs.*]{}, [**36**]{}, 1.
Uttenthaler, S. [*et al.*]{} 2011, [*Astron. Astrophys.*]{} [**531**]{}, A88.
Name P(d) MJD(1) N L/P Amn Amx Amx/Amn Ā $\Delta$A $\Delta$A/Ā Note
-------- ------ -------- ---- ----- ------ ------ --------- ------ ----------- ------------- ------
T And 281 16000 8 18 2.38 2.78 1.17 2.60 0.40 0.15 s
V And 256 20000 5 29 2.17 2.63 1.21 2.40 0.46 0.19 s
UW And 237 39000 1 80 1.68 2.21 1.32 2.00 0.53 0.27 d
YZ And 207 40000 3 28 2.00 2.51 1.26 2.25 0.51 0.23 –
S Car 151 20000 10 25 1.03 1.46 1.42 1.25 0.43 0.34 –
U Cas 277 20000 6 22 2.50 3.50 1.40 3.30 1.00 0.30 s
SS Cas 141 27500 5 43 1.28 1.78 1.39 1.55 0.50 0.32 –
Z Cet 184 25000 7 25 2.00 2.45 1.23 2.25 0.45 0.20 –
T Phe 282 20000 3 44 2.00 3.10 1.55 2.50 1.10 0.44 d
W Psc 188 40000 4 23 1.75 2.15 1.23 1.95 0.40 0.21 s
RZ Sco 160 25000 5 41 0.80 1.70 2.13 1.30 0.90 0.69 d\*
T Scl 205 32000 2 63 1.40 2.40 1.71 1.70 1.00 0.59 d
V Scl 296 30000 3 31 2.05 2.85 1.39 2.50 0.80 0.32 g
X Scl 265 33000 6 15 1.60 2.03 1.27 1.80 0.43 0.24 –
S Tuc 242 23000 6 24 2.35 2.85 1.21 2.65 0.50 0.39 s
U Tuc 262 20000 6 24 2.35 2.85 1.21 2.70 0.50 0.19 g
R Vir 149 20000 8 31 1.56 2.25 1.44 1.95 0.69 0.35 –
: Pulsation Properties of Shorter-Period PRGs
Star P(d) MJD(1) N L/P Amn Amx Amx/Amn Ā $\Delta$A $\Delta$A/Ā Note
-------- ------ -------- --- ----- ------ ------ --------- ------ ----------- ------------- ------
R And 410 20000 7 13 3.19 3.60 1.13 3.38 0.41 0.12 g
X And 343 16000 6 20 1.90 3.00 1.58 2.60 1.10 0.42 d
RR And 331 20000 5 22 2.68 3.18 1.19 3.00 0.50 0.17 s
RW And 430 15000 4 25 2.45 3.50 1.43 3.10 1.05 0.34 –
SV And 313 15500 6 22 2.15 2.80 1.30 2.45 0.65 0.27 –
TU And 313 37000 2 33 1.85 2.30 1.24 2.15 0.45 0.21 –
R Aqr 386 28000 4 19 1.80 2.20 1.22 1.95 0.40 0.21 –
R Car 310 20000 6 20 2.23 2.60 1.17 2.40 0.38 0.16 –
R Cas 430 15000 5 20 2.60 2.98 1.14 2.73 0.38 0.14 –
T Cas 445 20000 2 42 1.15 1.97 1.71 1.75 0.82 0.47 d
Y Cas 414 14500 4 26 1.80 2.28 1.27 2.05 0.48 0.23 g
RV Cas 332 20000 9 12 2.50 3.25 1.30 2.90 0.75 0.26 s
TY Cas 645 40000 1 27 2.28 3.20 1.40 2.90 0.92 0.32 s
Y Cep 333 15000 5 25 1.50 3.10 2.07 2.80 1.60 0.57 d
o Cet 332 20000 7 16 2.60 3.05 1.17 2.80 0.45 0.16 –
S Cet 321 20000 5 23 2.30 2.87 1.25 2.70 0.57 0.21 –
W Cet 352 32500 2 36 2.35 3.30 1.40 2.80 0.95 0.34 –
R Cyg 434 15000 5 19 2.73 2.98 1.09 2.83 0.25 0.09 –
R Hor 408 25000 5 16 2.95 3.67 1.24 3.45 0.72 0.21 g
Z Peg 320 20000 2 59 1.90 2.40 1.26 2.20 0.50 0.23 d
: Pulsation Properties of Longer-Period PRGs
Star P(d) MJD(1) N L/P Amn Amx Amx/Amn Ā $\Delta$A $\Delta$A/Ā Note
-------- ------ -------- ----- ----- ------ ------ --------- ------ ----------- ------------- ------
AZ Aur 415 40000 2.5 17 1.35 1.75 1.30 1.65 0.40 0.24 s
W Cas 406 20000 3.5 26 1.18 1.45 1.23 1.27 0.27 0.21 d
X Cas 423 20000 5 17 0.70 0.93 1.32 0.80 0.23 0.28 –
RV Cen 457 20000 3.5 23 0.83 1.23 1.48 1.03 0.40 0.39 g
V CrB 358 20000 6 17 1.36 1.75 1.29 1.50 0.39 0.26 –
U Cyg 463 20000 4 20 1.23 1.55 1.26 1.45 0.32 0.22 –
T Dra 422 20000 3 30 0.60 1.55 2.58 1.30 0.95 0.73 gd
R For 386 33000 5 12 1.17 1.53 1.31 1.35 0.36 0.27 d
VX Gem 379 40000 1.5 31 1.65 2.15 1.30 1.85 0.50 0.27 gd
ZZ Gem 315 40000 2.5 22 0.83 1.22 1.47 1.07 0.39 0.36 g
R Lep 445 20000 4 21 0.75 1.27 1.69 1.05 0.52 0.50 d\*
T Lyn 406 28000 4 18 1.18 1.53 1.30 1.40 0.35 0.25 –
V Oph 295 25000 5 22 1.03 1.30 1.27 1.13 0.28 0.24 –
RU Vir 434 20000 4.5 19 1.25 1.78 1.42 1.40 0.53 0.38 –
R Vol 453 20000 4 20 0.95 1.65 1.74 1.40 0.70 0.50 gd
: Pulsation Properties of Some Carbon PRGs
Star P(d) MJD(1) N L/P Amn A mx Amx/Amn Ā $\Delta$A $\Delta$A/Ā Note
------- ------ -------- ----- ----- ------ ------ --------- ------ ----------- ------------- ------
R Aql 311 20000 4 30 1.83 2.58 1.41 2.20 0.75 0.34 –
R Cen 502 20000 1 75 0.60 1.70 2.83 1.40 1.10 0.79 d\*
V Del 543 20000 2 34 2.58 3.30 1.28 2.85 0.72 0.25 s
W Dra 291 20000 4 32 1.62 2.58 1.59 2.20 0.96 0.44 –
R Hya 414 20000 3 30 1.40 2.25 1.61 1.70 0.85 0.50 \*
R Leo 319 20000 5 23 1.60 2.05 1.28 1.87 0.45 0.24 –
S Scl 367 20000 4.5 23 2.52 3.13 1.24 2.85 0.61 0.21 g
Z Tau 446 20000 3 28 1.45 2.78 1.92 1.90 1.33 0.70 ds\*
: Pulsation Properties of Some PRGs with Rapidly-Changing Periods
Property SP LP C CP
------------------ ------- ------- ------- -------
M($\Delta$A/Ā) 0.31 0.26 0.34 0.43
SD($\Delta$A/Ā) 0.15 0.12 0.14 0.22
SEM($\Delta$A/Ā) 0.036 0.028 0.037 0.076
M(Amx/Amn) 1.38 1.33 1.46 1.65
SE(Amx/Amn) 0.24 0.23 0.35 0.53
SEM(Amx/Amn) 0.058 0.052 0.089 0.188
M(L/P) 33 25 21 34
SE(L/P) 17 11 5 17
SEM(L/P) 4.1 2.5 1.3 6
: Properties of the Amplitude Variation in Four Samples of PRGs.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
**Parameter-dependent linear ordinary differential\
equations and topology of domains**
Vyacheslav M. Boyko$^{\dag 1}$, Michael Kunzinger$^{\ddag 2}$ and Roman O. Popovych$^{\dag\ddag\S 3}$
[*${}^\dag$Institute of Mathematics of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine,\
$\phantom{{}^\dag}$3 Tereshchenkivska Str., Kyiv-4, 01601 Ukraine\
$^\ddag$Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Wien, Oskar-Morgenstern-Platz 1, 1090 Wien, Austria\
$^\S$Mathematical Institute, Silesian University in Opava, Na Rybníčku 1, 746 01 Opava,\
$\phantom{^\S}$Czech Republic*]{}\
E-mail: $^[email protected], $^[email protected], $^[email protected]
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
The solution theory of $p$th order linear ordinary differential equations (ODEs) $$\label{eq:ode_no_parameter}
\sum_{i=0}^p g^i(x)\frac{{\rm d}^iu}{{\rm d} x^i}=f(x),$$ where $u$ is the unknown function, the independent variable $x$ varies in some interval $(a,b)$, $g^0,\dots,g^p,f\in {\rm C}\big((a,b)\big)$ and $g^p(x)\not=0$ for all $x\in (a,b)$, is a classical subject that is a part of most textbooks in the field (e.g., [@Amann1990; @Hartman2002; @Walter1998]). The set of all (classical) solutions to the homogeneous equation ($f=0$) forms a $p$-dimensional vector subspace $V$ of ${\rm C}^p\big((a,b)\big)$, while the solution space of is an affine subspace obtained by translating $V$ by any particular solution of . Any tuple of $p$ linearly independent solutions $(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p)$ of the homogeneous equation is called a fundamental set of solutions, and setting $\varphi_{s-1}:={\rm d}^{s-1}\varphi/{\rm d} x^{s-1}$, $s=1,\dots,p$, we write $$\label{eq:def_wronskian}
\mathrm W(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p) := \det
\begin{pmatrix}
\varphi^1 & \dots & \varphi^p \\
\varphi^1_1 & \dots & \varphi^p_1 \\
\vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
\varphi^1_{p-1} & \dots & \varphi^p_{p-1}
\end{pmatrix}$$ for the corresponding Wronskian. Solutions $\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p$ of the homogeneous equation form a fundamental set if and only if the Wronskian $\mathrm W(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p)$ does not vanish at $x_0\in (a,b)$, and therefore it vanishes nowhere on $(a,b)$ in view of the Liouville–Ostrogradski formula, $$\mathrm W(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p)(x)=\mathrm W(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p)(x_0)\exp\left(-\int_{x_0}^x\frac{g^{p-1}(x')}{g^p(x')}\,{\rm d}x'\right).$$ In this case, $(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p)$ is a basis of the vector space of solutions to the homogeneous equation. See, e.g., [@Hartman2002 Section IV.8.iii] or [@Walter1998 Section 19.II]. A particular solution to the inhomogeneous equation is given by (cf. [@Amann1990 Proposition (14.3)]) $$\label{eq:particular_sol_from_wronskian}
u(x) = \sum_{s=1}^p (-1)^{p-s} \varphi^s(x) \int_{x_0}^x\psi^s(x')\,{\rm d}x'
\quad\mbox{with}\quad
\psi^s:=\frac{f}{g^p}\frac{\mathrm W(\varphi^1,\dots,\lefteqn{\varphi^s}\!\smash{\diagdown}\,,\dots,\varphi^p)}{\mathrm W(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p)}.$$ Finally, we recall the well-known fact that any $p$th order equation of the form can be rewritten as a linear system of first-order ordinary differential equations in the normal Cauchy form, so that the solution theory of (scalar) equations of the form can be reduced to that of such systems. Concretely, setting $$v^s:=u_{s-1},\quad s=1,\dots,p,$$ equation is equivalent to the system $$\label{eq:ode_system_no_parameter}
v_1 = A(x)v + F(x)$$ for $v=(v^1,\dots,v^p)^{\mathsf T}$, where $$\label{eq:matrix_system}
A = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 0 & \dots & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 & \dots & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0 & 0 \\
\vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \dots & 0 & 1 \\
-\frac{g^0}{g^p} & -\frac{g^1}{g^p} & -\frac{g^2}{g^p} & \dots & -\frac{g^{p-2}}{g^p} & -\frac{g^{p-1}}{g^p}
\end{pmatrix},
\quad
F = \begin{pmatrix}
0\\
0\\
0\\
\vdots\\
0\\
\frac{f}{g^p}
\end{pmatrix}.$$
In this paper we address the question of how this solution theory changes if the coefficient functions and the right hand side in are allowed to additionally depend on a real parameter $t$. Thus we shall be investigating ODEs of the form $$\label{eq:main_problem}
Pu \equiv \sum_{i=0}^p g^i(t,x) u_i = f(t,x),$$ where, analogously to the above, $u_i:={\partial}^i u/{\partial}x^i$, $i=0,\dots,p$, as well as systems of the form $$\label{eq:main_problem_system}
v_1 = A(t,x) v + F(t,x),$$ for $(t,x)$ varying in some open subset $\Omega$ of ${\mathbb R}^2$. Here $g^0,\dots,g^p,f\in {\rm C}(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$, $g^p(t,x)\ne0$ for all $(t,x)\in\Omega$, $A\in {\rm C}(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$ and $F\in {\rm C}(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$. We are, in particular, interested in determining the influence of the topology of $\Omega$ on the structure of the solution spaces of and of . Basic examples show that solvability may completely break down already for very simple sets $\Omega$ (e.g. for $\Omega$ the punctured plane, cf. Example \[ex:1stOrderInhomLinODEWithoutSolutions\] below). Conversely, for nice enough domains, e.g. for rectangles, the parameter-dependent theory is practically the same as in the single-variable case. We want to find out which properties of the domain determine the solvability of linear parameter-dependent ODEs. Indeed, we will completely characterize the solvability of and of in terms of a topological property of $\Omega$, namely the so-called $x$-simplicity of $\Omega$, a notion well-known from elementary integration theory (cf., e.g., ). In addition, we characterize the existence of fundamental sets of solutions of or of fundamental matrices of , and the nonvanishing of the corresponding Wronskians, again in terms of the $x$-simplicity of $\Omega$ (or its connected components).
As may also be viewed as a specific kind of linear partial differential equation, the question of existence of solutions in terms of properties of the underlying domain bears some resemblance to notions like Hörmander’s concept of $P$-convexity [@Hoermander1976; @Hoermander1983_2]. In particular, it is of interest to address the problems stated above also within the framework of Schwartz distributions.
In the remainder of this introduction we fix some notations and outline the content of the sections to follow. Let us briefly comment on our choice of notation and style of presentation. Our original motivation for studying parameter-dependent linear ODEs derives from our desire to develop a more rigorous theory of Darboux transformations for (1+1)-dimensional linear evolution equations than the existing ones; cf. . This explains why we primarily focus on scalar equations and just outline the corresponding results for systems (contrary to the standard approach in the ODE literature). It also justifies the notation of variables, $x$ for the independent variable and $t$ for the parameter, as well as their order.
Given a subset $U$ of the $(t,x)$-plane, the projection $U$ to the $t$-axis is denoted by ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU$, where ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\colon\mathbb R^2\to\mathbb R$ is the projection $(t,x)\mapsto t$, and for each $t_0\in{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU$ the set $U_{t_0}$ is the projection of the section of $U$ by the line $t=t_0$ to the $x$-axis, $$\begin{gathered}
{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU:=\{t\in\mathbb R\mid \exists\ x\in\mathbb R\colon (t,x)\in U\},\quad
{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU\ni t\mapsto U_t:=\{x\in\mathbb R\mid (t,x)\in U\}.\end{gathered}$$ For a function $g\colon U\to\mathbb R$, the expression “$g\ne0$ on $U$” means that $g(z)\ne0$ for any $z\in U$.
For an open set $\Omega$ of the $(t,x)$-plane, ${\rm C}^\omega(\Omega)$ is the space of real analytic functions on $\Omega$. ${\rm C}^p_x(\Omega)$ with $p\in\mathbb N$ denotes the subspace of functions from ${\rm C}(\Omega)$ that admit derivatives with respect to $x$ up to order $p$, and these derivatives are continuous on $\Omega$. Analogously, ${\rm C}^\omega_x(\Omega)$ denotes the subspace of functions from ${\rm C}(\Omega)$ that are real analytic with respect to $x$ and whose derivatives with respect to $x$ are continuous on $\Omega$. ${{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$, ${{\rm DO}}^\infty(\Omega)$, ${{\rm DO}}^\omega_x(\Omega)$ and ${{\rm DO}}^\omega(\Omega)$ denote the sets of linear differential operators in $x$ (hence of the form ) with coefficients from ${\rm C}(\Omega)$, ${\rm C}^\infty(\Omega)$, ${\rm C}^\omega_x(\Omega)$ and ${\rm C}^\omega(\Omega)$, respectively, and whose leading coefficients do not vanish on the entire (open) set $\Omega$. ${{\rm DO}}_1(\Omega)$, ${{\rm DO}}^\infty_1(\Omega)$, ${{\rm DO}}^\omega_{x,1}(\Omega)$ and ${{\rm DO}}^\omega_1(\Omega)$ are, respectively, the subsets of operators from ${{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$, ${{\rm DO}}^\infty(\Omega)$, ${{\rm DO}}^\omega_x(\Omega)$ and ${{\rm DO}}^\omega(\Omega)$ whose leading coefficients are equal to one. The notation ${\mathop{\rm ord}\nolimits}P$ and ${\mathop{\rm lcoef}\nolimits}P$ is used for the order and the leading coefficient of the operator $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$, respectively. If ${\mathop{\rm ord}\nolimits}P=p$, then we view the operator $P$ as a map from ${\rm C}^p_x(\Omega)$ to ${\rm C}(\Omega)$, and thus (classical) solutions of the equation $\mathcal P$: $Pu=0$ belong to ${\rm C}^p_x(\Omega)$.
Expressions of the form $\zeta\psi$ for some functions $\zeta\in {\rm C}({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega)$ and $\psi\in {\rm C}(\Omega)$ should always be interpreted as the product of $\psi$ by the pullback of $\zeta$ to $\Omega$ with respect to the map ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\big|_\Omega$.
As already noted above, for a function $u$ of $(t,x)$ we set $u_i:={\partial}^i u/{\partial}x^i$, $i\in\mathbb N$, $u_0:=u$, and ${\partial}_x={\partial}/{\partial}x$. We also employ, depending upon convenience or necessity, the notation $u_x=u_1$. By $\mathrm W(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p)$ we denote the Wronskian of functions $\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p\in {\rm C}^p_x(\Omega)$ in the variable $x$, i.e., $\mathrm W(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p)=\det({\partial}_x^{s'-1}\varphi^s)_{s,s'=1,\dots,p}$.
The indices $s$, $s'$ and $s''$ run from 1 to $p$, and summation with respect to repeated indices is always understood.
The plan of the paper is as follows: In Section \[sec:xSimpleSets\] we introduce sets simple with respect to a variable (in our case, $x$), and prove some basic topological properties of such sets. In Section \[sec:FundamentalSolutionSetsOfLinODEsWithParameter\] we provide an appropriate notion of fundamental sets of solutions to homogeneous linear parameter-dependent ODEs and relate it to the nonvanishing of the corresponding Wronskian. We also characterize both concepts in terms of $x$-simplicity of (pieces of) the underlying domain $\Omega$. The inhomogeneous setting is studied in Section \[sec:ExistenceOfSolutionsOfInhomLinODEsWithParameter\], where we derive necessary and sufficient conditions for solvability in terms of $x$-simplicity and also quantify the ‘degree of non-solvability’ in case some connected component of $\Omega$ fails to be $x$-simple. In Section \[sec:DistrSolutionsOfLinODEsWithParameter\] we then turn to the distributional setting, singling out the relevant case of ${\rm C}^0$-semiregular distributions. The final Section \[sec:LinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter\] is devoted to the study of systems of parameter-dependent linear ODEs. In Appendix \[sec:DistributionsWithVanishingPartialDerivatives\] we prove a structure theorem for distributions with vanishing partial derivatives on domains that are simple with respect to a variable. This is required for deriving the general form of distributional solutions to parameter-dependent (systems of) linear ODEs on such domains in Sections \[sec:DistrSolutionsOfLinODEsWithParameter\] and \[sec:LinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter\].
Sets simple with respect to a variable {#sec:xSimpleSets}
======================================
Given a subset $U$ of the $(t,x)$-plane, by ${\rm lb}_U$ and ${\rm ub}_U$ we denote the *lower* and *upper bounds of $U$ in $x$*, which are functions from ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU$ to $\mathbb R\cup\{-\infty,+\infty\}$ defined by $${\rm lb}_U(t):=\inf U_t,\quad {\rm ub}_U(t):=\sup U_t,\quad t\in{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU.$$ In view of the inequality ${\rm lb}_U(t)\leqslant x\leqslant{\rm ub}_U(t)$ for any $t\in{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU$ and any $x\in U_t$, the functions ${\rm lb}_U$ and ${\rm ub}_U$ may attain values only from $\mathbb R\cup\{-\infty\}$ and $\mathbb R\cup\{+\infty\}$, respectively. It is obvious that $U\subseteq\{(t,x)\in\mathbb R^2\mid t\in{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU,\,{\rm lb}_U(t)\leqslant x\leqslant{\rm ub}_U(t)\}$. See Figure \[fig:ObjectRelatedToXSimplicity\] that illustrates some objects related to $x$-simplicity.
\[lem:OnOpenSetLB&UB\] If a subset $\Omega$ of the $(t,x)$-plane is open, then its projection $I:={\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$ is an open subset of $\mathbb R$ and the functions $a:={\rm lb}_\Omega$ and $b:={\rm ub}_\Omega$ are upper and lower semi-continuous, respectively.
Since for any ball contained in $\Omega$ its projection to the $t$-axis is an open interval contained in $I$, it is obvious that $I$ is an open set. Fix an arbitrary $t_0\in I$. If $a(t_0)\in\mathbb R$, then for any $\varepsilon>0$ with $a(t_0)+\varepsilon<b(t_0)$, the point $z_0=(t_0,a(t_0)+\varepsilon)$ belongs to $\Omega$ and thus there exists a $\delta>0$ such that the ball $B_\delta(z_0)$ is contained in $\Omega$. Therefore, for any $t\in(t_0-\delta,t_0+\delta)$ we have $t\in I$ and $a(t)<a(t_0)+\varepsilon$. Analogously, if $a(t_0)=-\infty$, then for an arbitrary $N>0$ with $-N<b(t_0)$, the point $z_0=(t_0,-N)$ belongs to $\Omega$ and again there exists a $\delta>0$ such that the ball $B_\delta(z_0)$ is contained in $\Omega$. Hence for any $t\in(t_0-\delta,t_0+\delta)$ we have $t\in I$ and $a(t)<-N$. In total, this means that the function $a$ is upper semi-continuous on $I$. The lower semi-continuity of $b$ is proved in a similar way.
In the above notation, we have $\Omega\subseteq\{(t,x)\mid t\in I,\, a(t)<x<b(t)\}$ if the set $\Omega$ is open.
\[def:XSimpleSet\] We call a subset $U$ of the $(t,x)$-plane an *$x$-simple set* if the intersection of $U$ by any line $t=t_0\in\mathbb R$ is an open interval within this line or the empty set.
Equivalently, a subset $U$ of the $(t,x)$-plane is called an $x$-simple set if there exist a subset $I$ of the $t$-axis and functions $a,b\colon I\to\mathbb R\cup\{-\infty,+\infty\}$ with $a(t)<b(t)$ for any $t\in I$ such that $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:EquivDefOfXSimpleSet}
U=\{(t,x)\mid t\in I,\, a(t)<x<b(t)\}.\end{gathered}$$ Then $I={\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU$, $a={\rm lb}_U$ and $b={\rm ub}_U$. Note that this definition of $x$-simple set is similar to but in fact different from and, in certain sense, more general than the one used in elementary calculus (cf., e.g., ).
\[lem:OnOpenX-SimpleRegion\] An $x$-simple subset $\Omega$ of the $(t,x)$-plane is open if and only if its projection $I:={\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$ is an open subset of $\mathbb R$ and its lower and upper bounds, $a:={\rm lb}_\Omega$ and $b:={\rm ub}_\Omega$, are upper and lower semi-continuous functions on $I$, respectively. Moreover, in this case there exists a smooth function $\theta\colon I\to\mathbb R$ such that $a(t)<\theta(t)<b(t)$ for any $t\in I$.
![Objects related to $x$-simplicity[]{data-label="fig:ObjectRelatedToXSimplicity"}](Ris1){width=".6\linewidth"}
The necessity of the first claim follows from Lemma \[lem:OnOpenSetLB&UB\]. Let us prove its sufficiency. Suppose that the set $I$ is open and the functions $a$ and $b$ are upper and lower semi-continuous, respectively. Fix an arbitrary $(t_0,x_0)\in\Omega$. Then $a(t_0)<x_0<b(t_0)$ and thus $\varepsilon:=\frac12\min\{x_0-a(t_0),b(t_0)-x_0,1\}>0$. Hence there exists a neighborhood $V$ of $t_0$ in $I$ such that for all $t\in V$, $a(t)<x_0-\varepsilon$ and $b(t)>x_0+\varepsilon$, i.e., the neighborhood $V\times(x_0-\varepsilon,x_0+\varepsilon)$ of $t_0$ is contained in $\Omega$. Therefore, the set $\Omega$ is open.
Supposing now that $\Omega$ is $x$-simple, we can cover the open set $I$ by a family of open subsets $(V_j)_{j\in J}$, where $J$ is some index set, such that for any $j\in J$ there exists $c_j\in\mathbb R$ with $a(t)<c_j<b(t)$ for any $t\in V_j$. Let $(\chi^j)_{j\in J}$ be a ${\rm C}^\infty$-partition of unity that is subordinate to $(V_j)_{j\in J}$, i.e., $({\mathop{\rm supp}\nolimits}\chi^j)_{j\in J}$ is locally finite and ${\mathop{\rm supp}\nolimits}\chi^j\subseteq V_j$ for any $j\in J$ [@MadsenTornehave1997 Theorem A.1]. Then the function $\theta:=\sum_{j\in J}\chi^jc_j$ belongs to ${\rm C}^\infty(I)$, and for any $t\in I$ we obtain $$a(t)=\sum_{j\in J}\chi^j(t)a(t)<\sum_{j\in J}\chi^j(t)c_j=\theta(t)<\sum_{j\in J}\chi^j(t)b(t)=b(t).$$ (Here non-strict inequalities are clear for any $j\in J$, but also for any $t\in I$ there exists $j_0\in J$ with $\chi^{j_0}(t)>0$, and for this term we have $\chi^{j_0}(t)a(t)<\chi^{j_0}(t)c_j<\chi^{j_0}(t)b(t)$, which implies that strict inequalities hold for the entire sums.)
\[lem:SimpleConnectnessOfX-SimpleSets\] Any $x$-simple open connected set is simply connected.
Suppose that the set $\Omega\subseteq\mathbb R^2$ is $x$-simple, open and connected. In view of Lemma \[lem:OnOpenX-SimpleRegion\], there exists a smooth function $\theta\in {\rm C}^\infty({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega)$ whose graph is contained in $\Omega$. (In fact, the continuity of $\theta$ is sufficient for the further proof.) Fix a point $t_0\in{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$ and consider an arbitrary continuous path $\gamma\colon S^1\to\Omega$, $S^1\ni\tau\mapsto(\gamma^1(\tau),\gamma^2(\tau))\in\Omega$, where $S^1$ is the unit circle. The path $\gamma$ can be shrunken to the point $(t_0,\theta(t_0))$ within $\Omega$ using the map from the unit disk to $\Omega$ that is defined by $$(\rho,\tau)\mapsto
\begin{cases}
\Big(\gamma^1(\tau)+(1-2\rho)(t_0-\gamma^1(\tau)),\,\theta\big(\gamma^1(\tau)+(1-2\rho)(t_0-\gamma^1(\tau))\big)\Big),\quad \rho\in\big[0,\tfrac12\big],
\\[1.5ex]
\Big(\gamma^1(\tau),\,\gamma^2(\tau)+2(1-\rho)\big(\theta(\gamma^1(\tau))-\gamma^2(\tau)\big)\Big),\quad \rho\in\big[\tfrac12,1\big],
\end{cases}$$ where $(\rho,\tau)$ are the ‘polar’ coordinates on the disk, $\rho\in[0,1]$ and $\tau\in S^1$. (Roughly speaking, we first shrink the path $\gamma$ along the $x$-direction to the arc $\{(t,\theta(t))\mid t\in{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\gamma(S^1)\}$ of the graph of the function $\theta$ and then shrink this arc along itself to the point $(t_0,\theta(t_0))$.)
Note that an open simply connected set is not in general $x$-simple. An example of such a set is $\mathbb R^2\setminus\big([0,+\infty)\times\{0\}\big)$.
The following lemma introduces an essential technical tool for our further investigation: it identifies, within any non-$x$-simple set, a certain configuration that will allow us to construct differential operators on $\Omega$ with ‘problematic’ behavior.
\[lem:OnOpenConnectedNonX-SimpleSets\]=-1 For any open connected non-$x$-simple subset $\Omega$ of the $(t,x)$-plane, there exist $\tilde t_0,\varepsilon,\tilde x_1,\tilde x_2\in\mathbb R$ with $\varepsilon>0$, and $\tilde x_1\leqslant\tilde x_2$ such that, up to reflections in $t$, the set $\Omega$ does not intersect a closed subset $\Upsilon$ of the line segment $\{\tilde t_0\}\times[\tilde x_1,\tilde x_2]$ with $(\tilde t_0,\tilde x_1),(\tilde t_0,\tilde x_2)\in\Upsilon$ and contains the subset $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:SpecialRectangleDomain}
[\tilde t_0-\varepsilon,\tilde t_0]\times[\tilde x_1-\varepsilon,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon]\setminus\Upsilon.\end{gathered}$$
Since the set $\Omega$ is not $x$-simple, there exists $t_0\in{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$ such that $\Omega_{t_0}$ is not connected, i.e., for some $x_0,x_1,x_2,x_3\in\mathbb R$ with $x_0<x_1\leqslant x_2<x_3$ we have $[x_0,x_1),(x_2,x_3]\subset\Omega_{t_0}$ and $x_1,x_2\notin\Omega_{t_0}$; see Figure \[fig:OnOpenConnectedNonX-SimpleSets\]. Since the set $\Omega$ is connected, there exists a (continuous) path $\gamma\colon[0,1]\to\Omega$ with $\gamma(0)=(t_0,x_0)$ and $\gamma(1)=(t_0,x_3)$. Without loss of generality, we can assume the map $\gamma$ injective.[^1] Let $$\tau_0=\sup\big\{\tau\in[0,1]\mid\gamma(\tau)\in\{t_0\}\times[x_0,x_1)\big\},\quad
\tau_1=\inf\big\{\tau\in[0,1]\mid\gamma(\tau)\in\{t_0\}\times(x_1,x_3]\big\}.$$ Replacing $\gamma$ by its subpath $\gamma\big|_{[\tau_0,\tau_1]}$, $(t_0,x_0)$ by $\gamma(\tau_0)$, $(t_0,x_3)$ by $\gamma(\tau_1)$ and $x_2$ by the supremum of the relative complement of $\Omega_{t_0}$ in the new interval $(x_0,x_3)$, we can also assume that $(t_0,x_0)$ and $(t_0,x_3)$ are the only common points of $\gamma([0,1])$ with $\{t_0\}\times[x_0,x_3]$. We complete $\gamma([0,1])$ by $\{t_0\}\times(x_0,x_3)$ to a simple closed curve, which we denote by $C$. According to the Jordan curve theorem, this curve divides the $(t,x)$-plane into the (bounded) interior $\Gamma$ and the (unbounded) exterior $\tilde\Gamma$. Up to reflections in $t$, we can assume that there exists a neighborhood $U$ of the point $(t_0,x_1)$ such that $U\cap\Gamma$ and $U\cap\tilde\Gamma$ contain only points with negative and positive values of $t-t_0$, respectively. Set $$\tilde t_0=\inf\{t\in\mathbb R\mid \exists\ x\in\mathbb R\colon (t,x)\in(C\cup\Gamma)\setminus\Omega\}.$$
![Existence of a rectangle with a punctured boundary in an open connected non-$x$-simple set[]{data-label="fig:OnOpenConnectedNonX-SimpleSets"}](Ris4){width="1.\linewidth"}
If $\tilde t_0=t_0$, then we set $\tilde x_1=x_1$, $\tilde x_2=x_2$ and $\varepsilon=\frac12\mathop{\rm dist}\big(\{\tilde t_0\}\times[\tilde x_1,\tilde x_2],\gamma([0,1])\big).$ (The distance is measured between disjoint compact sets and thus $\varepsilon>0$.)
=-1 Otherwise, the compactness of $(C\cup\Gamma)\setminus\Omega$ implies that there exists $\tilde x_0\in\mathbb R$ with $(\tilde t_0,\tilde x_0)\in\Gamma\setminus\Omega$. Since the set $\Gamma$ is bounded, the line $t=\tilde t_0$ intersects the curve $C$ in at least one point with $x$-coordinate less than $\tilde x_0$ and in at least one point with $x$-coordinate greater than $\tilde x_0$. Therefore the values $$\begin{gathered}
\hat x_1=\sup\big\{x\in\mathbb R\mid (\tilde t_0,x)\in\gamma([0,1]),\, x<\tilde x_0\big\}, \quad
\tilde x_1=\inf\big\{x\in\mathbb R\mid (\tilde t_0,x)\notin\Omega,\, x>\hat x_1\big\},
\\
\hat x_2=\inf\big\{x\in\mathbb R\mid (\tilde t_0,x)\in\gamma([0,1]),\, x>\tilde x_0\big\}, \quad
\tilde x_2=\sup\big\{x\in\mathbb R\mid (\tilde t_0,x)\notin\Omega,\, x<\hat x_2\big\}\end{gathered}$$ are well defined as the supremum (resp. infinum) of a nonempty set that is bounded from above (resp. below), and $\tilde x_1\leqslant\tilde x_2$. The line segment $\{\tilde t_0\}\times(\hat x_1,\hat x_2)$ does not intersect the curve $C$ and contains the point $(\tilde t_0,\tilde x_0)$, which belongs to the interior $\Gamma$. Therefore, this segment is contained in $\Gamma$. The value of $\varepsilon$ is defined as in the previous case.
The chosen values of $\tilde t_0$, $\varepsilon$, $\tilde x_1$ and $\tilde x_2$ then satisfy the claimed properties.
\[def:XSimplePiece\] If there exists an open interval $I$ of the $t$-axis such that the intersection of a subset $U$ of the $(t,x)$-plane by the strip $I\times\mathbb R$ has an $x$-simple connected component, then we call this component an *$x$-simple piece* of $U$.
\[rem:OnSpecificOpenSetsWithNoXSimplePieces\] Suppose that for an open set $\Omega$ of the $(t,x)$-plane the subset $J$ of $t$’s from ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$ with connected $\Omega_t$’s is dense in ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$. Then the set $\Omega$ contains no $x$-simple pieces if an only if the complement of $J$ in ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$ is also dense in ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$.
![“Infinitely punctured open square” without $x$-simple pieces[]{data-label="fig:InfinitelyPuncturedOpenSquare"}](Ris2){width=".5\linewidth"}
\[ex:InfinitelyPuncturedOpenSquare\] The set $\Omega:=\big((0,1)\times(0,1)\big)\setminus\big\{(2^{-k}l,1-2^{-k}),\,l=1,\dots,2^k-1,\,k\in\mathbb N\big\}$ is open, connected, and contains no $x$-simple pieces. See Figure \[fig:InfinitelyPuncturedOpenSquare\].
Open $x$-simple regions naturally arise in the context of fundamental sets of solutions of linear ordinary differential equations depending on a parameter. Moreover, several properties of such equations depend on whether the underlying domain $\Omega$ of the independent variable $x$ and the parameter $t$ is $x$-simple and how the $x$-simplicity is combined with the connectedness, in particular, whether all the connected components of $\Omega$ or at least some of them are connected or whether the domain $\Omega$ has $x$-simple pieces. These properties include
- the existence of fundamental sets of solutions and of sets of solutions with nonvanishing Wronskians,
- the relation between these two kinds of solution sets,
- the existence of solutions that are not identically zero for such homogeneous equations and
- the general existence of solutions for such inhomogeneous equations.
See Figure \[fig:VariationsOnXSimplicityAndConnectedness\] for some variants of combining $x$-simplicity, connectedness and simple connectedness.
![Variants of combining $x$-simplicity, connectedness and simple connectedness: ([*a*]{}) connected, $x$-simple and thus simply connected set; ([*b*]{}) connected, non-$x$-simple and thus multiply connected set; ([*c*]{}) non-$x$-simple, simply connected set; ([*d*]{}) disconnected $x$-simple set (each of its connected components is necessarily $x$-simple and thus simply connected); ([*e*]{}) disconnected non-$x$-simple set whose connected components are $x$-simple and thus simply connected; ([*f*]{}) disconnected non-$x$-simple set having a non-$x$-simple connected component. []{data-label="fig:VariationsOnXSimplicityAndConnectedness"}](Ris3){width=".9\linewidth"}
Fundamental sets of solutions of homogeneous linear ordinary differential equations depending on a parameter {#sec:FundamentalSolutionSetsOfLinODEsWithParameter}
============================================================================================================
Given a homogeneous linear $p$th order ordinary differential equation with the independent variable $x$ and the parameter $t$ and with continuous coefficients defined on an open set $\Omega\subseteq\mathbb R^2$ of $(t,x)$, the question is whether there exist $p$ continuous solutions[^2] of this equation with nonvanishing Wronskian on $\Omega$. In general, the answer is negative, as is illustrated by the following example.
\[ex:1stOrderHomLinODEWithVanishingWronskian\] Consider the linear homogeneous first-order ordinary differential equation $$\mathcal P\colon\quad u_x=\frac u{x^2+t^2}\quad\mbox{on}\quad \Omega=\mathbb R^2\setminus\{(0,0)\}.$$ For each fixed $t$, its general solution is $$u=C\exp\left(\frac1t\arctan\frac xt\right)\quad\mbox{if}\quad t\ne0, \qquad
u=C\exp\left(-\frac1x\right)\quad\mbox{if}\quad t=0,$$ where $C$ is an arbitrary constant. This solution is well defined on the entire $\Omega_t=\mathbb R$ if $t\ne0$, and should be considered separately on each $x$-semiaxis, $\mathbb R_{+}$ and $\mathbb R_{-}$, if $t=0$. The functions $$\begin{gathered}
u=\zeta^+(t)\exp\left(\frac1t\arctan\frac xt\right),\quad t>0,\ x\in\mathbb R,
\\[.5ex]
u=\zeta^-(t)\exp\left(\frac1t\arctan\frac xt\right),\quad t<0,\ x\in\mathbb R,\end{gathered}$$ where the parameter function $\zeta^+$ (resp. $\zeta^-$) runs through ${\rm C}(\mathbb R_{+})$ (resp. ${\rm C}(\mathbb R_{-})$), represent the general solutions of the equation $\mathcal P$ on the domains $\mathbb R_{+}\times\mathbb R$ and $\mathbb R_{-}\times\mathbb R$, respectively. The question is whether there exists a solution of $\mathcal P$ that is continuous and nonvanishing on the entire $\Omega$. Suppose that this is the case, and that $u=\varphi(t,x)$ is such a solution. Define the function $\zeta(t):=\varphi(t,-1)$, $t\in\mathbb R$. We have $\zeta\in {\rm C}(\mathbb R)$ and $$\varphi(t,x)=
\begin{cases}
\zeta(t)\exp\left(\dfrac1t\arctan\dfrac xt+\dfrac\pi{2|t|}-\dfrac{\arctan t}t\right) \quad\mbox{if}\quad t\ne0,\ x\in\mathbb R,
\\[2.5ex]
\zeta(0)\exp\left(-\dfrac1x-1\right) \quad\mbox{if}\quad t=0,\ x\in\mathbb R_-.
\end{cases}$$ Here we use the equality $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:IdentityWithArctan}
\dfrac1t\arctan\dfrac xt-\dfrac\pi{2|t|}{\mathop{\rm sgn}\nolimits}x=-\dfrac1t\arctan\dfrac tx \quad\mbox{if}\quad t\ne0,\ x\ne0.\end{gathered}$$ The right hand side function is continuous on $\mathbb R^2\setminus\big(\{0\}\times[0,+\infty)\big)$ but cannot be continuously extended to $\Omega$ if $\zeta(0)\ne0$ since for $x>0$ and $t\to0$ we obtain $$\zeta(t)\exp\left(\dfrac1t\arctan\dfrac xt+\dfrac\pi{2|t|}-\dfrac{\arctan t}t\right)=
\zeta(t)\exp\left(-\dfrac1t\arctan\dfrac tx+\dfrac\pi{ |t|}-\dfrac{\arctan t}t\right)\to\infty,$$ where the sign of infinity coincides with the sign of $\zeta(0)$. In other words, the equation $\mathcal P$ has *no (continuous) solution that is nonzero on the entire domain* $\Omega$. Moreover, any solution of this equation on $\Omega$ vanishes on the half-axis $\{0\}\times(-\infty,0)$, and the corresponding function $\zeta$ is $O(e^{-\pi/|t|})$ as $t\to 0$. Consider the solution $$\varphi^1(t,x)=
\begin{cases}
\exp\left(\dfrac1t\arctan\dfrac xt-\dfrac\pi{2|t|}+\dfrac{\arctan t}t\right) \quad\mbox{if}\quad t\ne0,\ x\in\mathbb R,
\\[2.5ex]
\exp\left(\dfrac1x-1\right) \quad\mbox{if}\quad t=0,\ x\in\mathbb R_+,
\\[2.5ex]
0 \quad\mbox{if}\quad t=0,\ x\in\mathbb R_-.
\end{cases}$$ Since $\varphi^1(t,1)=1$, any solution $\varphi$ of the equation $\mathcal P$ on $\Omega$ can be represented as $\varphi=\tilde\zeta\varphi^1$, where $\tilde\zeta:=\varphi(t,1)\in {\rm C}(\mathbb R)$. In this sense the function $\varphi^1$ constitutes a fundamental set of solutions of this equation on $\Omega$.
\[def:FundamentalSolutionSetOfODEWithParameter\] Given a linear ordinary differential equation $\mathcal P$: $Pu=0$ on an open subset $\Omega$ of the $(t,x)$-plane, where $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$ with ${\mathop{\rm ord}\nolimits}P=p$ and $t$ plays the role of a parameter, we say that functions $\varphi^s\in {\rm C}^p_x(\Omega)$, $s=1,\dots,p$, satisfying this equation constitute
- a *fundamental set of solutions* of $\mathcal P$ on $\Omega$ if any solution $u$ of $\mathcal P$ can uniquely be represented in the form $u=\zeta^s\varphi^s$ for certain functions $\zeta^s\in {\rm C}({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega)$;
- a *locally fundamental set of solutions* of $\mathcal P$ on $\Omega$ if there exists an open cover of the set $\Omega$ (by which we shall always understand a cover consisting of open subsets of $\Omega$) such that the restriction of any solution $u$ of $\mathcal P$ to any element $U$ of the cover, $u\big|_U$, can uniquely be represented in the form $u\big|_U=\zeta^s\,\varphi^s\big|_U$ for certain functions $\zeta^s\in {\rm C}({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU)$.
\[lem:OnWronskianOfFundamentalSolutionSetOfODEWithParameter\] Any solutions $\varphi^s\in {\rm C}^p_x(\Omega)$, $s=1,\dots,p$, of an equation $Pu=0$ with $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$ and ${\mathop{\rm ord}\nolimits}P=p$ that satisfy the condition $\mathrm W(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p)\ne0$ on $\Omega$ constitute a locally fundamental set of solutions of this equation.
It suffices to consider a covering of $\Omega$ by balls $U_j:=B_{\varepsilon_j}(z_j)\subseteq\Omega$, $j\in J$, where $J$ is some index set, and $z_j=(t_j,x_j)\in\Omega$. For an arbitrary solution $u$ of the equation $Pu=0$ and for each of these balls, we have the representation , where the functions are defined, for each $t\in(t_j-\varepsilon_j,t_j+\varepsilon_j)$, as solutions of the system $\zeta^{js}(t)\varphi^s_{s'-1}(t,x_j)=u_{s'-1}(t,x_j)$, $s'=1,\dots,p$.
\[thm:OnFundSolutionSetOfLinODEsWithParameter\] Given an open subset $\Omega$ of the $(t,x)$-plane, the following are equivalent:
- Any homogeneous linear ordinary differential equation $Pu=0$ with $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$ admits a fundamental set of solutions on $\Omega$ with Wronskian nonvanishing on the entire $\Omega$.
- $\Omega$ is an $x$-simple region.
[([*ii*]{})]{}${}\Rightarrow{}$[([*i*]{})]{}: Consider an arbitrary $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$. In view of Lemma \[lem:OnOpenX-SimpleRegion\], there exists a function $\theta\in {\rm C}^\infty(I)$ with $I={\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$ such that its graph is contained in $\Omega$. For each $t\in I$ and $s\in\{1,\dots,p\}$, we consider the initial value problem for the equation $Pu=0$ on $\Omega_t$ with the initial conditions $u_{s'-1}=\delta_{ss'}$, $s'=1,\dots,p$, at $x=\theta(t)$ and then vary $t$ through $I$. Here $\delta_{ss'}$ is the Kronecker delta. The collection of the solutions $\varphi^s\colon\Omega\to\mathbb R$ of the above problems then satisfies the required properties.
[([*i*]{})]{}${}\Rightarrow{}$[([*ii*]{})]{}: Supposing that the open set $\Omega$ is not $x$-simple, we distinguish two cases.
First, we assume that each connected component of $\Omega$ is an $x$-simple set but the entire $\Omega$ is not. This means that there are connected components $U_1$ and $U_2$ of $\Omega$ with overlapping projections ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU_1$ and ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU_2$ to the $t$-axis. Suppose that for some $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$ of some order $p$ the equation $\mathcal P$: $Pu=0$ possesses a fundamental set of solutions $\varphi^1$, …, $\varphi^p$ on $\Omega$. In view of the previous part of the proof, this equation possesses sets of $p$ solutions with nonzero Wronskians on each connected component of $\Omega$ and hence it does on the entire $\Omega$. Therefore the Wronskian of any fundamental set of solutions of $\mathcal P$ does not vanish on $\Omega$. Using Lemma \[lem:OnOpenX-SimpleRegion\], we fix a function $\theta\in {\rm C}^\infty({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU_1)$ whose graph is contained in $U_1$. There is a solution $\psi$ of $\mathcal P$ such that $\psi=1$ on this graph and $\psi=0$ on $U_2$. By assumption, $\psi=\zeta^s\varphi^s$ for some functions $\zeta^s\in {\rm C}({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega)$. These functions vanish on ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU_2$ since $\psi\equiv 0$ on $U_2$ and thus the solution $\psi$ vanishes on the intersection of the strip $\{(t,x)\mid t\in{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU_2,\,x\in\mathbb R^2\}$ with $\Omega$. But this contradicts the fact that $\psi(t,\theta(t))=1$ for $t\in{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU_1\cap{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU_2$. Therefore, for any $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$ with such an $\Omega$, the equation $Pu=0$ possesses no (global) fundamental set of solutions on $\Omega$.
Henceforth we may therefore assume that some connected component of $\Omega$ is not an $x$-simple region. Applying Lemma \[lem:OnOpenConnectedNonX-SimpleSets\] to this component, we get that up to reflections in $t$, the set $\Omega$ contains, for some $\tilde t_0,\varepsilon,\tilde x_1,\tilde x_2\in\mathbb R$ with $\varepsilon>0$, $\tilde x_1\leqslant\tilde x_2$ and for some closed subset $\Upsilon$ of the line segment $\{\tilde t_0\}\times[\tilde x_1,\tilde x_2]$ with $(\tilde t_0,\tilde x_1),(\tilde t_0,\tilde x_2)\in\Upsilon$, the subset $[\tilde t_0-\varepsilon,\tilde t_0]\times[\tilde x_1-\varepsilon,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon]\setminus\Upsilon$ and does not intersect $\Omega$. Consider any $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$ with $G(t)\to-\infty$ as $t\to\tilde t_0{}^-$,[^3] where $$G(t):=\int_{\tilde x_1-\varepsilon}^{\tilde x_2+\varepsilon}\frac{g^{p-1}(t,x)}{g^p(t,x)}\,{\rm d}x,
\quad t\in[\tilde t_0-\varepsilon,\tilde t_0),$$ $p={\mathop{\rm ord}\nolimits}P$, and $g^p$ and $g^{p-1}$ denote the leading and subleading coefficients of $P$, respectively. An example of such coefficients is given by $g^p(t,x)=1$ and $g^{p-1}(t,x)=-c\big((x-\tilde x_1)^2+(t-\tilde t_0)^2\big)^{-1}$ with $c>0$ for $(t,x)\in\Omega$, cf. Example \[ex:1stOrderHomLinODEWithVanishingWronskian\]. Then $\mathrm W(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p)=0$ on $\{\tilde t_0\}\times[\tilde x_1-\varepsilon,\tilde x_1)$ for any solutions $\varphi^1$, …, $\varphi^p$ of the equation $Pu=0$. Indeed, it suffices to prove this claim only for the point $(\tilde t_0,\tilde x_1-\varepsilon)$. Supposing that it is not the case, by the Liouville–Ostrogradski formula we obtain$\mathrm W(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p)(t,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon)
=\mathrm W(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p)(t,\tilde x_1-\varepsilon)e^{-G(t)}\to\infty$, $t\to\tilde t_0{}^-$, which contradicts the continuity of $\varphi^1$, …, $\varphi^p$ at $(\tilde t_0,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon)$.
If a connected component of an open set of $\Omega$ is not an $x$-simple region, then for each $p\in\mathbb N$ there exists an infinite-parameter family of equations of the form $Pu=0$ with $P\in{{\rm DO}}^\omega_1(\Omega)$ of order $p$ such that the Wronskian of any $p$ solutions of any of them vanishes on the same line segment $\{t_0\}\times[x_1,x_2]$ contained in $\Omega$.
We follow the proof of Theorem \[thm:OnFundSolutionSetOfLinODEsWithParameter\] and consider an operator $P\in{{\rm DO}}^\omega_1(\Omega)$ of the form $P=\sum_{q=0}^pg^q{\partial}_x^q$, where $g^p(t,x)=1$, $g^{p-1}(t,x)=-f(t,x)\big((x-\tilde x_1)^2+(t-\tilde t_0)^2\big)^{-1}$ for $(t,x)\in\Omega$, $g^q$, $q=0,\dots,p-2$, are arbitrary elements of ${\rm C}^\omega(\Omega)$, and $f$ is an arbitrary positive function in ${\rm C}^\omega(\Omega)$ that is separated from zero on the intersection of a neighborhood of $(\tilde t_0,\tilde x_1)$ with $\Omega$. The coefficients of the Taylor expansions of the functions $f$ and $g^q$, $q=0,\dots,p-2$, can serve as parameters of the family of equations $Pu=0$, which obviously has the required properties.
If each connected component of an open non-$x$-simple set $\Omega$ is $x$-simple, then any equation $Pu=0$ with $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$ admits sets of ${\mathop{\rm ord}\nolimits}P$ solutions with Wronskians nonvanishing on $\Omega$ and no fundamental set of solutions on $\Omega$.
\[cor:WronkianOfFSS\] Given an open $x$-simple subset $\Omega$ of the $(t,x)$-plane, a solution set $\{\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p\}$ of a $p$th order linear ordinary differential equation $\mathcal P$: $Pu=0$ with $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$ is fundamental on $\Omega$ if and only if the Wronskian of these solutions does not vanish on $\Omega$.
\[cor:OnOpenSetsWithXSimplePieces\] 1. If an open set $\Omega$ has an $x$-simple piece, then any differential equation $Pu=0$ with $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$, possesses a solution that is not identically zero on $\Omega$.
2\. If there are $x$-simple pieces of $\Omega$ with overlapping projections to the $t$-axis, then any equation of the above form admits no fundamental set of solutions on $\Omega$.
Fix $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$ with ${\mathop{\rm ord}\nolimits}P=p$ and let $U$ be an $x$-simple piece of $\Omega$. In view of Lemma \[lem:OnOpenX-SimpleRegion\], there exists a function $\theta\in {\rm C}^\infty({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU)$ whose graph is contained in $U$. For each $t\in{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU$, we consider the initial value problem for the equation $\mathcal P$: $Pu=0$ on $U_t$ with the initial conditions $u_{s-1}=\chi^s(t)$, $s=1,\dots,p$, at $x=\theta(t)$ and then vary $t$ through ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU$. Here $\chi^1$, …, $\chi^p$ are (smooth) bump functions on ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU$. The continuation of the solution of this problem by zero to $\Omega$ gives a solution of $\mathcal P$ on $\Omega$ as required.
Suppose that there is another $x$-simple piece $\tilde U$ of $\Omega$ such that ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t U\cap{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\tilde U\ne\varnothing$. We choose a value $t_0\in{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t U\cap{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\tilde U$ and additionally set the condition $\chi^1(t_0)\ne0$ in the above construction, which results in a solution $\psi\in {\rm C}^p_x(\Omega)$ of $\mathcal P$ with ${\mathop{\rm supp}\nolimits}\psi\subset U$ and $\psi\big(t_0,\theta(t_0)\big)\ne0$. If the equation $\mathcal P$ admitted a fundamental set $\{\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p\}$ of solutions on $\Omega$, where $p={\mathop{\rm ord}\nolimits}P$, then the restrictions of these solutions to $U$ and to $\tilde U$ would form fundamental sets of solutions of $\mathcal P$ on $U$ and on $\tilde U$, respectively. Thus, Corollary \[cor:WronkianOfFSS\] would imply that the Wronskian of these solutions does not vanish on $U\cup\tilde U$. Let us analyze the expansion $\psi=\zeta^s\varphi^s$, where $\zeta^s\in {\rm C}({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega)$. Since $\psi=0$ on $\tilde U$, the functions $\zeta^s$ would vanish on ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\tilde U$, which contradicts the condition $\psi\big(t_0,\theta(t_0)\big)\ne0$.
If an open set $\Omega$ contains no $x$-simple pieces, then there may exist a differential equation $Pu=0$ with $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$, possessing only the zero solution on $\Omega$:
\[ex:1stOrderODEWithNoNonzeroSolutions\] On the “infinitely punctured open square” $\Omega$ presented in Example \[ex:InfinitelyPuncturedOpenSquare\], we consider the equation $u_x=H(t,x)u$, where $$H(t,x):=\sum_{k=1}^\infty\sum_{l=1}^{2^k-1}\frac{4^{-k}c_{kl}}{(x-1+2^{-k})^2+(t-2^{-k}l)^2}, \quad (t,x)\in\Omega,$$ with positive constants $c_{kl}$ such that $\{c_{ki},\, k,i\in\mathbb N\}$ is bounded above by a (positive) constant $C$. Note that $H\in {\rm C}^\omega(\Omega)$, being a locally uniformly convergent sum of real analytic functions on $\Omega$. Indeed, take an arbitrary point $z_0=(t_0,x_0)\in\Omega$ and fix $\delta>0$ such that the ball $B_{2\delta}(z_0)$ is contained in $\Omega$. Then the series for $H$ is dominated on $B_\delta(z_0)$ by the convergent series .
Let $\psi$ be a solution of this equation on $\Omega$. According to the proof of Theorem \[thm:OnFundSolutionSetOfLinODEsWithParameter\], the function $\psi$ vanishes on the set , which is dense in $\Omega$. Hence this function vanishes on the entire $\Omega$.
Moreover, the above consideration allows us to conclude by induction that for any $p\in\mathbb N$ the equation $({\partial}_x-H)^pu=0$ admits only the zero solution on $\Omega$.
Example \[ex:1stOrderODEWithNoNonzeroSolutions\] can be generalized to the following assertion.
\[thm:NoNonzeroSolutionsForLinODEsWithParameterOnSpecialDomain\]=-1 If an open set $\Omega$ contains no $x$-simple pieces, and the subset $J$ of $t$’s from ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$ with connected $\Omega_t$’s is dense in ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$, then for each $p\in\mathbb N$ there exists an infinite-parameter family of equations of the form $Pu=0$ with $P\in{{\rm DO}}^\omega_1(\Omega)$ of order $p$ that possess only the zero solution on $\Omega$.
=-1 Given a set $\Omega$ with the prescribed properties and $I:={\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$, we can consider each connected component of $\Omega$ separately, and thus we can assume that $\Omega$ is connected. We define the set $$\Theta:=\{(t,x)\in\mathbb R^2\mid t\in I,\,
{\rm lb}_\Omega(t)<x<{\rm ub}_\Omega(t)\},$$ which is open and $x$-simple with ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Theta=I$. (Moreover, it is the minimal $x$-simple set that contains $\Omega$.) We fix a function $\theta\in {\rm C}^\infty(I)$ with graph contained in $\Theta$, which exists in view of Lemma \[lem:OnOpenX-SimpleRegion\].
![Objects related to $t_k$ in the proof of Theorem \[thm:NoNonzeroSolutionsForLinODEsWithParameterOnSpecialDomain\][]{data-label="fig:NoNonzeroSolutionsForLinODEsWithParameterOnSpecialDomain"}](Ris5){width="1.\linewidth"}
We choose a countable subset $\{t_k,\,k\in\mathbb N\}$ in $J$ that is dense in $J$ and thus in $I$. For each $k$, we have $\Omega_{t_k}=(a_k,b_k)$, where $a_k:={\rm lb}_\Omega(t_k)\in\mathbb R\cup\{-\infty\}$ and $b_k:={\rm ub}_\Omega(t_k)\in\mathbb R\cup\{+\infty\}$; see Figure \[fig:NoNonzeroSolutionsForLinODEsWithParameterOnSpecialDomain\]. Since the set $\Omega$ is open, there exists a sequence of rectangles $[t_k-\delta_{ki},t_k+\delta_{ki}]\times[a_{ki},b_{ki}]$, $i\in\mathbb N$, where $\delta_{ki}\downarrow0$, $a_{ki}\downarrow a_k$ and $b_{ki}\uparrow b_k$ strictly monotonically as $i\to\infty$, and $a_{ki}<\theta(t)<b_{ki}$ for $t\in[t_k-\delta_{ki},t_k+\delta_{ki}]$, and that are contained in $\Omega$. There exists a sequence of points $(t_{ki},x_{ki})\in\Theta\setminus\Omega$, $i\in\mathbb N$, such that $t_{ki}\in(t_k-\delta_{ki},t_0+\delta_{ki})$ and hence either $x_{ki}<a_{ki}$ or $x_{ki}>b_{ki}$ for each $i\in\mathbb N$. Indeed, if this was not the case for some $i$, then the set $\Omega$ would possess the piece $\Omega\cap(t_k-\delta_{ki},t_0+\delta_{ki})\times\mathbb R$, which contradicts the assumption of the lemma. Therefore, the sequence $(x_{ki}, i\in\mathbb N)$ has limit points that are less than $a_k$ or greater than $b_k$. Define[^4] $$K_+:=\bigg\{k\in\mathbb N\ \Big|\,\varlimsup_{i\to\infty}x_{ki}\geqslant b_k\bigg\},\quad
K_-:=\bigg\{k\in\mathbb N\setminus K_+\ \Big|\, \varliminf_{i\to\infty}x_{ki}\leqslant a_k\bigg\},$$ endowing these sets with the natural order inherited from $\mathbb N$. Only one of them may be empty. If $K_+\ne\varnothing$, then for each $k\in K_+$, we can assume without loss of generality (by selecting a subsequence) that $x_{ki}>b_{ki}$ for any $i\in\mathbb N$. Define $x_{ki}':=\inf\{x\in(b_{ki},x_{ki}]\mid x\notin\Omega_{t_{ki}}\}$. As a result, we construct the countable tuple $\big((t_{ki},x_{ki}'), k\in K_+,i\in\mathbb N\big)$.[^5] In a similar way, if $K_-\ne\varnothing$, then for each $k\in K_-$, we can assume without loss of generality that $x_{ki}<a_{ki}$ for any $i\in\mathbb N$. Then set $x_{ki}':=\sup\{x\in[x_{ki},a_{ki})\mid x\notin\Omega_{t_{ki}}\}$. This gives the countable tuple $\big((t_{ki},x_{ki}'),\, k\in K_-,\,i\in\mathbb N\big)$. We define the function $$H(t,x):=
\sum_{k\in K_+}\sum_{i=1}^\infty\frac{2^{-k-i}c_{ki}}{(x-x_{ki}')^2+(t-t_{ki})^2}
-\sum_{k\in K_-}\sum_{i=1}^\infty\frac{2^{-k-i}c_{ki}}{(x-x_{ki}')^2+(t-t_{ki})^2},
\quad (t,x)\in\Omega,$$ where the $c_{ki}$ are positive constants[^6] such that $\{c_{ki},\, k,i\in\mathbb N\}$ is bounded above. (These $c_{ki}$ can serve as a family of infinitely many parameters, cf. the formulation of the proposition.) The function $H$ is real analytic on $\Omega$, which is shown similarly to Example \[ex:1stOrderODEWithNoNonzeroSolutions\]. Let us prove that the equation $u_x=H(t,x)u$ possesses only the zero solution on $\Omega$.
Any solution $\psi\in {\rm C}^p_x(\Omega)$ of this equation vanishes on all the line segments $\{t_{ki}\}\times(a_{ki},x_{ki}')$, $k\in K_+$, $i\in\mathbb N$, and $\{t_{ki}\}\times(x_{ki}',b_{ki})$, $k\in K_-$, $i\in\mathbb N$. We will show this for arbitrary fixed $k\in K_+$ and $i\in\mathbb N$. (The proof for $k\in K_-$ is similar.) It suffices to prove that $\psi(t_{ki},b_{ki})=0$. There exists $b_{ki}'\in\Omega_{t_{ki}}$ that is greater than $x_{ki}'$. Since the set $\Omega$ is open, there exists $\delta>0$ such that both the balls $B_{2\delta}\big((t_{ki},b_{ki})\big)$ and $B_{2\delta}\big((t_{ki},b_{ki}')\big)$ are contained in $\Omega$. Then also $[b_{ki},b_{ki}']\subset\Omega_t$ for any $t\in J\cap[t_{ki}-\delta,t_{ki}+\delta]$. Similarly to the proof of Theorem \[thm:OnFundSolutionSetOfLinODEsWithParameter\], the assumption $\psi(t_{ki},b_{ki})\ne0$ implies that $$\psi(t,b_{ki}')=\psi(t,b_{ki})\exp\left(\int_{b_{ki}}^{b_{ki}'}H(t,x)\,{\rm d}x\right)\to\infty
\mbox{ \ as \ } t\to t_{ki}
\mbox{ \ within \ } J\cap[t_{ki}-\delta,t_{ki}+\delta],$$ which contradicts the continuity of $\psi$ at the point $(t_{ki},b_{ki}')$.
As a result, we have $0=\psi\big(t_{ki},\theta(t_{ki})\big)\to\psi\big(t_k,\theta(t_k)\big)$ as $i\to\infty$, and hence $\psi\big(t_k,\theta(t_k)\big)=0$. Therefore, $\psi=0$ on the union $\bigcup_{k=1}^\infty\{t_k\}\times\Omega_{t_k}$, which is dense in $\Omega$. This finally implies that $\psi=0$ on $\Omega$.
It is easy to prove by induction using the above claim on the equation $u_x=H(t,x)u$ as both the base case and a base for proving the inductive step that for any $p\in\mathbb N$ the equation $({\partial}_x-H)^pu=0$ admits only the zero solution on $\Omega$.
The following is an analogue of Theorem \[thm:NoNonzeroSolutionsForLinODEsWithParameterOnSpecialDomain\] for an arbitrary open subset of the $(t,x)$-plane without $x$-simple pieces only for equations with coefficients in ${\rm C}^\omega_x(\Omega)$.
\[thm:NoNonzeroSolutionsForLinODEsWithParameter\] An open set $\Omega$ contains no $x$-simple pieces if and only if for each $p\in\mathbb N$ there exists an infinite-parameter family of equations of the form $Pu=0$ with $P\in{{\rm DO}}^\omega_{x,1}(\Omega)$ of order $p$ that possess only the zero solution on $\Omega$.
We prove the sufficiency of the absence of $x$-simple pieces for existence of equations with only the zero solution since the necessity follows from point 1 of Corollary \[cor:OnOpenSetsWithXSimplePieces\]. Thus, suppose that an open set $\Omega$ contains no $x$-simple pieces.
Choose a countable dense subset $\{(t^*_k,x^*_k),\,k\in\mathbb N\}$ of $\Omega$. We consider nested open subsets $\Omega_k$, $k\in\mathbb N$, of $\Omega$, $\Omega_1:=\Omega\supset\Omega_2\supset\Omega_3\supset\cdots$, and points $(t_k,x_k)\in\Omega_k$ with $(t_1,x_1):=(t^*_1,x^*_1)$ and $(t_k-t^*_k)^2+(x_k-x^*_k)^2<k^{-2}$ for $k>1$. The subsets $\Omega_k$ with $k>1$ will be defined recursively later.
For each $k\in\mathbb N$, we implement the following procedure.
There exists $\delta_k>0$ such that $I_k\times\{x_k\}\subset\Omega_k$, where $I_k:=(t_k-\delta_k,t_k+\delta_k)$. Define the functions $a^k\colon I_k\to\mathbb R\cup\{-\infty\}$ and $b^k\colon I_k\to\mathbb R\cup\{+\infty\}$ by $a^k(t):=\inf\{x\in\mathbb R\mid[x,x_k]\subset\Omega_t\}$ and $b^k(t):=\sup\{x\in\mathbb R\mid[x_k,x]\subset\Omega_t\}$. These functions are upper and lower semi-continuous on $I_k$, respectively; cf. the proof of Lemma \[lem:OnOpenSetLB&UB\]. Indeed, fix an arbitrary $t\in I_k$. If $a^k(t)\in\mathbb R$, then for any $\varepsilon>0$ with $a^k(t)+\varepsilon<x_k$, the interval $[a^k(t)+\varepsilon,x_k]$ is contained in $\Omega_t$ and thus there exists a $\delta>0$ such that $(t-\delta,t+\delta)\subset I_k$ and $(t-\delta,t+\delta)\times[a^k(t)+\varepsilon,x_k]\subset\Omega$. Therefore, for any $t'\in(t-\delta,t+\delta)$ we have $a^k(t')<a^k(t)+\varepsilon$. Analogously, if $a^k(t)=-\infty$, then for an arbitrary $N>0$ with $-N<x_k$, the interval $[-N,x_k])$ is contained in $\Omega_t$ and again there exists a $\delta>0$ such that $(t-\delta,t+\delta)\subset I_k$ and $(t-\delta,t+\delta)\times[-N,x_k]\subset\Omega$. Hence for any $t'\in(t-\delta,+\delta)$ we have $a^k(t')<-N$. In total, this means that the function $a^k$ is upper semi-continuous on $I_k$. The lower semi-continuity of $b^k$ is proved in a similar way.
We distinguish four possible cases. For each of Cases 2–4, we assume that the conditions of the previous cases do not hold.
1. There exists a sequence $(t_{k0m})_{m\in\mathbb N}$ contained in $I_k$ and strictly monotonically converging to $t_k$ such that and $(b^k(t_k),\beta_k)\cap\Omega_{t_k}\ne\varnothing$. Set $\Lambda_k:=\{0\}$ and $t_{k0}:=t_k$.
2. There exists a sequence $(t_{k0m})_{m\in\mathbb N}$ contained in $I_k$ and strictly monotonically converging to $t_k$ such that and $(\alpha_k,a^k(t_k))\cap\Omega_{t_k}\ne\varnothing$. Set $\Lambda_k:=\{0\}$ and $t_{k0}:=t_k$.
3. There exists a sequence $(t_{kl})_{l\in\mathbb N}$ contained in $I_k$ and strictly monotonically converging to $t_k$ such that for each $l\in\mathbb N$ there exists a sequence $(t_{klm})_{m\in\mathbb N}$ contained in $I_k$ and strictly monotonically converging to $t_{kl}$ with and $(b^k(t_{kl}),\beta_{kl})\cap\Omega_{t_{kl}}\ne\varnothing$. Set $\Lambda_k:=\mathbb N$.
4. There exists a sequence $(t_{kl})_{l\in\mathbb N}$ contained in $I_k$ and strictly monotonically converging to $t_k$ such that for each $l\in\mathbb N$ there exists a sequence $(t_{klm})_{m\in\mathbb N}$ contained in $I_k$ and strictly monotonically converging to $t_{kl}$ with and $(\alpha_{kl},a^k(t_{kl}))\cap\Omega_{t_{kl}}\ne\varnothing$. Set $\Lambda_k:=\mathbb N$.
Let us show that one of the above cases necessarily holds. Indeed, otherwise there exists $\delta'_k$ with $0<\delta'_k<\delta_k$ such that the restrictions of $a^k$ and $b^k$ on the interval $I'_k:=(t_k-\delta'_k,t_k+\delta'_k)$ have none of the properties associated with these cases. Consider the intersection $\Upsilon$ of $\Omega$ with the strip $I'_k\times\mathbb R$ and partition it into three parts, $$\begin{aligned}
\Upsilon_-&:=\{(t,x)\in\Omega\mid t\in I'_k,\, x\leqslant a^k(t)\},\\
\Upsilon_0&:=\{(t,x)\in\Omega\mid t\in I'_k,\, a^k(t)<x<b^k(t)\},\\
\Upsilon_+&:=\{(t,x)\in\Omega\mid t\in I'_k,\, x\geqslant b^k(t)\};\end{aligned}$$ see Figure \[fig:NoNonzeroSolutionsForLinODEsWithParameterOnDomainWithoutXSimplePieces\]. In fact, $\Upsilon_0=\{(t,x)\in\mathbb R^2\mid t\in I'_k,\, a^k(t)<x<b^k(t)\}$. From this it is obvious that $\Upsilon_0$ is a subset of $\Omega$ that is $x$-simple and connected. Since the lower and upper bounds of $\Upsilon_0$ in $x$, and , are upper and lower semi-continuous, respectively, then Lemma \[lem:OnOpenX-SimpleRegion\] implies that $\Upsilon_0$ is an open set. Hence $\Upsilon_0$ is not a connected component of $\Upsilon$; otherwise $\Upsilon_0$ would be an $x$-simple piece of $\Omega$. This implies that $\Upsilon_-\cup\Upsilon_+\ne\varnothing$ and there exists a continuous path $\gamma=(\gamma^1,\gamma^2)\colon[0,1]\to\Upsilon$ such that $\gamma(0)\in\Upsilon_0$ and $\gamma(1)\in\Upsilon_-\cup\Upsilon_+$. Define $\tau_0:=\sup\{\tau\in[0,1]\mid\gamma([0,\tau])\subset\Upsilon_0\}$. Since the set $\Upsilon_0$ is open, the point $\gamma(\tau_0)$ does not belong to it and thus it belongs to $\Upsilon_-\cup\Upsilon_+$, say to $\Upsilon_+$. It is obvious that $b^k(\gamma^1(\tau))>\gamma^2(\tau)$ for $\tau\in[0,\tau_0)$, and $b^k(\gamma^1(\tau_0))<\gamma^2(\tau_0)$. Therefore, for $\hat t:=\gamma^1(\tau_0)$ we have $\hat t\in I'_k$, $\hat\beta:=\limsup_{t\to\hat t}b^k(t)>b^k(\hat t)$ and $(b^k(\hat t),\hat\beta)\cap\Omega_{\hat t}\ne\varnothing$, which contradicts the conditions for $I'_k$. =-1
![Argumentation on the conditions for $a^k$ and $b^k$ in the proof of Theorem \[thm:NoNonzeroSolutionsForLinODEsWithParameter\][]{data-label="fig:NoNonzeroSolutionsForLinODEsWithParameterOnDomainWithoutXSimplePieces"}](Ris6){width="1.\linewidth"}
Denote the set of $k$’s related to Cases 1 and 3 by $K_+$ and the set of $k$’s related to Cases 2 and 4 by $K_-$. Thus, $K_+\cup K_-=\mathbb N$ and $K_+\cap K_-=\varnothing$. We define $$\Omega_{k+1}=\Omega_k\setminus\big(
\{t_k,t_{kl},t_{klm},l\in\Lambda_k,m\in\mathbb N\}\times\mathbb R\big),$$ i.e., the set $\Omega_{k+1}$ is obtained from $\Omega_k$ by excluding all lines with fixed values of $t$ that are involved in the $k$th step. Clearly there exists a point $(t_{k+1},x_{k+1})\in\Omega_{k+1}$ with and $(t_{k+1}-t^*_{k+1})^2+(x_{k+1}-x^*_{k+1})^2<(k+1)^{-2}$. Hence the above recursion procedure is well defined.
We define the function $$H(t,x):=
\sum_{k\in K_+}\sum_{l\in\Lambda_k}\frac{2^{-k-l}c_{kl}\chi^k(t)}{(x-b^k(t_{kl}))^2+(t-t_{kl})^2}-
\sum_{k\in K_-}\sum_{l\in\Lambda_k}\frac{2^{-k-l}c_{kl}\chi^k(t)}{(x-a^k(t_{kl}))^2+(t-t_{kl})^2},$$ for $(t,x)\in\Omega$, where $c_{kl}$ are positive constants[^7] such that $\{c_{kl}, k\in\mathbb N, l\in\Lambda_k\}$ is bounded above by a (positive) constant $C$, and the functions $\chi^k\in {\rm C}^\infty({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega)$ satisfy the properties $$\begin{gathered}
\chi^k(t_{kl})=1,\quad \chi^k(t)\geqslant0\ \ \forall t\in{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega,\quad {\mathop{\rm supp}\nolimits}\chi^k\subseteq I_k.\end{gathered}$$ (Again, these $c_{ki}$ can serve as a family of infinitely many parameters, cf. the formulation of the theorem.) The function $H$ belongs to the space ${\rm C}^\omega_x(\Omega)$,[^8] being a locally uniformly convergent sum of functions in ${\rm C}^\omega_x(\Omega)$. Indeed, take an arbitrary point $z_0=(t_0,x_0)\in\Omega$ and fix $\delta>0$ such that the ball $B_{2\delta}(z_0)$ is contained in $\Omega$. Then the series for $H$ is dominated on $B_\delta(z_0)$ by the convergent series .
Let us prove that the equation $u_x=H(t,x)u$ possesses only the zero solution on $\Omega$. Any solution $\psi\in {\rm C}^1_x(\Omega)$ of this equation vanishes on all the line segments $\{t_{kl}\}\times(a^k(t_{kl}),b^k(t_{kl}))$, $k\in \mathbb N$, $l\in\Lambda_k$, and hence on all the line segments $\{t_k\}\times(a^k(t_k),b^k(t_k))$, $k\in \mathbb N$. We will show this for arbitrary fixed $k\in K_+$ and $l\in\Lambda_k$. (The proof for $k\in K_-$ is similar.) Since the union of the line segments $\{t_k\}\times(a^k(t_k),b^k(t_k))$, $k\in \mathbb N$, is dense in $\Omega$, this will imply that the function $\psi$ vanishes identically on $\Omega$.
We fix a $y_1\in(a^k(t_{kl}),b^k(t_{kl}))$ and a $y_2\in(b^k(t_{kl}),\beta_{kl})$. Selecting a subsequence if necessary, we can assume without loss of generality that the sequence $(b^k(t_{klm}))_{m\in\mathbb N}$ converges to $\beta_{kl}$. Since the function $a^k$ is upper semi-continuous on $I_k$ and $b^k(t_{klm})\to\beta_{kl}>b^k(t_{kl})$ as $m\to\infty$, there exists $N_1\in\mathbb N$ such that $[y_1,y_2]\subset(a^k(t_{klm}),b^k(t_{klm}))\subset\Omega_{t_{klm}}$ for any $m>N_1$. Since $\chi^k(t_{kl})=1$ and $t_{klm}\to t_{kl}$ as $m\to\infty$, there exists $N_2\in\mathbb N$ such that $\chi^k(t_{klm})>1/2$ for any $m>N_1$. Further we consider only values of $m$ greater than $N:=\max(N_1,N_2)$. We have $\chi^{k'}(t_{klm})=0$ for any $k'>k$ and any $m\in\mathbb N$ and thus $$H(t_{klm},x)\geqslant\frac{2^{-k-l-1}c_{kl}}{(x-b^k(t_{kl}))^2+(t-t_{kl})^2}-C\delta_{kl}^{-2},$$ where $\delta_{kl}:=\mathop{\rm dist}(\mathbb R\setminus I_k,\{t_{kl},t_{klm},m\in\mathbb N\})$. Consequently, the assumption $\psi(t_{kl},y_1)\ne0$ implies that $$\psi(t_{klm},y_2)=\psi(t_{klm},y_1)\exp\left(\int_{y_1}^{y_2}H(t_{klm},x)\,{\rm d}x\right)\to\infty
\mbox{ \ as \ } m\to\infty,$$ which contradicts the continuity of $\psi$ at the point $(t_{ki},b_{ki}')$. Therefore, the function $\psi$ vanishes at $(t_{kl},y_1)$ and thus it vanishes on the entire line segment $\{t_{kl}\}\times(a^k(t_{kl}),b^k(t_{kl}))$.
Similarly to the proof of Theorem \[thm:NoNonzeroSolutionsForLinODEsWithParameterOnSpecialDomain\], we use the above claim on the equation $u_x=H(t,x)u$ as both the base case and a base for proving the inductive step and derive that for any $p\in\mathbb N$ the equation $({\partial}_x-H)^pu=0$ admits only the zero solution on $\Omega$.
Existence of solutions of inhomogeneous linear\
ordinary differential equations with parameter {#sec:ExistenceOfSolutionsOfInhomLinODEsWithParameter}
===============================================
As illustrated by the following example, an inhomogeneous linear $p$th order ordinary differential equation with independent variable $x$ and parameter $t$ and with real analytic coefficients and right hand side defined on an open set $\Omega\subseteq\mathbb R^2$ of $(t,x)$ may possess no continuous solutions on $\Omega$ at all.
\[ex:1stOrderInhomLinODEWithoutSolutions\] Similarly to Example \[ex:1stOrderHomLinODEWithVanishingWronskian\], consider the elementary linear inhomogeneous first-order ordinary differential equation $$\mathcal P\colon\quad u_x=\frac 1{x^2+t^2}\quad\mbox{on}\quad \Omega=\mathbb R^2\setminus\{(0,0)\},$$ which corresponds to the operator $P:={\partial}_x\in{{\rm DO}}^\omega(\Omega)$. For each fixed $t$, its general solution is $$u=\frac1t\arctan\frac xt+C\quad\mbox{if}\quad t\ne0, \qquad
u=-\frac1x+C\quad\mbox{if}\quad t=0,$$ where $C$ is an arbitrary constant. This solution is well defined on the entire $\Omega_t=\mathbb R$ if $t\ne0$, and should be separately considered on each $x$-semiaxis, $\mathbb R_{+}$ and $\mathbb R_{-}$, if $t=0$. The functions $$\begin{gathered}
u=\frac1t\arctan\frac xt+\zeta^+(t),\quad t>0,\ x\in\mathbb R,
\\[.5ex]
u=\frac1t\arctan\frac xt+\zeta^-(t),\quad t<0,\ x\in\mathbb R,\end{gathered}$$ where the parameter function $\zeta^+$ (resp. $\zeta^-$) runs through ${\rm C}(\mathbb R_{+})$ (resp. ${\rm C}(\mathbb R_{-})$), represent the general solutions of the equation $\mathcal P$ on the domains $\mathbb R_{+}\times\mathbb R$ and $\mathbb R_{-}\times\mathbb R$, respectively. The question is whether there exists a solution of $\mathcal P$ that is continuous on the entire $\Omega$. Suppose that this is the case, and that $u=\varphi(t,x)$ is such a solution. Define the function $\zeta(t):=\varphi(t,-1)$, $t\in\mathbb R$. We have $\zeta\in {\rm C}(\mathbb R)$ and $$\varphi(t,x)=
\begin{cases}
\dfrac1t\arctan\dfrac xt+\dfrac\pi{2|t|}-\dfrac{\arctan t}t+\zeta(t)\quad\mbox{if}\quad t\ne0,\ x\in\mathbb R,
\\[2.5ex]
-\dfrac1x-1+\zeta(0) \quad\mbox{if}\quad t=0,\ x\in\mathbb R_-,
\end{cases}$$ where we use the equality . Here the right hand side is continuous on $\mathbb R^2\setminus\big(\{0\}\times[0,+\infty)\big)$ but cannot be continuously extended to $\Omega$ since for $x>0$ and $t\to0$ we obtain $$\dfrac1t\arctan\dfrac xt+\dfrac\pi{2|t|}-\dfrac{\arctan t}t+\zeta(t)=
-\dfrac1t\arctan\dfrac tx+\dfrac\pi{ |t|}-\dfrac{\arctan t}t+\zeta(t)\to+\infty.$$ In other words, the equation $\mathcal P$ has *no (continuous) solution on the entire domain* $\Omega$.
\[ex:InfiniteSetFamilyOf1stOrderInhomLinODEWithoutSolutions\] Generalizing Example \[ex:1stOrderInhomLinODEWithoutSolutions\], consider the family of elementary linear inhomogeneous first-order ordinary differential equations $$\mathcal P_f\colon\quad (x^2+t^2)u_x=f(t,x)\quad\mbox{on}\quad \Omega=\mathbb R^2\setminus\{(0,0)\},$$ with the operator $P:=(x^2+t^2){\partial}_x\in{{\rm DO}}^\omega(\Omega)$, where the parameter function $f$ runs through the subset $\mathcal F$ of functions from ${\rm C}(\Omega)$ whose values at certain upper or lower half-neighborhoods of $(0,0)$ are separated from zero, i.e., for each element $f$ of $\mathcal F$ there exist $\delta,\varepsilon>0$ such that, up to reflections in $t$ and function values, $f(t,x)\geqslant\delta$ for $(t,x)\in(0,\varepsilon]\times[-\varepsilon,\varepsilon]$. Supposing that the equation $\mathcal P_f$ admits a solution $\varphi\in {\rm C}^1_x(\Omega)$, we obtain $$\begin{split}
\varphi(t,\varepsilon)&=\varphi(t,-\varepsilon)+\int_{-\varepsilon}^\varepsilon\frac{f(t,x)}{x^2+t^2}\,{\rm d}x
\geqslant\varphi(t,-\varepsilon)+\int_{-\varepsilon}^\varepsilon\frac{\delta\,{\rm d}x}{x^2+t^2}\\[.5ex]
&=\frac\pi t-\frac2t\arctan\dfrac t\varepsilon+\varphi(t,-\varepsilon)\to +\infty
\quad\mbox{as}\quad t\to0 \quad\mbox{within}\quad (0,\varepsilon],
\end{split}$$ which contradicts the continuity of $\varphi$ at $(0,\varepsilon)$. In other words, for any $f\in\mathcal F$ the equation $\mathcal P_f$ has no (continuous) solution on the entire domain $\Omega$. Therefore, *the quotient space ${\rm C}(\Omega)/\mathop{\rm im}P$ is infinite dimensional*. Additionally assuming $f\in{\rm C}^\infty(\Omega)$ or $f\in{\rm C}^\omega(\Omega)$, we also conclude that the quotient spaces ${\rm C}^\infty(\Omega)/P({\rm C}^\infty(\Omega))$ and ${\rm C}^\omega(\Omega)/P({\rm C}^\omega(\Omega))$ are infinite dimensional.
\[thm:OnExistenceOfSolutionsOfInhomLinODEsWithParameter\] Given an open subset $\Omega$ of the $(t,x)$-plane, any inhomogeneous linear ordinary differential equation $Pu=f$ with $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$ and $f\in {\rm C}(\Omega)$ admits solutions on the entire $\Omega$ if and only if each connected component of $\Omega$ is an $x$-simple set.
Without loss of generality, we may assume that the set $\Omega$ itself is connected.
Suppose that the set $\Omega$ is $x$-simple. In view of Lemma \[lem:OnOpenX-SimpleRegion\], there exists a function $\theta\in {\rm C}^\infty(I)$ with $I={\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$ such that its graph is contained in $\Omega$. Consider an arbitrary $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$ with $p={\mathop{\rm ord}\nolimits}P$. Theorem \[thm:OnFundSolutionSetOfLinODEsWithParameter\] implies that the equation $Pu=0$ admits a fundamental set of solutions on $\Omega$ with Wronskian nonvanishing on the entire $\Omega$, $\{\varphi^s, s=1,\dots,p\}$. Using the Lagrange method of variation of constants, for any $f\in {\rm C}(\Omega)$ the general solution of the equation $Pu=f$ can be represented in the form $u=\psi+\sum_{s=1}^p\zeta^s\varphi^s$. Here the tuple $(\zeta^1,\dots,\zeta^p)$ runs through ${\rm C}(I,\mathbb R^p)$ and $\psi\in {\rm C}^p_x(\Omega)$ is a particular solution of this equation that is defined by (cf. ) $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:ParticularSolutionOfInhomLinODEsWithParameter}
\psi(t,x)=\sum_{s=1}^p\varphi^s(t,x)\int_{\theta(t)}^x\psi^s(t,x')\,{\rm d}x', \quad (t,x)\in\Omega\end{gathered}$$ with $$\psi^s:=(-1)^{p-s}\frac f{{\mathop{\rm lcoef}\nolimits}P}\frac{ W(\varphi^1,\dots,\lefteqn{\varphi^s}\!\smash{\diagdown}\,,\dots,\varphi^p)}{\mathrm W(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p)}, \quad
s=1,\dots,p.$$ For proving $\psi\in {\rm C}^p_x(\Omega)$ it suffices to switch from the equation to the equivalent linear system of first-order ordinary differential equations in the normal form with $A$ and $F$ defined by . In other words, the equation $Pu=f$ possesses a family of solutions that are continuous on the entire $\Omega$ and parameterized by $p$ arbitrary continuous functions of $t$.
Conversely, let $\Omega$ be an open set that is not $x$-simple. In view of Lemma \[lem:OnOpenConnectedNonX-SimpleSets\], there exist $\tilde t_0,\varepsilon,\tilde x_1,\tilde x_2\in\mathbb R$ with $\varepsilon>0$ and $\tilde x_1\leqslant\tilde x_2$ such that up to reflections in $t$, the set $\Omega$ contains a subset of the form $[\tilde t_0-\varepsilon,\tilde t_0]\times[\tilde x_1-\varepsilon,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon]\setminus\Upsilon$, where $\Upsilon$ is a closed subset of $\{\tilde t_0\}\times[\tilde x_1,\tilde x_2]$ that is disjoint from $\Omega$ and contains the points $(\tilde t_0,\tilde x_1)$ and $(\tilde t_0,\tilde x_2)$. The equation $u_x=\big((x-\tilde x_1)^2+(t-\tilde t_0)^2\big)^{-1}$ has no (continuous) solution on the entire domain $\Omega$; cf. Example \[ex:InfiniteSetFamilyOf1stOrderInhomLinODEWithoutSolutions\].
If a connected component of an open set $\Omega$ is not $x$-simple, then in fact we can show much more than just the existence of an inhomogeneous linear ordinary differential equation $Pu=f$ with $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$ and $f\in {\rm C}(\Omega)$ that possesses no continuous solutions on the entire $\Omega$.
\[thm:QuotientSpacesForLinODEOpsWithParameter\] If a connected component of an open set of $\Omega$ is not $x$-simple, then for each $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$ the quotient space ${\rm C}(\Omega)/\mathop{\rm im}P$ is infinite dimensional.
We again apply Lemma \[lem:OnOpenConnectedNonX-SimpleSets\] to obtain the existence, up to reflections in $t$, of a subset of the “rectangular” shape in $\Omega$. Below we continue to use the notation of this lemma. There exist $\delta_k\in\mathbb R_+$, $k\in\mathbb N$, with $\delta_k\geqslant\delta_{k+1}$ for any $k\in\mathbb N$ such that $$\begin{gathered}
\begin{split}
\Xi:=&(\tilde t_0-\varepsilon-\delta_1,\tilde t_0)\times(\tilde x_1-\varepsilon-\delta_1,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon+\delta_1)\\
&\cup[\tilde t_0,\tilde t_0+\delta_1)\times(\tilde x_1-\varepsilon-\delta_1,\tilde x_1-\varepsilon/2)
\cup\mathop{\cup}\limits_{k=2}^\infty[\tilde t_0,\tilde t_0+\delta_k)\times[\tilde x_1-\varepsilon/k,\tilde x_1-\varepsilon/(k+1))
\end{split}\end{gathered}$$ is a subset of $\Omega$; see Figure \[fig:QuotientSpacesForLinODEOpsWithParameter\]. By construction, the set $\Xi$ is $x$-simple and open. In the capacity of a smooth function $\theta$ related to $\Xi$ according to Lemma \[lem:OnOpenX-SimpleRegion\], we can choose the constant function $\theta(t)=\tilde x_1-\varepsilon$, $t\in(\tilde t_0-\varepsilon-\delta_1,\tilde t_0+\delta_1)$.
![Geometric constructions in the proof of Theorem \[thm:QuotientSpacesForLinODEOpsWithParameter\][]{data-label="fig:QuotientSpacesForLinODEOpsWithParameter"}](Ris7){width="1.\linewidth"}
For an arbitrary operator $P\in{{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$, we consider the corresponding inhomogeneous linear differential equations, $\mathcal P_f$: $Pu=f$ with $f\in {\rm C}(\Omega)$. We will prove that there exist an infinite number of linearly independent continuous right hand sides $f$ such that for any solution $\psi$ of $\mathcal P_f$ on $\Xi$ we have a sequence $\big((t^*_k,x^*_k), k\in\mathbb N\big)$ of points in $\Xi$ with $t^*_k\to\tilde t_0$, $x^*_k\to\tilde x_3\in(\tilde x_2,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon]$ and $\psi(t^*_k,x^*_k)\to\infty$ as $k\to\infty$. (We will choose $t^*_k=\tilde t_0-\varepsilon/k$.) This means that such solutions cannot be extended to (continuous) solutions of $\mathcal P_f$ on the entire $\Omega$. In other words, this implies that the equation $\mathcal P_f$ admits no smooth solutions on $\Omega$.
We elucidate the basic ideas of the proof by first treating the particular case of first-order differential operators. Thus, we consider an arbitrary operator $P$ of the form $P:=h^1(t,x){\partial}_x+h^0(t,x)$ with $h^0,h^1\in {\rm C}(\Omega)$ and $h^1\ne0$ on $\Omega$. The function $\varphi\in {\rm C}^1_x(\Xi)$ defined by $$\varphi(t,x):=\exp\int_{\tilde x_1-\varepsilon}^x\frac{h^0(t,x')}{h^1(t,x')}\,{\rm d}x',\quad (t,x)\in\Xi,$$ constitutes a fundamental set of solutions of the equation $\mathcal P_0$ on $\Xi$ and satisfies the initial condition $\varphi=1$ at $x=\tilde x_1-\varepsilon$ for $t\in(\tilde t_0-\varepsilon-\delta_1,\tilde t_0+\delta_1)$. Note that this solution is positive on $\Xi$, and this specific feature of first-order operators from ${{\rm DO}}(\Omega)$ has no counterpart in higher orders. We set $t^*_0:=\tilde t_0-\varepsilon-\delta_1$ and $t^*_k:=\tilde t_0-\varepsilon/k$, $k\in\mathbb N$. For each $k\in\mathbb N$, there exist $b_k>0$ and $\varepsilon_k$ with $0<\varepsilon_k\leqslant\varepsilon$ such that $|h^1(t^*_k,x)|\,\varphi(t^*_k,x)\leqslant b_k$ for $x\in\bar B_{\varepsilon_k}(\tilde x_1)=\{x\in\mathbb R\mid|x-\tilde x_1|\leqslant\varepsilon_k\}$. We take a continuous function $f^k$ of $x\in\mathbb R$ and a continuous function $\chi^k$ of $t\in\mathbb R$, respectively, satisfying the properties $$\begin{gathered}
{\mathop{\rm supp}\nolimits}f^k\subseteq\bar B_{\varepsilon_k}(\tilde x_1), \quad f^k(x)\geqslant0\ \ \forall x\in\mathbb R, \quad
\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}f^k(x)\,{\rm d}x\geqslant kb_k\left(1+\frac1{\varphi(t^*_k,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon)}\right),\\
\chi^k(t^*_k)=1,\quad \chi^k(t)\geqslant0\ \ \forall t\in\mathbb R,\quad {\mathop{\rm supp}\nolimits}\chi^k\subseteq[t^*_{k-1},t^*_{k+1}]\end{gathered}$$ and construct the function $f:=\left(\sum_{k=1}^\infty f^k\chi^k\right)\big|_\Omega$, which is continuous on $\Omega$. Any solution $\psi$ of $\mathcal P_f$ on $\Xi$ can be represented in the form $$\psi(t,x)=\varphi(t,x)\left(\psi(t,\tilde x_1-\varepsilon)+\int_{\tilde x_1-\varepsilon}^x\frac{f(t,x')}{h^1(t,x')\varphi(t,x')}\,{\rm d}x'\right).$$ Since $\psi\in {\rm C}^1_x(\Xi)$, it is bounded on the line segment $[\tilde t_0-\varepsilon,\tilde t_0]\times\{\tilde x_1-\varepsilon\}$, i.e., there exists a constant $C>0$ such that $|\psi(t,\tilde x_1-\varepsilon)|\leqslant C$ for any $t\in[\tilde t_0-\varepsilon,\tilde t_0]$. Estimating the value of $\psi$ at $(t^*_k,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon)$ for $k>C$, we obtain $$\begin{gathered}
|\psi(t^*_k,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon)|\geqslant\varphi(t^*_k,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon)
\left(\frac1{b_k}kb_k\left(1+\frac1{\varphi(t^*_k,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon)}\right)-C\right)>k,\end{gathered}$$ which completes the proof for ${\mathop{\rm ord}\nolimits}P=1$. Here $x^*_k:=\tilde x_2+\varepsilon$ for any $k\in\mathbb N$.
Now we consider the general case of ${\mathop{\rm ord}\nolimits}P=:p$. Following the proof of Theorem \[thm:OnFundSolutionSetOfLinODEsWithParameter\] we choose the fundamental set of solutions $\{\varphi^s, s=1,\dots,p\}$ of the homogeneous equation $\mathcal P_0$ on $\Xi$ that satisfy the initial conditions $\varphi^s_{s'-1}=\delta_{ss'}$, $s'=1,\dots,p$, at $x=\tilde x_1-\varepsilon$ with $t$ varying through $(\tilde t_0-\varepsilon-\delta_1,\tilde t_0+\delta_1)$. Recall that $\delta_{ss'}$ denotes the Kronecker delta. The Wronskian $\mathrm W:=\mathrm W(\varphi^1,\dots,\varphi^p)$ does not vanish on $\Xi$, and thus it does not vanish at the points $(t^*_k,\tilde x^1)$, $k\in\mathbb N$, where again $t^*_0:=\tilde t_0-\varepsilon-\delta_1$ and $t^*_k:=\tilde t_0-\varepsilon/k$, $k\in\mathbb N$.
We fix $k\in\mathbb N$ and set $\varphi^{k1s}:=\varphi^s(t^*_k,\cdot)\in {\rm C}^p\big((\tilde x_1-\varepsilon-\delta_1,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon+\delta_1)\big)$, $s=1,\dots,p$. Now choose $s_1\in\{1,\dots,p\}$ such that $|\varphi^{k1s_1}(\tilde x_1)|=\max_s|\varphi^{k1s}(\tilde x_1)|$. This absolute value is greater than zero since $\mathrm W(t^*_k,\tilde x^1)\ne0$. Set $$\varphi^{k2s_1}:=\varphi^{k1s_1},\quad
\varphi^{k2s}:=\varphi^{k1s}-\frac{\varphi^{k1s}(\tilde x_1)}{\varphi^{k1s_1}(\tilde x_1)}\varphi^{k1s_1},\ \ s\ne s_1.$$ For the transition matrix from $(\varphi^{k1s})_s$ to $(\varphi^{k2s})_s$, its determinant equals one, the absolute value of each of its entries is not greater than one, and its inverse has the same properties. Therefore, the Wronskian of $(\varphi^{k2s})_s$ coincides with $\mathrm W(t^*_k,\cdot)$. Then we recursively iterate the above procedure, repeating it for ascending orders of derivatives. More specifically, on the $s'$th step, where $s'\in\{1,\dots,p-1\}$, we choose $s_{s'}\in N_{s'-1}:=\{1,\dots,p\}\setminus\{s_1,\dots,s_{s'-1}\}$ such that $$|\varphi^{ks's_{s'}}_{s'-1}(\tilde x_1)|=\max\{|\varphi^{ks's}_{s'-1}(\tilde x_1)\mid s\in N_{s'-1}\}.$$ Recall that a subscript of a function denotes the corresponding number of differentiations with respect to $x$, $f_s:={\partial}_x^sf$. The above maximal absolute value is greater than zero since the Wronskian of $(\varphi^{ks's})_s$ coincides with $\mathrm W(t^*_k,\cdot)$ and hence it does not vanish at $\tilde x^1$. We define $$\begin{gathered}
\varphi^{k,s'+1,s_i}:=\varphi^{ks's_i},\ \ i=1,\dots,s',\\
\varphi^{k,s'+1,s}:=\varphi^{ks's}-\frac{\varphi^{ks's}_{s'-1}(\tilde x_1)}{\varphi^{ks's_{s'}}_{s'-1}(\tilde x_1)}\varphi^{ks's_{s'}},\ \ s\in N_{s'}.\end{gathered}$$ For the transition matrix from $(\varphi^{ks's})_s$ to $(\varphi^{k,s'+1,s})_s$, again its determinant equals one, the absolute value of each of its entries is not greater than one, and its inverse has the same properties.
The above procedure results in the functions $\varphi^{kps}\in {\rm C}^p\big((\tilde x_1-\varepsilon-\delta_1,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon+\delta_1)\big)$, $s=1,\dots,p$ with Wronskian coinciding with $\mathrm W(t^*_k,\cdot)$. Since the Wronskian $\mathrm W$ does not vanish on $\Xi$, there exists $x^*_k\in[\tilde x_2+\varepsilon/2,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon]$ such that $\varphi^{kps_p}(x^*_k)\ne0$. We also have $\varphi^{kps_i}_{j-1}(\tilde x_1)=0$, $1\leqslant j<i\leqslant p$. Consequently, the $(p-1)$th order sub-Wronskians $\mathrm W^{ks_i}:=\mathrm W(\varphi^{kps})_{s\ne s_i}$ satisfy the conditions $\mathrm W^{ks_i}(\tilde x_1)=0$, $i=1,\dots,p-1$, and $\mathrm W^{ks_p}(\tilde x_1)\ne0$, and hence there exist $b_k>0$ and $\varepsilon_k$ with $0<\varepsilon_k\leqslant\varepsilon$ such that $$\left|\frac{\mathrm W^{ks_p}(x)}{(\mathrm W \cdot{\mathop{\rm lcoef}\nolimits}P)(t^*_k,x)}\right|\geqslant b_k,\quad
\left|\frac{\mathrm W^{ks_i}(x)}{(\mathrm W \cdot {\mathop{\rm lcoef}\nolimits}P)(t^*_k,x)}\right|\leqslant
\frac{b_k|\varphi^{kps_p}(x^*_k)|}{4p\max_s|\varphi^{kps}(x^*_k)|},\quad
i=1,\dots,p-1,$$ for any $x\in\bar B_{\varepsilon_k}(\tilde x_1)$. We pick a continuous function $f^k$ of $x\in\mathbb R$ and a continuous function $\chi^k$ of $t\in\mathbb R$, respectively, satisfying the properties $$\begin{gathered}
{\mathop{\rm supp}\nolimits}f^k\subseteq\bar B_{\varepsilon_k}(\tilde x_1), \quad f^k(x)\geqslant0\ \ \forall x\in\mathbb R,
\\[.5ex]
\frac{2k}{b_k|\varphi^{kps_p}(x^*_k)|}\left(1+\!\sum_{s=1}^p|\varphi^{kps}(x^*_k)|\right)
\leqslant\int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}\!f^k(x)\,{\rm d}x\leqslant
\frac{4k}{b_k|\varphi^{kps_p}(x^*_k)|}\left(1+\!\sum_{s=1}^p|\varphi^{kps}(x^*_k)|\right)\!,
\\[.5ex]
\chi^k(t^*_k)=1,\quad \chi^k(t)\geqslant0\ \ \forall t\in\mathbb R,\quad {\mathop{\rm supp}\nolimits}\chi^k\subseteq[t^*_{k-1},t^*_{k+1}]\end{gathered}$$ and construct the function $f:=\left(\sum_{k=1}^\infty f^k\chi^k\right)\big|_\Omega$. Any solution $\psi$ of $\mathcal P_f$ on $\Xi$ can be represented at $t=t^*_k$ in the form $$\psi(t^*_k,x)=\sum_{s=1}^p\varphi^{kps}(x)\left(\,\sum_{s'=1}^pd_{kss'}\psi_{s'-1}(t^*_k,\tilde x_1-\varepsilon)
+\int_{\tilde x_1-\varepsilon}^x\frac{(-1)^{p-s}f(t,x')\mathrm W^{ks}(x')}{(\mathrm W{\mathop{\rm lcoef}\nolimits}P)(t^*_k,x')}\,{\rm d}x'\right).$$ Here the matrix $(d_{kss'})_{s,s'=1,\dots,p}$ is the inverse of the Wronsky matrix $(\varphi^{kps}_{s'-1})_{s,s'=1,\dots,p}$ at $\tilde x_1-\varepsilon$, which coincides with the the transition matrix from $(\varphi^{k1s})_s$ to $(\varphi^{kps})_s$ in view of $\varphi^{k1s}_{s'-1}(\tilde x_1-\varepsilon)=\delta_{ss'}$. Hence the set of the matrices $(d_{kss'})_{s,s'=1,\dots,p}$ with $k$ running through $\mathbb N$ is bounded. Since $\psi\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Xi)$, the function $\psi$ and each of its derivatives with respect to $x$ are bounded on the line segment $[\tilde t_0-\varepsilon,\tilde t_0]\times\{\tilde x_1-\varepsilon\}$. As a result, there exists a constant $C>0$ such that $|\sum_{s'=1}^pd_{kss'}\psi_{s'-1}(t,\tilde x_1-\varepsilon)|\leqslant C$ for any $t\in[\tilde t_0-\varepsilon,\tilde t_0]$ and for any $s\in\{1,\dots,p\}$.
Minorizing the value of $|\psi|$ at $(t^*_k,x^*_k)$ for $k>C$, we use the above representation for $\psi(t^*_k,x)$, compute a lower bound of the absolute value of the summand $$\varphi^{kps}(x^*_k)\int_{\tilde x_1-\varepsilon}^{x^*_k}\frac{(-1)^{p-s}f(t,x')\mathrm W^{ks}(x')}{(\mathrm W{\mathop{\rm lcoef}\nolimits}P)(t^*_k,x')}\,{\rm d}x'$$ and subtract upper bounds of the absolute values of the other summand from this lower bound. We arrive at $$\begin{gathered}
\begin{split}
|\psi(t^*_k,x^*_k)|\geqslant{}
&|\varphi^{kps_p}(x^*_k)|b_k\frac{2k}{b_k|\varphi^{kps_p}(x^*_k)|}\left(1+\sum_{s=1}^p|\varphi^{kps}(x^*_k)|\right)
\\
&-\sum_{s\ne s_p}|\varphi^{kps}(x^*_k)|\frac{b_k|\varphi^{kps_p}(x^*_k)|}{4p\max_{s'}|\varphi^{kps'}(x^*_k)|}
\frac{4k}{b_k|\varphi^{kps_p}(x^*_k)|}\left(1+\sum_{s=1}^p|\varphi^{kps}(x^*_k)|\right)
\\
&-C\sum_{s=1}^p|\varphi^{kps}(x^*_k)|
\\
{}={}&k+(k-C)\sum_{s=1}^p|\varphi^{kps}(x^*_k)|>k
\end{split}\end{gathered}$$ if $k>C$. Therefore, $|\psi(t^*_k,x^*_k)|\to+\infty$ as $k\to\infty$. There is a convergent subsequence of the sequence $(x^*_k)_{k\in\mathbb N}^{}$, and the limit of this subsequence belongs to the interval $[\tilde x_2+\varepsilon/2,\tilde x_2+\varepsilon]$.
An inspection of the above proof also shows the following:
If a connected component of an open set of $\Omega$ is not $x$-simple, then for each $P\in{{\rm DO}}^\infty(\Omega)$ the quotient space ${\rm C}^\infty(\Omega)/P({\rm C}^\infty(\Omega))$ is infinite dimensional.
Distributional solutions of linear ordinary\
differential equations with parameter {#sec:DistrSolutionsOfLinODEsWithParameter}
============================================
In contrast to usual ordinary differential operators, an operator $P$ from ${{\rm DO}}^\infty(\Omega)$, where $\Omega$ is an $x$-simple open subset of $\mathbb R^2$, is never hypoelliptic. At the same time, for any $f\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Omega)$ we can represent the general distributional solution of the equation $Pu=f$ on $\Omega$ in terms of a fundamental set of smooth solutions of this equation.
\[pro:DistrSolutionsOfLinODEsWithParameter\] Given an $x$-simple open subset $\Omega$ of $\mathbb R^2$, an arbitrary $P\in{{\rm DO}}^\infty(\Omega)$ of order $p\in\mathbb N$ and an arbitrary $f\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Omega)$, the general solution of the equation $Pu=f$ in $\mathcal D'(\Omega)$ can be represented in the form $u=T_\psi+\varphi^s\cdot(\zeta^s\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_{\mathbb R}})\big|_\Omega$, where $T_\psi$ and $T_{\mathbf 1_{\mathbb R}}$ are the regular distributions associated with a particular solution $\psi\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Omega)$ of this equation and with the indicator function $\mathbf 1_{\mathbb R}$ of $\mathbb R$, respectively, $\{\varphi^s, s=1,\dots,p\}$ is a fundamental set of smooth solutions of this equation on $\Omega$ and each $\zeta^s$ runs though $\mathcal D'({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega)$.
The proof of this proposition follows from Proposition \[pro:DistrSolutionsOfLinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter\] below, using the equivalence of and via . Proposition \[pro:DistrSolutionsOfLinODEsWithParameter\] can be generalized to right hand sides of lower regularity. Thus, for $f\in {\rm C}(\Omega)$ or $f\in\mathcal D'(\Omega)$ it suffices to replace the condition $\psi\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Omega)$ by the condition $\psi\in {\rm C}^p_x(\Omega)$ or $T_\psi$ by $\psi\in\mathcal D'(\Omega)$, respectively. For $f\in{\rm C}^0_x(\mathcal D'_t)(\Omega)$ we should substitute the condition $\psi\in{\rm C}^p_x(\mathcal D'_t)(\Omega)$, which leads to a result in the spirit of [@Hoermander1983 Theorem 4.4.8]. Here ${\rm C}^0_x(\mathcal D'_t)(\Omega)$ is the space of distributions on $\Omega$ that are ${\rm C}^0$-semiregular in $x$. We call an element $u$ of $\mathcal D'(\Omega)$ *${\rm C}^0$-semiregular in $x$* if for any open rectangle $I\times J\subset\Omega$ we have that $u$ restricted to $I\times J$ is in ${\rm C}(J,\mathcal D'(I))$, cf. . The space ${\rm C}^p_x(\mathcal D'_t)(\Omega)$ is defined analogously.
\[ex:1stOrderODEWithNonzeroDistrSolutions\] Although the equation $u_x=H(t,x)u$ from Example \[ex:1stOrderODEWithNoNonzeroSolutions\] has no nonzero smooth solutions on $\Omega$, it admits nonzero distributional solutions on this set, for example $u=\delta_{t_0}\otimes T_\eta$, where $\delta_{t_0}$ is the Dirac delta at $t_0\in(0,1)\setminus\{2^{-k}l,\,l=1,\dots,2^k-1,\,k\in\mathbb N\}$, and $T_\eta$ is the regular distribution associated with the smooth function $\eta\in {\rm C}^\infty\big((0,1)\big)$, $\eta(x):=\exp\big(\int_{1/4}^xH(t_0,x')\,{\rm d}x'\big)$, $x\in(0,1)$. It is obvious that the Dirac delta can be replaced by an arbitrary linear combination of its derivatives. The equation constructed in the proof of Theorem \[thm:NoNonzeroSolutionsForLinODEsWithParameterOnSpecialDomain\] also possesses similar nonzero distributional solutions.
As the previous example suggests, $\mathcal D'(\Omega)$ is not necessarily the best choice for seeking solutions of equations of the form $Pu=f$ with $P\in{{\rm DO}}^\infty(\Omega)$ and $f\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Omega)$ since for this space one can in fact solve such equations on each slice $\Omega_t$, $t\in{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$ separately, and slice solutions do not affect each other. It is more natural to look for solutions in the space ${\rm C}^0_t(\mathcal D'_x)(\Omega)$ of distributions on $\Omega$ that are ${\rm C}^0$-semiregular in $t$. Modifying the definition of the semiregularity in $x$ by permuting $t$ and $x$, we call an element $u$ of $\mathcal D'(\Omega)$ *${\rm C}^0$-semiregular in $t$* if for any open rectangle $I\times J\subset\Omega$ we have that $u$ restricted to $I\times J$ is in ${\rm C}(I,\mathcal D'(J))$. Analogously, we can also define distributions on $\Omega$ that are ${\rm C}^q$-semiregular in $t$ with $q\in\mathbb N$ or ${\rm C}^\infty$-semiregular in $t$. =-1
\[pro:SemiregularDistrSolutionsOfLinODEsWithParameter\] Given an $x$-simple open subset $\Omega$ of $\mathbb R^2$, an arbitrary $P\in{{\rm DO}}^\infty(\Omega)$ and an arbitrary $f\in {\rm C}(\Omega)$ (resp. $f\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Omega)$), any solution of the equation $Pu=f$ in ${\rm C}^0_t(\mathcal D'_x)(\Omega)$ (resp. ${\rm C}^\infty_t(\mathcal D'_x)(\Omega)$) is a regular distribution associated with a classical (resp. smooth) solution of this equation.
Again, it is better to carry out the proof for the linear system of first-order ordinary differential equations that is equivalent to the equation $Pu=f$ via , see Proposition \[pro:SemiregularDistrSolutionsOfLinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter\] below.
Parameter-dependent linear systems\
of ordinary differential equations {#sec:LinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter}
===================================
The results of the previous sections on single parameter-dependent linear ordinary differential equations can easily be extended to parameter-dependent linear systems of ordinary differential equations in the canonical form. Any such system is equivalent to a linear system of first-order ordinary differential equations in the normal Cauchy form (cf. Section \[sec:intro\]). It is then evident that the results of Sections \[sec:FundamentalSolutionSetsOfLinODEsWithParameter\], \[sec:ExistenceOfSolutionsOfInhomLinODEsWithParameter\] and \[sec:DistrSolutionsOfLinODEsWithParameter\] have direct analogues for the system case. Except for the case of distributional solutions we shall therefore omit the proofs and confine ourselves to stating the results below. Let $\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R)$ denote the set of $p\times p$ matrices with real coefficients. Consider a system of linear ordinary differential equations $\mathcal P$: $v_x=A(t,x)v$ on an open subset $\Omega$ of the $(t,x)$-plane, where $A\in {\rm C}(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$, $v=(v^1,\dots,v^p)^{\mathsf T}$ is the unknown vector function of $(t,x)$, $x$ is the independent variable and $t$ plays the role of a parameter. This system can be interpreted as a vector differential equation. Its matrix counterpart, $M_x=A(t,x)M$ with $M\in\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R)$, is denoted by $\mathcal P_{\rm m}$. We assume that (classical) solutions of the system $\mathcal P$ and the matrix equation $\mathcal P_{\rm m}$ belong to ${\rm C}^1_x(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$ and ${\rm C}^1_x(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$, respectively.
\[def:FundamentalMatrixOfLinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter\] We say that a matrix-valued function $\Phi\in {\rm C}^1_x(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$ satisfying the equation $\mathcal P_{\rm m}$, $\Phi_x=A(t,x)\Phi$, is
- a *fundamental matrix* of $\mathcal P$ on $\Omega$ if any solution $v$ of $\mathcal P$ can uniquely be represented in the form $v=\Phi\zeta$ for some function $\zeta\in {\rm C}({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$;
- a *locally fundamental matrix* of $\mathcal P$ on $\Omega$ if there exists an open cover of the set $\Omega$ such that the restriction of any solution $v$ of $\mathcal P$ to any element $U$ of the cover, $v\big|_U$, can uniquely be represented in the form $v\big|_U=\Phi\big|_U\zeta$ for some function $\zeta\in {\rm C}({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_tU,\mathbb R^p)$.
\[lem:OnMatrixSolutionsWithNonzeroDet\] Any solution $\Phi$ of the matrix equation $P_{\rm m}$ with determinant nonvanishing on $\Omega$ is a locally fundamental matrix of the system $\mathcal P$.
\[thm:OnFundamentalMatrixOfLinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter\] Given an open subset $\Omega$ of the $(t,x)$-plane, the following are equivalent:
- Any homogeneous linear system of first-order ordinary differential equations $v_x=A(t,x)v$ with $A\in {\rm C}(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$, where $t$ plays the role of a parameter, admits a fundamental matrix on $\Omega$ with determinant nonvanishing on the entire $\Omega$.
- $\Omega$ is an $x$-simple region.
If a connected component of an open set of $\Omega$ is not an $x$-simple region, then for each $p\in\mathbb N$ there exists an infinite-parameter family of $p\times p$ matrix equations of the form $M_x=A(t,x)M$ with $A\in {\rm C}^\omega(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$ such that the determinant of any solution of each of them vanishes on the same line segment $\{t_0\}\times[x_1,x_2]$ contained in $\Omega$.
If each connected component of an open non-$x$-simple set $\Omega$ is $x$-simple, then any $p$-vector equation of the form $v_x=A(t,x)v$ with $A\in {\rm C}(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$ admits no fundamental matrix on $\Omega$ although the associated matrix equation has solutions with determinants nonvanishing on $\Omega$.
\[cor:DetOfFundMatrix\] Given an open $x$-simple subset $\Omega$ of the $(t,x)$-plane, a solution $\Phi$ of a $p\times p$ matrix equations of the form $M_x=A(t,x)M$ with $A\in {\rm C}(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$ is a fundamental matrix on $\Omega$ for the associated vector equation $v_x=A(t,x)v$ if and only if the determinant of $\Phi$ does not vanish on $\Omega$.
\[cor:SystemsOnOpenSetsWithXSimplePieces\] 1. If an open set $\Omega$ has an $x$-simple piece, then any system of differential equations $v_x=A(t,x)v$ with $A\in {\rm C}(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$, possesses a solution that is not identically zero on $\Omega$.
2. If there are $x$-simple pieces of $\Omega$ with overlapping projections to the $t$-axis, then any system of the above form admits no fundamental matrix on $\Omega$.
\[pro:NoNonzeroSolutionsForLinSystemsOfODEsWithParameterOSpecialDomain\]=-1 If an open set $\Omega$ contains no $x$-simple pieces, and the subset $J$ of $t$’s from ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$ with connected $\Omega_t$’s is dense in ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega$, then for each $p\in\mathbb N$ there exists an infinite-parameter family of $p$-vector equations of the form $v_x=Av$ with $A\in {\rm C}^\omega(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$ that possess only the zero solution on $\Omega$.
\[thm:NoNonzeroSolutionsForLinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter\] An open set $\Omega$ contains no $x$-simple pieces if and only if for each $p\in\mathbb N$ there exists an infinite-parameter family of $p$-vector equations of the form $v_x=Av$ with $A\in {\rm C}(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$ that possess only the zero solution on $\Omega$.
\[thm:OnExistenceOfSolutionsOfInhomLinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter\] Given an open subset $\Omega$ of the $(t,x)$-plane, any inhomogeneous linear system of first-order ordinary differential equations $v_x=Av+F$ with $A\in {\rm C}(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$ and $F\in {\rm C}(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$, where $t$ plays the role of a parameter, admits continuous solutions on the entire $\Omega$ if and only if each connected component of $\Omega$ is an $x$-simple set.
If a connected component of an open set of $\Omega$ is not $x$-simple, then for each $A\in {\rm C}(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$ the quotient space ${\rm C}(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)/({\partial}_x-A)({\rm C}^1_x(\Omega,\mathbb R^p))$ is infinite dimensional.
If a connected component of an open set of $\Omega$ is not $x$-simple, then for each $A\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$ the quotient space ${\rm C}^\infty(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)/({\partial}_x-A)({\rm C}^\infty(\Omega,\mathbb R^p))$ is infinite dimensional.
Finally, we turn to the case of distributional solutions of parameter-dependent systems:
\[pro:DistrSolutionsOfLinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter\] Given an $x$-simple open subset $\Omega$ of $\mathbb R^2$, an arbitrary $A\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$ and an arbitrary $F\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$, the general solution of the system $v_x=Av+F$ in $\mathcal D'(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$ can be represented in the form $v=T_\psi+\Phi\cdot(\zeta\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_{\mathbb R}})\big|_\Omega$, where the tensor product is understood componentwise, $T_\psi$ and $T_{\mathbf 1_{\mathbb R}}$ are the regular distributions associated with a particular solution $\psi\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$ of this system and with the indicator function $\mathbf 1_{\mathbb R}$ of $\mathbb R$, respectively, $\Phi$ is a smooth fundamental matrix of this system on $\Omega$, and $\zeta$ runs through $\mathcal D'({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$.
We fix a particular solution $\psi\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$ of the system $v_x=Av+F$ and a smooth fundamental matrix $\Phi$ of this system on $\Omega$ (cf. Theorem \[thm:OnFundamentalMatrixOfLinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter\]). If a distribution $v\in\mathcal D'(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$ satisfies the system $v_x=Av+F$, then the distribution $\tilde v:=\Phi^{-1}(v-T_\psi)$ satisfies the system . By Theorem \[thm:distributional\_derivative\_tensor\_product\_y\_simple\], the general distributional solution of the latter system is , where $\zeta$ runs though $\mathcal D'({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$.
Similarly to Proposition \[pro:DistrSolutionsOfLinODEsWithParameter\], Proposition \[pro:DistrSolutionsOfLinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter\] can be extended to right hand sides of lower regularity. Thus, for $F\in {\rm C}(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$ or $F\in\mathcal D'(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$ it suffices to replace the condition $\psi\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$ by the condition $\psi\in {\rm C}^1_x(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$ or $T_\psi$ by $\psi\in\mathcal D'(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$, respectively.
\[pro:SemiregularDistrSolutionsOfLinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter\] Given an $x$-simple open subset $\Omega$ of $\mathbb R^2$, an arbitrary $A\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Omega,\mathrm M_p(\mathbb R))$ and an arbitrary $F\in {\rm C}(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$ (resp. $F\in {\rm C}^\infty(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$), any solution of the the system $v_x=Av+F$ in ${\rm C}^0_t(\mathcal D'_x)(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$ (resp. ${\rm C}^\infty_t(\mathcal D'_x)(\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$) is a regular distribution associated with a classical (resp. smooth) solution of this system.
In the notation of the proof of Proposition \[pro:DistrSolutionsOfLinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter\], if $v$ is ${\rm C}^0$-semiregular in $t$ (resp. ${\rm C}^\infty$-semiregular in $t$), then $\tilde v$ is of the same semiregularity in $t$ and hence the corresponding tuple $\zeta$ belongs to ${\rm C}({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$ (resp. ${\rm C}^\infty({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega,\mathbb R^p)$).
Distributions with vanishing partial derivatives {#sec:DistributionsWithVanishingPartialDerivatives}
================================================
In this appendix we collect some results required in Sections \[sec:DistrSolutionsOfLinODEsWithParameter\] and \[sec:LinSystemsOfODEsWithParameter\] for deriving the general form of distributional solutions to linear (systems of) ODEs.
For a distribution $u\in \mathcal D'(\mathbb R^{n+1})$ it is well known (cf. [@Schwartz1966 Chapitre IV, § 5], [@Friedlander1998 Theorem 4.3.4]) that ${\partial}_{x_{n+1}}u=0$ if and only if $u$ is of the form $v\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_{\mathbb R}}$ for some $v\in\mathcal D'(\mathbb R^n)$. For $u\in\mathcal D'(\Omega)$ with $\Omega$ an arbitrary open subset of $\mathbb R^n$ such a result cannot be expected. Nevertheless, we shall show that if $\Omega$ is $x_{n+1}$-simple, then a suitable generalization does indeed hold.
We first note that [@Friedlander1998 Theorem 4.3.4] remains true for more general products, and we include a proof for the sake of completeness:
\[thm:distributional\_derivative\_tensor\_product\] Let $X\subset \mathbb R^n$ be open, $Y=(a,b)$, $-\infty\le a <b\le \infty$, $n\in \mathbb N_0$ (setting $X\times Y:=Y$ in case $n=0$), and let $u\in \mathcal D'(X\times Y)$. Then $${\partial}_y u = 0 \ \Leftrightarrow \exists\ v\in \mathcal D'(X)\colon\ u(x,y) = v\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_Y}.$$
$(\Leftarrow)$: ${\partial}_y(v\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_Y}) = v\otimes{\partial}_y T_{\mathbf 1_Y} = v\otimes 0 = 0$.
$(\Rightarrow)$: Pick some $\chi\in \mathcal D(Y)$ with $\int_Y \chi(y)\,{\rm d}y=1$ and define $v\colon \mathcal D(X)\to \mathbb R$ by $${\langle v, \psi \rangle}:={\langle u(x,y), \psi(x)\otimes\chi(y) \rangle}\quad \mbox{for all}\quad \psi\in \mathcal D(X).$$ Then $v\in \mathcal D'(X)$ and for any $\varphi\in \mathcal D(X\times Y)$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
{\langle v\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_Y}, \varphi \rangle}
&= {\big\langle v(x), {\langle T_{\mathbf 1_Y}, \varphi(x,y) \rangle} \big\rangle}={\big\langle v(x), \textstyle\int_Y\varphi(x,y)\,{\rm d}y \big\rangle}\\[.5ex]
&= {\big\langle u(x,y), \textstyle\int_Y\varphi(x,y')\,{\rm d}y'\otimes \chi(y) \big\rangle}.\end{aligned}$$ Hence ${\langle u-v\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_Y}, \varphi \rangle} = {\langle u, \phi \rangle}$, where $\phi(x,y)=\varphi(x,y)-\int_Y\varphi(x,y')\,{\rm d}y'\otimes \chi(y)$. Now for any $x\in X$ we have $\int_Y \phi(x,y)\,{\rm d}y = 0$, so that $\psi(x,y):=\int_a^y \phi(x,y')\,{\rm d}y'$ defines an element of $\mathcal D(X\times Y)$ and satisfies ${\partial}_y \psi=\phi$. Consequently, $${\langle u-v\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_Y}, \varphi \rangle} = {\langle u, \phi \rangle} = {\langle u, {\partial}_y \psi \rangle} = -{\langle {\partial}_y u, \psi \rangle} = 0,$$ which completes the proof.
In analogy to Definition \[def:XSimpleSet\] we say that an open subset $\Omega$ of $\mathbb R^n_x\times \mathbb R_y$ (where the subscripts refer to the names of the corresponding variables) is *$y$-simple* if, for all $x\in \mathbb R^n$, the intersection $\Omega_x:=(\{x\}\times \mathbb R) \cap \Omega$ is connected or is the empty set. Using this terminology, we have:
\[thm:distributional\_derivative\_tensor\_product\_y\_simple\] Let $\Omega\subset \mathbb R^n_x\times \mathbb R_y$ be open and $y$-simple ($n\in \mathbb N_0$), and let $u\in \mathcal D'(\Omega)$. Then $${\partial}_y u = 0 \ \Leftrightarrow \exists\ v\in \mathcal D'({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_X(\Omega))\colon\ u(x,y) = (v\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_{\mathbb R_y}})\big|_\Omega\,.$$ (Here ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_X$ denotes the projection into $\mathbb R^n_x$).
Only the direction $(\Leftarrow)$ requires a proof. Thus let $\{X_i\times Y_i\mid i\in J\}$ be an open cover of $\Omega$ with $X_i$ open in $\mathbb R^n_x$ and $Y_i$ open intervals in $\mathbb R_y$. Then ${\partial}_y (u\big|_{X_i\times Y_i})=0$ for all $i\in J$, and so by Theorem \[thm:distributional\_derivative\_tensor\_product\] there exist $v^i\in \mathcal D'(X_i)$ such that $u\big|_{X_i\times Y_i} = v^i\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_{Y_i}}$.
We now show that $\{v^i\mid i\in J\}$ forms a coherent family of distributions associated to the covering $\{X_i\mid i\in J\}$ of ${\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_X\Omega$. To see this, suppose that $X_i\cap X_j\not=\varnothing$. We have to show that then $v^i\big|_{X_i\cap X_j} = v^j\big|_{X_i\cap X_j}$. We distinguish two cases:
First, if $Y_i\cap Y_j\not=\varnothing$, then $U:=(X_i\times Y_i)\cap (X_j\times Y_j)\not=\varnothing$, and therefore $$v^i\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_{Y_i}}\big|_U = u\big|_U = v^j\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_{Y_j}}\big|_U,$$ so that indeed $v^i\big|_{X_i\cap X_j} = v^j\big|_{X_i\cap X_j}$.
Second, suppose that $Y_i\cap Y_j=\varnothing$ and fix arbitrary $x\in X_i\cap X_j$ and $y_i\in Y_i$, $y_j\in Y_j$, assuming without loss of generality that $y_i<y_j$. Since $\Omega$ is $y$-simple, we may pick a finite subset $J'$ of $J$ such that $\{X_k\times Y_k\mid k\in J'\}$ is a minimal covering of $\{x\}\times [y_i,y_j]$. Let $J'=\{k_1,\dots,k_p\}$, $Y_{k_l}=(a_{k_l},b_{k_l})$, $l=1,\dots,p$, and assume without loss of generality that $a_{k_1}<a_{k_2}<\dots <a_{k_p}$. Then $U:=\bigcap_{k\in J'}X_k$ is an open neighborhood of $x$, and by the previous case we have $$v^i\big|_U = v^{k_1}\big|_U = \dots = v^{k_p}\big|_U = v^j\big|_U,$$ which allows us to conclude that $v^i\big|_{X_i\cap X_j} = v^j\big|_{X_i\cap X_j}$ also in this case.
By the sheaf property of distributions [@Schwartz1966 Chapitre I, § 3, Théorème IV], it follows that there exists a unique $v\in \mathcal D'({\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_X(\Omega))$ such that $v\big|_{X_i}=v^i$ for all $i\in J$. Thus $$u\big|_{X_i\times Y_i} = v^i\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_{Y_i}} = v\big|_{X_i} \otimes T_{\mathbf 1_{Y_i}}
= (v\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_{\mathbb R_y}})\big|_{X_i\times Y_i}.$$ Again by the sheaf property of distributions, $u=(v\otimes T_{\mathbf 1_{\mathbb R_y}})\big|_\Omega$.
=-1 The condition on the simplicity of the domain with respect to the variable involved in the distributional derivative is essential in Theorem \[thm:distributional\_derivative\_tensor\_product\_y\_simple\]. Indeed, given a nonempty open set $\Omega\subset \mathbb R^n_x\times \mathbb R_y$ ($n\in \mathbb N_0$) that is not $y$-simple, we may take some $x_0\in\mathbb R^n_x$ such that the intersection $\Omega_{x_0}:=(\{x_0\}\times \mathbb R) \cap \Omega$ is non-empty and not connected. For $-\infty\leqslant y_0<y_1\leqslant y_2<y_3\leqslant+\infty$ such that $\{x_0\}\times(y_0,y_1)$ and $\{x_0\}\times(y_2,y_3)$ are connected components of $\Omega_{x_0}$ and for any different and nonzero $c_1,c_2\in\mathbb R$, consider the distribution $$u:=\left(\delta_{x_0}\otimes\big(c_1T_{\mathbf 1_{(y_0,y_1)}}+c_2T_{\mathbf 1_{(y_2,y_3)}}\big)\right)\Big|_\Omega\in\mathcal D'(\Omega).$$ Then $u$ is not of the form given in Theorem \[thm:distributional\_derivative\_tensor\_product\_y\_simple\] although ${\partial}_xu=0$.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
----------------
The authors thank Galyna Popovych for helpful discussions and interesting comments. The research of ROP was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), projects P25064 and P30233. ROP is also grateful to the project No. CZ.$02.2.69\/0.0/0.0/16\_027/0008521$ “Support of International Mobility of Researchers at SU” which supports international cooperation.
[99]{} =0ex
Amann H., [*Ordinary differential equations*]{}, De Gruyter Studies in Mathematics, 13, Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin, 1990.
Friedlander F.G., [*Introduction to the theory of distributions*]{}, Second edition. With additional material by M. Joshi, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998.
Hartman P., [*Ordinary differential equations*]{}, Corrected reprint of the second (1982) edition \[Birkhäuser, Boston, MA\], Classics in Applied Mathematics, 38, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM), Philadelphia, PA, 2002.
Hörmander L., [*Linear partial differential operators*]{}, Springer-Verlag, Berlin–New York, 1976.
Hörmander L., [*The analysis of linear partial differential operators. I. Distribution theory and Fourier analysis*]{}, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, vol. 256, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983.
Hörmander L., [*The analysis of linear partial differential operators. I. Distribution theory and Fourier analysis*]{}, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, vol. 257, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983.
Madsen I. and Tornehave J., [*From calculus to cohomology. de Rham cohomology and characteristic classes*]{}, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997.
Malgrange B. and Garding L., Opérateurs différentiels partiellement hypoelliptiques et partiellement elliptiques, [*Math. Scand.*]{} [**9**]{} (1961), 5–21. (French)
Marsden J.E. and Tromba A.J., [*Vector Calculus*]{}, Fifth edition, Freeman and Company, New York, 2003.
Matveev V.B., Darboux transformation and explicit solutions of the Kadomtcev–Petviaschvily equation, depending on functional parameters, [*Lett. Math. Phys.*]{} [**3**]{} (1979), 213–216.
Matveev V.B. and Salle M.A., [*Darboux transformations and solitons*]{}, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991.
Popovych R.O., Kunzinger M. and Ivanova N.M., Conservation laws and potential symmetries of linear parabolic equations, [*Acta. Appl. Math.*]{} [**100**]{} (2008), 113–185, arXiv:0706.0443.
Schwartz L., Distributions semi-régulières et changements de coordonnées, [*J. Math. Pures Appl. (9)*]{} [**36**]{} (1957), 109–127. (French)
Schwartz L., [*Théorie des distributions*]{}, Publications de l’Institut de Mathématique de l’Université de Strasbourg, Hermann, Paris, 1966.
Walter W., [*Ordinary differential equations*]{}, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, 182, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1998.
[^1]: Using the openness of $\Omega$, we can additionally assume that the image of $\gamma$ is a polygonal line, but this is not essential for the present proof.
[^2]: By this we mean solutions from $C^p_x(\Omega)$, cf. the notations agreed upon in Section \[sec:intro\].
[^3]: If $G(t)\to+\infty$ as $t\to\tilde t_0{}^-$, it is necessary to carry out a reflection in $x$ permuting the points $\tilde x_1-\varepsilon$ and $\tilde x_2+\varepsilon$.
[^4]: It suffices for each $k$ to belong to a single set, either $K_+$ or $K_-$.
[^5]: In general, there may be repeated points, but this is not essential for the further construction.
[^6]: These constants can be replaced by functions from ${\rm C}^\omega(\Omega)$ each of which is positive on $\Omega$, bounded above by the same constant $C$ on $\Omega$ and separated from zero on the intersection of a neighborhood of the corresponding point $(t_{ki},x_{ki}')$ with $\Omega$.
[^7]: These constants can be replaced by functions from ${\rm C}^\omega_x(\Omega)$ each of which is positive on $\Omega$, bounded above by the same constant $C$ on $\Omega$ and separated from zero on the intersection of $\Omega$ by a neighborhood of the corresponding point, $(t_{kl},a^k(t_{kl}))$ if $k\in K_-$ or $(t_{kl},b^k(t_{kl}))$ if $k\in K_+$.
[^8]: For each fixed $q\in\mathbb N$, we can obtain $q$ times continuous differentiability of $H$ with respect to $t$ by setting more restrictive conditions on the parameters $c_{kl}$. More precisely, denote by ${\rm C}^{\omega,q}_{x,t}(\Omega)$ the subspace of functions in ${\rm C}^\omega_x(\Omega)$ that are continuously differentiable with respect to $t$ $q$ times, with each of these derivatives belonging to ${\rm C}^\omega_x(\Omega)$. Then the above function $H$ belongs to ${\rm C}^{\omega,q}_{x,t}(\Omega)$ if additionally $c_{kl}<C/\max\{1,|({\partial}^{q'}\chi^k/{\partial}t^{q'})(t)|, t\in{\mathop{\rm pr}\nolimits}_t\Omega, q'=1,\dots,q\}$ for all $k\in\mathbb N$ and all $l\in\Lambda_k$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In this Report we outline some basic results on generalized Finsler–Kaluza–Klein gravity and locally anisotropic strings. There are investigated exact solutions for locally anisotropic Friedmann–Robertson–Walker universes and three dimensional and string black holes with generic anisotropy.'
---
22.5cm
**Exact Solutions in Locally Anisotropic**
**Gravity and Strings**
Sergiu I. Vacaru
Introduction
============
The theory of locally anisotropic field interactions and (super)strings is recently descussed [@v1; @v2; @v3; @v4] in the context of development of unified approaches to generalized Finsler like [@ma] and Kaluza–Klein gravity [@ow]. A number of present day cosmological models are constructed as higher–dimensional extensions of general relativity with a general anisotropic distribution of matter and in correlation with low–energy limits of string perturbation theory. In non–explicit form it is assumed the [**postulate: the matter always (even being anisotropic) gives rise to a locally isotropic geometry,**]{} which is contained in the structure of Einstein equations for metric $g_{ij}(x^{k})$ on (pseudo)Riemannian spaces: $$\begin{array}{ccc}
G_{ij}(x^{k}) & \simeq & T_{ij}(x^{k},y^{a}) \\
\mbox{\sf Einstein tensor} & & \mbox{\sf Energy--momentum tensor }
\\ \fbox{{\sf ( for a locally isotropic curved space)}} & & \fbox{{\sf (in
general anisotropic)}}
\end{array}$$ where $x^i, i=0,1,...,n-1$ are coordinates on space–time $M$ and $y^a,
a=1,2,...,m$ are parameters (coordinates) of anisotropies.
Anisotropic cosmological and locally anisotropic self–gravitating models are widely used in order to interpret the observable anisotropic structure of the Universe and of background radiation. Our basic idea to be developed in this paper is that cosmological anisotropies are not only consequences of some anisotropic distributions of matter but they reflect a generic space–time anisotropy induced after reductions from higher to lower dimensions and by primordial quantum field fluctuations. If usual Kaluza–Klein theories routinely require compactification mechanisms, we suggest a more general scenarios of possible decompositions of higher dimensional (super)space into lower dimensional ones being modelled by a specific “splitting field” defined geometrically as a nonlinear connection.
A geometry of manifolds provided with a metric more general than the usual Riemann one, $g_{ij}(x^k)\Longrightarrow g_{ij}(x^k,\lambda ^sy^n),$ where $%
y^n\simeq \frac{dx^n}{dt}$ and $\lambda ^s$ is a parameter of homogeneity of order $s,$ was proposed in 1854 by B. Riemann and it was studied for the first time in P. Finsler (1918) and E. Cartan (1934) (see historical overviews, basic results and references in [@ma; @v3; @v4]). At first sight there are very substantial objections of physical character to generalized Finsler like theories: One was considered that a local anisotropy crucially frustrates the local Lorentz invariance. Not having even local (pseudo)rotations and translations it is an unsurmountable problem to define conservation laws and values of energy–momentum type, to apply the concept of fundamental particles fields (for example, without local rotations we can not define local groups and algebras and their representations). A difficulty with Finsler like gravity was also the problem of its inclusion into the framework of modern approaches based on (super)strings, Kaluza–Klein and gauge theories.
The main purpose of a series of our works (see [@v1; @v2; @v3; @v4] and references) is the development of a general approach to locally anisotropic gravity imbedding both type of Kaluza–Klein and Finsler–like theories. It should be emphasized that a subclass of such models can be constructed as to have a local space–time Lorentz invariance. We proved that the general higher order anisotropic gravity can be treated as alternative low energy limits of (super)string theories with a dynamical reduction given by the nonlinear connection field and that there are natural extensions of the Einstein gravity to locally anisotropic theories constructed on generic nonholonomic vector bundles provided with nonlinear connection structure.
The field equations of locally anisotropic gravity are of type $$\fbox{%
$
G_{\alpha \beta }(x^\alpha ,y^\beta ) \simeq T_{\alpha \beta }(x^\alpha ,
y^\beta ) $}$$ where the Einstein tensor is defined on a bundle (generalized Finsler) space, $x^\alpha $ are usual coordinate on the base manifold and $y^\beta $ are coordinates on the fibers (parameters of anisotropy), in general $\dim
\{x^\alpha \}\neq \dim \{y^\beta \}.$
This paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II we briefly review the geometric background of locally anisotropic gravity. Models of locally anisotropic Friedmann–Robertson–Walker universe are considered in Sec. III. In Sec. IV we analyze anisotropic black hole solutions in three dimensional space–times and extend such solutions to the string theory. Conclusions are drawn in Sec. V.
Generalized Finsler–Kaluza–Klein gravity
========================================
In Einstein gravity and its locally isotropic modifications of Kaluza–Klein, lower dimensional, or of Einstein–Cartan–Weyl types, the fundamental space–time is considered as a real $(4 +d)$–dimensional, where $(d = -2,-1, 0, 1,$ $
..., n),$ manifold of necessary smoothly class and signature, provided with independent metric (equivalently, tetrad) and linear connection (in general nonsymmetric). In order to model spaces with generic local anisotropy instead of manifolds one considers vector, or tangent/cotangent, bundles (with possible higher order generalizations) enabled with nonlinear connection and distinguished (by the nonlinear connection) linear connection and metric structures. The coordinates in fibers are treated as parameters of possible anisotropy and/or as higher dimension coordinates which in general are not compactified.
In this section we outline the basic results from the so–called locally anisotropic (la) gravity [@ma; @v1; @v2; @v3; @v4] (in brief we shall use la–gravity, la–space and so on).
Let ${\cal E}=(E,\pi ,F,Gr,M)\;$ be a locally trivial vector bundle (v–bundle) over a base $M$ of dimension $n,$ where $F={\cal R}^m$ is the typical real vector space of dimension $m,$ the structural group is taken to be the group of linear transforms of ${\cal R}^m,$ i. e. $Gr=GL(m,{\cal R}).$ We locally parametrize ${\cal E}$ by coordinates $u^\alpha =(x^i,y^a),$ where $%
i,j,k,l,m,...,=0,1,...,n-1$ and $a,b,c,d,...=1,2,...,m.$ Coordinate transforms $(x^k,y^a)\rightarrow (x^{k^{\prime }},y^{a^{\prime }}) $ on $%
{\cal E},$ considered as a differentiable manifold, are given by formulas $%
x^{k^{\prime }}=x^{k^{\prime }}(x^k),y^{a^{\prime }}= M_a^{a^{\prime
}}(x)y^a,$ where $rank(\frac{\partial x^{k^{\prime }}}{\partial x^k})=n$ and $M_a^{a^{\prime }}(x)\in Gr.$
One of the fundamental objects in the geometry of la–spaces is the [**nonlinear connection,**]{} in brief [**N–connection.**]{} The N-connection can be defined as a global decomposition of v-bundle ${\cal E}$ into horizontal, $%
{\cal HE},$ and vertical, ${\cal VE},$ subbundles of the tangent bundle $%
{\cal TE}, {\cal TE}={\cal HE}\oplus {\cal VE}.$ With respect to a N–connection in ${\cal E}$ one defines a covariant derivation operator $%
\nabla _YA=Y^i\left\{ \frac{\partial A^a}{\partial x^i}+N_i^a(x,A)\right\}
s_a,$ where $s_a$ are local linearly independent sections of ${\cal E},\Lambda
=\Lambda ^as_a$ and $Y=Y^is_i$ is the decomposition of a vector field $Y$ with respect to a local basis $s_i$ on $M.$ Differentiable functions $N_i^a(x,y)$ are called the coefficients of the N–connection. One holds these transformation laws for components $N_i^a$ under coordinate transforms: $N_{i^{\prime
}}^{a^{\prime }}\frac{\partial x^{i^{\prime }}}{\partial x^i}=M_a^{a^{\prime
}}N_i^a+\frac{\partial M_a^{a^{\prime }}}{\partial x^i}y^a. $ The N–connection is also characterized by its [**curvature**]{} $${\Omega }_{ij}^a=\frac{\partial N_j^a}{\partial x^i}-\frac{\partial N_i^a}{%
\partial x^j}+N_j^b\frac{\partial N_i^a}{\partial y^b}-N_i^b\frac{\partial
N_j^a}{\partial y^b},$$ and by its linearization which is defined as $\Gamma _{.bi\;}^a(x,y)=\frac{%
\partial N_i^a(x,y)}{\partial y^b}. $ The usual linear connections $\omega
_{.b}^a=K_{.bi}^a(x)dx^i $ in a v–bundle ${\cal E}$ form a particular class of N–connections with coefficients parametrized as $%
N_i^a(x,y)=K_{.bi}^a(x)y^b. $
Having introduced in a v–bundle ${\cal E}$ a N–connection structure we must modify the operation of partial derivation and introduce a locally adapted (to the N–connection) basis (frame) $$\frac \delta {\delta u^\alpha }=(\frac \delta {\delta x^i}=\partial
_i-N_i^a(x,y)\frac \partial {\partial y^a},\frac \delta {\delta y^a}=\frac
\partial {\partial y^a}),\ \eqno(2.1)$$ instead of the local coordinate basis $\frac \partial {\partial u^a}=(\frac
\partial {\partial x^i},\frac \partial {\partial y^a}).$ The basis dual to $%
\frac \delta {\delta u^\alpha }$ is written as $$\delta u^\alpha =(\delta x^i=dx^i,\delta y^a=dy^a+N_i^a(x,y)dx^i).\eqno(2.2)$$
We note that a v–bundle provided with a N–connection structure is a generic nonholonomic manifiold because in general the nonholonomy coefficients $w_{.\alpha \beta}^{\gamma},$ defined by relations $[\frac
\delta {\delta u^\alpha },\frac \delta {\delta u^\beta }]=\frac \delta
{\delta u^\alpha }\frac \delta {\delta u^\beta }-\frac \delta {\delta
u^\beta }\frac \delta {\delta u^\alpha }=w_{.\alpha \beta }^\gamma \frac
\delta {\delta u^\gamma }, $ do not vanish.
By using bases (2.1) and (2.2) we can introduce the algebra of tensor distinguished fields (d–fields, d–tensors) on ${\cal E},{\cal C}={\cal C}%
_{qs}^{pr},$ which is equivalent to the tensor algebra of the v–bundle $%
{\cal E}_d$ defined as $\pi _d:{\cal HE}\oplus {\cal VE}\rightarrow {\cal TE}%
$ [@ma]. An element $t\in {\cal C}_{qs}^{pr},$ of d–tensor of type $\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
p & r \\
q & s
\end{array}
\right) ,$ are written in local form as$$t=t_{j_1...j_qb_{1...}b_s}^{i_1...i_pa_1...a_r}(u)\frac \delta {\delta
x^{i_1}}\otimes ...\otimes \frac \delta {\delta x^{i_r}}\otimes
dx^{j_1}\otimes ...\otimes dx^{j_p}\otimes$$ $$\frac \partial {\partial
y^{a_1}}\otimes ...\otimes \frac \partial {\partial y^{a_r}}\otimes \delta
y^{b_1}\otimes ...\otimes \delta y^{b_s}.$$
In addition to d–tensors we can consider different types of d-objects with group and coordinate transforms adapted to a global splitting of v-bundle by a N–connection.
A [**distinguished linear connection,**]{} in brief [**a d–connection,**]{} is defined as a linear connection $D$ in ${\cal E}$ conserving as a parallelism the Whitney sum ${\cal HE}\ \oplus \ {\cal VE}$ associated to a fixed N-connection structure in ${\cal E}.$ Components $\Gamma _{.\beta
\gamma }^\alpha $ of a d–connection $D$ are introduced by relations $%
D_\gamma (\frac \delta {\delta u^\beta })=D_{(\frac \delta {\delta u^\gamma
})}(\frac \delta {\delta u^\beta })=\Gamma _{.\beta \gamma }^\alpha (\frac
\delta {\delta u^\alpha }).$
We can compute in a standard manner but with respect to a locally adapted frame (2.1), the components of [**torsion and curvature of a d–connection**]{} $D:$ $$T_{.\beta \gamma }^\alpha =\Gamma _{.\beta \gamma }^\alpha -\Gamma _{.\gamma
\beta }^\alpha +w_{.\beta \gamma }^\alpha \eqno(2.3)%$$ and $$R_{\beta .\gamma \delta }^{.\alpha }=\frac{\delta \Gamma _{.\beta \gamma
}^\alpha }{\delta u^\delta }-\frac{\delta \Gamma _{.\beta \delta }^\alpha }{%
\delta u^\gamma }+\Gamma _{.\beta \gamma }^\varphi \Gamma _{.\varphi \delta
}^\alpha -\Gamma _{.\beta \delta }^\varphi \Gamma _{.\varphi \gamma }^\alpha
+\Gamma _{.\beta \varphi }^\alpha w_{.\gamma \delta }^\varphi . \eqno(2.4)$$
The global decomposition by a N–connection induces a corresponding invariant splitting into horizontal $D_X^h=D_{hX}$ (h–derivation ) and vertical $D_X^v=D_{vX}$ (v–derivation) parts of the operator of covariant derivation $D,D_X=D_X^h+D_X^v,$ where $hX=X^i\frac \delta {\delta u^i}$ and $%
vX=X^a\frac \partial {\partial y^a}$ are, respectively, the horizontal and vertical components of the vector field $X=hX+vX\,$ on ${\cal E}.$
Local coefficients $\left( L_{.jk}^i(x,y),L_{.bk}^a(x,y)\right) $ of covariant h-derivation $D^h$ are introduced as $D_{\left( \frac \delta
{\delta x^k}\right) }^h\left( \frac \delta {\delta x^j}\right)
=L_{.jk}^i\left( x,y\right) \frac \delta {\delta x^i},\quad D_{\left( \frac
\delta {\delta x^k}\right) }^h\left( \frac \partial {\partial y^b}\right)
=L_{.bk}^a(x,y)\frac \partial {\partial y^a} $ and $D_{\left( \frac \delta
{\delta x^k}\right) }^hf=\frac{\delta f}{\delta x^k}=\frac{\partial f}{%
\partial x^k}-N_k^a\left( x,y\right) \frac{\partial f}{\partial y^a}, $ where $f\left( x,y\right) $ is a scalar function on ${\cal E}.$
Local coefficients $\left( C_{.jk}^i\left( x,y\right)
,C_{.bk}^a\left( x,y\right) \right) $ of v-derivation $D^v$ are introduced as $D_{\left( \frac \partial {\partial y^c}\right) }^v\left(
\frac \delta {\delta x^j}\right) =C_{.jk}^i\left( x,y\right) \frac \delta
{\delta x^i},\quad D_{\left( \frac \partial {\partial y^c}\right) }^v\left(
\frac \partial {\partial y^b}\right) =C_{.bc}^a\left( x,y\right)$ and\
$D_{\left( \frac \partial
{\partial y^c}\right) }^vf=\frac{\partial f}{\partial y^c}. $
By straightforward calculations we can express respectively the coefficients of torsion (2.3) and curvature (2.4) [@ma] via h- and v-components parametrized as ${T^{\alpha}}_{\beta\gamma} = \{ T^i_{.jk}, T_{ja}^i,
T_{aj}^i, T_{.ja}^i, T_{.bc}^a \}$ and\
$R_{\beta . \gamma\delta}^{. \alpha}
= \{ R_{h.jk}^{.i}, R_{b.jk}^{.a}, P_{j.ka}^{.i}, P_{b.ka}^{.c},
S_{j.bc}^{.i}, S_{b.cd}^{.a} \} .$
The components of the Ricci d–tensor $R_{\alpha \beta }=R_{\alpha .\beta
\tau }^{.\tau } $ with respect to locally adapted frame (2.2) are as follows:$R_{ij}=R_{i.jk}^{.k},R_{ia}=-^2P_{ia}=-P_{i.ka}^{.k},
R_{ai}=^1P_{ai}=P_{a.ib}^{.b},R_{ab}=S_{a.bc}^{.c}.$ We point out that because, in general, $^1P_{ai}\neq ^2P_{ia}$ the Ricci d–tensor is nonsymmetric.
Now, we shall analyze the compatibility conditions of N- and d–connections and metric structures on the v–bundle ${\cal E}.$ A metric field on ${\cal E%
},\ G\left( u\right) =G_{\alpha \beta }\left( u\right) du^\alpha du^\beta ,$ is associated to a map $G\left( X,Y\right) :{\cal T}_u{\cal E}\times {\cal T}%
_u{\cal E}\rightarrow R, $ parametrized by a non degenerate symmetric $%
(n+m) \times (n+m)$–matrix with components $\widehat{G}_{ij}=G\left( \frac
\partial {\partial x^i},\frac \partial {\partial x^j}\right) ,\widehat{G}%
_{ia}=G\left( \frac \partial {\partial x^i},\frac \partial {\partial
y^a}\right) \ \mbox{ and} \ \widehat{G}_{ab}=G\left( \frac \partial
{\partial y^a},\frac \partial {\partial y^b}\right) . $ One chooses a concordance between N–connection and G–metric structures by imposing conditions ${G}\left( \frac \delta {\delta x^i},\frac \partial {\partial
y^a}\right) =0,$ equivalently, $N_i^a\left( x,u\right) =\widehat{G}%
_{ib}\left( x,y\right)$ $ \widehat{G}^{ba}\left( x,y\right) ,$ where $\widehat{G%
}^{ba}\left( x,y\right) $ are found to be components of the matrix $\widehat{%
G}^{\alpha \beta }$ which is the inverse to $\widehat{G}_{\alpha \beta }.$ In this case the metric ${G}$ on ${\cal E}$ is defined by two independent d–tensors, $g_{ij}\left( x,y\right) $ and $h_{ab}\left( x,y\right),$ and written as $$G\left( u\right) =G_{\alpha \beta }\left( u\right) \delta u^\alpha \delta
u^\beta = g_{ij}\left( x,y\right) dx^i\otimes dx^j+h_{ab}\left( x,y\right)
\delta y^a\otimes \delta y^b. \eqno(2.5)%$$ The d–connection $\Gamma _{.\beta \gamma }^\alpha $ is compatible with the d–metric structure $G(u)$ on ${\cal E}$ if one holds equalities $D_\alpha
G_{\beta \gamma }=0.$
Having defined the d–metric (2.5) in ${\cal E}$ we can introduce the scalar curvature of d–connection ${\overleftarrow{R}}=G^{\alpha \beta }R_{\alpha
\beta }=R+S,$ where $R=g^{ij}R_{ij}$ and $S=h^{ab}S_{ab}.$
Now we can write the Einstein equations for la–gravity $${R}_{\alpha \beta } - {\frac{1}{2}} G_{\alpha \beta} {\overleftarrow{R}} + {%
\lambda} G_{\alpha \beta} = {\kappa}_1 {\cal T}_{\alpha \beta} , \eqno(2.6)$$ where ${\cal T}_{\alpha \beta}$ is the energy–momentum d–tensor on la–space, ${\kappa}_1$ is the interaction constant and $\lambda$ is the cosmological constant. We emphasize that in general the d–torsion does not vanish even for symmetric d–connections (because of nonholonomy coefficients $w^{\alpha}_{\beta \gamma}).$ So the d–torsion interactions plays a fundamental role on la–spaces. A gauge like version of la–gravity with dynamical torsion was proposed in [@v5]. We can also restrict our considerations only with algebraic equations for d–torsion in the framework of an Einstein–Cartan type model of la–gravity.
Finally, we note that all presented in this section geometric constructions contain as particular cases those elaborated for generalized Lagrange and Finsler spaces [@ma], for which a tangent bundle $TM$ is considered instead of a v-bundle ${\cal E}.$ We also note that the Lagrange (Finsler) geometry is characterized by a metric of type (2.5) with components parametrized as $g_{ij}=\frac 12\frac{\partial ^2{\cal L}}{\partial
y^i\partial y^j}$ $\left( g_{ij}=\frac 12\frac{\partial ^2\Lambda ^2}{%
\partial y^i\partial y^j}\right) $ and $h_{ij}=g_{ij},$ where ${\cal L=L}$ $%
(x,y)$ is a Lagrangian ($\left( \Lambda =\Lambda \left( x,y\right) \right) $ is a Finsler metric) on $TM,$ see details in [@ma; @v1; @v2; @v3; @v4; @v5]. The usual Kaluza–Klein geometry could be obtained for corresponding parametrizations of N–connection and metric structures on the background v–bundle.
Anisotropic Friedmann-Robertson-Walker Universes
================================================
In this section we shall construct solutions of Einstein equations (2.6) generalizing the class of Friedmann–Robertson–Walker (in brief FRW) metrics to the case of $(n=4,m=1)$ dimensional locally anisotropic space. In order to simplify our considerations we shall consider a prescribed N-connection structure of type $N_0^1=n(t,\theta ),N_1^1=0,N_2^1=0,N_3^1=0,$ where the local coordinates on the base $M$ are taken as spherical coordinates for the Robertson-Walker model, $x^0=t,x^1=r,x^2=\theta
,x^3=\varphi ,$ and the anisotropic coordinate is denoted $y^1\equiv y.$
The la–metric (2.5) is parametrized by the anzats$$\delta s^2=ds_{RW}^2+h_{11}(t,r,\theta ,\varphi ,y)\delta y^2\eqno(3.1)$$ where the Robertson-Walker like metric $ds_{RW}^2$ is written as $$ds_{RW}^2=-dt^2+a^2(t,\theta )\left[ \frac{dr^2}{1-kr^2}+r^2\left( d\theta
^2+\sin ^2\theta \cdot d\varphi ^2\right) \right] ,$$ $k=-1,0$ and $1,$ respectively, for open, flat and closed universes, $%
H(t,\theta )=\partial a(t,\theta )/\partial t$ is the anisotropic on angle $%
\theta $ (for our model) Hubble parameter, the containing the $N$-connection coefficients value $\delta y,$ see (2.2), is of type $\delta y=dy+n(t,\theta )dt $ and coefficients $n(t,\theta )$ and $h_{11}(t,r,\theta ,\varphi ,y)$ are considered as arbitrary functions, which are prescribed on la–spaces defined as nonholonomic manifolds (in self–consistent dynamical field models one must find solutions of a closed system of equations for N- and d–connection and d–metric structure).
Considering an anisotropic fluctuation of matter distribution of type\
${\cal %
T}_{\alpha \beta }=T_{\alpha \beta }^{(a)}+T_{\alpha \beta }^{(i)},$ with nonvanishing anisotropic components $T_{10}^{(a)}(t,r,\theta )\neq 0$ and $%
T_{20}^{(a)}(t,\theta )\neq 0$ and diagonal isotropic energy-momentum tensor\
$T_{\alpha \beta }^{(i)}=diag(-\rho ,p,p,p,p_{(y)}),$ where $\rho $ is the matter density, $p$ and $p_{(y)}$ are respectively pressures in 3 dimensional space and extended space, we obtain from the Einstein equations (2.6) this generalized system of Friedmann equations:$$\left( \frac 1a\frac{\partial a}{\partial t}\right) ^2=\frac{8\pi G_{(gr)}}%
3\rho -\frac k{a^2},\eqno(3.2)$$ $$\frac 1a\frac{\partial ^2a}{\partial t^2}-n(t,\theta )\frac 1a\frac{\partial
a}{\partial t}=-\frac{4\pi G_{(gr)}}3(\rho +3p)\eqno(3.3)$$ with anisotropic additional relations between nonsymmetric, for la–spaces, Ricci and energy–momentum d–tensors:$$R_{10}=-n(t,\theta )\left( \frac{kr}{1-kr^2}+\frac 2r\right) \simeq
T_{10}^{(a)}(t,r,\theta ),$$ $$R_{20}=-n(t,\theta )\cdot ctg\theta \simeq
T_{20}^{(a)}(t,\theta )$$ when $R_{01}=0$ and $R_{02}=0.$ The $G_{(gr)}$ from (3.2) and (3.3) is the usual gravitational constant from the Einstein theory.
For the locally isotropic FRW model, when $\rho =-p,$ the equations (3.2) and (3.3) have an exponential solution of type $a_{FRW}^{(\exp )}=a_0\cdot e^{\omega _\rho \cdot t}, $ where $a_0=const$ and $\omega _\rho =\sqrt{\frac{8\pi G_{(gr)}}3\rho }.$ This fact is widely applied in modern cosmology.
Substituting (3.2) into (3.3) we obtain the equation $$\frac{\partial ^2a}{\partial t^2}-n(t,\theta )\frac{\partial a}{\partial t}%
-\omega _\rho ^2a=0\eqno(3.4)$$ where the function $a(t,\theta )$ depends on coordinates $t$ and (as on a parameter) $\theta .$ Introducing a new variable $u=a\cdot
\exp \left[ -\frac 12\int n(t,\theta )dt\right] $ we can rewrite the (3.4) as a parametric equation $$\frac{d^2u(t,\theta )}{dt^2}-\widetilde{\omega }(t,\theta )u(t,\theta )=0$$ for $\widetilde{\omega }(t,\theta )=\omega _\rho ^2+\left( \frac n2\right)
^2+\frac 12\frac{\partial n}{\partial t}$ which admits expressions of the general solution as series (see [@k]).
It is easy to construct exact solutions and understand the physical properties of the equations of type (3.4) if the nonlinear connection structure does not depend on time variable, i.e. $n=n(\theta ).$ By introducing the new variable $\tau =\omega _\rho t$ and function $a=v\cdot
\exp \left( -D_0\left( \theta \right) \tau \right) ,$ where $D_0\left(
\theta \right) =-n(\theta )/2\omega _\rho ,$ we transform (3.4) into the equation$$\frac{d^2v}{d\tau ^2}+\left( 1-D_0^2\left( \theta \right) \right) v=0$$ which can be solved in explicit form:$$v=\left\{
\begin{array}{ccc}
C\cdot e^{-D_0\left( \theta \right) \tau }\cdot \cos (\zeta \tau -\tau _0),
& \quad \varsigma ^2=1-D_0^2\left( \theta \right) , & D_0\left( \theta
\right) <1; \\
C\cdot ch\left( \varepsilon \tau +\tau _0\right) , & \varepsilon
^2=D_0^2\left( \theta \right) -1, & D_0\left( \theta \right) >1; \\
e^{-\tau }\left[ v_0\left( 1+\tau \right) +v_1\tau \right], & & D_0\left(
\theta \right) \to 1,
\end{array}
\right\} \eqno(3.5)$$ where $C, \tau _0, v_0$ and $v_1$ are integration constants.
It is clear from the solutions (3.5) that a generic local anisotropy of space–time (possibly induced from higher dimensions) could play a crucial role in Cosmology. For some prescribed values of nonlinear connection components we can obtain exponential anisotropic acceleration, or damping for corresponding conditions, of the inflational scenarios of universes, for another ones there are possible oscillations.
Anisotropic Black Holes and Strings
====================================
Three dimensional la–solutions
------------------------------
We first consider the simplest possible case when (2+1)–dimensional space–time admits a prescribed N–connection structure. The anzats for la–metric (2.5) is chosen in the form$$\delta s^2=-N_{*}^2(r)dt^2+S_{*}^2(r)dr^2+P_{*}^2(r)\delta y^2,\eqno(4.1)$$ where $\delta y=d\varphi +n(r)dr. $ The metric (4.1) is written for a la–space with local coordinates $%
x^0=t,x^1=r$ and fiber coordinate $y^1=\varphi $ and has components: $%
g_{00}=-N_{*}^2(r),g_{11}=S_{*}^2(r)$ and $h_{11}=P_{*}^2(r).$ The prescription for N-connection from (2.2) is taken $N_0^1=0$ and $%
N_1^1=n\left( r\right) .$
The Einstein equations (2.6) are satisfied if one holds the condition $n=\frac{{\ddot N}_*}{{\dot N}_*}-\frac{{\dot S}_*}{S_{*}},$ where, for instance, ${\dot S}_*=\frac{dS_{*}}{dt}.$ So on a (2+1)–dimensional space–time with prescribed generic N–connection there are possible nonsingular la–metrics.
Nevertheless (2+1)–like black hole solutions with singular anisotropies can be constructed, for instance, by choosing the parametrizations $$P_{*}^2(r)=P^2(r)=\rho ^2\left( r\right) ,\quad N_{*}^2(r)=N^2(r)=\left(
\frac r\rho \right) \cdot \left( \frac{r^2-r_{+}^2}l\right) ,\eqno(4.2)$$ $$S_{*}^2=S^2=\left( \frac r{\rho N}\right) ^2,\quad n(r)=N^\varphi \left(
r\right) =-\frac J{2\rho ^2}$$ where $$\rho ^2=r^2+\frac 12\left( Ml^2-r_{+}^2\right) ,\quad r_{+}^2=Ml^2\sqrt{%
1-\left( \frac J{Ml}\right) ^2}$$ and $J,M,l$ are constants characterizing some values of rotational momentum, mass and fundamental length type. In this case the la–metric (4.1) transforms in the well known BTZ–solution for three dimensional black holes [@btz].
We can also parametrize solutions for la–gravity of type (4.1) as to be equivalent to a locally isotropic anti–de Sitter space with cosmological constant $\Lambda =-\frac 1{l^2}$ when coefficients (4.2) are modified by the relations $N(r)=N^{\perp }=f=\left( -M+\frac{r^2}{l^2}+\frac{J^2}{4r^2}\right)
^{1/2},N^\varphi \left( r\right) =-\frac J{2r^2}, $ where $M>0$ and $\left| J\right| \leq Ml$ and the solution has an outer event horizon at $r=r_{+}$ and inner horizon at $r=r_{-},$ $r_{\pm }^2=\frac{Ml^2}2\{1\pm \sqrt{1-\left( \frac J{Ml}\right) ^2}\}.
$ We conclude that the N–connection could model both singular and nonsingular anisotropies of (2+1)–dimensional space–times.
Three dimensional la–solutions and strings
------------------------------------------
We proceed to study the possibility of imbedding of 3–dimensional solutions of la–gravity into the low energy dynamics of la–strings [@v2; @v3; @v4].
A la–metric $$\delta s^2=-K^{-1}(r)f(r)dt^2+f^{-1}(r)dr^2+K(r)\delta y^2,\eqno(4.3)$$ where $\delta y=dx_1+n(r)dt,$ i.e. $N_0^1=n(r)$ and $N_0^1=0,$ solves the Einstein la–equations (2.6) if $$n(r)=\frac 34\varsigma \left( r\right) +\frac{\dot \varsigma (r)}\varsigma
\eqno(4.4)$$ with $\varsigma (r)=\dot f/f-\dot K/K,$ where, for instance $\dot f=df/dt.$
Metrics of type (4.3) are considered [@sf] in an isotropic manner in connection to solutions of type IIA supergravity that describes a non–extremal intersection of a solitonic 5–brane, a fundamental string and a wave along one of common directions.
We have an anisotropic plane wave solution in $D+1$ dimensions if$$\delta s^2=-K^{-1}(r)f(r)dt^2+f^{-1}(r)dr^2+r^2d\Omega _{D-2}^2+K(r)\delta
y_{(\alpha )}^2\eqno(4.5)$$ where $
\delta y_{(\alpha )}=dx_1+\left[ 1/K^{\prime }\left( r\right) -1+\tan \alpha
\right] dt, $$K(r)=1+\mu ^{D-3}\sinh ^2\alpha /r^{D-3},$ $\left( K^{\prime }(r)\right)
^{-1}=1-\mu ^{D-3}\sinh \alpha \cosh \alpha /(r^{D-3}K),f\left( r\right)
=1-\mu ^{D-3}/r^{D-3}$ for isotropic solutions but $f(r)$ is a function defined by the prescribed component of N–connection (4.4) for la–spaces, $%
r^2=x_2^2+...x_D^2,$ and the parameter $\alpha $ define shift translations.
A la–string [@v2; @v3; @v4] solution is constructed by including (4.5) into a 10–dimensional la–metric with trivial shift $\delta y_{(\alpha =0)}$ $$\delta s_{(10)}^2=H_f^{-1}\left[ -\frac{f(r)}{K(r)}dt^2+K(r)\delta
y_{(0)}^2\right] +$$ $$dx_2^2+...+dx_5^2+H_{S5}\left[ f^{-1}(r)dr^2+r^2d\Omega
_3^2\right]$$ where the la–string dilaton fields and antisymmetric tensor are defined [@sf] by the relations $e^{-2\phi }=H_{S5}^{-1}H_f,B_{01}=H_f^{-1}+\tanh \alpha _f,
$ $r^2=x_6^2+...x_8^2,$ $H_{ijk}=\frac 12\epsilon _{ijkl}\delta _lH_{S5}$ (in general, one considers la–derivations of type (2.2)) and $%
i,j,d,l=6,...,9.$
Considering dimensional reductions in variables $x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5$ one can construct non–extremal, under singular anisotropies, 5–dimensional la–black hole solutions $$\delta s_{(5)}^2=-\lambda ^{-2/3}f(r)dt^2+\lambda ^{1/3}\left[
f^{-1}(r)dr^2+r^2d\Omega _3^2\right]$$ where $\lambda =H_{S5}H_fK=\left( 1+\frac{Q_{S5}}{r^2}\right) \left( 1+\frac{%
Q_f}{r^2}\right) \left( 1+\frac{Q_K}{r^2}\right) ;Q_{S5},Q_f$ and $Q_K$ are constants. Finally we note that for la–backgrounds the function $f\left( r\right) $ is connected with the components of N–connection via relation (4.4), i.e. the N–connection structure could model both type of singular (like black hole ) and nonsingular locally anisotropic string solutions.
Conclusions
===========
The scenario of modelling of physical theories with generic locally anisotropic interactions on nonholonomic bundles provided with nonlinear connection structure has taught us a number of interesting things about a new class of anisotropic cosmological models, black hole solutions and low energy limits of string theories. Generic anisotropy of space–time could be a consequence of reduction from higher to lower dimensions and of quantum filed and space–time structure fluctuations in pre–inflationary period. This way an unification of logical aspects, geometrical background and physical ideas from the generalized Finsler and Kaluza–Klein theories was achieved.
The focus of this paper was to present some exact solutions with prescribed nonlinear connection for the locally anisotropic gravity and string theory. We have shown that a generic anisotropy of Friedmann–Robertson–Walker metrics could result in drastic modifications of cosmological models. It was our task here to point the conditions when the nonlinear connection will model singular, or nonsingular, anisotropies with three dimensional black hole solutions and to investigate the possibility of generalization of such type constructions to string theories.
The author would like to thank the Organizing Committee of International Conference “Particle, Fields and Gravitation”, Lodz, April 15–19, 1998, for support of his participation. He is very grateful to Profs. A. Trautman and S. Bazanski for hospitality during his visit to Warsaw University.
[9]{} M. Banados, C. Teitelboim and J. Zanelli, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**69,**]{} 1849-1855 (1992); M. Henneaux, C. Teitelboim and J. Zanelli, Phys. Rev. [**D48**]{} 1506–1541 (1993).
E. Kamke, [*Differentialgleichungen, Losungsmethoden und Losungen, I. Gewohnliche Differntialgleichungen*]{} (Leipzig, 1959).
R. Miron and M. Anastasiei, [*The Geometry of Lagrange Spaces: Theory and Applications*]{} (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston, London, 1994).
J. M. Overduin and P. S. Wesson, Phys. Rep. [**283,**]{} 303–378 (1997).
K. Sfetsos and K. Slenderis, hep–th/9711138.
S. Vacaru, J. Math. Phys. [**37,**]{} 508–523 (1997); gr–qc/9604015.
S. Vacaru, Annals of Physics (NY) [**256,**]{} 39-61 (1997); gr-qc/9604013.
S. Vacaru, Nucl. Phys. [**B434,**]{} 590–654 (1997); hep–th/9611034.
S. Vacaru, [*Interactions, Strings and Isotopies in Higher Order Anisotropic Superspaces*]{} (Hadronic Press, Palm Harbor, USA, 1998); summary in: physics/9706038.
S. Vacaru and Yu. Goncharenko, Int. J. Theor. Phys. [**34,**]{} 1955-1980 (1995); gr–qc/9604013.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Stochastic efficiency is evaluated in five case studies: driven Brownian motion, effusion with a thermo-chemical and thermo-velocity gradient, a quantum dot and a model for information to work conversion. The salient features of stochastic efficiency, including the maximum of the large deviation function at the reversible efficiency, are reproduced. The approach to and extrapolation into the asymptotic time regime are documented.'
address: 'Hasselt University, B-3590 Diepenbeek, Belgium'
author:
- Karel Proesmans and Christian Van den Broeck
title: 'Stochastic Efficiency: Five Case Studies'
---
The concept of Carnot efficiency is a founding principle of macroscopic thermodynamics. It allows to introduce entropy as a state function and to define the Kelvin temperature scale. It states that, for a system operating between two reservoirs at temperatures $T_h$ and $T_c$, the efficiency $\bar{\eta}=W/Q_h$, being the ratio of output work $W$ over input heat $Q_h$, is bounded by the Carnot efficiency $\bar{\eta} \leq \eta_C$ with $\eta_C=1-T_c/T_h$. Right from the start, the question was raised about the efficiency of small scale machines. Maxwell introduced a small-scale demon which was deemed to rectify thermal fluctuations. A clarifying rebuttal was given by Smoluchowski, who proposed a mechanical implementation of the Maxwell demon, the so-called ratchet and pawl. He stressed that this small-scale device would eventually thermalize, after which any rectification would stop. Szilard introduced an information driven engine which seemed to be able to extract work from a single reservoir, in violation with the Carnot prediction. Since he believed that this could not be true, he concluded that there had to be a thermodynamic cost associated to the information gathering [@szilard1929entropieverminderung]. The Szilard engine gave rise to a prolonged scientific discussion about the source of dissipation [@leff2002maxwell]. It is not the measurement or computational process, but the resetting process of the memory device that seems to be the dissipative step. The Smoluchowski engine was revisited by Feynman, who showed by an explicit model calculation that the efficiency of the ratchet and pawl in contact with two reservoirs is indeed bounded by the Carnot efficiency. A subtle error in his analysis was elucidated by Parrondo and Sekimoto [@parrondo1996criticism; @sekimoto1997kinetic], indicating that the efficiency was strictly below Carnot efficiency in this model. This was confirmed by a more detailed analysis on simplified models [@jarzynski1999feynman; @van2004microscopic], prompting the question whether Carnot efficiency could at all be reached in such small devices [@sekimoto1998langevin]. These questions have led to major interest in information to work conversion, both theoretically [@barato2014unifying; @barato2014stochastic; @mandal2012work; @touchette2000information; @sagawa2010generalized; @horowitz2011designing; @kish2012energy; @abreu2012thermodynamics; @mandal2013maxwell; @esposito2012stochastic; @horowitz2013imitating] and experimentally [@raizen2009comprehensive; @raizen2011demons; @berut2012experimental; @thorn2008experimental; @Toyabe; @strasberg2013thermodynamics; @Serreli].
Thermodynamic efficiency can also be defined for other types of engines, notably for work to work and the above mentioned information to work transformations. In the case of a transformation of input work $W_i$ to output work $W_o$, the thermodynamic efficiency is defined as $\bar{\eta}=W_o/W_i$. The analogue of Carnot efficiency is reached for a reversible operation leading to $W_o=W_i$ (since no heat is dissipated). Hence the second law stipulates $\bar{\eta}\leq{\eta}_{r}$, with the reversible efficiency is ${\eta}_{r}=1$. For information to work transformation, we note that information about the system can be used to extract work. The reversible limit has been known since the work of Szilard, namely $k_B T \ln 2$ of work can be extracted per bit of information (in an environment operating at temperature $T$). One bit corresponds to a Shannon information of $I=\ln2$. More generally, in a transformation of a Shannon information amount $I$ into an amount $W$ of work, the efficiency $\bar{\eta}=W/(k_B T I)$ is upper bounded by the reversible result ${\eta}_{r}=1$.
Over the past two decades, one has been able to reformulate thermodynamics to describe fluctuating small-scale systems. The most notable of the results is the fluctuation theorem, stating that the probability for a stochastic entropy production $\Delta_is$ is exponentially more probable than that of a corresponding decrease $-\Delta_is$ in an “inverse” experiment: $$\label{ft}
\frac{P(\Delta_is)}{\tilde{P}(-\Delta_is)}=\exp(k_B \Delta_is).$$ The tilde refers to the “time- inverse" experiment. The above symmetry relation for the probability implies the following integral fluctuation theorem: $$\label{ift}
\langle \exp{(-k_B \Delta_is)}\rangle=1,$$ which in term implies the “second law": $$\langle\Delta_i s \rangle \geq 0,$$ The detailed and integral fluctuation theorems (\[ft\]) and (\[ift\]) have been derived in many different settings, see for example the Jarzynski [@jarzynski1997nonequilibrium] and Crooks [@crooks1999entropy] equalities, and stochastic thermodynamics [@seifert2012stochastic; @vandenbroeck]. When considering a finite time experiment, the interpretation of (\[ft\]) is somewhat delicate, and there may be restrictions, for example on the initial and final states of the experiment, cf. [@becker2015echo] for a recent discussion. The fluctuation theorem however appears to have a wide ranging validity, comparable to the second law, when considering the asymptotic long time limit, in which case (\[ft\]) reduces to a statement about the large deviation properties of the entropy production. The theorem was actually first derived in this context [@evans1993probability; @gallavotti1995dynamical; @lebowitz1999gallavotti; @kurchan1998fluctuation]. Surprisingly, the impact of these new insights on the efficiency, and in particular on its stochastic properties, has only been considered very recently [@nc; @berkeley; @verley2014universal; @proesmans2014stochastic; @polettini2014finite; @rana2014single; @campisi2014nonequilibrium; @esposito2015efficiency; @martinez2014brownian], and only in work to work and heat to work converters. When running a small-scale engine for a finite time, the corresponding cumulated work output and heat uptake, $w$ and $q_h$, or work output $w_o$ and work input $w_i$, are stochastic quantities, and hence so is the corresponding stochastic efficiency ${\eta}={w}/q_h$ or ${\eta}={w_o}/w_i$. Starting with the detailed fluctuation theorem (\[ft\]), it was pointed out that one can make universal statements about the stochastic efficiency ${\eta}$, as it approaches the macroscopic efficiency. More precisely, for large but finite times, values of the stochastic efficiency $\eta$ different from the macroscopic efficiency $\bar{\eta}$ are exponentially unlikely, as described by the large deviation function $J(\eta)=-\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}1/t\ln P_t(\eta)$, $J(\eta)\geq J(\bar{\eta})=0$. For the case of a thermodynamic machine driven by a time-symmetric protocol, it was shown that the reversible efficiency is the least likely, i.e., the large deviation function $J(\eta)$ has a maximum at $\eta=\eta_{r}$. The macroscopic efficiency is reproduced as the value carrying all probability to dominant order $J(\bar{\eta})=0$. For time-asymmetric protocols, the large deviation curves of the stochastic efficiency for the forward and backward experiment cross at the reversible efficiency [@berkeley; @verley2014universal].
In this paper, we provide an explicit and comprehensive illustration of the stochastic efficiency in five engines. Providing possibly the simplest steady state models for work to work and heat to work transformation, we consider a Brownian particle subject to competing forces [@nc] and effusion between two compartments [@proesmans2014stochastic]. Even though these cases have been discussed in some detail in the literature, they are introduced briefly for completeness and for comparison with the other models. The third model is a thermal engine based on a quantum dot. It is of interest because its stochastic thermodynamic properties have been discussed and measured, and because it is in principle richer than the effusion model, which can be recovered in an appropriate mathematical limit. In the last two problems, we evaluate stochastic efficiency in novel settings. We show that the universal features of stochastic efficiency are valid for heat to momentum transformation. This is illustrated on an effusion model with momentum transfer. Finally, we discuss the stochastic efficiency for information to work transformation. It is indeed possible to reformulate the fluctuation theorem when dealing with an information processing set-up, such as the one introduced by Szilard. In particular one can introduce the stochastic efficiency $\eta=w/i$ for a machine transforming a stochastic amount of input (Shannon) information $i$ into work $w$. We show that its large deviation function again displays the same general features. In particular, the reversible efficiency $\eta_{r}=1$ is exponentially less likely than any other efficiency in the asymptotic time limit (for time-symmetric protocols). We illustrate these features on the Mandal-Jarzynski model [@barato2014unifying; @mandal2012work].
Brownian Engine
===============
Consider an overdamped Brownian particle on a plane, subject to two external forces, a loading force $\vec{F_1}$, and a driving force $\vec{F_2}$ [@nc], cf. Fig. \[fig1\]. The (larger) driving force $\vec{F_2}$ pushes the particle against the loading force $\vec{F_1}$. The stochastic efficiency of such a device as a work-to-work converter was discussed in [@nc; @polettini2014finite].
The mathematics are very simple. Considering for simplicity a two dimensional set-up, the displacement $\vec{x}$ of the Brownian particle during a time $t$ is characterised by a bi-Gaussian distribution. Under influence of the resulting force $\vec{F}=\vec{F_1}+\vec{F_2}$ the average displacement is $\left\langle \vec{x}\right\rangle=\mu \vec{F} t$, $\mu$ being the mobility. The variance is isotropic and uncorrelated in orthogonal directions, $\left\langle\delta\vec{x}\delta\vec{x}\right\rangle=2Dt \vec{1}$, where $D$ is the diffusion coefficient and $\vec{1}$ the unit matrix.
We first turn to the macroscopic efficiency, which is very easy to evaluate, see also Fig. \[fig2\] for a colour-coded illustration: $$\label{ee}\bar{\eta}=-\frac{\left\langle w_1\right\rangle}{\left\langle w_2\right\rangle}=-\frac{\vec{F}_1\cdot\left\langle \vec{x}\right\rangle}{\vec{F}_2\cdot\left\langle \vec{x}\right\rangle}=-\frac{\vec{F}_1\cdot\vec{F}}{\vec{F}_2\cdot\vec{F}},$$ where $w_1=\vec{F}_1\cdot \vec{x}$ and $w_2=\vec{F}_2\cdot \vec{x}$ are the stochastic amounts of work delivered by the loading and driving force respectively. The engine regime, i.e., the regime where the driving force delivers a positive amount of work to the loading force, is determined by: $$\label{EngineCondBrown}-\frac{\left|\vec{F_2}\right|}{\left|\vec{F}_1\right|}\leq \cos\theta\leq -\frac{\left|\vec{F}_1\right|}{\left|\vec{F}_2\right|},$$ with $\theta$ is the angle between $\vec{F}_1$ and $\vec{F}_2$. In combination with (\[ee\]), it is clear from (\[EngineCondBrown\]) that, in the engine regime, the macroscopic efficiency is bounded by $\bar{\eta}\leq \eta_r=1$. The reversible efficiency $\eta_r=1$ can only be reached in the limit $\vec{F}_2\rightarrow -\vec{F}_1$ with $\vec{F}_2 \parallel -\vec{F}_1$. This can also be seen in Fig. \[fig2\].
We next investigate the stochastic efficiency $\eta=-w_1/w_2=-\vec{F}_1\cdot\vec{x}/\vec{F}_2\cdot\vec{x}$. Being the ratio of two correlated Gaussian variables, its probability distribution can be evaluated analytically, see also [@polettini2014finite]: $$P_t(\eta)=\frac{\left|\vec{F}_1\times \vec{F}_2\right| e^{-\frac{t}{t_0}}}{(\vec{F}_{1}+\eta \vec{F}_{2})^2\pi}\left(1+\sqrt{\pi g(\eta)} \mathrm{Erf}(\sqrt{g(\eta)})e^{g(\eta)}\right),\label{PetaGauss}$$ with $$g(\eta)=\frac{t}{t_0}\frac{\left(1-\eta\right)^2\left(\vec{F_1}\times \vec{F}_2\right)^2}{\vec{F}^2\left(\vec{F}_1+\eta\vec{F}_2\right)^2},\label{GetaGauss}$$ and $\mathrm{Erf(x)}$ is the error function. The characteristic time $t_0={2D}/\left(\mu\left|\vec{F}\right|\right)^2$ determines the boundary between diffusion dominated ($t\ll t_0$) and drift dominated ($t\gg t_0$) dynamics. We note in passing that it is easy to show from equations (\[PetaGauss\]) and (\[GetaGauss\]) that $P'_t(0)>0$ and $P'_t(\eta_r)<0$, implying that there exists at least one maximum in the interval $\eta\in\left[0,1\right]$
Universal features of the efficiency fluctuations are revealed when studying the asymptotic time behavior via the large deviation function of $\eta$ [@nc]: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{LDFBrown}J(\eta)&=&-\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}\frac{1}{t}\ln P_t(\eta)\nonumber\\&=&\frac{\mu^2}{4D}\frac{\left[(\vec{F_1}+\eta\vec{F_2})\cdot(\vec{F_1}+\vec{F_2})\right]^2}{(\vec{F_1}+\eta\vec{F_2})^2}.\end{aligned}$$ This function has a minimum at the macroscopic efficiency $J(\bar{\eta})=0$, but also a maximum at the reversible efficiency $\eta_r=1$, with equal asymptotes in the limits $\eta\rightarrow\pm\infty$. To illustrate the approach to the large deviation regime, $-\ln(P_t(\eta))/t$ is plotted in Fig. \[fig4\] for $t/t_0=2, 5,$ and $10$, together with the limiting expression (\[LDFBrown\]). We also include the result of an extrapolation ansatz [@proesmans2014stochastic], described in more detail in \[AppLDF\]. The extrapolation, based on the $t/t_0=2, 5,$ and $10$ curves, is in surprisingly good agreement with the exact asymptotic expression. Although these finite time results do not, in this particular instance, exhibit a maximum close to the reversible efficiency $\eta_r=1$, it does show up by extrapolation.
Effusion Engine
===============
The effusion engine [@proesmans2014stochastic] consists of two reservoirs, exchanging heat and particles by effusion via one or more small holes in the separating wall, cf. Fig. \[fig5\]. The reservoirs are supposed to be infinitely large and at equilibrium. The holes are smaller than the mean free path so that the equilibrium state is not disturbed by the effusion process. Under proper working conditions, a net flux of particles moves from say the left compartment, at high temperature $T_h$ and low chemical potential $\mu_h$, to the right compartment at lower temperature $T_c$ but higher chemical potential $\mu_c$.
When a particle moves from the hot to the cold reservoir, it delivers an amount of work $w_0=\mu_c-\mu_h=\Delta \mu$, while extracting an amount of heat $q_0=u_0-\mu_h$ from the hot reservoir, where $u_0$ is the kinetic energy of the transfered particle. Therefore, after a net transfer of $n$ particles, the total amount of delivered work and extracted heat, $w$ and $q$ are given by: $$\begin{aligned}
w=n\Delta \mu,\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
q=u- n\mu_h,\end{aligned}$$ with $u$ the net energy transfers.
Particles with kinetic energy $E$ transfer from the hot to the cold reservoir at rate [@preCleuren]: $$\label{EffThc}T_{h\rightarrow c}(E)=\frac{1}{t_0}\frac{E}{\left(k_B T_h\right)^2}e^{-\frac{E}{k_B T_h}},$$ and from the cold to the hot reservoir at rate $$\label{EffTch}T_{c\rightarrow h}(E)=\frac{1}{t_0}\frac{E}{\left(k_B T_h\right)^2}e^{-\frac{E}{k_B T_c}+\frac{\mu_c}{k_BT_c}-\frac{\mu_h}{k_B T_h}},$$ where $t_0=\sqrt{2\pi m/\left(\sigma^2\rho^2_hk_BT_h\right)}$ is the average time between particle crossings from the hot to the cold reservoir, $\sigma$ is the surface area of the effusion hole and $m$ is the mass of the particles of the gas. The macroscopic efficiency can be easily obtained: $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{\eta}&=&\frac{\left\langle w\right\rangle}{\left\langle q\right\rangle}\nonumber\\&=&\frac{\Delta \mu\left\langle n \right\rangle}{\left\langle u\right\rangle-\mu_h \left\langle n\right\rangle }\nonumber\\&=&\frac{\Delta \mu \left((k_BT_h)^2 e^{\frac{\mu_h}{k_BT_h}}-(k_BT_c)^2 e^{\frac{\mu_c}{k_BT_c}}\right)}{(k_BT_h)^2 (2 k_BT_h-\mu_h)e^{\frac{\mu_h}{k_BT_h}}-(k_BT_c)^2\left(2 k_BT_c-\mu_h \right)e^{\frac{\mu_c}{k_BT_c}} }.\end{aligned}$$ This is plotted for Carnot efficiency $\eta_C=1/2$ in Fig. \[fig6\] in terms of $\mu_c/k_B T_h$ and $\mu_h/k_BT_h$. The engine boundaries are given by $\mu_h<\mu_c<\mu_hT_c/T_h-2k_B T_c \ln\left(T_c/T_h\right)$. Furthermore, the macroscopic efficiency is bounded by the Carnot efficiency, and this boundary is only reached in the limit $\mu_c,\mu_h\rightarrow -\infty$, which, for an ideal gas, corresponds to zero density.
We next investigate the stochastic efficiency $\eta=w/q$. Since it is not possible to obtain the analytic expression of the probability distribution $P_t(\eta)$, we present results from a numerical simulation of the Markov process with the prescribed rates (\[EffThc\]) and (\[EffTch\]), cf. Fig. \[fig7\].
For the parameter values under consideration, one clearly sees a minimum in the probability distribution developing in the vicinity of the Carnot efficiency $\eta_C$, even at the rather short times represented here. The behavior around $\eta=0$, and in particular the other minimum around $\eta=0$, can be explained by the low number of particle crossings for short times [@proesmans2014stochastic]. Turning finally to the asymptotic time behaviour, we note that the large deviation function $J(\eta)$ of the stochastic efficiency can be obtained from the joint cumulant generating function of work and heat $\varphi(\lambda,\omega)$, cf. [@verley2014universal]. The latter is explicitly known for effusion [@preCleuren] : $$\begin{aligned}
\varphi(\lambda,\omega)&=&\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}\frac{1}{t}\ln\left\langle e^{-\lambda W-\omega Q}\right\rangle\nonumber\\&=&-\frac{\sigma \rho_h \sqrt{k_BT_h}}{\sqrt{2\pi m}}\left(1-\frac{\exp\left(-\lambda \Delta \mu - \omega \mu_h\right)}{(1-k_BT_h \omega)^2}\right)\nonumber\\&&-\frac{\sigma \rho_c \sqrt{k_BT_c}}{\sqrt{2\pi m}}\left(1-\frac{\exp\left(\lambda \Delta \mu + \omega \mu_c\right)}{(1+k_BT_c \omega)^2} \right).\end{aligned}$$ The large deviation function of the stochastic efficiency is then given by: $$J(\eta)=-\min\limits_{\lambda}\varphi(\lambda,\lambda \eta).\label{JEff}$$ The contraction can be done numerically, and the comparison with finite-time simulations is represented in Fig. \[fig8\]. Note that the extrapolation again works quite well, except in the vicinity of $\eta=0$.
Quantum Dot
===========
The quantum dot model, schematically represented in Fig. \[fig9\], has been investigated in detail in the context of stochastic thermodynamics [@esposito2009thermoelectric; @esposito2010finite; @esposito2010quantum; @esposito2012stochastically]. Two electron reservoirs are brought in contact with each other via one or multiple quantum dots. In order to investigate its stochastic efficiency, we focus on the case of two quantum dots, each with one “active" energy level, $E_1$ and $E_2$ ($E_1<E_2$). Occupancy of a quantum dot by multiple electrons is forbidden because of Coulomb repulsion. For mathematical simplicity, we also set all coupling constants between dot and reservoirs equal to $\Gamma$.
The operation of each quantum dot as a thermal engine is similar to that of the effusion engine: a net motion of electrons from a reservoir with low chemical potential to one with higher chemical potential is induced by a driving temperature gradient. For every particle transferring through the quantum dot with the lower energy level $E_1$, the heat taken from the hot reservoir is given by $\delta q_1=E_1-\mu_h$ and the delivered amount of work is $w_0=\mu_c-\mu_h=\Delta\mu$. Furthermore, the rate of transfer between the hot reservoir and the quantum dot are given by: $$\label{RateQD1}k^{+}_h=\frac{\Gamma e^{-\frac{E_1-\mu_h}{T_h}}}{1+e^{-\frac{E_1-\mu_h}{T_h}}},$$ $$\label{RateQD2}k^{-}_h=\frac{\Gamma}{1+e^{-\frac{E_1-\mu_h}{T_h}}}.$$ The rate of exchange between the cold reservoir and the quantum dot is obtained by replacing with $T_h$ and $\mu_h$ by $T_c$ and $\mu_c$, respectively. Analogous expressions hold for transfer through the other quantum dot, with $E_1$ replaced by $E_2$. The total amount of delivered work $w$ and consumed heat $q$ after a net transfer of $n_1$ particles through the quantum dot with energy level $E_1$ and $n_2$ particles through the quantum dot with energy level $E_2$ are then given by: $$w=\Delta \mu\left(n_1+n_2\right),$$ $$q=\delta q_1 n_1+\delta q_2 n_2.$$
The macroscopic efficiency can now be written as: $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{\eta}&=&\frac{\left\langle w\right\rangle}{\left\langle q\right\rangle}\\&=&\frac{\Delta\mu\left(\left\langle n_1\right\rangle+\left\langle n_2\right\rangle\right)}{\left\langle n_1 \right\rangle(E_1-\mu_c)+\left\langle n_2\right\rangle (E_2-\mu_c)},\end{aligned}$$ where $ n_1$ and $ n_2$ are the (stochastic) net amount of particles transferred through respectively the quantum dot with the lower and higher energy level. Their average value can be calculated from equations (\[RateQD1\]) and (\[RateQD2\]): $$\left\langle n_1\right\rangle=\frac{\Gamma}{2}\frac{{\rm e}^{{\frac {E_{{1}}-\mu_{{c}}}{T_{{c}}}}}-{
{\rm e}^{{\frac {E_{{1}}-\mu_{{h}}}{T_{{h}}}}}}}{\left( {
{\rm e}^{{\frac {E_{{1}}-\mu_{{c}}}{T_{{c}}}}}}+1 \right) \left( {{\rm e}^{{\frac {E_{{1}}-\mu_{{h}}}{T_{{h}}}}}}+1 \right) },$$ and an analogous expression for $\left\langle n_2\right\rangle$ with $E_1$ replaced by $E_2$. The macroscopic efficiency of the engine is plotted in Fig. \[fig10\] in function of $\mu_h/k_BT_h$ and $\mu_c/k_BT_h$. These results are comparable with the results of the effusion engine. Again, Carnot efficiency is only reached in the limit of zero density.
For the study of the efficiency fluctuations at finite time, we again first turn to numerical simulations. The probability distribution $P_t(\eta)$, $\eta=w/q$, is obtained by sampling the net fluxes $n_1$ and $n_2$ using the rates specified in equations (\[RateQD1\]) and (\[RateQD2\]). A typical result is shown in Fig. \[fig11\]. The results appear to be rather noisy, which is due to the fact that the delivered amounts of work and heat are discrete variables. Nevertheless, the minimum at Carnot efficiency is very striking, even at these short times. The convergence to the macroscopic efficiency on the other hand is rather slow, which is, in this particular case, due to the small value of the large deviation function.
Due to the fact that this engine is driven by two independent, tight-coupled operating channels (namely the two quantum dots), with heat consumption and efficiencies per particle $\delta q_i$ and $\eta_i=w_0/\delta q_i$ respectively, $i=1,2$, the large deviation function for the efficiency $J(\eta)$ can be written in terms of the event large deviation functions $\phi_i(n)$, $i=1,2$ (see \[AppEve\]): $$J(\eta)=\min_x\left(\phi_1\left(\frac{\alpha x}{\delta q_1}\right)+\phi_2\left(\frac{(1-\alpha)x}{\delta q_2}\right)\right).\label{EtaContrQD}$$ Here, $\alpha=(\eta-\eta_2)/(\eta_1-\eta_2)$, and $\phi_1 (n)$ and $\phi_2 (n)$ are the large deviation functions of the net number of transferred particles through each of the channels. As these large deviation functions are known (see \[AppQD\]), equation (\[EtaContrQD\]) can be used to estimate the large deviation function of $\eta$. The comparison with finite time numerical simulations is shown in Fig. \[fig12\]. Note that the extrapolation from finite time results does not work uniformly well due to the aforementioned discreteness of work and heat variables.
Effusion with momentum transfer
===============================
The effusion model, discussed in section 2, has also been studied in the presence of momentum exchange between the reservoirs [@wood2007fluctuation], see Fig. \[fig1mom\]. In this set-up, the gases move with overall average speed $V_h$ and $V_c$ parallel to the separating wall containing the effusion hole. For the purpose of illustration, we assume equal densities and chemical potentials in both reservoirs, and consider a thermal engine, with temperatures $T_h$ and $T_c$ in the respective compartments, driving momentum exchange.
Note that there are $3$ stochastic fluxes: the transfer of particles, of energy and of transversal momentum. This leaves some freedom in the definition of the efficiency. Here, we choose to define it as: $$\eta=-\frac{A_N n+A_{p_x} p_x}{A_U u},$$ with $$A_N=\frac{3}{2}k_B \ln\left(\frac{T_c}{T_h}\right)+\left(\frac{m V_c^2}{2T_c}-\frac{m V_h^2}{2T_h}\right),$$ $$A_{p_x}=\frac{V_h}{T_h}-\frac{V_c}{T_c},$$ $$A_U=\frac{1}{T_c}-\frac{1}{T_h},$$ the affinities of the particle, momentum and energy transport, and $n$, $p_x$ and $u$ the amounts of particle, momentum and energy transport. The macroscopic efficiency then reads: $$\bar{\eta}=-\frac{A_N \left\langle n\right\rangle+A_{p_x} \left\langle {p_x}\right\rangle}{A_U \left\langle u\right\rangle},$$ with $\left\langle n\right\rangle$, $\left\langle p_x\right\rangle$ and $\left\langle u\right\rangle$, the macroscopic particle, energy and momentum fluxes. The total entropy production is given by [@wood2007fluctuation]: $$\Delta_i S=A_N \left\langle n\right\rangle+A_{p_x} \left\langle p_x\right\rangle+A_U \left\langle u\right\rangle\geq 0.$$ Hence the second law of thermodynamics dictates that macroscopic efficiency in the engine regime is smaller than $1$. This is illustrated for the parameter values considered in Fig. \[fig2mom\].
Following the discussion of the previous examples, we now turn to the efficiency fluctuations. For the finite-time probability distribution $P_t(\eta)$, we again rely on numerical simulations. The rates of particle transfer are given by: $$\begin{aligned}
T_{h\rightarrow c}(E,p_x)=\frac{1}{t_0}&\frac{\sqrt{2}}{\left(k_B T_h\right)^2\pi \sqrt{m}}\left(E-\frac{p^{2}_x}{2m}\right)^{1/2}\nonumber\\&\exp\left(-\frac{m}{2k_B T_h}\left(\frac{2\left(E-\frac{p^{2}_x}{2m}\right)}{m}+\left(\frac{p_x}{m}+V_h\right)^2\right)\right),\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
T_{c\rightarrow h}(E,p_x)=\frac{1}{t_0}&\frac{\sqrt{2}}{\left(k_B T_c\right)^{3/2}\left(k_B T_h\right)^{1/2}\pi \sqrt{m}}\left(E-\frac{p^{2}_x}{2m}\right)^{1/2}\nonumber\\&\exp\left(-\frac{m}{2k_B T_c}\left(\frac{2\left(E-\frac{p^{2}_x}{2m}\right)}{m}+\left(\frac{p_x}{m}+V_c\right)^2\right)\right),\end{aligned}$$ with $t_0=\sqrt{{2\pi m}/(k_BT_h\sigma^2 \rho^2)}$, the average time between particle crossings from reservoir $h$ to reservoir $c$ and $\rho$ the particle density inside the reservoirs. The results of the simulations are shown in Fig. \[fig3mom\]. The minimum at the reversible limit is clearly visible. Note also that, in contrast to effusion without momentum transfer, the probability distribution behaves smoothly around $\eta=0$. The explanation is that, due to the possibility of momentum transport alone, small efficiencies are possible without net particle transport.
To evaluate the large deviation function of the efficiency, we first note that: $$\left\langle e^{-\lambda_W \Delta W-\lambda_Q \Delta Q}\right\rangle =\left\langle e^{-\lambda_W(A_N\Delta N+A_{p_x}\Delta p_x)-\lambda_q A_U \Delta U}\right\rangle,$$ and therefore the cumulant generating function of the produced work and heat $\mu_0(\lambda_W,\lambda_Q)$ can be written in terms of the cumulant generating function of the transferred momentum, energy and particle numbers $\mu_1(\lambda_U,\lambda_N,\lambda_{p_x})$: $$\begin{aligned}
\mu_0(\lambda_W,\lambda_Q)&=&\mu_1(A_N \lambda_W,A_{p_x}\lambda_W,A_{U}\lambda_Q)\nonumber\\&=&\sigma\left(\frac{k_B}{2\pi m}\right)^{1/2}\rho T_h^{1/2}\left(1-\frac{G_h\left(A_N \lambda_W,A_{p_x}\lambda_W,A_{U}\lambda_Q\right)}{\left(1+k_BT_hA_{U}\lambda_Q\right)^2}\right)\nonumber\\&&+\sigma\left(\frac{k_B}{2\pi m}\right)^{1/2}\rho T_c^{1/2}\left(1-\frac{G_c\left(A_N \lambda_W,A_{p_x}\lambda_W,A_{U}\lambda_Q\right)}{\left(1-k_BT_cA_{U}\lambda_Q\right)^2}\right),\nonumber\\\end{aligned}$$ with: $$G_h\left(\lambda_N,\lambda_{p_X},\lambda_U\right)=\exp\left(-\lambda_N-\frac{mV_h^2\lambda_U-k_BmT_h\lambda^2_{p_x}+2mV_h\lambda_{p_x}}{2\left(1+k_BT_h\lambda_U\right)}\right),$$ and $$G_c\left(\lambda_N,\lambda_{p_X},\lambda_U\right)=\exp\left(\lambda_N+\frac{mV_c^2\lambda_U+k_BmT_c\lambda^2_{p_x}+2mV_c\lambda_{p_x}}{2\left(1-k_BT_c\lambda_U\right)}\right).$$ As was discussed for the effusion model, the large deviation can then be found by numerically contracting the cumulant generating function: $$J(\eta)=-\min_{\lambda}\mu_0(\lambda,\lambda\eta)=-\min_{\lambda}\mu_1(A_N\lambda,A_{p_x}\lambda,A_U\eta\lambda).$$ The comparison with simulations is shown in Fig. \[fig4mom\]. The extrapolation ansatz seems to work quite well apart from an overshoot at the reversible efficiency.
Mandal-Jarzynski model
======================
Recently, there has been considerable interest in the stochastic information-to-work conversion. To study this issue in the context of stochastic efficiency, we focus on one of the simplest models, namely the Mandal-Jarzynski engine [@mandal2012work], cf. Fig. \[fig1inf\].
A particle, in contact with a heat bath at constant temperature $T$, can make transitions between a number of energy levels, which are multiples of $\delta E$. Apart from the thermal dissipative transitions due to the bath, the particle undergoes transitions that are driven by the entries of a linear tape. This interaction corresponds to a form of input work. The energy levels of the systems are numbered as shown in Fig. \[fig1inf\]. The input tape consists of a sequence of entry values, each referring uniquely to one of the possible energies, which are presented subsequently to the system. During such an interaction, the particle is moved to the energy level with number equal to the initial value on the tape. In this way, work is delivered. After each entry of the tape, the system is left to thermalize, and the new energy state of the particle is written into the tape, which we call the final or exit value. Note that this will alter the Shannon entropy of the tape. The tape moves on one step and the process is repeated. We mention a closely related implementation of the Mandal-Jarzynski model, shown in Fig. \[fig1infb\]. A Brownian particle in contact with a thermal bath at temperature $T$, can make jumps on a discrete lattice with a wall at position zero and a force gradient in the negative direction, inducing an energy difference between two neighbouring sites equal to $\delta E$. After the particle has thermalized, its position is measured, and the wall is instantaneously brought to the measured position. Next the wall is adiabatically moved back to the original position with delivery of work, after which the process is repeated. While we studied both versions, we focus in the following on the simplest situation giving nontrivial results for stochastic efficiency, namely a Mandal-Jarzynski model with 3 states, cf. Fig. \[fig1inf\].
It is clear that the amount of delivered work after one entry (trit) of the tape is given by: $$\begin{aligned}
w=\delta E\left(f-i\right),\end{aligned}$$ where $i$ and $f$ are the initial and final state of the system, respectively. The corresponding information entropy production in the tape can be defined in multiple ways, but if we assume that the dynamics is the same for the reversed trajectory, it is given by [@barato2014unifying; @horowitz2013imitating]: $$\Delta s_{tape}=k_B\left(\ln\left(p_{I,i}\right)-\ln\left(p_{I,f}\right)\right),$$ with $i$ and $f$ the initial and final state of the trit and $p_{I,k}$ the probability for entry state $k$ on the tape. The average information entropy change upon processing one trit is thus given by: $$\begin{aligned}
\left\langle\Delta s_{tape}\right\rangle&=&k_B\sum_j \left(p_{I,j}-p_{F,j}\right)\ln\left(p_{I,j}\right).\end{aligned}$$ Here: $$p_{F,j}=e^{-j\frac{\delta E}{k_B T}}/\left(1+e^{-\frac{\delta E}{k_B T}}+e^{-2\frac{\delta E}{k_B T}}\right),$$ is the probability that the trit leaves the system in state j ($j=0,1,2$). The information entropy written in this way is the sum of the change in Shannon entropy and the entropy production of an auxiliary Mandal-Jarzynski system if it were to bring the tape back to its original distribution [@barato2014stochastic].
The efficiency is defined as the ratio of the delivered work and the amount of information consumed.
![Macroscopic efficiency of the Mandal-Jarzynski model in the engine regime, with $\delta E=k_B T$. The green dot corresponds to $p_{I,1}=0.2$, $p_{I,2}=0.1$ and $\bar{\eta}=0.68$. The stochastic efficiency for the latter case is represented in Fig. \[fig3mom\][]{data-label="fig2inf"}](MacroEtaMJ.png){width="6cm"}
In particular the macroscopic efficiency is given by: $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{\eta}&=&\frac{\left\langle w\right\rangle}{T\left\langle\Delta s_{tape}\right\rangle}\nonumber\\&=&\frac{\delta E}{k_B T}\frac{\left(2\left(p_{F,2}-p_{I,2}\right)+\left(p_{F,1}-p_{I,1}\right)\right)}{\left(\left(p_{I,0}-p_{F,0}\right)\ln\left(p_{I,0}\right)+\left(p_{I,1}-p_{F,1}\right)\ln\left(p_{I,1}\right)+\left(p_{I,2}-p_{F,2}\right)\ln\left(p_{I,2}\right)\right)}.\nonumber\\\end{aligned}$$ A colour-coded plot is given in Fig. \[fig2inf\], for $\delta E/k_B T=1$. Reversible efficiency ($\bar{\eta}=1$) can be reached in the limit where $p_{I,j}=p_{F,j}$, $j=1,2$.
The joint probability distribution $P_{Init,N}\left(n_{1},n_{2}\right)$ of $n_{1}$ and $n_{2}$ incoming trits with value 1 and 2 respectively on a total of N trits is given by: $$\label{PInit}P_{Init,N}(n_1, n_2)=\frac{N!}{(N-n_1-n_2)!n_1!n_2!}p_{I,1}^{n_1}p_{I,2}^{n_2}(1-p_{I,1}-p_{I,2})^{N-n_1-n_2}$$ and the joint probability distribution of $n_{1}$ and $n_{2}$ outgoing trits with value 1 and 2 respectively on a total of N trits is given by: $$\begin{aligned}
P_{Final,N}(n_1, n_2)&=&\frac{N!}{(N-n_1-n_2)!n_1!n_2!}p_{F,1}^{n_1}p_{F,2}^{n_2}(1-p_{F,1}-p_{F,2})^{N-n_1-n_2},\nonumber\\\end{aligned}$$ which is independent of the distribution of the incoming trits. Using these distributions, numerical simulations can be performed, to evaluate the probability distribution of the stochastic efficiency $\eta=w/(T \Delta s_{tape})$, cf. Fig. \[fig4inf\]. The minimum around $\eta=0$ is analogous to the minimum in the effusion model, and disappears in the large time limit. Furthermore, one observes the weak local minimum at reversible efficiency $1$ with, to its right, a more clearly visible maximum.
The large deviation functions of $x_1=n_{I,1}/N$ and $x_2=n_{I,2}/N$ incoming trits with value 1 and 2 respectively, is found from equation (\[PInit\]): $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma_{Init}(x_1,x_2)=x_1 && \ln(x_1)+x_2 \ln(x_2)+(1-x_1-x_2) \ln(1-x_1-x_2)\nonumber\\&&-x_1 \ln(p_{I,1}) -x_2\ln(p_{I,2})-(1-x_1-x_2)\ln(1-p_{I,1}-p_{I,2}),\nonumber\\\end{aligned}$$ and a completely analogous expression for the large deviation function $\gamma_{Final}(y_1,y_2)$ of $y_1=n_{F,1}/N$ and $y_2=n_{F,2}/N$, with $p_{I,k}$ replaced by $p_{F,k}$. From this, the large deviation function of the efficiency can be calculated: $$J(\eta)=\min_{x_1,x_2,y_1,y_2}\left(\gamma_{Init}(x_1,x_2)+\gamma_{Final}(y_1,y_2)\right)$$ where $x_1$, $x_2$, $y_1$ and $y_2$ are constrained to reproduce the efficiency $\eta$ under consideration, i.e., they are related by: $$\eta=\frac{\delta E}{k_B T}\frac{\left(2\left(y_2-x_2\right)+y_1-x_1\right)}{\left(x_0-y_0\right)\ln\left(p_{I,0}\right)+\left(x_1-y_1\right)\ln\left(p_{I,1}\right)+\left(x_2-y_2\right)\ln\left(p_{I,2}\right)}.$$ This minimisation can be done numerically, cf. Fig. \[fig5inf\]. In spite of the noise, which is mainly due to the discreteness of variables, the extrapolation seems to work quite well. Also, the telltale maximum in the large deviation function close to reversible efficiency is again reproduced.
Discussion
==========
The concept of efficiency plays a crucial role in thermodynamics, especially when the efficiency is defined in such a way that is leads to universal system-independent statements, such as the one concerning Carnot efficiency. With the advent of stochastic thermodynamics, it is natural to revisit such questions for stochastic efficiency. Universal statements appear to be possible for the large deviation function characterising the asymptotic time regime. In particular, long-time realisations with reversible efficiency are exponentially least probable. One purpose of this paper has been to verify and document the salient features of the time-asymptotic stochastic efficiency in five different settings, namely driven Brownian motion, effusion with a thermo-chemical and thermo-velocity gradient, a quantum dot and a model for information to work conversion. In addition, we provide the analysis for finite time including the approach to and extrapolation into the asymptotic time regime. A revealing feature of our analysis is that the large deviation properties can be obtained quite consistently by extrapolation from rather short finite time results. The other encouraging message is that one can apply the analysis to a wide variety of completely different implementations, some of which may be easier to realise. Both observations imply that an experimental verification should not pose a real problem. In particular, in view of existing experiments on the issue [@berut2012experimental; @Toyabe; @wang; @seifert; @dellago], the experimental implementation for the stochastic efficiency of an information to work engine should be relatively straigthforward.
We thank Thijs Becker and Bart Cleuren for a careful reading of the manuscript.
Large deviation functions from finite time results\[AppLDF\]
============================================================
The central object of interest in stochastic efficiency is its large deviation function. Unfortunately, the evaluation of exponentially unlikely events is obviously very difficult. For this reason, we propose a simple and apparently robust method to deduce the large deviation function $J(\eta)$ from finite time results. As input we give the efficiency probability distributions for three finite times $t_1$, $t_2$ and $t_3$. We propose the following ansatz for $P_t(\eta)$ : $$P_{\mathrm{Fit},t}(\eta)=A(\eta)t^{-B(\eta)}e^{-tJ(\eta)}$$ Here, $A(\eta)$, $B(\eta)$ and $J(\eta)$ are three fitting parameters for each $\eta$. $J(\eta)$ shall be our estimate for the large deviation function. The fitting parameters can be obtained from the known values $-\ln\left(P_{t_i}(\eta)\right)$, with $i=1,2,3$, since: $$\left[
\begin{array}{c}
-\ln\left(P_{t_1}(\eta)\right)/t_1\\
-\ln\left(P_{t_2}(\eta)\right)/t_2\\
-\ln\left(P_{t_3}(\eta)\right)/t_3
\end{array}
\right]
=
\left[
\begin{array}{ccc}
1&1/t_{1}&\ln \left( t_{1} \right)/t_{1}\\
1&1/t_{2}&\ln \left( t_{2} \right)/t_{2}\\
1&1/t_{3}&\ln \left( t_{3} \right)/t_{3}\\
\end {array}\right]
\left[\begin{array}{c}J(\eta)\\-\ln\left(A(\eta)\right)\\B(\eta)\end{array}\right].$$ Inverting this matrix equality leads to an estimate of the large deviation function.
Efficiency calculations from event probability distributions \[AppEve\]
=======================================================================
Consider a model consisting of $k$ tight-coupled processes (e.g. k channels for particle transport), where the $i$-th process undergoes $n_i$ events, $i=1,..,k$. Furthermore, the total delivered amount of work and heat can be written as $W(n_1,...,n_k)$ and $Q(n_1,...,n_k)$. Once the event probability distribution is known, the probability distribution of $\eta$ can be written as: $$\label{PetaGen2}P_t(\eta)=\sum_{n_1,...,n_k}P_t(n_1,...,n_k)\delta_{\eta Q(n_1,...,n_k),W(n_1,...,n_k)},$$ for discrete variables and $$\label{PetaGen}P_t(\eta)=\int dn_1..dn_kP_t(n_1,...,n_k)\delta\left(\eta-\frac{W(n_1,...,n_k)}{Q(n_1,...,n_k)}\right),$$ for continuous variables, where $P_t(n_1,...,n_k)$ is the probability that at time t, for process i, $n_i$ events have occured. Using the corresponding event large deviation function $\gamma (n_1,...,n_k)=-\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}\left(1/t \ln\left(P_t(n_1,...,n_k)\right)\right)$, the efficiency large deviation function $J(\eta)$ can then be calculated via the contraction principle: $$J(\eta)=\min_{n_1,...,n_k}\gamma(n_1,...,n_k),\label{JetaApp}$$ where $n_1,...,n_k$ are conditioned to: $$\eta=\frac{W(n_1,...,n_k)}{Q(n_1,...,n_k)}.$$ This provides a good scheme for numerical calculations.
We proceed to show that there are, in this case, only two extrema of the efficiency large deviation function: the macroscopic efficiency and the reversible efficiency. Using Lagrange multipliers, we have: $$J(\eta)=\mathrm{Extr}_{x_1,...,x_k,\lambda}L(x_1,..,x_k,\lambda),$$ with $$L(x_1,...,x_k,\lambda)=\gamma(x_1,...,x_k)+\lambda\left(\eta Q(x_1,...,x_k)-W(x_1,...,x_k)\right).$$ Therefore, $x_1,...,x_k,\lambda$ are constrained to: $$\frac{\partial \gamma(x_1,...,x_k)}{\partial x_i}=-\lambda\left(\eta \frac{\partial Q(x_1,...,x_k)}{\partial x_i}-\frac{W(x_1,...,x_k)}{\partial x_i}\right),\label{GamApp}$$ for all i. As $L(x_1,...,x_k,\lambda)$ is an extremum of $\lambda$ and $x_i$, $i=1,...,k$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d}{d\eta}J(\eta)&=&\sum_i\frac{\partial L(x_1,...,x_k,\lambda)}{\partial x_i}\frac{\partial x_i}{\partial \eta}+\frac{\partial L(x_1,...,x_k,\lambda)}{\partial \lambda}\frac{\partial \lambda}{\partial \eta}+\frac{\partial L(x_1,...,x_k,\lambda)}{\partial \eta}\nonumber\\&=&\frac{\partial L(x_1,...,x_k,\lambda)}{\partial \eta}\nonumber\\&=&\lambda Q(x_1,...,x_k).\end{aligned}$$ Note that $Q(x_1,...,x_k)=0$ corresponds to reversible efficiency due to the fluctuation theorem, and that $\lambda=0$ corresponds to $\partial \gamma(x_1,...,x_k)/\partial x_i=0$ (using equation \[GamApp\]) which is equivalent with macroscopic efficiency (as we assume convex event large deviation functions). As one of these two equalities has to be fulfilled to be in an extremum of $J(\eta)$, we conclude that these are the only two extremums of the large deviation function
We finally note that the expression for $J(\eta)$ can be further simplified if the processes are independent. We shall illustrate this for systems consisting of two independent processes (with $n_1$ and $n_2$ events respectively). The extension to more independent processes is straightforward. The amount of delivered work per event in the $i$th process is written as $w_i$ and the amount of extracted heat is $q_i$, $i=1,2$. The efficiency is then given by: $$\begin{aligned}
\eta&=&\frac{w_1 n_1+w_2 n_2}{q_1 n_1+q_2 n_2}\nonumber\\&=& \frac{q_1 n_1}{q_1 n_1+q_2 n_2} \eta_1+n_2 \frac{q_2 n_2}{q_1 n_1+q_2 n_2} \eta_2\nonumber\\&=& \alpha\eta_1+(1-\alpha) \eta_2,\end{aligned}$$ with $$\label{Fora}\alpha=\frac{q_1 n_1}{q_1 n_1+q_2 n_2}=\frac{\eta-\eta_2}{\eta_1-\eta_2},$$ and $\eta_i=w_i/q_i$, $i=1,2$. Therefore, the probability distribution of $\eta$ at time t is given by: $$\begin{aligned}
P_t(\eta)&=&\int\int dw dq P_t(w,q)\delta\left(\eta-\frac{w}{q}\right)\nonumber\\&=&\int\int dn_1 dn_2\left|w_1 q_2-w_2 q_1\right|P_t (n_1)P_t (n_2) \delta\left(\eta-\alpha\eta_1-(1-\alpha) \eta_2\right).\nonumber\\ \end{aligned}$$ From large deviation theory, we can now write the efficiency large deviation function $J(\eta)$ in terms of terms of the large deviation functions of the event numbers $\varphi_1(n_1)$ and $\varphi_2( n_2)$: $$J(\eta)=\min_x \left(\varphi_1\left(\frac{\alpha x}{ q_1}\right)+\varphi_2\left(\frac{(1-\alpha)x}{q_2}\right)\right).$$
Event large deviation function of quantum dot-like models\[AppQD\]
==================================================================
We present for completeness the large deviation function for the number of particles travelling through one energy level of a quantum dot (with energy $E$ and coupling constant $\Gamma=1$) . We only quote the final result, as similar calculations can be found in the literature, see e.g. [@willaert2014fluctuation; @lacoste2008fluctuation; @harris2007fluctuation; @verley2013modulated]. We recall that the fluxes are given by equations (\[RateQD1\]) and (\[RateQD2\]). The cumulant generating function is given by: $$f(\gamma)=k+\sqrt{r+ q(\gamma)s},$$ with $$\begin{aligned}
k=-\frac{\left(k^{+}_L+k^{-}_L+k^{+}_R+k^{-}_R\right)}{2};\quad s=\sqrt{k^{+}_Lk^{+}_Rk^{-}_Lk^{-}_R};\quad \gamma_0=\ln\left(\frac{k^+_Lk^-_R}{k^+_Rk^-_L}\right)\nonumber\\\rho(\gamma)=e^{\gamma_0/2-\gamma};\quad r=k^2-k^+_Lk^-_R-k^+_Rk^-_L;\quad q(\gamma)=\rho(\gamma)+\rho(\gamma)^{-1}.\end{aligned}$$ The large deviation function reads: $$h(n)=-f(\gamma(n))-n\gamma(n),$$ with: $$\bar{q}(n)=\frac{2n}{s}\sqrt{r+2n^2+2\sqrt{s^2+r n^2+n^4}},$$ $$\gamma(n)=\frac{\gamma_0}{2}-\ln\left(\frac{\sqrt{\bar{q}(n)^2+4}+\bar{q}(n)}{2}\right)$$
[10]{} url \#1[[\#1]{}]{}urlprefix\[2\]\[\][[\#2](#2)]{} Szilard L 1929 [*Zeitschrift f[ü]{}r Physik*]{} [**53**]{} 840–856
Leff H and Rew A 2002 [*Maxwell’s Demon 2 Entropy, Classical and Quantum Information, Computing*]{} (CRC Press)
Parrondo J M and Espa[ñ]{}ol P 1996 [*American Journal of Physics*]{} [ **64**]{} 1125–1129
Sekimoto K 1997 [*Journal of the physical society of Japan*]{} [**66**]{} 1234–1237
Jarzynski C and Mazonka O 1999 [*Physical Review E*]{} [**59**]{} 6448
Van den Broeck C, Kawai R and Meurs P 2004 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [ **93**]{} 090601
Sekimoto K 1998 [*Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement*]{} [**130**]{} 17–27
Barato A and Seifert U 2014 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [**112**]{} 090601
Barato A and Seifert U 2014 [*Physical Review E*]{} [**90**]{} 042150
Mandal D and Jarzynski C 2012 [*Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences*]{} [**109**]{} 11641–11645
Touchette H and Lloyd S 2000 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [**84**]{} 1156
Sagawa T and Ueda M 2010 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [**104**]{} 090602
Horowitz J M and Parrondo J M 2011 [*New Journal of Physics*]{} [**13**]{} 123019
Kish L B and Granqvist C G 2012 [*EPL (Europhysics Letters)*]{} [**98**]{} 68001
Abreu D and Seifert U 2012 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [**108**]{} 030601
Mandal D, Quan H and Jarzynski C 2013 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [**111**]{} 030602
Esposito M and Schaller G 2012 [*EPL (Europhysics Letters)*]{} [**99**]{} 30003
Horowitz J M, Sagawa T and Parrondo J M 2013 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [**111**]{} 010602
Raizen M G 2009 [*Science*]{} [**324**]{} 1403–1406
Raizen M G 2011 [*Scientific American*]{} [**304**]{} 54–59
B[é]{}rut A, Arakelyan A, Petrosyan A, Ciliberto S, Dillenschneider R and Lutz E 2012 [*Nature*]{} [**483**]{} 187–189
Thorn J J, Schoene E A, Li T and Steck D A 2008 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [**100**]{} 240407
Toyabe S, Sagawa T, Ueda M, Muneyuki E and Sano M 2010 [*Nature Physics*]{} [**6**]{} 988–992
Strasberg P, Schaller G, Brandes T and Esposito M 2013 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [**110**]{} 040601
Serreli V, Lee C F, Kay E R and Leigh D A 2007 [*Nature*]{} [**445**]{} 523–527
Jarzynski C 1997 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [**78**]{} 2690
Crooks G E 1999 [*Physical Review E*]{} [**60**]{} 2721
Seifert U 2012 [*Reports on Progress in Physics*]{} [**75**]{} 126001
Van den Broeck C and Esposito M 2015 [*Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications*]{} [**418**]{} 6–16
Becker T, Willaert T, Cleuren B and Van den Broeck C 2015 [*Physical Review E*]{} [**91**]{} 012101
Evans D J, Cohen E and Morriss G 1993 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [**71**]{} 2401
Gallavotti G and Cohen EGD 1995 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [**74**]{} 2694
Lebowitz J and Spohn H 1999 [*Journal of Statistical Physics*]{} [**95**]{} 333
Kurchan J 1998 [*Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General*]{} [**31**]{} 3719
Verley G, Willaert T, Van den Broeck C and Esposito M 2014 [*Nature Communications*]{} [**5**]{}
Gingrich T R, Rotskoff G M, Vaikuntanathan S and Geissler P L 2014 [*New Journal of Physics*]{} [**16**]{} 102003
Verley G, Willaert T, Van den Broeck C and Esposito M 2014 [ *Physical Review E*]{} [**90**]{} 052145
Proesmans K, Cleuren B and Van den Broeck C 2015 [*EPL (Europhysics Letters)*]{} [**109**]{} 20004
Polettini M, Verley G and Esposito M 2015 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [ **114**]{}(5) 050601
Rana S, Pal P, Saha A and Jayannavar A 2014 [*Physical Review E*]{} [**90**]{} 042146
Campisi M, Pekola J and Fazio R 2014 [*arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.0898*]{}
Esposito M, Ochoa M A and Galperin M 2015 [*arXiv preprint arXiv:1501.03232*]{}
Martinez I A, Roldan E, Dinis L, Petrov D, Parrondo J M and Rica R 2014 [ *arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.1282*]{}
Cleuren B, Van den Broeck C and Kawai R 2006 [*Physical Review E*]{} [**74**]{} 021117
Esposito M, Lindenberg K and Van den Broeck C 2009 [*EPL (Europhysics Letters)*]{} [**85**]{} 60010
Esposito M, Kawai R, Lindenberg K and Van den Broeck C 2010 [*EPL (Europhysics Letters)*]{} [**89**]{} 20003
Esposito M, Kawai R, Lindenberg K and Van den Broeck C 2010 [*Physical Review E*]{} [**81**]{} 041106
Esposito M, Kumar N, Lindenberg K and Van den Broeck C 2012 [*Physical Review E*]{} [**85**]{} 031117
Wood K, Van den Broeck C, Kawai R and Lindenberg K 2007 [*Physical Review E*]{} [**75**]{} 061116
Wang G M, Sevick E M, Mittag E, Searles D J and Evans D J 2002 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [**89**]{} 050601
Blickle V, Speck T, Helden L, Seifert U and Bechinger C 2006 [*Physical Review Letters*]{} [**96**]{} 070603
Gieseler J, Quidant R, Dellago C, and Novotny L 2014 [*Nature Nanotechnology*]{} [**9**]{} 358–364 (2014).
Willaert T, Cleuren B and Van den Broeck C 2014 [*The European Physical Journal B*]{} [**87**]{} 1–4
Lacoste D, Lau A and Mallick K 2008 [*Physical Review E*]{} [**78**]{} 011915
Harris R and Sch[ü]{}tz G 2007 [*Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment*]{} [**2007**]{} P07020
Verley G, Van den Broeck C and Esposito M 2013 [*Physical Review E*]{} [ **88**]{} 032137
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Despite recent success of deep learning models in numerous applications, their widespread use on mobile devices is seriously impeded by storage and computational requirements. In this paper, we propose a novel network compression method called Adaptive Dimension Adjustment Tucker decomposition (ADA-Tucker). With learnable core tensors and transformation matrices, ADA-Tucker performs Tucker decomposition of *arbitrary-order* tensors. Furthermore, we propose that weight tensors in networks with proper order and balanced dimension are easier to be compressed. Therefore, the high flexibility in decomposition choice distinguishes ADA-Tucker from all previous low-rank models. To compress more, we further extend the model to Shared Core ADA-Tucker (SCADA-Tucker) by defining a shared core tensor for all layers. Our methods require no overhead of recording indices of non-zero elements. Without loss of accuracy, our methods reduce the storage of LeNet-5 and LeNet-300 by ratios of $\mathbf{691\times}$ and $\mathbf{233\times}$, respectively, significantly outperforming state of the art. The effectiveness of our methods is also evaluated on other three benchmarks (CIFAR-10, SVHN, ILSVRC12) and modern newly deep networks (ResNet, Wide-ResNet).'
author:
- 'Zhisheng Zhong [^1] Fangyin Wei Zhouchen Lin Chao Zhang [^2]'
bibliography:
- 'ref.bib'
title: ' ADA-Tucker: Compressing Deep Neural Networks via Adaptive Dimension Adjustment Tucker Decomposition '
---
Introduction
============
Driven by increasing computation power of GPUs and huge amount of data, deep learning has recently made great achievements in computer vision, natural language processing and speech recognition. In the history of neural network [@lecun1998gradient; @krizhevsky2012imagenet; @simonyan2014very; @szegedy2015going; @he2016deep; @huang2016densely], networks tend to have more layers and more weights. Although deeper neural networks may achieve better results, the expense of storage and computation is still a great challenge. Due to limits of devices and increasing demands from many applications, effective network compression for convolutional (Conv) layers and fully-connected (FC) layers is a critical research topic in deep learning.
So far, as illustrated in Figure \[flowchart\], mainstream methods for network compression can be categorized into four groups: reducing the bits of weight representation, effective coding, making weights sparse and simplifying the network structure. These four methods can be combined together for higher compression ratio with little loss in network performance. Han et al. have combined the first three methods in [@han2015deep].
![Four categories of mainstream compression methods, which can be combined for higher compression ratio. “$a\times$” etc. means that the network is compressed by $a$ times.[]{data-label="flowchart"}](related_work.pdf){width="1\linewidth"}
#### Reducing the bits of weight representation and Effective coding
There are two approaches for the first category: clustering and quantization. BinaryConnect [@courbariaux2015binaryconnect] enforces weights in neural networks to take binary values. Incremental network quantization [@zhou2017incremental] quantizes deep models with 5 bits incrementally. Gong et al. [@gong2014compressing] learn CNNs in advance, and then apply k-means clustering on the weights for quantization. Ullrich et al. [@ullrich2017soft] cluster the weights with a Gaussian mixture model (GMM), using only six class centers to represent all weights. The second category, effective coding, always combines with the first category, where the coding scheme is mainly Huffman coding. DeepCompression [@han2015deep] first introduces Huffman coding in network compression and improves the compression ratios further. CNNPack [@wang2016cnnpack] also uses Huffman coding and gets better results.
#### Making weights sparse
Sparsity can be induced in either the original domain or the frequency domain. The most commonly used sparsity method in the original domain is pruning. Han et al. [@han2015learning] recursively train a neural network and prune unimportant connections based on their weight magnitude. Dynamic network surgery [@guo2016dynamic] prunes and splices the branch of the network. The frequency domain sparsity methods benefit from discrete cosine transformation (DCT). Chen et al. [@chen2016compressing] take advantage of DCT to make weights sparse in the frequency domain. Wang et al. [@wang2016cnnpack] combine DCT, clustering and Huffman coding for further compression.
{width="100.00000%"}
{width="100.00000%"}
#### Simplifying the network structure
A common approach of the fourth category involves matrix and tensor decomposition, while another rarely used approach called teacher-student model [@ba2014deep; @hinton2015distilling] tries to reduce the depth of networks. Low-rank models were first used in the fully-connected layer [@denil2013predicting]. They utilize singular value decomposition (SVD) to reduce the computation and storage. Tensor Train decomposition [@novikov2015tensorizing] is another model to compress fully-connected layer. Jaderberg et al. [@jaderberg2014speeding], Denton et al. [@denton2014exploiting] and Tai et al. [@tai2015convolutional] speed up CNNs with low-rank regularization. Canonical Polyadic [@lebedev2014speeding] and Tucker decomposition [@kim2015compression] are advocated to accelerate the training of CNNs.
Our model falls into the last category, and it differs from the existing methods in two folds. First, while previous methods generally decompose weight tensors with fixed order and dimension, our methods adaptively adjust the original weight tensor into a new tensor with arbitrary order before Tucker decomposition. The superiority of such flexibility will be explained and demonstrated in the next section. Second, the proposed model can be applied to *both Conv and FC layers*, requiring no definition of new layers. In fact, previous low-rank models implemented by defining additional layers are special cases of our methods.
In principle, our methods can also combine with other three categories for higher compression ratios. In the experiments section, we combine quantization and Huffman coding for better results.
In summary, our contributions are as follows:
- We demonstrate that deep neural networks can be better compressed using weight tensors with proper orders and balanced dimensions of modes without performance degradation.
- We propose a novel network compression method called ADA-Tucker with flexible decomposition that drastically compresses deep networks while learning.
- We further extend ADA-Tucker to SCADA-Tucker with a shared core tensor for all layers, achieving even higher compression ratios with negligible accuracy loss.
ADA-Tucker and SCADA-Tucker {#ada}
===========================
**Notations:** Following [@kolda2009tensor], tensors are denoted by boldface Euler script letters, e.g., $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{A}}$, matrices are denoted by boldface capital letters, e.g., $\boldsymbol{A}$, vectors are denoted by boldface lowercase letters, e.g., $\boldsymbol{a}$, and scalars are denoted by lowercase letters, e.g., $a$. $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{A}}^{(i)}$ represents the parameters of the $i$-th layer and $\boldsymbol{A}_{(i)}$ represents the $i$-mode of tensor $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{A}}$.
Tensor Decomposition on the Weight Tensor {#ADA-Tucker conv}
-----------------------------------------
Weights of a deep neural network mainly come from Conv layers and FC layers. With weights in both types of layer represented by tensors, methods based on tensor decomposition can be applied to reduce the weight numbers.
For a Conv layer, its weight can be represented by a fourth order tensor $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}}\in \mathbb{R}^{h \times w \times s \times t}$, where $h$ and $w$ represent the height and width of the kernel, respectively, and $s$ and $t$ represent the channel number of input and output, respectively. Similarly, the weight of a FC layer can be viewed as a second order tensor $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}}\in \mathbb{R}^{s \times t}$, where $s$ and $t$ represent the number of the layer’s input and output units, respectively. Thus in general, the form of a weight tensor is a $d_w$-th order $(m_1,m_2,...,m_{d_w})$-dimensional tensor $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}}\in \mathbb{R}^{m_1\times m_2\times ... \times m_{d_w}}$, where $m_i$ is the dimension of the $i$-th mode.
The weight tensor can be original if the magnitude of $m_i$’s is balanced. Otherwise, it can be a reshaped version of the original tensor according to the adaptive dimension adjustment mechanism described in the next subsection. Suppose that $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}}$ is reshaped into $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{\tilde{W}}}\in \mathbb{R}^{n_1\times n_2 \times ... \times n_{d_c}}$, where $n_1\times n_2\times ... \times n_{d_c}=m_1\times m_2\times ... \times m_{d_w}$. Then based on Tucker decomposition, we decompose the reshaped weight tensor $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{\tilde{W}}}$ into a $d_c$-mode product of a core tensor $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}$ and a series of transformation matrices $\{\boldsymbol{M}\}$: $$\label{tucker_any}
\boldsymbol{\mathcal{\tilde{W}}}\approx \boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}\times_1 \boldsymbol{M}_1 \times_2 \boldsymbol{M}_2 \times_3 ... \times_{d_c} \boldsymbol{M}_{d_c}
,$$ where $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}\in \mathbb{R}^{k_1\times k_2\times ... \times k_{d_c}}$ and $\boldsymbol{M}_i \in \mathbb{R}^{n_i \times k_i} (i=1,2,...,d_c)$ are all learnable. They need to be stored during training in order to reconstruct $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}}$: after the $d_c$-mode product w.r.t. $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}$, we reshape ${\boldsymbol{\mathcal{\tilde{W}}}}$ into $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}}$ so as to produce the output of the layer in forward propagation and pass the gradients in backward propagation.
We define $\boldsymbol{\tilde{W}}_{(i)}\in \mathbb{R}^{n_i\times (n_1... n_{i-1}n_{i+1}... n_{d_c})}$ and $\boldsymbol{C}_{(i)}\in \mathbb{R}^{k_i\times (k_1... k_{i-1}k_{i+1}... k_{d_c})}$ as the $i$-mode unfolding of tensor $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{\tilde{W}}}$ and $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}$, respectively, and rewrite Eq. as: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{mode_n_tucker}
\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{\tilde{W}}_{(i)} =
\boldsymbol{M}_i\boldsymbol{C}_{(i)}\left(\boldsymbol{M}_{d_c}\otimes\boldsymbol{M}_{d_c-1}\otimes...\otimes\boldsymbol{M}_{i+1}\otimes\boldsymbol{M}_{i-1}\otimes...\otimes\boldsymbol{M}_{1}\right)^T,
\end{aligned}\end{aligned}$$ where $\otimes$ represents the Kronecker product. The gradients of loss $L$ w.r.t. the core tensors and the transformation matrices are as follows:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{dm}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial L}{\partial \boldsymbol{M}_i} =
\frac{\partial L}{\partial \boldsymbol{\tilde{W}}_{(i)}}
\left(\boldsymbol{M}_{d_c}\otimes\boldsymbol{M}_{d_c-1}\otimes...\otimes\boldsymbol{M}_{i+1}\otimes\boldsymbol{M}_{i-1}\otimes...\otimes\boldsymbol{M}_{1}\right)\boldsymbol{C}_{(i)}^T
,
\end{aligned}\end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{dc}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial L}{\partial \boldsymbol{C}_{(i)}} =
\boldsymbol{M}_i^T\frac{\partial L}{\partial \boldsymbol{\tilde{W}}_{(i)}}\left(\boldsymbol{M}_{d_c}\otimes\boldsymbol{M}_{d_c-1}\otimes...\otimes \boldsymbol{M}_{i+1}\otimes\boldsymbol{M}_{i-1}\otimes...\otimes\boldsymbol{M}_{1}\right),
\end{aligned}\end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{dc_reshape}
\frac{\partial L}{\partial \boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}} =
{\rm{fold}}\left(\frac{\partial L}{\partial \boldsymbol{C}_{(i)}}\right).\end{aligned}$$
Adaptive Dimension Adjustment and motivation {#dimension_adjust}
--------------------------------------------
The tendency of network overfitting suggests that there is always redundancy among the weights which can be approximately measured by ‘rank’. And ‘rank’ is often determined by the smaller or smallest size of different modes (e.g., for a matrix, its rank cannot exceed its row number or column number, whichever smaller). If the size of a mode is much smaller than others, compressing along that mode will cause significant information loss.
Changing the dimension of the weight tensors to avoid the significant information loss in DNNs has been widely used in network compression. For example, Jaderberg et al. [@jaderberg2014speeding] compress network with low-rank regularization. In their model, they merged the kernel height dimension and kernel width dimension into one dimension and got success, which suggests that there exist some information redundancy between the kernel width dimension and kernel height dimension. ThiNet [@luo2017thinet] proposed to compress the weights through the input channel dimension and output channel dimension, which suggests that there exist some information redundancy between the input channel dimension and output channel dimension. Zhang et al. [@zhang2017interleaved] proposed interleaved group convolutions that splitting the weight tensor into several small group tensor, which also means that there exist redundancy among the four dimensions. Here, we extend these ideas further. We treat all four dimensions of the weight tensor equally. So we reshape the weight tensor to any order and any shape. Here is a toy example that can illustrate this idea. Suppose that we have 100 parameters represented by a matrix of size $1\times100$ or $10\times10$. Obviously, the rank of the former matrix tends to be 1, in which case rank-based compression is hard (compressing to a zero-rank matrix will lose all information). In contrast, a matrix of real data in the latter form can be easily approximated with a lower-rank matrix without losing too much information.
As a conclusion, compression will be much less effective if a tensor is not reshaped to one with appropriate order and balanced dimension. Motivated by such consideration, we implement adaptive dimension adjustment in our model that allows reshaping weight tensors and defining core tensors of arbitrary shape. Experiments also demonstrate that both balanced dimensions of each mode and a proper order of the weight tensor contribute to better performance during network compression.
In the following subsection, we will describe the principle and process of adaptive dimension adjustment.
### Adaptive Dimension Adjustment for Conv Layers {#ada_conv}
For a Conv layer, the basic mechanism is to reshape the original weight tensor into a tensor with roughly even dimensions of modes. We take the Conv1 (first convolutional) layer of LeNet-5 as an example. The size of its original weight tensor is $5\times5\times1\times20$. Normally, a mode of dimension one is redundant and can be simply neglected (such case usually occurs in the first convolutional layer of a neural network). Note that dimensions of the first two modes are much smaller than that of the last one. With $20$ still an acceptable dimension size, we merge the first two modes and get a second order tensor of size $25\times20$. We may then define a smaller second order core tensor accordingly for decomposition.
Generally speaking, when there are few input channels (e.g., for the first layer of a network, $s=1$ or $s=3$), we merge the input and output channels into one mode, obtaining a third order weight tensor $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{\tilde{W}}}\in \mathbb{R}^{h \times w \times st}$. Similar operation is conducted for small kernel size (e.g., $1 \times 1$ or $5 \times 5$), i.e., merging the first two modes into one to have $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{\tilde{W}}}\in \mathbb{R}^{hw \times s\times t}$. If these two cases occur simultaneously, we can reduce the original fourth order weight tensor to a matrix $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{\tilde{W}}}\in \mathbb{R}^{hw \times st}$. With the same principle in mind, when the kernel size grows large enough, it is better to maintain the weight tensor as a fourth order tensor or even reshape it to one with a higher order (e.g., fifth order and sixth order). In fact, the dimension adjustment operations are *not limited to simply merging several modes*: any form of reshaping operation is valid as long as the number of weight stays the same, which, as far as we know, is not achieved by any previous low-rank models.
{width="0.85\linewidth"}
We designed experiments about adaptive dimension adjustment of Conv1 and Conv2 layers in LeNet5. We conducted this experiments by changing the order of the weight tensor of Conv1/Conv2 layer while fixing the rest. The details of the Conv1/Conv2’s weight tensor with different orders are listed in Table \[conv1\] and Table \[conv2\] of the appendices part. We chose proper core tensor sizes for each order to ensure the numbers of parameters under different settings are similar. The network performances under different settings are showing in Figure \[dimension\_conv\]. From Figure \[dimension\_conv\], the optimal order for Conv1 and Conv2 layers in LeNet-5 are five and three, respectively. Here is one more important thing to mention, the gray and yellow bars mean we did not use adaptive dimension adjustment on these two settings. The original order for Conv layer’s weight is four, so our ADA-Tucker degenerates to Tucker under these two settings. From the results, if we reshape the tensor with proper order and balanced dimensions before Tucker decomposition, we can get better compressed results.
### Adaptive Dimension Adjustment for FC Layers {#ada_fc}
Our dimension adjustment mechanism also applies to FC layers. Here we present an example involving a fifth order reshaped tensor for FC2 (second fully-connected) layer of LeNet-5, which is originally a matrix of size $500 \times 10$. To balance the dimensions of modes, we reshape the original weight tensor to a size of $5 \times 5 \times 5 \times 5 \times 8$. Note that such operation does not necessarily indicate splitting individual mode, the decomposition is allowed to disrupt the original sequence of dimension size (e.g., 8 is a factor of neither 500 nor 10). With the weight tensor reshaped as a fifth order tensor according to our adaptive dimension adjustment principle, the network finds its best structure for the FC2 layer. To our knowledge, previous tensor decomposition methods can only regard FC layer’s weights as a second order tensor with fixed dimensions of modes.
{width="0.85\linewidth"}
We also conducted experiments about dimension adjustment of FC1 and FC2 layers in LeNet5. We conducted this experiments by changing the order of the weight tensor of FC1/FC2 layer while fixing the rest. The details of the FC1/FC2’s weight tensor with different orders are listed in the appendices part Table \[fc1\] and Table \[fc2\]. The network performances under different settings are showing in Figure \[dimension\_fc\]. From Figure \[dimension\_fc\], a fourth order weight tensor is optimal for FC1 layer while a fifth order weight tensor is superior to others for FC2 layer. The original orders for FC1 and FC2 are both two. Same as previous analysis, the gray and yellow bars mean we did not use adaptive dimension adjustment on these two settings. Our ADA-tucker also got better results than Tucker without ADA on FC layers.
In summary, the optimal order of weight tensor varies for different layers. The results indicate that previous low-rank compression methods may impair network performance by constraining a fixed form of decomposition. The flexibility of ADA-Tucker enables networks to adaptively adjust the dimensions and orders of weight tensor when being compressed, thus achieving better performance.
The ADA-Tucker algorithm is summarized in Alg. \[algorithm\].
\[algorithm\] $\mathbf{Input}$: $\mathbf{X}$, $\mathbf{Y}$: training data and labels.\
$\mathbf{Input}$: $\{n_1^{(i)}, n_2^{(i)}, ..., n_{d_c}^{(i)}: 1 \leq i\leq l\}$: $n_{d_c}^{(i)}$ is the dimension of $d_c$ mode of the $i$-th layer’s reshaped weight tensor, which is denoted by adaptive dimension adjustment mechanism.\
$\mathbf{Output}$: $\{\boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}^{(i)},\mathbf{M}^{(i)}_1,\mathbf{M}^{(i)}_2,...,\mathbf{M}^{(i)}_{i_{d_c}}:1 \leq i\leq l\}$: the core tensors and transformation matrices for every layer.\
Adaptive dimension adjustment: based on the input $\{n_1^{(i)}, n_2^{(i)}, ..., n_{d_c}^{(i)}: 1 \leq i\leq l\}$, construct $\boldsymbol{\tilde{\mathcal{W}}}^{(i)}$ from $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}}^{(i)}$, define $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}^{(i)}$ and $\mathbf{M}^{(i)}_j$, $1\leq i\leq l, 1\leq j\leq i_{d_c}$.\
$\mathbf{for}$ number of training iterations $\mathbf{do}$\
$\quad$Choose a minibatch of network input from $\mathbf{X}$.\
$\quad$$\mathbf{for}$ $i=1,2,3,...,l$ $\mathbf{do}$ $\quad\quad$Use Eq. and reshape function to rebuild $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}}^{(i)}$, use $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}}^{(i)}$ to get the output of the $i$-th layer.\
$\quad\mathbf{end}\ \mathbf{for}$\
$\quad$Compute the loss function $L$.\
$\quad$$\mathbf{for}$ $i=l,l-1,l-2,...,1$ $\mathbf{do}$ $\quad\quad$Follow traditional backward propagation to get $\frac{\partial L}{\partial \boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}}^{(i)}}$ and compute $\frac{\partial L}{\partial {\boldsymbol{\mathcal{\tilde{W}}}}^{(i)}}$ from $\frac{\partial L}{\partial \boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}}^{(i)}}$.\
$\quad\quad$$\mathbf{for}$ $j=1,2,3,...,i_{d_c}$ $\mathbf{do}$ $\quad\quad\quad$ Use Eq. to compute $\frac{\partial L}{\partial \boldsymbol{M}^{(i)}_j}$, then update $\boldsymbol{M}^{(i)}_j$. $\quad\quad$$\mathbf{end\ for}$ $\quad\quad$ Use Eq. to compute $\frac{\partial L}{\partial \boldsymbol{C}^{(i)}_{(1)}}$, use Eq. to construct $\frac{\partial L}{\partial \boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}^{(i)}}$, then update $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}^{(i)}$. $\quad\mathbf{end}\ \mathbf{for}$ $\mathbf{end}\ \mathbf{for}$
### Influence of Dimension Eveness of Core Tensor {#ada_shape}
{width="0.8\linewidth"}
To explore the influence of dimension eveness of core tensor, we change the shape of core tensor and record accuracy of each network after training them from scratch. The details of this experiment settings please refer to Table \[dim\] in appendices part. As is shown in Figure \[shape\_selection\], the network with square core tensors performs better than the one with other core shapes. Specifically, as the difference between the two dimensions grows larger, i.e., when the core becomes less ‘square’, the network’s accuracy decreases accordingly. We speculate that the mechanism behind is to evenly distribute weights across different dimensions.
Here we give a more clear summary for the adaptive dimension adjustment mechanism based on the experiments on dimension adjustment of Conv layers, dimension adjustment of FC layers and influence of dimension eveness of core tensor: The mechanism is somewhat like factorization of the number of weights for a specific layer. The number of factors is equal to the order after the adaptive dimension adjustment mechanism. From the experiments of dimension adjustment of Conv layers (Figure \[dimension\_conv\] for performances of all settings. Table \[conv1\] for the detail of Conv1’s weight tensor and Table \[conv2\] for the detail of Conv2’s weight tensor) and FC layers (Figure \[dimension\_fc\] for performances of all settings. Table \[fc1\] for the detail of FC1’s weight tensor and Table \[fc2\] for the detail of FC2’s weight tensor), we found that if we make factors’ values more similar with each other (balanced dimensions), the performance is better. The factors’ value should not be too big, otherwise it will cost vast storage for transformation matrices and lose much information (Performance degradation in FC1 layer when the order of core tenor is two). From the experiments of Influence of dimension eveness of core tensor, we learn that if the reshape tensor is balanced with proper order, the core tensor with hypercube shape will have the best performance.
CP is a special case of Tucker and Tucker is a special case of ADA-Tucker
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Suppose now we have a $d$-dimensional tensor $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}}$ of size $n_1 \times n_2 \times... \times n_d$ and a core tensor $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}$ of size $k_1 \times k_2 \times... \times k_d$, Tucker decomposition has the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}} &\approx \boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}\times_1 \boldsymbol{M}_1 \times_2 \boldsymbol{M}_2 \times_3 ... \times_d \boldsymbol{M}_d\\
&= \sum_{i_1=1}^{k_1}\sum_{i_2=1}^{k_2}...\sum_{i_d=1}^{k_d}\boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}_{i_1i_2...i_d}\boldsymbol{m}_{i_1}^{1}\otimes\boldsymbol{m}_{i_2}^{2}\otimes...\otimes\boldsymbol{m}_{i_d}^{d},
\end{aligned}$$ where $m_{i}^j$ means the $i$-th column of matrix $\boldsymbol{M}_j$. While CP-decomposition has the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}} &\approx \sum_{i=1}^{r}\lambda_{i}\boldsymbol{m}_{i}^{1}\otimes\boldsymbol{m}_{i}^{2}\otimes...\otimes\boldsymbol{m}_{i}^{d}.
\end{aligned}$$
In the case of the core tensor being a hypercube, if its elements are nonzero when $i_j=i,\forall j\in\{1,2,3...,d\}$ and are zero otherwise, then Tucker degenerates to CP. The fact that CP is a special case of Tucker indicates that Tucker is more powerful than CP. In fact, Tucker encodes much more compact representation as its core tensor is denser and smaller-sized, using the mechanism of Adaptive Dimension Adjustment. It is obvious to learn that ADA-Tucker degenerates to Tucker without using the mechanism of Adaptive Dimension Adjustment. Empirically, the following experimental evidence is provided for detailed comparisons for these three methods.
Shared Core ADA-Tucker {#scada}
----------------------
With input data passing serially through each layer in a network, we believe that there exist some correspondence and invariance in weights across different layers. Concretely, we think that a weight tensor preserve two kind of information, namely, the first kind of information tries to construct some transformations to extract global features (encode the same object at different layers and different scales) and the second kind of information tries to construct some transformations to extract local specific features for different layers and different scales. This conjecture indicates that there may exist shared information for transformation in functions expressed as a $d_c$-mode product between core tensors and transformation matrices across layers. We assume that the layer-invariant information lies in the core tensor, as it has the majority of weights, while the transformation matrices are responsible for the layer-specific mapping. Therefore, as illustrated in Figure \[tucker\_illustration\_scada\], we devise a so-called SCADA-Tucker, where all layers of a network share one common core tensor, thus achieving higher compression ratio.
Suppose that the network has $l$ layers. Based on the description above, we need one core tensor and $\sum_{i=1}^{l}d_i$ transformation matrices, where $d_i$ represents the order of core tensor for the $i$-th layer. With SCADA-Tucker, the model contains $l$ core tensors and $ld$ transformation matrices ($d=\max \{d_i\}, i=1,2,...,l$). We can set a specific transformation matrix $\mathbf{M}_{j}^{(i)} \in \mathbb{R}^{1\times k_j^{(i)}} (j=1,2,\dots,d)$ if the reshaped weight tensor of the $i$-th layer has a lower order than the shared core tensor. The forward propagation is:
$$\label{tucker_share}
\begin{aligned}
&{\boldsymbol{\mathcal{\tilde{W}}}}^{(i)}\approx\boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}\times_1 \boldsymbol{M}_1^{(i)} \times_2 \boldsymbol{M}_2^{(i)}\times_3 ... \times_d \boldsymbol{M}_d^{(i)},\\ & \boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}}^{(i)} = {\rm{reshape}}\left({\boldsymbol{\mathcal{\tilde{W}}}}^{(i)}\right).
\end{aligned}$$
{width="1\linewidth"}
The backpropagation of $ld$ transformation matrices are the same as that in the ADA-Tucker model. The major difference lies in the gradient w.r.t. the core tensor. We compute it as:
$$\label{share}
\frac{\partial L}{\partial \boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}}= \sum_{i=1}^{l}\frac{\partial L}{\partial \boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}^{(i)}}}.$$
We present here a detailed property comparison between SCADA-Tucker and ADA-Tucker. We use LeNet-5 and set the core tensor of each layer as a fourth order tensor of the same size. We examine the performance of LeNet-5 using two compression methods by changing the size of core tensor only while fixing the rest hyperparameters. The details of ADA-Tucker and SCADA-Tucker settings for this experiments are in Table \[scada\_ada\] of appendices part. From the results in Figure \[ADA\_SCADA\], we can see that under the same parameter setting, SCADA-Tucker is able to significantly reduce the number of weight in the network with only minor performance degradation compared to ADA-Tucker. It is because core tensors generally account for a major proportion of the total number of weights. When the dimension of each mode increases to seven, SCADA-Tucker even achieves an accuracy slightly higher than that of ADA-Tucker. Note that the number of weight in SCADA-Tucker is less than one half of that in ADA-Tucker under the same setting.
{width="0.95\linewidth"}
An alternative perspective is to view SCADA-Tucker as a module with properties analogous to recurrent neural networks (RNN). The comparison of forward propagations for these two models can be seen in Figure \[SCADA\_rnn\]. We all know that an RNN can be rolled out as a serial network with shared weights and it captures the temporal relations among sequential inputs. Thus with part of weights shared across layers, SCADA-Tucker can be regarded as an architecture in a recurrent style. Concretely, the forward propagation of RNN can be represented as $\boldsymbol{h}^{(t)}=\sigma(\boldsymbol{U}\boldsymbol{x}^{(t)}+\boldsymbol{W}\boldsymbol{h}^{(t-1)}+\boldsymbol{b})$, where $\boldsymbol{x}^{(t)}$ is the input at time step $t$, $\boldsymbol{h}^{(t)}$ is the hidden state at time step $t$, $\boldsymbol{b}$ is the bias term, $\sigma(\cdot)$ is the activation function and $\boldsymbol{U}, \boldsymbol{W}$ are the transformation matrices shared by all time steps. In comparison, the forward propagation of SCADA-Tucker can be represented as
$$\boldsymbol{h}^{(i)}=\sigma(\boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}\prod_{j}\times_j\boldsymbol{M}_j^{(i)}\boldsymbol{h}^{(i-1)}+\boldsymbol{b}), i = 1,2,3,...,l.$$
The “input” of each layer is a series of transformation matrices $\{\boldsymbol{M}\}$ and the core tensor $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}$ is the share parameter for all layers.
Moreover, SCADA-Tucker creatively connects weights of different layers, enabling direct gradient flow from the loss function to earlier layers. Some modern architectures of neural networks such as ResNet [@he2016deep], DenseNet [@huang2016densely] and CliqueNet [@yang2018convolutional] benefit from the direct gradient flow from the loss function to earlier layers and have achieved great success. *Such a parameter reuse mechanism also addresses redundancy in common parameterized functions shared across layers. Note that none of other compression methods involve dimension adjustment and sharing parameters among different layers*, which are crucial to the compression performance.
Therefore, SCADA-Tucker has the potential to pass and share some critical and common information across layers, which cannot be achieved by ADA-Tucker. Finally, we regard SCADA-Tucker as a promising compression method for high-ratio network compression with a negligible sacrifice in network performance.
Compression Ratio Analysis {#compression_analysis}
==========================
Raw Compression Ratio Analysis
------------------------------
Suppose that the network has $l$ layers. Let $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{\tilde{W}}}^{(i)}\in \mathbb{R}^{n^{(i)}_1\times n^{(i)}_2 \cdot\cdot\cdot \times n^{(i)}_{d_i}}$ and $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{C}}^{(i)}\in \mathbb{R}^{k^{(i)}_1\times k^{(i)}_2 \cdot\cdot\cdot \times k^{(i)}_{d_i}}$ be the reshaped weight tensor and core tensor of the $i$-th layer, respectively. Obviously, $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{\tilde{W}}}^{(i)}$ has the same number of weights as $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{W}}^{(i)}$. Then the compression ratio of ADA-Tucker is: $$\label{c_a}
\begin{aligned}
r_{A}&= \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{l}\prod_{j=1}^{d_i}n^{(i)}_j}{\sum_{i=1}^{l}\prod_{j=1}^{d_i}k^{(i)}_j+\sum_{i=1}^{l}\sum_{j=1}^{d_i}n^{(i)}_jk^{(i)}_j}\\
&\approx\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{l}\prod_{j=1}^{d_i}n^{(i)}_j}{\sum_{i=1}^{l}\prod_{j=1}^{d_i}k^{(i)}_j}.
\end{aligned}$$
For SCADA-Tucker, all layers share the same core tensor with order $d$, i.e, $d=d_i, i=1,2,\cdots,l$. Then its compression ratio is: $$\label{c_sc}
\begin{aligned}
r_{SC}&= \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{l}\prod_{j=1}^{d}n^{(i)}_j}{\prod_{j=1}^{d}k_j+\sum_{i=1}^{l}\sum_{j=1}^{d}n^{(i)}_jk_j}\\
&\approx\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{l}\prod_{j=1}^{d}n^{(i)}_j}{\prod_{j=1}^{d}k_j}\geqslant r_A.
\end{aligned}$$
Further Compression by Quantization
-----------------------------------
{width="1\linewidth"}
After being compressed by ADA-Tucker and SCADA-Tucker, the weight distribution is close to Laplacian distribution. Since almost all weights are in the range of $[-3,3]$ (Figure \[distribution\]), we can use pruning and quantization to compress these weights further following Han et al. [@han2015learning]. In our experiments, we integrate the following quantization into our model: $$\label{quantization}
w_q = -b + \left\lfloor\frac{(\max(-b,\min(w,b))+b))Q}{2b}\right\rfloor\cdot\frac{2b}{Q},$$ where $Q$ represents the number of clusters, $b$ represents the max-min bound of quantization and $\lfloor x \rfloor$ is the floor function. Since weights are originally stored in the float32 format ($32$ bits), our compression ratio can be further increased by this quantization trick. After quantization, we utilize Huffman coding to compress it further. Suppose that the average length of Huffman coding is $\bar{a}$, we compute the final compression ratio by: $$\label{c_qh}
r_{A+QH}=\frac{32r_{A}}{\bar{a}},\ \ r_{SC+QH}=\frac{32r_{SC}}{\bar{a}}.$$
Experimental Results {#experiment}
====================
In this section, we experimentally analyze the proposed methods. We use Adam [@kingma2014adam] as our optimizer. The starting learning rate is set as $0.01$, $0.003$, $0.003$ and $0.01$ for MNIST, CIFAR-10, SVHN and ImageNet, respectively. After every $10\sim20$ epochs, the learning rate is divided by $3$. We choose $256$ as the batch size for most experiments. For initializers of core tensors and transformation matrices, we have experimented with the glorot initializer [@glorot2010understanding], the Kaiming initializer [@he2015delving] and HOOI [@de2000best] to solve the decomposition from the original weight tensors. These three methods have similar performances. Note that for the following experiments, little time is spent on fine-tuning our model.
MNIST {#mnist_experiment}
-----
MNIST is a database of handwritten digits with $60,000$ training images and $10,000$ testing images. It is widely used to evaluate machine learning algorithms. Same as DC [@han2015deep], DNS [@guo2016dynamic] and SWS [@ullrich2017soft], we test our methods on two classical networks: LeNet-5 and LeNet-300-100.
[ccc|c|c|c|c|c]{} & & & &\
& & & Org. & Raw & +QH & Raw& +QH\
& DC [@han2015deep] & $21.4$K & $ 1.64$&$1.57$ &$1.58$ &$<12$ &$40$\
& DNS [@guo2016dynamic] & $4.8$K &$ 2.28$&$1.99$& - &$< 56$ &-\
& SWS [@ullrich2017soft] & $4.3$K & $ 1.89$&-&$1.94$ &$<62$ &$64$\
& ADA-Tucker & $4.1$K & $ 1.89$&$1.88$ &$1.91$ &$=65$ &$\mathbf{233}$\
& SCADA-Tucker & $3.4$K &$ 1.89$ &$ 2.11$&$ 2.26$ &$=78$&$\mathbf{321}$\
& DC [@han2015deep] & $34.5$K & $ 0.80$&$0.77$&$0.74$ &$<13$ &$39$\
& DNS [@guo2016dynamic] & $4.0$K & $ 0.91$&$0.91$ &- &$<108$ &-\
& SWS [@ullrich2017soft] & $2.2$K & $ 0.88$&-&$0.97$ &$<196$ &$162$\
& ADA-Tucker & $2.6$K & $ 0.88$&$0.84$ &$0.94$ &$=166$ &$\mathbf{691}$\
& SCADA-Tucker & $2.3$K & $ 0.88$&$0.94$&$1.18$ &$=185$ &$\mathbf{757}$\
\[mnist\]
The raw compression ratios of ADA-Tucker and SCADA-Tucker in Table \[mnist\] are computed by Eq. and Eq. , respectively. The compression ratio of +QH is computed by Eq. . Because all these methods [@guo2016dynamic; @han2015learning; @ullrich2017soft] in Table \[mnist\] [^3] need to record the indices of nonzero elements, their actual compression ratios are smaller than the calculated results. *Our methods do not need to record the indices*, so our actual compression ratios are equal to the calculated results, suggesting that our model has the highest compression ratio even if it has the same number of weight with the methods mentioned above. We set $Q=512$ and $b=3$ during the quantization process of LeNet-5 and get the final compression ratio of $\mathbf{691\times}$ with $0.94\%$ error rate. For LeNet-300-100, we set $Q=1,500$ and $b=5$ to achieve a $\mathbf{233\times}$ compression ratio and the final error rate is $1.91\%$. The value of $b$ can be adjusted according to the distribution of weights after ADA-Tucker/SCADA-Tucker compression.
Tensor Train decomposition (TT) [@novikov2015tensorizing] is similar to Tucker decomposition in that they both involve a product of matrices. With Tucker, the number of parameters can be further reduced by sharing core tensor, which cannot be achieved by TT. Moreover, we chose Tucker because TT has to use enormously-sized matrices to exactly represent a tensor when its order is greater than three. Thus compressing with TT significantly may cause huge approximation error. Using Tucker helps strike a better balance between compression ratio and recognition accuracy. More importantly, TT can only be applied to FC layers despite the fact that Conv layers are more crucial than FC layers to achieve top performance for most of the current deep learning tasks. In contrast, our model with Tucker decomposition is able to adjust the order and dimension of tensors in *both FC and Conv layers*. Still, for a closer examination, here we provide results of two models in all-FC-layer network for better reference. For MNIST we use the same network architecture as [@novikov2015tensorizing] and get $98.13\%$ test accuracy with $6,824$ parameters, while TT gets $98.1\%$ test accuracy with $7,698$ parameters. This again proves the strength of our methods in compressing network and preserving information.
SVHN and CIFAR-10 {#svhn_cifar}
-----------------
To prove the generalization ability of our methods, we also conduct experiments on SVHN and CIFAR-10 datasets. The SVHN dataset is a large collection of digits cropped from real-world scenes, consisting of $604,388$ training images and $26,032$ testing images. The CIFAR-10 dataset contains $60,000$ images of $32 \times 32$ pixels with three color channels. With the same network architectures, our compressed models significantly outperform [@denil2013predicting; @chen2015compressing; @chen2016compressing] in terms of both compression ratio and classification accuracy. The details of network architecture are listed in Table \[cifar\_net\] and the setting for ADA-Tucker are showing in Table \[cifar\_ada\] of appendices part. On the CIFAR-10 dataset, ADA-Tucker has a higher accuracy with a compression ratio lower than SCADA-Tucker as expected. However, on the SVHN dataset, SCADA-Tucker surprisingly preforms much better than ADA-Tucker. Specifically, SCADA-Tucker compresses the original network by $73 \times$ with $0.23\%$ accuracy drop, while ADA-Tucker compresses it by $64 \times$ with $0.72\%$ accuracy drop.
ILSVRC12
--------
In this subsection, we empirically compare the performances of CP, Tucker and ADA-Tucker on ILSVRC12 dataset.
{width="85.00000%"} \[cp\_vs\_tucker\]
To prove this work preserves more information and easier compress networks compared with CP-decomposition and Tucker-decomposition, we follow the ILSVRC12 experiment in [@lebedev2014speeding]. We also compress the second convolutional layer of AlexNet [@krizhevsky2012imagenet]. As a baseline, we use a pre-trained AlexNet model shipped with Pytorch, which achieves a top-5 accuracy of $79.59\%$. Following [@lebedev2014speeding], models are evaluated by test accuracy drop when increasing compression ratio. Experimental results in Figure \[ada\_vs\_cp\] shows that our methods have less accuracy drop at the same compression ratio. The gap between our method and CP-decomposition becomes larger as the compression ratio goes higher. The same experimental phenomenon also appeared when we compared our method with Tucker-decomposition. Concretely, at the same compression ratio equal to 18, the accuracy drop of our method is less than $4\%$, while the CP-decomposition method drops about $70\%$ and Tucker-decomposition method drops about $6\%$. This result suggests that our method has a better capacity to preserve more information than CP and easier compress networks than Tucker.
Modern networks {#modern_net}
---------------
{width="100.00000%"}
{width="100.00000%"}
Here we discuss a more recent work, ResNet [@he2016deep] and its variations Wide-ResNet [@zagoruyko2016wide; @xie2017aggregated]. ResNet and its variations also have achieved promising preformances in numerous computer vision applications such as image classification, human face verification, object recognition, and object detection. It is very meaningful to be able to effectively compress these networks.
We applied our ADA-Tucker on two representative networks ResNet-20 and Wide-ResNet-28-10 (WRN-28-10). This experiment was done on CIFAR-10 dataset. The details of ADA-Tucker for ResNet-20 and WRN-28-10 can be found in Table \[rnrn20\] and Table \[wrnwrn\] of appendices part, respectively. The compression results are listed in Table \[modern\_network\]. From Table \[modern\_network\], ADA-tucker compressed ResNet-20 by $12\times$. Since the number of parameters of ResNet-20 is only about 0.27M, it is difficult to compress it further on CIFAR-10 dataset with negligible loss. The number of parameters of Wide ResNet-28-10 is about 36.5M, which is much bigger than ResNet-20’s. Showing in Table \[modern\_network\], our ADA-Tucker compressed WRN-28-10 by amazing 58 times without deteriorating its performances. We also plotted visualizations for parameters comparisons of all layers in terms of ResNet-20 (Figure \[resnet20\]) and WRN-28-10 (Figure \[wrn2810\]). The convincing results on these newly large networks suggest that the proposed method works well for modern CNN architectures.
Conclusion
==========
In this paper, we demonstrate that deep neural networks can be better compressed using weight tensors with proper orders and balanced dimensions of modes without performance degradation. We also present two methods based on our demonstration, ADA-Tucker and SCADA-Tucker, for deep neural network compression. Unlike previous decomposition methods, our methods adaptively adjust the order of original weight tensors and the dimension of each mode before Tucker decomposition. We do not need to add new layers for implementing the Tucker decomposition as other methods do. The advantage of our methods over those involving the frequency domain and pruning is that we do not require recording the indices of nonzero elements. We demonstrate the superior compressing capacity of the proposed model: after applying quantization and Huffman coding, ADA-Tucker compresses LeNet-5 and LeNet-300-100 by $\mathbf{691\times}$ and $\mathbf{233\times}$, respectively, outperforming state-of-the-art methods. The experiments on CIFAR-10 and SVHN also show our models’ overwhelming strength. The experiments on ImageNet indicate that Tucker decomposition combined with adaptive dimension adjustment has a great advantage over other decomposition-based methods especially at a large compression ratio.The convincing results on these newly large networks also suggest that the proposed method works well for modern CNN architectures.
In the future, we will further investigate the mechanism behind our findings and summarize a detailed rule of thumb for determining the order of weight tensor as well as dimensions of modes. Other research directions include combining this work with pruning techniques and exploiting its potential in accelerating computation and inference.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
This research is partially supported by National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) (grant nos. 2015CB352303 and 2015CB352502), National Natural Science Foundation (NSF) of China (grant nos. 61231002, 61625301, 61671027 and 61731018), Qualcomm, and Microsoft Research Asia.
Experiments settings
====================
[^1]: Peking University; email: {zszhong, weifangyin, zlin}@pku.edu.cn, [email protected]
[^2]: Corresponding author
[^3]: We compare our models with state of the art in 2015, 2016 and 2017 for compressing LeNet-5 and LeNet-300. HashedNet [@chen2015compressing] does not appear in Table \[mnist\] because it used a network different from LeNet-5 or LeNet-300 and thus cannot be compared with other methods. Since methods in Table \[mnist\] conducted experiments on MNIST but not on CIFAR-10 or SVHN, these methods are not shown in Table \[cifar\_svhn\].
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We present a study of the magnetic field properties of NGC 4038/9 (the ‘Antennae’ galaxies), the closest example of a late stage merger of two spiral galaxies. Wideband polarimetric observations were performed using the Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array between 2 and 4 GHz. Rotation measure synthesis and Faraday depolarization analysis was performed to probe the magnetic field strength and structure at spatial resolution of $\sim1$ kpc. Highly polarized emission from the southern tidal tail is detected with intrinsic fractional polarization close to the theoretical maximum ($0.62\pm0.18$), estimated by fitting the Faraday depolarization with a volume that is both synchrotron emitting and Faraday rotating containing random magnetic fields. Magnetic fields are well aligned along the tidal tail and the Faraday depths shows large-scale smooth variations preserving its sign. This suggests the field in the plane of the sky to be regular up to $\sim20$ kpc, which is the largest detected regular field structure on galactic scales. The equipartition field strength of $\sim8.5~\mu$G of the regular field in the tidal tail is reached within a few 100 Myr, likely generated by stretching of the galactic disc field by a factor of 4–9 during the tidal interaction. The regular field strength is greater than the turbulent fields in the tidal tail. Our study comprehensively demonstrates, although the magnetic fields within the merging bodies are dominated by strong turbulent magnetic fields of $\sim20~\mu$G in strength, tidal interactions can produce large-scale regular field structure in the outskirts.'
author:
- |
Aritra Basu$^1$[^1], S. A. Mao$^{1\star}$, Amanda A. Kepley$^2$, Timothy Robishaw$^3$, Ellen G. Zweibel$^4$, John. S. Gallagher III$^4$\
$^1$Max-Planck-Institut f[ü]{}r Radioastronomie, Auf dem H[ü]{}gel 69, D-53121 Bonn, Germany\
$^2$National Radio Astronomy Observatory, 520 Edgemont Road, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475, USA\
$^3$National Research Council Canada, Herzberg Astronomy and Astrophysics Programs, Dominion Radio Astrophysical Observatory, Penticton, BC V2A 6J9, Canada\
$^4$Department of Astronomy and Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, WI 53706, USA
bibliography:
- 'abasu\_etal\_mnr.bib'
title: 'Detection of a $\sim$20 kpc coherent magnetic field in the outskirt of merging spirals: the Antennae galaxies'
---
\[firstpage\]
galaxies : NGC 4038/9 – galaxies: ISM – galaxies : magnetic fields – polarization galaxies
Introduction
============
Magnetic fields are pervasive in the Universe on all scales and they play crucial roles in various processes in the interstellar medium. The large-scale ordered magnetic fields ($\gtrsim1$ kpc) in galaxies are thought to be amplified via the $\alpha$–$\Omega$ dynamo mechanism—the buildup of initially weak seed fields ($<10^{-9}$ G; @ade15) to microgauss fields via small-scale turbulence and differential rotation [@ruzma88; @kulsr08]. The small-scale dynamo can efficiently amplify the magnetic fields on scales $\lesssim1$ kpc in $\sim10^6$ years [@kandu99; @feder11; @chama13; @schob13]. On the other hand, the conventional $\alpha$–$\Omega$ dynamo action requires $\sim10^9$ years to amplify the large-scale magnetic field in galaxies [@arsha09; @pakmo14], which is too long to explain the detection of coherent fields in young systems [e.g., @berne08; @farne14]. This suggests that there must be other magnetic field amplification processes at work.
-- --
-- --
In the current framework of hierarchical structure formation, galaxies build up their mass by merging. Galaxy encounters can compress, stretch and reshape fields in the progenitor galaxies, hence they provide a conducive environment for magnetic field amplification [@kotar10]. Since merger events were more frequent in the early Universe [e.g., @patto02], it is important to assess how galaxy interactions affect the strength and geometry of galactic-scale magnetic fields in order to understand the overall evolution of cosmic magnetism. Gravitationally interacting galaxies possess a range of magnetic field properties. For example, despite their irregular appearances, the tidally interacting Magellanic Clouds have been shown to host large-scale ordered fields of microgauss strength [@gaens05; @mao08; @mao12]. On the other hand, @drzaz11 suggested, based on study of 16 merger pairs, that interacting galaxies have lower field regularities and stronger total magnetic field strengths than non-interacting ones. Unfortunately, due to the lack of Faraday rotation measure (RM) information, the magnetic field coherency in these systems could not be probed. Moreover, the large distances to their sample galaxies and the limited angular resolution prevent one from studying magnetic field structures on scales $< 7$ kpc. Therefore, a high resolution mapping of the magnetic field of a prototypical merger event is much needed. To date, detailed high-resolution studies of galactic magnetic fields are of individual galaxies in isolation—only a few focus on magnetism in interacting galaxies [e.g., @brind92; @humme95; @chyzy04; @rampa08].
The Antennae pair (NGC 4038/9) is the nearest merger [22 Mpc; @schwe08] between two gas-rich spirals. The bodies of the colliding galaxies host sites of active star formation in the form of super starclusters, with a global star formation rate of 20 M$_\odot$yr$^{-1}$ [@zhang01]. The Antennae galaxies hosts tidal tails that measure over 100 kpc in H[i]{} and likely originate from outskirts of the progenitors. The Antennae have been studied extensively from the radio to X-ray. They are also the subject of several numerical simulations [e.g., @mihos93; @karl10; @kotar10]. The latest work by @karl10 proposed that the progenitors first encountered $\sim600$ Myr ago and they have just undergone the second passage. Our understanding of the pairs’ interaction history, its multi-wavelength emission and its proximity make the Antennae an ideal candidate for a detailed magnetic field study.
Magnetism in the Antennae was studied by @chyzy04 with the Very Large Array at 1.49, 4.86 and 8.44 GHz. Enhanced polarized emission is found near the root of a tidal tail which is suggestive of a remnant spiral field. @chyzy04 computed the RM of diffuse polarized emission at 8.44 GHz and 4.86 GHz at a resolution $17\times14$ arcsec$^2$ ($\sim2$ kpc linear scale). They pointed out that in the region where the galactic discs overlap, RMs are coherent on the scale of several synthesized beams, likely tracing the large-scale magnetic fields in the progenitors. There are several regions with consistent RM sign, which is suggestive of coherent magnetic fields. However, these RMs could suffer from the $n\pi$ ambiguity because they were computed using polarization angle measurements at only two bands, separated widely in frequency. A wideband study of the diffuse polarized emission from the Antennae is much needed to consistently derive RM to confirm the existence of coherent magnetic fields.
In this paper, we present study of the magnetic field properties in the Antennae galaxies. In 2, we describe our observations and data analysis procedure. The results on Faraday depolarization and magnetic field strengths are presented in 3 followed by discussion in 4. Our results are summarized in 5.
Observations and analysis
=========================
We carried out wideband polarimetric observations of the Antennae galaxies using the Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array (VLA) in the hybrid DnC array configuration on 10-May-2013 and CnB array configuration on 09-September-2013 (project code: 13A-400). Data between 2 and 4 GHz (divided into 1024 2-MHz channels) were recorded with the [widar]{} correlator. The 1024 channels were divided in 16 sub-bands known as spectral windows. Two scans of 15 minutes each using the DnC array and 30 minutes each using the CnB array on the Antennae were interspersed with $\sim3$ minute scans on the phase calibrator J1130$-$1449. 3C 286 was observed as the flux, bandpass and absolute polarization angle calibrator for 10 minutes at the beginning of each observation run. Unpolarized point sources, J0713$+$4349 and J1407$+$2827, were used to calibrate polarization leakages. We used the @perle13a flux density scale to determine the absolute flux density of the flux calibrator 3C 286 and its absolute polarization angle was set to $+33^\circ$ across the entire observing band [@perle13b].
Data reduction was carried out using the Common Astronomy Software Applications[^2] ([casa]{}) package following standard data calibration procedure for each array configuration separately. The task ‘[rflag]{}’ was used to automatically flag data affected by radio frequency interference (RFI). Further manual inspection of the data was done to remove low-lying RFI features. Overall, for both array configurations, approximately 750 MHz of data were unusable and the remaining $\sim1200$ MHz of data (non-continuous, spanning between 2 and 3.6 GHz) was used for further analysis. Several rounds of calibration and additional flagging were done iteratively, and the gain solutions were transferred to the target source. To estimate the on-axis polarization leakage post calibration, we made a linearly polarized intensity ($PI$) image of the unpolarized calibrator J0713$+$4349. The image was consistent with noise throughout. We estimate the on-axis instrumental polarization leakage as the ratio of the maximum value of the $PI$ image at the position of J0713$+$4349 to its total flux density, which was found to be $<0.2$ per cent.
![Integrated flux densities between 2 and 3.6 GHz for each spectral window of the Antennae galaxies. The solid black circles, open circles, and blue triangles show the total intensity using DnC+CnB, CnB, and DnC array configurations, respectively. The black line is the power-law fit of a spectral index $-0.85\pm0.02$ to the DnC+CnB array data points. The red squares are the non-thermal emission after subtracting the thermal emission (green dashed-dot line). The red dashed line is the fit to the non-thermal emission with a non-thermal spectral index $-1.11\pm0.03$.[]{data-label="integ"}](figure2.eps){width="8cm"}
Total intensity imaging
-----------------------
We binned the 2-MHz data into 8-MHz channels for further analysis resulting in 149 8-MHz channels. Several iterations of [*phase only*]{} self-calibration were done using point sources chosen by deconvolving visibilities $\gtrsim1$ k$\lambda$ and using a uniform weighting scheme (Briggs’ robust parameter = $-2$). Self-calibration was done for each array configuration and spectral window independently. After satisfactory phase solutions were obtained, one round of [*amplitude and phase*]{} self-calibration was carried out for a solution interval of 15 minutes considering the entire $uv-$range.
Finally, the calibrated data were imaged and deconvolved using the Multi-Scale Multi-Frequency Synthesis algorithm ([ms-mfs]{}; @rau11) available in the [casa]{} package. At this stage, we combined the [*uv*]{} data from DnC and CnB arrays. The combined image has the optimum resolution to study the small-scale structures while being sensitive to the large-scale diffuse emission. To model the small, as well as the large angular scale structures, we used six deconvolving scales varying linearly from one synthesized beam size to $\sim1.5$ arcmin, i.e., half the angular extent of the Antennae. The frequency dependence was modelled using two Taylor terms ($nterms=2$). The final total intensity image was made with an effective bandwidth of 1.6 GHz centered at 2.8 GHz. Figure \[totI\] (left-hand panel) shows the [*natural weighted*]{} total intensity DnC and CnB array combined image with an angular resolution of $11\times9$ arcsec$^2$ [^3] and $1\sigma$ noise level of $\sim40~\mu$Jy beam$^{-1}$. The integrated flux density of the Antennae is 336$\pm$9 mJy at 2.8 GHz. This is in good agreement with interpolated flux densities between 1.45 and 4.85 GHz [@chyzy04]. The notable features detected in the galaxies, such as the tidal tail towards south, the central cores, the remnant spiral arm in the north and the cold dust complex are marked in Figure \[totI\] (right-hand panel).
[c]{}\
We also made total intensity maps for each spectral window. In Figure \[integ\], we present the galaxy-integrated total flux density of the Antennae at each of the 11 usable spectral windows for the different array configurations: DnC, CnB and DnC+CnB. The flux densities measured using the CnB array (open circles) are significantly underestimated due to missing flux density from lack of short baselines. However, the flux densities measured using the DnC+CnB array (solid black circles) agree well with the flux densities measured using the DnC array (solid blue triangles). The higher resolution DnC+CnB array images are sensitive to both small-scale as well as large-scale diffuse emission and hence we use this image for the rest of our analysis.
Radio continuum emission in galaxies mainly originates from non-thermal synchrotron and thermal free–free emission. In order to study the magnetic field properties in galaxies, contribution from the thermal emission needs to be separated from the total radio emission. We have used star formation rate, estimated via extinction corrected far ultraviolet (FUV) emission, as the tracer of thermal emission. A detailed description of the thermal emission separation method is given in Appendix \[thermal\]. We note, that the estimated thermal emission can suffer from systematic errors up to $\sim30$ per cent in regions of high dust extinction or starbursts. However, the errors in the estimated non-thermal emission in those regions are less than $\sim20$ per cent. The estimated thermal emission is shown as the green dashed-dot line in Figure \[integ\]. The red squares shows the non-thermal emission after separating the thermal emission at each spectral window and is well fitted by a power-law (red dashed line) with spectral index $-1.11\pm0.03$. However, due to uncertainties in the estimated thermal emission, there can be systematic error up to $\sim10$ per cent on the value of the spectral index.
Rotation measure synthesis
--------------------------
The plane of polarization of a linearly polarized signal is rotated when it passes through a magneto-ionic medium because of the Faraday rotation effect. The angle of rotation depends on the Faraday depth ($\phi$) and is given by, $$\left(\frac{\phi}{\rm rad~m^{-2}}\right) = 0.812 \int_{\rm source}^{\rm observer} \left(\frac{n_e(l)}{\rm cm^{-3}}\right) \left(\frac{B_{\rm \parallel}(l)}{\rm \mu G}\right)~\left(\frac{dl}{\rm pc}\right).$$ Here, $n_e$ is the density of thermal electrons, $B_{\parallel}$ is the magnetic field component along the line of sight and $dl$ is the path length through the magneto-ionic media. We employ the technique of RM synthesis [@brent05] to estimate $\phi$.
To facilitate a spatially resolved Faraday rotation study across NGC 4038/9, Stokes $Q$ and $U$ images of the combined DnC+CnB array for each of the 149 8-MHz channels were made. We applied the natural weighting scheme to the $uv$ data and performed multi-scale [clean]{}. Since the angular resolution for each channel is different, we convolved all the channel maps to a common resolution of $15\times12$ arcsec$^2$ (resolution of the lowest frequency channel) before combining them into a single image cube. RM synthesis and deconvolution of the $\phi$ spectrum were performed on this image cube using the [pyrmsynth]{} package [@bell13]. The typical rms noise in the Faraday depth spectrum is $\sim10~\mu$Jy beam$^{-1}$. We cleaned down to 3$\sigma$ ($\sim30~\mu$Jy beam$^{-1}$) when deconvolving the pixel-by-pixel Faraday depth spectrum.
The $\lambda^2$ coverage determines the maximum observable $\phi$ and the sensitivity to extended $\phi$ structures. For our data, the maximum observable $\phi$ ($|\phi_{\rm max}|$) is $\sim1\times 10^4~\rm rad~m^{-2}$ and our sensitivity to extended structures in $\phi$ drops to 50 per cent at $450~\rm
rad~m^{-2}$. The RM spread function (RMSF) was computed from the $\lambda^2$ coverage by weighting each frequency channel by their noise. The RMSF for our observations has a full-width at half maximum (FWHM) of $219 \rm ~rad~m^{-2}$.
Initially, we performed a low-resolution search for significant $\phi$ components in the range $-2\times10^4 \rm ~rad~m^{-2}< \phi <2\times10^4
~rad~m^{-2}$ in steps of 50 rad m$^{-2}$. No significant component was found for $|\phi|>10^3~\rm rad~m^{-2}$. Then, we performed a higher resolution search in the range $-2000 \rm ~rad~m^{-2}< \phi <2000~rad~m^{-2}$ in steps of 10 rad m$^{-2}$ to oversample the FWHM. We considered five adjacent values around the peak and fitted the peak to a parabola to determine the peak Faraday depth and the corresponding peak polarized intensity. To reduce the effect of the Ricean bias due to positive noise background of the polarized intensity map, we considered only those pixels where the peak polarized intensity was more than 7$\sigma$ level. We therefore do not correct for the Ricean bias as its effect would be less than 3 per cent for polarized intensity $>7\sigma$ [@wardl74].
Foreground contribution to the Faraday depth from the Milky Way was estimated using the @opper12 Galactic RM map. The foreground RM was found to be $-28\pm7$ rad m$^{-2}$ in the direction of the Antennae. We adopt $-30~\rm
rad~m^{-2}$ as the contribution from the Milky way [similar to @chyzy04] to the $\phi$ obtained through RM synthesis.
Results
=======
Total radio intensity
---------------------
In the left-hand panel of Figure \[totI\] we present the total intensity map of NGC 4038/9 across the frequency range 2 to 3.6 GHz. In the right-hand panel we label the prominent features visible in our total intensity images. The notable features are as follows: (1) the central cores of the two galaxies, (2) the remnant spiral arm of the northern galaxy NGC 4038, (3) the tidal tail toward the south and (4) the cold dust complex located northeast of the southern galaxy NGC 4039. These features were also visible in the 4.86 GHz observations by @chyzy04.
In Figure \[composite\], we show a composite image of the Antennae with [*GALEX*]{} far-ultraviolet (FUV) in blue, $y-$band optical image in green observed with the HST-F550M medium band filter, and narrow band H$\alpha$ image in red observed with the HST-F658N narrow band filter. The total intensity contours at 2.8 GHz and the line segments of magnetic field vectors corrected for Faraday rotation are overlaid. The local peaks of the radio emission closely follow the sites of star formation traced by the H$\alpha$ and FUV emission. The non-thermal spectral index[^4] (${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$) in the star-forming regions is comparatively flatter than in the diffuse regions and typically lies in the range $-0.6$ to $-0.8$ close to the injection spectral index of CREs. This indicates the radio emission originates from freshly generated cosmic ray electrons (CREs). The peak in the radio emission is co-incident with the dark cloud complex in the southern part (see Figure \[totI\]). The non-thermal spectrum is flattest in this region with ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}\sim-0.6$ indicating that this is an efficient site for producing cosmic ray particles. The thermal free–free emission in this region is the brightest although, the H$\alpha$ and FUV emission in this region are relatively weak, likely due to high dust extinction.
[c]{}\
### Southern tidal tail
A notable feature in the total intensity map is the detection of the gas-rich tidal tail toward the south. The northern tail has poor gas content [@hibba01] and remains undetected in our observations. The southern tail extends up to $\sim2.8$ arcmin in size, corresponding to a projected length of $\sim18$ kpc from the base of the tail[^5] at the 3$\sigma$ level. The H[i]{} emission in this tail spans $\sim65$ kpc [@hibba01] and the detectable radio continuum emission closely follows it up to $\sim18$ kpc.
Although the southern tail has H[i]{} column densities that exceeds $10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$, there is little evidence of active star formation as revealed by the UV emission [@hibba05]. The tail is, however, visible in the wide band optical images and mid-infrared images between $2-8~\mu$m, and the UV emission predominantly arises from stars older than the dynamical age of the tidal tail [@hibba05]. The FUV emission from the southern tail is weak and corresponds to an average star formation rate of $\sim10^{-3}~\rm
M_\odot~yr^{-1}$ over the entire radio extent. This FUV emission could also arise from less massive ($\lesssim5~\rm M_\odot$) and older stellar populations that were stripped from the galactic disc due to the interaction. This suggests that the CREs giving rise to the radio emission were produced in the star-forming disc before the first interaction $\sim6\times10^8$ years ago [@karl10]. In 3.4, we estimate the magnetic field strength in the tidal tail to be $\sim10~\mu$G assuming energy equipartition between cosmic ray particles and magnetic field [@beckkrause05]. The synchrotron lifetime of the CREs emitting at 2.8 GHz in a magnetic field of $10~\mu$G is $\sim3\times10^7$ years, which is shorter than the dynamical age of the tail. Therefore, the CREs in the tidal tail are composed of relatively old population which gives rise to steep non-thermal spectrum with ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$ in the range $-1.2$ to $-1.6$ (see Figure \[spind\_distr\]).
-- --
-- --
-- -- --
-- -- --
Polarized intensity and Faraday depth
-------------------------------------
The polarized intensity image of the Antennae galaxies at 2.8 GHz determined from the peak of the Faraday depth spectrum is shown in Figure \[polimap\]. Overlaid segments are the Faraday rotation-corrected magnetic field orientations. Due to our stringent cut of 7$\sigma$ on the peak polarized intensity, we do not detect polarized emission from the entire radio-emitting region. However, we do detect the southern tidal tail, the merging disc and the northern part of NGC 4038. Strongly polarized emission is observed from the tidal tail with median fractional polarization[^6], $\Pi\sim 25$ per cent at 2.8 GHz. The polarized intensity spans a projected linear size of $\sim20$ kpc, longer than the extent of the detectable total intensity emission.[^7] The magnetic field vectors are well aligned along the entire length of the tail. In the region of the merging discs, the polarized emission is weakly polarized (median $\Pi\sim1.6$ per cent) and the magnetic field is more randomly oriented. The polarized emission and the magnetic field vectors in the northern galaxy NGC 4038 follow a spiral pattern, however, this emission is offset outward (to the west) with respect to the remnant spiral arm. The peak of the polarized emission is shifted outward by $\sim1.6$ kpc from the peak of the total intensity. Such an offset of the polarized emission was also seen in the 4.85 GHz observations of @chyzy04. The polarized emission along the peak of the total radio continuum emission in the remnant spiral arm remains undetected. This region also hosts sites of intense star formation and hence the polarized emission is likely depolarized due to turbulent magnetic fields.
We did not detect any polarized emission at 2.8 GHz from the southern part of the galaxies in general, in particular around the dark cloud complex. At 7$\sigma$ cutoff, this corresponds to a $\Pi\lesssim0.2$ per cent, comparable to the instrumental leakage. This region shows strong Faraday depolarization between the 4.86 and 8.44 GHz observations of @chyzy04. Moreover, they found the percentage polarization to be $\lesssim1$ per cent at 8.44 GHz. Since, this region also hosts strong thermal emission, the high $n_e$ would lead to high Faraday depth. Therefore, the low fractional polarization can be caused by either strong wavelength$-$($\lambda-$)dependent depolarization or by $\lambda-$independent depolarization due to turbulent magnetic fields within the beam.
-- --
-- --
In left-hand panel of Figure \[rmmap\], we show the Galactic foreground-corrected map of the Faraday depth of the Antennae and its pixel-wise distribution in the right-hand panel. Faraday depth along the tidal tail vary smoothly having a mean of $+25$ rad m$^{-2}$ and a standard deviation of 22 rad m$^{-2}$ (shown as the blue histogram) measured over several beams in the plane of the sky. In the northern polarized arm, we find the mean Faraday depth to be $+9.3$ rad m$^{-2}$ with dispersion of 20.5 rad m$^{-2}$ (shown as the red histogram). The dispersion of Faraday depth around its mean value is larger than that of the tidal tail, suggesting the magnetic field is more ordered in the tidal tail.
The merging disc has strong $\phi$ variations in the range $-100$ to $+140$ rad m$^{-2}$. The pixel-wise distribution of $\phi$ in this region shows two peaks (shown as the green histogram in Figure \[rmmap\]) at $\sim-25$ rad m$^{-2}$ and $\sim+40$ rad m$^{-2}$. The Faraday depth in this region is observed to change sign abruptly and is co-spatial with the systemic velocity of the H[i]{} emission. The Faraday depth spectra in this region have complicated structures having highly dispersed $\phi$ components as compared to other regions. The middle and the right-hand panels of Figure \[spectra\] show the Faraday depth spectra at two adjacent pixels where the sign change is observed. Clearly, the spectra are not single peaked as compared to the spectra in the tail (left-hand panel). For the middle panel, the Faraday depth spectrum has a peak at $+68$ rad m$^{-2}$, while for the right-hand panel, the Faraday depth spectrum peaks at $-130$ rad m$^{-2}$. The restoration of the multiple clean $\phi$ components (shown as red lines in Figure \[spectra\]) with the RMSF of 219 rad m$^{-2}$ gives rise to complicated, broad Faraday depth spectrum. The merging region possibly hosts extended Faraday depth structures, however it is not clear whether the multiple components are indeed different Faraday depth components or one (or multiple) broad components. Therefore, it is not clear if the sign change we observe in Faraday depth is real. Both high angular and Faraday depth resolution are needed along with larger wavelength coverage at lower frequencies to study Faraday depolarization and the nature of the magneto-ionic medium of the merging disc.
Faraday depolarization
----------------------
The maximum fractional polarization ($\Pi_{\rm max}$) arising due to synchrotron emission is given by $\Pi_{\rm max} = (1-{\alpha_{\rm nt}})/(5/3-{\alpha_{\rm nt}})$ and lies in the range $0.7-0.75$ for ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$ in the range $-0.7$ to $-1.1$. However, we seldomly observe this theoretical maximum because the polarized emission can be depolarized due to: (1) $\lambda-$independent beam depolarization caused by random magnetic fields on scales smaller than the beam, (2) bandwidth depolarization caused by Faraday rotation within a finite bandwidth and/or (3) $\lambda-$dependent depolarization depending on the nature of the magneto-ionic medium [see e.g., @sokol98; @sulli12]. Studying the nature of the $\lambda-$dependent depolarization can help us to determine the properties of the magneto-ionic medium. However note, the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) per 8-MHz channel is insufficient to estimate the polarized intensity. Hence, we averaged over each spectral window of 108 MHz width, after flagging the edge channels.
To improve the SNR further, we studied the $\lambda-$dependent depolarization averaged over the tidal tail, the merging disc and the northern region of NGC 4038. To account for beam depolarization while averaging the extended emission over the region of interest, we computed $\Pi$ by averaging the pixels in Stokes $Q$ and $U$ maps as $\Pi = \sqrt{\langle Q \rangle^2 + \langle U
\rangle^2}/\langle I_{\rm nt}\rangle$. We find evidence of strong $\lambda-$dependent depolarization in all parts of the Antennae. Due to limited signal-to-noise ratio in individual channel maps, detailed fitting of the Stokes $Q$ and $U$ [*versus*]{} $\lambda^2$ as done for the galaxy M 51 by @mao15 was not possible. Hence, we fitted the fractional polarization as a function of $\lambda^2$ using the simple models given in @sulli12 based on @sokol98.
We note that the depolarization[^8] between 2 and 3.6 GHz is $\sim0.15$. For this depolarization to arise due to bandwidth depolarization because of averaging over 108 MHz, $|\phi|\gtrsim
10^3$ rad m$^{-2}$ is required. The maximum observed $\phi$ is $\sim150$ rad m$^{-2}$ and thus bandwidth depolarization is not the dominant depolarization mechanism. Therefore, we do not consider this effect in our future calculations.
### Tidal tail and merging disc {#depoltailmerger}
To assess which mechanism causes the $\lambda-$dependent depolarization, we model the polarization fraction as a function of $\lambda^2$ using the different depolarization models given in @sokol98: differential Faraday rotation (DFR), internal Faraday dispersion (IFD), and external Faraday dispersion (EFD). In Figure \[banddepol\], we show the variation of the $\Pi$ with $\lambda^2$ computed within each spectral window of $\sim108$ MHz width. The left-hand panel is for the tail region and the right-hand panel is for the merging disc region.
For the tidal tail region, $\Pi(\lambda)$ is best fitted by the IFD model (red solid line in Figure \[banddepol\] left-hand panel) with $\chi^2=3.2$ as compared to $\chi^2$ of 10.3 and 5.7 for the DFR and EFD models, respectively. As per the IFD model, the Faraday-rotating medium contains turbulent magnetic fields along the line-of-sight and is also emitting synchrotron radiation. In this case $\Pi(\lambda)$ varies as $$\Pi(\lambda) = \Pi_{\rm int} \left(\frac{1-e^{-S}}{S}\right).
\label{eqnIFD}$$ Here, $\Pi_{\rm int}$ is the $\lambda-$independent intrinsic polarization fraction, and $S=2\sigma_{\rm RM}^2\lambda^4$, where $\sigma_{\rm RM}$ is the Faraday dispersion within the 3D beam arising from turbulent fields. We find $\sigma_{\rm RM} = 131\pm23$ rad m$^{-2}$ and internal polarization fraction of $0.62\pm0.18$ close to the theoretical value.
Similarly, for the merging disc region, $\Pi(\lambda)$ is best fitted by an external dispersion screen (green dashed-dot line in Figure \[banddepol\] right-hand panel) with $\chi^2=1.5$. The fits with DFR and IFD models gives $\chi^2$ of 4.8 and 6.1, respectively. In an external dispersion screen, the Faraday rotating medium, lying between the observer and the synchrotron emitting media, contains random magnetic field along the line of sight. In this case $\Pi(\lambda)$ is given by $$\Pi(\lambda) = \Pi_{\rm int} e^{-2\sigma_{\rm RM}^2\lambda^4}.
\label{eqnDFR}$$ We find the internal polarization fraction to be $0.040\pm0.006$ and $\sigma_{\rm RM}=99\pm5$ rad m$^{-2}$.
### Star-forming regions {#sfreg}
We did not detect any polarized emission from the dark cloud and star-forming regions located in the southern part of NGC 4038/9. While the synchrotron emission is the strongest in these regions, non-detection of polarized emission at the resolution of our observations (corresponding to $\sim1$ kpc linear scales) suggests the magnetic field could be random at much smaller scales. However, we could estimate the effects of Faraday depolarization in these regions using the estimated thermal emission. The free–free optical depth ($\tau_{\rm
ff}$) at a radio frequency ($\nu$) is related to the thermal flux density ($S_{\rm th,\nu}$) as $S_{\rm th,\nu} = 2kT_e\nu^2 \Delta\Omega
(1-e^{-\tau_{\rm ff}})/{c^2}$. Here, $\Delta\Omega$ is the solid angle subtended by the source and $T_e$ is the electron temperature assumed to be $10^4$ K. The $\tau_{\rm ff}$ is related to the emission measure ($\textrm{EM}$) as $$\label{tauff}
\tau_{\rm ff} = 0.082 ~T_e^{-1.35} \nu^{-2.1} \textrm{EM}.$$ Here, $n_e$ is the thermal electron density and is related to the $\textrm{EM}$ as $n_e \approx (\textrm{EM}~f/h_{\rm ion})^{1/2}$, where $f$ is the filling fraction. In a star-forming disc, the $\textrm{EM}$ predominantly arises from the H[ii]{} regions with small filling factors, $f\sim5$ per cent [@ehle93; @beck07].[^9] $h_{\rm ion}$ is the line-of-sight depth of the ionized gas assumed to be the linear size of the star-forming regions and is observed to have similar size as the resolution of our observations ($\sim 1$ kpc) as seen in the H$\alpha$ images. Using the thermal emission, we estimate the typical $n_e$ to be $\sim3-5$ cm$^{-3}$. Thus, the $|\phi|$ for a regular magnetic field of $\sim1$ kpc scale having strength $|B_{\parallel}| \sim 3-5~\mu$G (see \[bord\]) is $\sim1-2 \times 10^4~\rm rad~m^{-2}$.
For $|\phi|\approx2\times10^4$ rad m$^{-2}$, the effect of bandwidth depolarization is severe below 1.5 GHz within a channel width of 8 MHz. This effect is less than 20 per cent at 3 GHz and our observations are sensitive to $|\phi|\sim10^4$ rad m$^{-2}$. Thus, our estimated $|\phi|$ of $\sim1-2\times
10^4$ rad m$^{-2}$ in the southern part of NGC 4038/9 may not depolarize the emission at the higher frequency end of our observations. Moreover, the fractional polarization in these regions was found to be $\sim1$ per cent at 8.44 GHz [@chyzy04], where the effect of bandwidth depolarization is even lower. Thus, owing to the extreme environment and turbulence driven by super starclusters, we conclude that the effects of Faraday depolarization could be severe.
Magnetic field properties
-------------------------
### Total magnetic field strength
[c]{}\
The total magnetic field strength ($B_{\rm tot}$) was computed assuming equipartition of energy between magnetic field strength and cosmic ray particles using the revised equipartition formula by @beckkrause05. Figure \[totmag\] shows the magnetic field strength map overlaid with the total intensity contours. We used the non-thermal emission at 2.8 GHz and the non-thermal spectral index map to compute the field strength. In addition, we assumed a synchrotron path length $l=2$ kpc, corrected for inclination and the ratio of number densities of relativistic protons to electrons ($K_0$) of 100. The average magnetic field strength in NGC 4038/9 is found to be $\sim
20~\mu$G, significantly stronger than that of normal star-forming galaxies having typical magnetic field strength of $\sim 10~\mu$G [@basu13; @eck15]. Our estimated magnetic field strength is consistent with that obtained in @chyzy04. Note that our assumption of a constant $l$ throughout the Antennae galaxies is likely not realistic and the estimated magnetic field can be scaled by $[2 \times 10^{-2} (K_0 + 1)/l_{\rm kpc}]^{1/({\alpha_{\rm nt}}+ 3)}$ due to the assumption of $K_0 =100$ and $l= 2$ kpc. A factor of 2 difference in the path length in different parts of the galaxies would change the field strength estimate by less than 20 per cent.
Within the merging disc, the magnetic field is strong: from $\sim 10~\mu$G in the periphery to $\sim25~\mu$G. The magnetic field strength is strongest, $\sim35~\mu$G, in the dark dusty cloud complex. This strong magnetic field is likely produced by the fluctuation dynamo [@kandu98] driven by high star formation activity. We detect low surface brightness synchrotron emission from the tidal tail with an equipartition field strength of $\sim 6-10~\mu$G. However, because of significant energy loss of the CREs in the tidal tail (see 3.1.1), the energy spectral index between CREs and cosmic ray proton differs. The energy spectral indices for cosmic ray protons and electrons are assumed to be constant and the same in the revised equipartition formula. We have therefore set ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$ as $-1$ in the tidal tail region and thus the field strength are underestimated.
### Ordered magnetic field strength {#bord}
--------------- --------------- ------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- ---------------- ---------------------- --------------------------
Region $B_{\rm tot}$ $\frac{B_{\rm turb}}{B_{\rm ord, \perp}}$ $\frac{B_{\rm turb}}{B_{\rm ord, \parallel}}$ $B_{\rm turb}$ $B_{\rm ord, \perp}$ $B_{\rm ord, \parallel}$
($\mu$G) ($\mu$G) ($\mu$G) ($\mu$G)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
Southern tail 10 0.6 5.8–9.2 5 8.5 $<1$
Merging disc 20 7–12 4–5 19.5 $<5$ $<5$
Northern arm 20 $< 3.7$ – 19 $<6$ –
Star-forming 25–35 – – – – –
--------------- --------------- ------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- ---------------- ---------------------- --------------------------
: The equipartition magnetic field strengths (in $\mu$G) of the different magnetic field components at various region of the Antennae galaxies. $B_{\rm tot}$ is the total strength, $B_{\rm turb}$ is the strength of the turbulent field, $B_{\rm ord, \perp}$ is the ordered component in the plane of the sky and $B_{\rm ord, \parallel}$ is the ordered component along the line of sight. We have assumed a 3D isotropic turbulent field.
\[btable\]
The internal degree of polarization ($\Pi_{\rm int}$) is related to the ratio of the 3D isotropic turbulent field ($B_{\rm turb}$) and the ordered magnetic field in the plane of the sky ($B_{\rm ord,\perp}$). Under the assumption of equipartition, $\Pi_{\rm int}$ is related to $q=B_{\rm turb}/B_{\rm ord, \perp}$ by [@sokol98] $$\Pi_{\rm int} = \Pi_{\rm max} \frac{\left(1 + \frac{7}{3} q^2\right)}{\left(1 + 3 q^2 + \frac{10}{9} q^4\right)}.$$ We note that, the above relation assumes the ordered magnetic fields lies entirely in the plane of the disc. Thus, for a realistic scenario of a non-zero ordered magnetic field component perpendicular to the disc, especially for the merging galaxies, $B_{\rm ord, \perp}$ would be overestimated. Furthermore, since, $B_{\rm tot}^2 = B_{\rm ord}^2 + B_{\rm turb}^2 = B_{\rm
turb}^2 \left[1 + q^{-2} + (B_{\rm ord, \parallel}/B_{\rm turb})^2 \right]$, the above assumption does not affect the estimation of $B_{\rm turb}$ using $q$ if the turbulent field is isotropic, but it affects the regular field strength estimation. This is because what we actually measure is $1/q_{\rm obs}^2 =
1/q^2 + (B_{\rm ord, \parallel}/B_{\rm turb})^2$.
At the frequency of our observations, the fractional polarization is strongly affected by $\lambda-$dependent depolarization, therefore we are unable to produce a map of $B_{\rm ord, \perp}$. We use the fitted values for $\Pi_{\rm
int}$ from \[depoltailmerger\] to estimate $B_{\rm ord, \perp}$. We further use the ratio ${\sigma_{\rm RM}}/\langle {\rm RM} \rangle$ to estimate $B_{\rm ord, \parallel}/B_{\rm turb}$ (see \[orderedtail\]). In the tidal tail, the average $B_{\rm tot}$ is $\sim10~\mu$G, $B_{\rm turb}$ is $\sim5~\mu$G and the $B_{\rm \perp, ord}$ is $\sim8.5~\mu$G. In the merging disc, the total field strength is found to be $\sim20~\mu$G. This gives a turbulent field strength of $19.5~\mu$G for the fitted $\Pi_{\rm int}$ of $\sim0.04$ and the upper limit on the $B_{\rm ord, \perp}$ of $2.7~\mu$G. The magnetic field strength estimates in different regions of the Antennae are summarized in Table \[btable\].
Discussion
==========
Regular field of $\sim20$ kpc in the tidal tail {#orderedtail}
-----------------------------------------------
We detect highly polarized emission along the southern tidal tail of the Antennae with intrinsic polarization fraction close to the theoretical maximum (see \[depoltailmerger\]). The magnetic field orientations in the plane of the sky corrected for Faraday rotation are well-aligned along the tail (see Figure \[polimap\]). Such a high degree of polarization can originate from a combination of anisotropic turbulent magnetic fields by compressing an initially random field, and regular magnetic fields in the plane of the sky [@beck16]. However, anisotropic fields dominating over the regular field will not contribute to Faraday depth [@jaffe10]. From our data, we find the Milky Way foreground-corrected Faraday depth along the tidal tail varies smoothly with positive sign throughout (see Figure \[rmmap\]) indicating the line-of-sight ordered field points toward the observer. Anisotropic random fields alone cannot give rise to a smooth large-scale variation of Faraday depth measured over several beams. We therefore conclude that the magnetic field in the plane of the sky along the tidal tail is regular (or coherent) and maintains its direction over $\sim20$ kpc. To our knowledge, this is the largest coherent magnetic field structure observed in galaxies. We discuss in detail the properties of the magneto-ionic medium in the tidal tail.
### Turbulent cell size
The standard deviation of the Faraday depth within the 3D beam (${\sigma_{\rm RM}}$) in the tidal tail region is found to be $131$ rad m$^{-2}$ (see \[depoltailmerger\]). This dispersion of the RM is caused by fluctuations of the field strength along the line of sight. The ${\sigma_{\rm RM}}$ depends on the turbulent magnetic field along the line of sight and the properties of the magneto-ionic medium as $$\sigma_{\rm RM} = 0.81 \left(\frac{\langle n_{\rm e}\rangle}{\rm cm^{-3}}\right) \left(\frac{B_{\rm turb, \parallel}}{\rm \mu G}\right) \left(\frac{L_{\rm ion} d}{f}\right)^{1/2}.
\label{sigmaRM}$$ Here, $\langle n_{\rm e}\rangle$ is the average thermal electron density along the line of sight, $B_{\rm turb, \parallel}$ is the strength of the random magnetic field along the line of sight, $L_{\rm ion}$ is the path length through the ionized medium (in pc), $d$ is the size of the turbulent cells (in pc) and $f$ is the volume filling factor of electrons along the line of sight. The RM dispersion in the plane of the sky ($\sigma_{\rm RM, sky}$) is related to the $\sigma_{\rm RM}$ as [@fletc11] $$\sigma_{\rm RM, sky} \simeq N^{-1/2} \sigma_{\rm RM},$$ where, $N\approx(D/d)^2$ is the number of turbulent cells for the projected beam area in the sky of diameter $D$, for which $\sigma_{\rm RM, sky}$ is measured. Thus, we can compute the diameter of typical turbulent cell size $d$ using the observed $\sigma_{\rm RM, sky}$, $\sigma_{\rm RM}$, and the beam size $D\approx 1400$ pc. $d$ is found to be $\sim230$ pc, significantly larger than the typical turbulent cell size of $\sim50$ pc observed in the discs of galaxies [@fletc11; @mao15; @haver08]. Hence, assuming the line of sight extent of the tidal tail to be the same as the thickness in the plane of sky, i.e. $L_{\rm ion}=1.1$ kpc, the field along the line of sight must be regular. Therefore, the observed dispersion of the Faraday depth must be caused by systematic variations in the plane of the sky. The Faraday depth indeed varies smoothly in the tidal tail (see Figure \[rmmap\]).
### Regular field strengths
The mean RM depends on the regular component of the magnetic field along the line of sight ($B_{\rm reg, \parallel}$) as $$\langle {\rm RM}\rangle = 0.81 \langle n_{\rm e} \rangle B_{\rm reg, \parallel} L_{\rm ion \label{eqrm}}.$$ Thus, the ratio of $\sigma_{\rm RM}$ to $\langle \rm RM \rangle$ can give us the estimate of $B_{\rm turb, \parallel}/B_{\rm reg, \parallel}$ and is given by $$\frac{{\sigma_{\rm RM}}}{|\langle \rm RM \rangle|} = \frac{B_{\rm turb, \parallel}}{|B_{\rm reg, \parallel}|}\left(\frac{d}{f L_{\rm ion}} \right)^{1/2}.$$ From our estimated values of ${\sigma_{\rm RM}}$, $\langle \rm RM\rangle$ and $d$, and assumed value for $L_{\rm ion}$, we find $B_{\rm turb, \parallel}/B_{\rm reg,
\parallel}\sim 13 f^{1/2}$. Compared to the star-forming disc, the ionized medium in the tidal tail is more diffuse. Therefore, assuming typical $f$ in the range $0.2 - 0.5$ for a diffuse medium, $B_{\rm turb, \parallel}/B_{\rm
reg, \parallel}$ lies in the range $5.8-9.2$. Assuming $B_{\rm turb}=5~\mu$G is isotropic (see \[bord\]), we estimate $B_{\rm reg, \parallel}$ to be $\lesssim 1~\mu$G. Thus, the field strength in the plane of the sky ($B_{\rm reg, \perp} \sim8.5~\mu$G) is significantly larger than $B_{\rm reg,
\parallel}$, perhaps caused due to stretching and twisting of the remnant spiral field in the disc of the galaxies during the tidal interaction.
Here, we explore the degree of stretching required to amplify an initial regular field in the progenitor galaxy to the observed field strengths in the tidal tail. For this, we consider the scenario that an initially cylindrical spiral-shaped regular field generated in the progenitor galaxies by dynamo action has been stretched by the tidal interaction. Assuming the field is stretched keeping the cross-sectional area constant, then the ratio $B/\rho l$ is conserved if the magnetic flux is frozen in the tube [see e.g., @longa11]. Here, $\rho$ is the density of the gas and $l$ is the length of the cylinder. From observations of H[i]{} gas [@hibba01], the density in the tidal tail is about a factor of 3 lower than that in the remnant spiral arm. Therefore, a regular field of 8.5 $\mu$G in the tidal tail requires stretching by a factor of $\sim4-9$ for an initial regular field of $\sim3-6~\mu$G in strength (see \[n-arm\]). This implies, the dynamo generated initial field was regular over $\sim2-5$ kpc, which is a typical length-scale observed in nearby spiral galaxies [@beck13book]. Thus, tidal stretching of field lines can also amplify large-scale regular fields within the dynamical time-scale of the merger event, i.e., few 100 Myr. A full treatment of the 3D magnetic field structure is beyond the scope of this paper and will be discussed in a forthcoming paper (A. Basu et al. 2016 in preparation).
### Thermal electron densities
Using Equation \[eqrm\], and the upper limit on $B_{\rm \parallel, reg}$, we constrain $\langle n_{\rm e}\rangle$ to be $\gtrsim0.02$ cm$^{-3}$ in the tidal tail. The column density of the H[i]{} in the tidal tail is found to be $\sim6\times10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$ having thickness $\sim 4.5$ kpc [@hibba01] which corresponds to $\langle n_{\rm H}\rangle \sim 0.04$ cm$^{-3}$. Thus, from our constraint on the $\langle n_{\rm e} \rangle$, the ionization fraction in the tidal tail is $\gtrsim30$ per cent. As pointed out in the study by @hibba05, the UV emission from the tidal tail predominantly arises from old stars, and there is little evidence of on-going star formation. This is insufficient to sustain the ionic medium and therefore the ionization of the tidal tail is maintained by the inter-galactic radiation field.
Turbulent fields in the merging disc
------------------------------------
The polarized emission from the merging disc of the galaxies has low fractional polarization with a median value of only $\sim0.016$ at 2.8 GHz and the $\lambda-$dependent depolarization is best described by an external dispersion screen (see 3.3). From the fitted value of ${\sigma_{\rm RM}}\approx100$ rad m$^{-2}$ and observed $|\langle \rm RM \rangle|\approx40$ rad m$^{-2}$, we find $B_{\rm turb, \parallel}/B_{\rm ord, \parallel} \approx 16 f^{1/2}$, assuming path length $L_{\rm ion}=2$ kpc and a typical turbulent cell size of $\sim50$ pc observed in discs of galaxies. Hence, $B_{\rm turb,
\parallel}/B_{\rm ord, \parallel}$ ranges from 4–5 for $f$ in the range 0.05–0.1. The measured low $\Pi_{\rm int}$ of 0.04 is likely caused by a turbulent magnetic field enhanced due to the merger event. For the estimated $\Pi_{\rm int}$ of 0.04, we find $B_{\rm turb, \perp}/B_{\rm ord, \perp}$ in the range 7–12, i.e., the turbulent field strength significantly dominates over the ordered field both in the plane of the sky and along the line of sight. For isotropic turbulence, $B_{\rm turb}$ is found to be $\sim19.5~\mu$G. Using this, we constrain the strength of the regular fields along the line of sight $B_{\rm ord, \perp}$ to be $\lesssim5~\mu$G, and in the plane of the sky, $B_{\rm ord, \parallel} \approx 1.2f^{-1/2} \lesssim 5~\mu$G for $f\gtrsim0.05$.
Ordered fields in the northern arm {#n-arm}
----------------------------------
[c]{}\
The polarized emission from the relic spiral arm of NGC 4038 in the north is weak with median $\Pi\sim0.08$ at 2.8 GHz. The $B_{\rm \perp, reg}$ is observed to follow a spiral pattern (see Figure \[composite\]). The polarized emission is depolarized in the optical spiral arm hosting sites of high star formation and the detected polarized emission is offset toward the outer parts. It is difficult to reliably measure the fractional polarization as the total intensity quickly falls off to the background noise level in that region. The mean Faraday depth of this feature is $\sim+9$ rad m$^{-2}$ and has a comparatively large dispersion of $\sim20$ rad m$^{-2}$ in the plane of the sky varying between $-30$ to $+40$ rad m$^{-2}$ (see Figure \[rmmap\]). We observe the Faraday depth to frequently change sign smoothly over a few synthesized beam, indicative of a less coherent regular component of the magnetic field in the plane of the sky than that in the tidal tail.
In Figure \[banddepolnorth\], we show the variation of $\Pi$ as a function of $\lambda^2$ in the northern arm region. Due to a limited $\lambda^2$ coverage of our data, it is not possible to select a best fit model from our data ($\chi^2=2.2, 1.6$ and $1.8$ for the DFR, IFD and EFD models, respectively). All the depolarization mechanisms indicate a $\Pi_{\rm int}$ between 0.08–0.1 and if we assume isotropic turbulent fields, $B_{\rm turb}$ is estimated to be $\sim19~\mu$G. Since, we do not have a estimate of $B_{\rm turb, \parallel}
/B_{\rm ord, \parallel}$ due to lack of unambiguous fit to Faraday depolarization, we estimate an upper limit on the strength of $B_{\rm ord,
\perp}$ as $6~\mu$G.
Extreme Faraday depolarization in southern star-forming regions
---------------------------------------------------------------
The southern part of the Antennae system around the dark cloud region shows strong depolarization, such that the polarized emission remains undetectable in our observations below $\sim3.6$ GHz, at 4.8 GHz [@chyzy04] and the fractional polarization at 8.44 GHz is extremely low [$\sim1$ per cent; @chyzy04]. Although, such an effect could be caused by $\lambda-$independent beam depolarization due to the random component of the magnetic field, here we assess the possibility of extreme nature of Faraday depolarization.
In \[sfreg\] we showed, based on the estimated thermal emission, we expect $|\phi|$ $\sim10^4$ rad m$^{-2}$. Such high $\phi$ values are unlikely to cause bandwidth depolarization especially above $\sim3$ GHz within a 8 MHz channel. Assuming that the $\lambda-$dependent depolarization arises due to the same region being Faraday rotating and synchrotron emitting but with a regular magnetic field along the line of sight, i.e., depolarization due to differential Faraday rotation (DFR), the $\Pi(\lambda)$ is given by $$\Pi(\lambda) = \Pi_{\rm int} \frac{\sin |\phi \lambda^2|}{|\phi \lambda^2|}.$$ In this case, $\phi$ is related to the RM as $\phi = (1/2)\textrm{RM}$. Using this we find, for the estimated $\phi\sim10^4$ rad m$^{-2}$, the expected fractional polarization at 8.44 GHz with a bandwidth of 50 MHz [same as the observations of @chyzy04] lies between $1-7$ per cent with occasional null values depending on the $|\phi|$. The variation of the fractional polarization at 8.44 GHz along this region was observed to be spatially smooth (1–2 per cent) and hence it is unlikely that an ionic medium with only a uniform magnetic field gives rise to such high depolarization.
If the magneto-ionic medium is turbulent, driven by high star-formation activity and merger, then the internal and external Faraday dispersion models, give $\sigma_{\rm RM} \sim 10^3$ rad m$^{-2}$. Using Equation \[sigmaRM\] we infer the turbulent cells to be 10–50 pc in size for a turbulent field strength of $\sim20~\mu$G and the estimated $\langle n_{\rm e}\rangle \approx
3~\rm cm^{-3}$. The cell size is typical of what is observed in the spiral arms of normal star-forming galaxies [@fletc11; @mao15]. Hence, it is difficult to disentangle whether the star-forming regions in the southern part are beam depolarized due to a turbulent magnetic field or Faraday depolarized due to extreme properties of the magneto-ionic media. To distinguish between these broadband properties require Stokes $Q$ and $U$ fitting of higher resolution (A- and B-array) and higher frequency (4–8 GHz) data. We have acquired data between 4 and 8 GHz using the VLA in the DnC, CnB and BnA array configurations and the data will be analyzed.
Implications on the buildup of galactic magnetic fields
-------------------------------------------------------
[*Implications on ISM of galaxies*]{}: As a late stage merger, the Antennae is a classic example of a system at the peak of the cosmic star formation history. We, however, note that the early merging galaxies are believed to be different in their interstellar medium ISM properties as compared to the present day mergers. The present day merging systems, such as the Antennae galaxies, are predominantly between well-settled, dynamically cold discs with comparatively lower star formation rates as compared to early mergers which can be between more gas-rich, turbulent, and compact systems [@forst09; @willi11; @stott16]. Based on the bolometric far infrared luminosity, the Antennae pair is classified as a luminous infrared galaxy (LIRG). LIRGs contribute significantly to the comoving star formation density beyond redshift of 1 [@magne09]. Therefore, a detail understanding of the Antennae is essential to understand cosmic evolution of ISM in galaxies. Merger induced active star formation and turbulence [@veill02] is an essential ingredient in the evolution of hot interstellar gas through stellar feedback [@metz04]. It is crucial in the rapid amplification of magnetic fields via turbulent-dynamo mechanisms. Our study demonstrates the magnetic field strength in the Antennae is comparatively higher than that in isolated galaxies and is dominated significantly by turbulent fields within the merging bodies.
The turbulent magnetic field—and its coupling with the ISM energy densities, especially the kinetic energy of the turbulent gas—is important in the origin and maintenance of the radio–far infrared correlation at higher redshifts [@schle13]. The stronger field strength in merging galaxies ($\sim20~\mu$G) compensate for the inverse-Compton losses due to the cosmic microwave background at higher redshifts and helps in maintaining the radio–far infrared correlation [@basu15b].
[*Comparison to the pan-Magellanic field*]{}: In the immediate neighbourhood of the Milky Way, the Magellanic bridge connecting the Large and Small Magellanic clouds (LMC and SMC, respectively) could potentially be an example of a system hosting regular magnetic fields of similar length-scale as detected in the tidal tail of Antennae galaxies. Through studies of starlight polarization and RMs inferred from background sources, it has been suggested that an aligned “pan-Magellanic” magnetic field possibly exists, connecting LMC and SMC [@mao08; @wayte90]. @deinz73 presented model of the H[i]{} gas connecting the two clouds that spans $\sim20$ kpc, which supports the existence of pan-Magellanic magnetic field. Although, similar to the tidal tail of the Antennae galaxies, the Magellanic bridge is likely generated from a tidal event [@besla12; @baghe13], its progenitors are very different from those of the Antennae galaxies both in terms of morphologies and their initial field strengths. Detailed studies of magnetic field properties in LMC and SMC have revealed low total field strengths of $\sim3~\mu$G [@mao08; @mao12]. Therefore, low progenitor magnetic field strengths along with significantly less tidal pressure because of shallow gravitational potential of the LMC–SMC system as compared to that of the Antennae galaxies, the strength of the pan-Magellanic ordered field could be low. For example, the model by @deinz73, predicts the strength of the pan-Magellanic ordered field to be sub-microgauss to a few microgauss.
The pan-Magellanic ordered field could span about 20 degrees on the sky. Therefore, direct detection of the regular field from linearly polarized emission is difficult because of low surface brightness and systematic contribution from the Milky Way in the foreground. To firmly establish the existence of such a field, improved RM grid experiment with a large number of background polarized sources is essential as suggested by @mao08. A systematic comparison of the pan-Magellanic magnetic field with that of the tidal tail of the Antennae galaxies is not possible until we have firm observations about the strength and the structure of this pan-Magellanic magnetic field.
[*Implications on magnetic field measurements at high redshifts*]{}: Usually, one studies magnetic field properties in high redshift intervening objects by measuring the excess RM towards quasar absorption line systems: Mg[ii]{}, damped Lyman-$\alpha$ (DLA), sub-DLA [see e.g., @oren95; @berne08; @joshi13; @farne14]. It has been suggested that the sub-DLAs can originate from neutral gas that lies $\gtrsim20$ kpc from the host galaxies and the absorbing gas is likely stripped via tidal interaction and/or ram pressure [@semba01; @muzah16]. The tidal tail of the Antennae with $N_{\rm HI}$ in the range $\sim10^{20}-6\times10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$, would be a classic example of a DLA or sub-DLA (depending on at what distance the from the host galaxies the line-of-sight intersects), when observed as a Lyman-$\alpha$ absorber against a quasar at high redshifts. Our study shows that such systems can host large scale regular magnetic fields and gives rise to rotation measure when observed at suitable viewing angles. It is therefore important to take into account that the inferred field could come from tidally stripped gas, and not only from the disc.
[*Implications to magnetization of the intergalactic medium*]{}: Coherent magnetic fields in the outskirts of merging galaxies, extending in to the intergalactic medium, assists in propagation of cosmic ray particles along the field lines [see e.g., @cesar80; @ptusk06]. Thus, apart from starburst driven galactic winds, galaxy mergers can also play an important role in magnetizing the intergalactic medium and enriching it with cosmic ray particles.
[*Implication to evolution of large-scale fields in galaxies*]{}: In a study of cosmological evolution of large- and small-scale magnetic fields in galaxies, @arsha09 predicted that major merger events dissipate the $10^{-6}$ G large-scale disc fields down to several $10^{-8}$ G. Our study comprehensively shows that, although the pre-merger regular magnetic fields in the galactic discs are mostly disrupted by the merger and are dominated by turbulent fields, they can assist in producing larger-scale coherent fields several microgauss in strength through field stretching. The detection of a $\sim20$ kpc coherent magnetic field in the tidal tail indicates that large-scale fields can be preserved even in advanced merging systems. Moreover, large-scale fields do not necessarily require Gyr timescales to develop as predicted by magneto-hydrodynamic (MHD) simulations [@arsha09; @hanas09]. A detailed MHD simulation is essential to understand the nature of the coherent magnetic fields in the tidal tails and its implications in developing large-scale regular fields observed in isolated galaxies in the local Universe.
Summary
=======
We have studied the magnetic field properties of the spiral galaxies NGC 4038/9, also known as the Antennae galaxies, undergoing late stage merger. The galaxies were observed between 2 and 4 GHz using the VLA in DnC and CnB arrays and studied the polarization properties using the combined DnC+CnB array data. We summarize our main findings in this section.
(i) We estimated the thermal emission from the galaxies using FUV emission as a tracer. We find the mean ${f_{\rm th}}$ to be $\sim25$ per cent, significantly higher than what is found in normal star-forming galaxies. The galaxy-integrated ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$ is found to be $-1.11\pm0.03$. The ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$ value can have systematic error up to $\sim10$ per cent due to uncertainties in the thermal emission.
(ii) We detect the total intensity radio continuum emission from the gas-rich southern tidal tail extending up to $\sim18$ kpc at $3\sigma$ level. This region shows steep non-thermal spectrum with ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$ lying in the range $-1.2$ to $-1.6$, indicating that the tail is composed of an older population of CREs.
(iii) Employing the technique of RM synthesis, we detect polarized emission from the southern tidal tail extending up to $\sim20$ kpc. The Faraday depth along the tidal tail varies smoothly preserving its sign throughout. The $\lambda-$dependent Faraday depolarization of this region is best described by an internal Faraday dispersion model with ${\sigma_{\rm RM}}= 131\pm23$ [rad m$^{-2}$ ]{}and an internal fractional polarization of $0.62\pm0.18$.
(iv) Our result suggests that the magnetic field along the tidal tail is highly regular up to a size of $\sim20$ kpc, the largest known coherent field structure on galactic scales. In this region, the regular field lies mostly in the plane of the sky with $B_{\rm reg, \perp} \approx 8.5\mu$G and dominates over the turbulent field ($B_{\rm turb} \approx 5~\mu$G). The large-scale field is likely generated by stretching of an initial disc field by a factor of 4–9 over the merger’s dynamical time-scale of few 100 Myr.
(v) We estimate the ionization fraction in the tidal tail to be $\gtrsim30$ per cent, although there is no indication for on-going star formation that could maintain the ionized medium. Inter-galactic radiation field is likely the main contributor of ionizing photons.
(vi) The remnant spiral arm in the northern galaxy NGC 4038 has spiral-shaped regular magnetic field structures and it is displaced outward by $\sim1.6$ kpc with respect to that of the optical and total intensity radio-continuum emission. Here, the Faraday depth varies between $-30$ and $+40$ [rad m$^{-2}$ ]{}and frequently reverses sign along the arm, indicating the magnetic field is less ordered than that in the tail. The magnetic field strength in this region is dominated by the turbulent field ($\sim19~\mu$G).
(vii) In the merging disc, the $\lambda-$dependent Faraday depolarization is best described by an external Faraday dispersion screen with strong turbulent fields of strength $\sim19.5~\mu$G. Faraday depth spectra in this region have complex structures with multiple and/or broad Faraday depth components. The ordered component of magnetic fields, $B_{\rm ord, \perp}$ and $B_{\rm ord,
\parallel}$ is estimated to be $<2.7$ and $<4~\mu$G, respectively.
(viii) The magnetic field strength is strongest in the star-forming regions reaching values up to $\sim35~\mu$G. The polarized emission from the star-forming regions remain undetected at the sensitivity of our observations. This is perhaps caused due to turbulence driven by merger induced intense star formation.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
We thank Dr. Rainer Beck for critical review of the manuscript and useful discussions that improved the presentation of the paper. We thank Prof. Sne[ž]{}ana Stanimirovi[ć]{} for the help during carrying out of the VLA observations. Ancor Damas and Maja Kierdorf are acknowledged for carefully reading the manuscript and helpful comments. The VLA is operated by the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO). The NRAO is a facility of the National Science Foundation operated under cooperative agreement by Associated Universities, Inc. Based on observations made with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, and obtained from the Hubble Legacy Archive, which is a collaboration between the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI/NASA), the Space Telescope European Coordinating Facility (ST-ECF/ESA) and the Canadian Astronomy Data Centre (CADC/NRC/CSA). Some of the data presented in this paper were obtained from the Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes (MAST). STScI is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS5-26555.
Thermal emission separation {#thermal}
===========================
The radio continuum emission is mainly a combination of non-thermal synchrotron and thermal free–free emission. Although, the overall contribution of thermal emission to the total radio emission at 1.4 GHz is $\sim10$ per cent for normal star-forming galaxies [@nikla97a; @tabat07b; @basu12], the thermal fraction[^10] (${f_{\rm th}}$) could be much higher—more than 30 per cent in star-forming regions. Detailed studies of the star formation history in the Antennae have revealed intense starbursts in localized regions, especially in the overlapping region and the western galaxy NGC 4038 [@zhang10; @klaas10]. Such regions are bright in H$\alpha$, coincident with the peaks in the total radio continuum emission (see Figure \[totI\]) due to enhanced thermal emission. We estimated the thermal emission on a pixel-by-pixel basis using star formation rate (SFR) as its tracer following @condo92. The thermal emission ($S_{\rm\nu, th}$) at a radio frequency $\nu$ is related to $\textrm {SFR}$ as $$\left(\frac{S_{\rm\nu, th}}{\rm Jy}\right) \approx 4.6 D_{\rm Mpc}^{-2} \nu_{\rm GHz}^{-0.1} \left( \frac{\textrm {SFR}}{\rm M_\odot yr^{-1}}\right).$$ Here, $D_{\rm Mpc}$ is the distance to the galaxy in Mpc. We used the [*GALEX*]{} far-ultraviolet (FUV; $\lambda\approx1520 \AA$) image[^11] to estimate SFR using the calibration given in @kenni12. We corrected the FUV emission for dust extinction using the observed FUV–NUV colour ($(FUV-NUV)_{\rm obs}$; @hao11) $$A_{\rm FUV} = (3.83\pm0.48)\times [(FUV-NUV)_{\rm obs} - (0.022\pm0.024)].$$ The large error in the attenuation ($A_{\rm FUV}$) calibration gives rise to up to $\sim20$ per cent error in extinction correction for the range of $(FUV-NUV)_{\rm obs}$ in the Antennae galaxies. The highest extinction is observed around the central regions of the two galaxies and along the spiral arms. In those regions, the estimated SFR, and hence the thermal emission, can be uncertain by at most 30 per cent. We estimate the total $\textrm{SFR}$ for the Antennae galaxies to be $\sim10~\rm M_\odot~yr^{-1}$ which is in agreement with total $\textrm{SFR}$ of $13~\rm M_\odot~yr^{-1}$ estimated by @klaas10 using total infrared emission within 30 per cent.[^12]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
![Thermal emission map of the Antennae galaxies estimated using extinction corrected FUV emission. The overlaid total intensity contours are same as Figure \[totI\].[]{data-label="sth"}](figureA1.eps "fig:"){width="8cm"}
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our estimated total $\textrm{SFR}$ of 10 $\rm M_\odot~yr^{-1}$ corresponds to a total thermal emission of $86$ mJy, hence mean $f_{\rm th}\sim25$ per cent at 2.8 GHz. In Figure \[sth\], we show the thermal emission map of the Antennae galaxies. The estimated ${f_{\rm th}}$ is in good agreement with 27 per cent at 2.8 GHz estimated by interpolating ${f_{\rm th}}\approx50$ per cent at 10.45 GHz for the flux density scale assumed in @chyzy04. The mean ${f_{\rm th}}$ is significantly higher than what have been observed for normal star-forming galaxies. The western galaxy NGC 4038 have comparatively higher ${f_{\rm th}}$ of $\sim30$ per cent at the centre and $\sim24$ per cent in its remnant spiral arm. These regions host intense star formation likely induced by the merger [@zhang10]. In the dark cloud region, radio emission is significantly dominated by non-thermal emission where ${f_{\rm th}}\lesssim8$ per cent. This is also the region where ${f_{\rm th}}$ is lowest.
We note that our thermal emission could be overestimated because of FUV emission was used as a tracer of star formation. The thermal emission is best traced by H$\alpha$ emission originating from ionization by young ($\lesssim10$ Myr) and massive ($\gtrsim10~\rm M_\odot$) stars. While, the FUV emission could also originate from an older population (10–100 Myr) of lower mass stars [@kenni12]. The contribution of the older stellar population to the FUV emission therefore overestimates the recent SFR and the thermal emission can be overestimated. We could not use the H$\alpha$ emission for estimating the thermal emission because the only publicly-available continuum subtracted H$\alpha$ map does not cover the entire Antennae galaxies [see e.g., @whitm99].
----------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------
{width="8cm"} {width="8cm"}
----------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------
Spectral index distribution {#spind_distr}
===========================
The total intensity maps of each spectral window were used to compute the in-band spectral index ($\alpha$) between 2 and 3.6 GHz of the Antennae galaxies. The spectral index map for NGC 4038/9 was computed by fitting a power law of the form, $\log S_\nu = \beta + \alpha \log \nu$, to each pixel of the total intensity maps across the 11 spectral window images. Here, $S_\nu$ is the total flux density at a frequency $\nu$ and $\beta$ is the normalization constant at $\nu=1$ GHz. We convolved the total intensity images of all the 11 spectral windows to a common resolution of $15\times12$ arcsec$^2$ (the resolution at the lowest frequency). All the maps were then aligned to a common coordinate system to do the fitting. The left-hand panel of Figure \[totspind\] shows the spectral index map. The galaxy-integrated spectral index between 2–3.6 GHz, estimated by fitting the integrated total intensities shown in Figure \[integ\], is found to be $-0.85\pm0.02$. The spectral index shows large variations between $-0.6$ in the dark cloud complex and $<-1.2$ in the tidal tail. The typical error on the fitted values of spectral index in high signal-to-noise ratio (SNR; $\gtrsim10$) pixels is $\lesssim5$ per cent. In low SNR ($\lesssim5$) pixels, especially in the outer parts and tidal tail, the spectral index error is up to $\sim25$ per cent. The variation of the spectral index is in good agreement with @chyzy04.
The task [clean]{} with [*nterms=2*]{} in [casa]{} can also produce a spectral index map through modelling the sky brightness as a Taylor-series expansion per frequency channel [see @rau11]. In right-hand panel of Figure \[totspind\] we show the spectral index map computed using [casa]{}. Note that, the colour-scale of the two maps are different in order to represent the full range of values. In regions with high SNR ($\gtrsim6$) in inner parts of the Antennae, both the methods are in excellent agreement with each other. But, in regions with $\textrm{SNR}\lesssim5$, especially in the outer parts of the extended emission, the spectrum computed by [casa]{} is either flat or inverted which is unrealistic. Our fitting does not produce $\alpha$ with values $\gtrsim-0.3$.
The differences in $\alpha$ in the outer parts is not critical for our analysis, but we prefer to use the pixel-by-pixel fitting method as it enables us to compute the non-thermal spectral index map. The non-thermal spectral index, ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$, was computed after subtracting the thermal emission map scaled to the frequencies of each spectral window. A similar pixel-by-pixel fitting was done using the non-thermal emission map of each spectral window. The green dash-dot line in Figure \[integ\] represents the thermal emission with a spectral index of $-0.1$. The non-thermal emission at each spectral window after subtracting the thermal emission from the total intensity are shown as the red squares. The galaxy-integrated ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$ estimated by fitting the total non-thermal emission at each spectral window is found to be $-1.11\pm0.03$ and is shown as the red dashed line in Figure \[integ\]. However, the estimated ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$, overall, can have systematic error up to $\sim10$ per cent due to uncertainty in the estimated thermal emission. In spatially resolved case, the uncertainty in the thermal emission affects ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$ up to 10 per cent in bright regions where ${f_{\rm th}}$ is high. The errors in ${f_{\rm th}}$ do not affect ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$ in regions of low thermal fraction, i.e., in the outer parts of the Antennae and in the tidal tail. Our estimated value of the ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$ is significantly steeper than the value ($-0.8$) assumed by @chyzy04 for performing a crude thermal emission separation. We note that, the estimated ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$ is a lower limit because the thermal emission could be overestimated by the FUV emission (see Appendix \[thermal\]).
\[lastpage\]
[^1]: E-mail: [email protected] (AB); [email protected] (SAM)
[^2]: http://casa.nrao.edu/
[^3]: The angular resolution corresponds to $\sim1$ kpc linear scale at the distance of the galaxies.
[^4]: The non-thermal spectral index, ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$, is defined as $S_\nu\propto \nu^{\alpha_{\rm nt}}$. The method of estimating ${\alpha_{\rm nt}}$ is discussed in Appendix \[spind\_distr\]
[^5]: We define the base of the tail to be located eastward of the merging disc region at RA = $\rm
12^{h}01^{m}57.5^{s}$ and Dec. = $-18^\circ52^\prime06^{\prime\prime}$ (J2000).
[^6]: The fractional polarization is defined as, $\Pi=PI/I_{\rm nt}$, where, $PI$ is the linearly polarized intensity and $I_{\rm nt}$ is the synchrotron intensity. We express $\Pi$ both in terms of percentage and fraction.
[^7]: $\Pi$ is computed within overlapping regions in $I_{\rm
nt}$ and $PI$. We considered only the pixels with $I_{\rm nt}\gtrsim 3\sigma$ and $PI\gtrsim7\sigma$.
[^8]: Depolarization is defined as the ratio of polarization fraction at $\nu_1$ and $\nu_2$, where $\nu_1 < \nu_2$.
[^9]: We note that the filling factor is a difficult quantity to measure in external galaxies. We therefore use representative values within a range of factor of 2 in our calculations.
[^10]: Thermal fraction at a frequency $\nu$ is defined as, $f_{\rm
th, \nu}=S_{\rm \nu, th}/S_{\rm \nu, tot}$. Here, $S_{\rm \nu, th}$ is the flux density of the thermal component of the total emission $S_{\rm \nu, tot}$. We express ${f_{\rm th}}$ in per cent.
[^11]: Downloaded from the [*MAST*]{} website.
[^12]: Note that the $\textrm{SFR}$ in @klaas10 was estimated to be $22~\rm
M_\odot~yr^{-1}$. The difference arises due their assumed distance of 28.4 Mpc. However, the assumed distance does not affect the surface brightness of the thermal emission.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We revise the mass estimate of the Local Group (LG) when Dark Energy (in the form of the Cosmological Constant) is incorporated into the Timing Argument (TA) mass estimator for the Local Group (LG). Assuming the age of the Universe and the Cosmological Constant according to the recent values from the Planck CMB experiment, we find the mass of the LG to be $\mtade = (4.73 \pm 1.03) \times 10^{12} M_{\sun}$ which is 13% higher than the classical TA mass estimate. This partly explains the discrepancy between earlier results from LCDM simulations and the classical TA. When a similar analysis is performed on 16 LG-like galaxy pairs from the CLUES simulations, we find that the scatter in the ratio of the virial to the TA estimated mass is given by $\mvir / \mtade = 1.04 \pm 0.16$. Applying it to the LG mass estimation we find a calibrated $\mvir = (4.92 \pm 1.08 \textrm{(obs.)} \pm 0.79 \textrm{(sys.)} ) \times 10^{12} M_{\sun}$.'
bibliography:
- 'timingargbib.bib'
date: Released 2013
title: Weighing the Local Group in the Presence of Dark Energy
---
\[firstpage\]
galaxies: kinematics and dynamics – Local Group – Dark Energy.
Introduction
============
In this paper, we explore the possibility that Dark Energy would have an influence on estimation of galaxy masses via the Timing Argument (TA). The TA relates the mass of the Local Group (LG) with the age of the universe by a method that was formulated by [@kahnwoltjer1959] and refined by [@lyndenbell1981]. Since the bulk of the mass of the LG is concentrated in M31 (Andromeda Galaxy) and the Milky Way (MW), it can be modelled as an isolated system of two point masses. Because M31 is approaching the MW on a low angular momentum orbit, the LG can be well approximated by an isolated two-body problem with zero angular momentum ([@vdm12] and [@cosmoLG]). The Timing Argument of [@kahnwoltjer1959] is perhaps not sufficiently credited as one of the first indicators of dark matter ([@freeman2013]).
Soon after the time of the Big Bang, these two galaxies must have been in the same place, with zero separation. The two galaxies are observed at present to be approaching each other, implying that they would have reached maximum separation at some point in the past. Because they have low orbital angular momentum, the two galaxies would be on a nearly head-on collision course. In that case, their disks would have already been severely disrupted unless they are not currently on their first close approach. Since both galaxies have unperturbed disks, it is assumed that they are on their first passage. Therefore the mass of the MW/M31 galaxy pair can be estimated by the TA, as shown by [@lyndenbell1981] and [@binneytremaine].
It seems that there is some confusion in the literature about the role of $\Lambda$ in the growth of structure. When global fluctuations relative to the background are being discussed, as in [@peebles1980], the $\Lambda$ term cancels out and seemingly has no effect on dynamics. This comes from the fact that these problems are being considered in co-moving coordinates, and therefore the expansion of the universe due to Dark Energy is already captured by the background expansion of the coordinate system.
However, when local dynamics are being considered, particularly for gravitationally bound systems like the Local Group, the equations used to model said systems are usually written in physical coordinates, hence the $\Lambda$ term should be there, as in the case of spherical collapse. Investigation of the effects of incorporating $\Lambda$ into the TA is a good test of the assertion that $\Lambda$ should be included in models for bound systems in physical coordinates.
The acceleration of the galaxies towards each other is described by the radial differential equation, where $r$ is a proper radial coordinate, $$\label{ODE}
\frac{d^2 r}{dt^2} = -\frac{GM}{r^2} + \frac{\Lambda}{3}r.$$ In this equation, $r$ represents the scalar distance, or radial separation, between the MW and M31, and $M$ is the sum of the masses for the MW and M31, although it is recognised that halo mass is an ill-defined quantity. For the purposes of our analysis, our treatment only applies to the simplest DE model, namely one with a cosmological constant where the equation of state $w=-1$ at all times. Further, we assume that the masses of the MW and M31 are fixed in time. Tidal interactions and orbital angular momentum are also ignored.
Equation \[ODE\] is the same as the equation for a Lemaître-Tolman-Bondi spherical collapse which was applied in the past for collapse in the presence of Dark Energy (e.g. [@lahav1991], [@wangsteinhardt], [@maorlahav]). Equation \[ODE\] was applied to the Local Group by [@axenides], [@PP06], [@PP08], [@binneytremaine], [@chernin2009] and [@chernin2006], and to the Virgo-centric infall by [@hoffman2007]. We point out that Lambda was not taken into account in Local Group Timing Argument recent analyses e.g. [@timingargwhite] and [@vdm12]. The goal of this paper is investigate if the inclusion of Lambda in the TA better models the dynamics of LG-like galaxy pairs in LCDM simulations. In particular, [@timingargwhite] compared their LG-like galaxy pairs from their LCDM simulations with the classical TA with $\Lambda=0$, i.e. $$\label{newtonianODE}
\frac{d^2 r}{dt^2} = -\frac{GM}{r^2}.$$
This differential equation is parameterised as follows (e.g. [@binneytremaine] and [@kahnwoltjer1959]): $$\label{TAeq1}
r = a(1 - \cos{\theta})$$ $$\label{TAeq2}
t = \sqrt{\frac{a^3}{GM}}\,(\theta - \sin{\theta})$$ $$\label{TAeq3}
v = \frac{dr}{dt} = \sqrt{\frac{GM}{a}} \frac{\sin{\theta}}{1 - \cos{\theta}}.$$ An angle of $\theta = 0$ corresponds to the closest approach at $t=0$ (the Big Bang). The angle $\theta = \pi$ is where the maximum radial separation $2a$ occurs. For a given known radial separation $r$, velocity $v$, and the age of the universe $t$, these give the mass of the system.
In this paper, we explore if the addition of $\Lambda$ to the LG TA could improve the agreement with the N-Body results. In order to include the effect of $\Lambda$, we sought to numerically solve Eq. \[ODE\], which was numerically solved with $\Lambda \neq 0$ and $\Lambda = 0$ so that we could directly compare the behaviour of the DE TA model with that of the analytic TA model. This comparison is interesting because some discrepancy was noted by [@timingargwhite] between masses derived from their simulation and classical TA. Furthermore, the connection between simulations and the Newtonian Eq. \[ODE\] is non-trivial. In the simulations, $\Lambda$ only appears in the scale factor to describe the expansion of the simulated box, while in Eq. \[ODE\], the Lambda term as repulsive force in proper coordinates.
The outline of the paper is as follows: In Section 2 we solve Eq. \[ODE\] numerically so that we could directly compare the behaviour of the TA with and without Lambda, and apply both to the LG, indicating a derived mass 13% higher from the TA with $\Lambda$ as compared to the classical TA. In Section 3, we compare the TA with $\Lambda$ against simulations with the motivation of calibrating the TA model is even after $\Lambda$ was included. Section 4 discusses the implications of our results.
Application to Local Group
==========================
Four input parameters are required to solve Eq. 1 for the mass $M$. For ease of comparison with [@timingargwhite], we assume at the present epoch the physical separation between MW and M31 is $r= 784 \pm 21$kpc ([@stanek1998]), and the radial velocity is $v=-130 \pm 8\,\textrm{km}\,\textrm{s}^{-1}$ ([@M31transverse] as used by [@timingargwhite]). We note that unlike our radial model, [@M31transverse] assumed a model with transverse motion of M31, however we use their $v$ for simplicity. For the cosmological parameters, we use the recent Planck CMB experiment values: the Cosmological Constant term $\Omega_{\Lambda} = \Lambda/3H_0^2$ where $\Omega_{\Lambda} = 0.69 \pm 0.02$ and $H_0 = 67.4 \pm 1.4$km/sec/Mpc, and the age of the Universe is $13.81 \pm 0.06$Gyr ([@planck]).
![The projected distance between MW and M31 according to Eq. \[ODE\] for the radial motion and analytic equation for $\mta = 5.30 \times 10^{12}\,\text{M}_{\sun}$. We see that the traditional analytic solution agrees with the numerical solution for the case where $\Lambda = 0$. In the case where $\Omega_{\Lambda} = 0.69$, we find a longer age of the Universe (see text for explanation).[]{data-label="fig:radialobs"}](radial_plot_obs_planck.pdf)
![The radial equation including the Dark Energy term has $r=0$ at $t=0$ at $\mtade = 5.95 \times 10^{12}\,\text{M}_{\sun}$, which is the value that results from the observed $r, v, t$, and $\Lambda$, as given in the text. In the case where $\Omega_{\Lambda} = 0.69$, we now find that the age of the Universe has shortened compared with Fig. \[fig:radialobs\].[]{data-label="fig:radialshift"}](radial_plot_shift_planck.pdf)
It can be seen from Fig. \[fig:radialobs\] that both the analytic and non-Lambda $r(t)$ curves are identical and that they converge to the expected radius of $r = 0$ when time $t = 0$, i.e. that the MW and M31 were coincident at the beginning of the universe, as the TA assumes. For the classical TA, we derive a Timing Argument mass of $\mta = (5.30 \pm 0.47) \times 10^{12}\,\text{M}_{\sun}$, where the statistical error was estimated by propagating the above errors on input parameters through the TA mass model and then adding them in quadrature. However, in the presence of Dark Energy for the same mass, the curve $r(t)$ reaches zero 4 Gyr before the Big Bang. According to the TA, there are two points on the curve where the radial separation and velocity are known: at the beginning of the universe, and at the present time. Therefore, we have to find the mass which forces the curve $r(t)$ in the presence of Dark Energy to begin at $r=0$ at $t=0$ (see Fig.\[fig:radialshift\]). By an iterative process, we derived $\mtade = (5.95 \pm 0.52) \times 10^{12}\,\mathrm{M_{\sun}}$. This shows that the Dark Energy term would have a significant effect on TA mass estimates for the LG, increasing it by 12%.
This is illustrated in Fig.\[fig:massvtime\], which is similar to Fig. 1 of [@chernin2009] and [@binneytremaine] (note that their input infall parameter and assumed cosmology are somewhat different from ours), who found an increased mass estimate of 15%, which is similar to our findings. To derive the most up-to-date mass of the LG, we use now the latest infall values of $r = 770 \pm 40$kpc and $v=-109.3 \pm 4.4\,\textrm{km}\,\textrm{s}^{-1}$ from [@vdm12] to calculate the mass estimate with and without Dark Energy. Using this $r$ and $v$, we get $\mta = (4.17\pm0.89) \times 10^{12}\,\text{M}_{\sun}$, and $\mtade = (4.73 \pm 1.03) \times 10^{12}\,\text{M}_{\sun}$, or a mass increase of 13%.
![For assumed $r, v, t$, and $\Omega_{\Lambda}$ as given in the text, the classical TA mass estimate is $M_{TA}=5.30 \pm 0.47 \times10^{12}\,\text{M}_{\sun}$, as compared with an effective TA mass that incorporates Dark Energy of $M_{TA \Lambda}=5.95 \pm 0.52 \times10^{12}\,\text{M}_{\sun}$ []{data-label="fig:massvtime"}](mass_v_time.pdf)
The physical interpretation of this result is that due to the repulsive nature of Dark Energy, it would take more mass to overcome the outward push from Dark Energy in order for the system to find itself in the configuration that we see today.
Simulations
===========
![Histogram showing the distribution of the average mass ratios found by bootstrapping the 16 simulation pairs for 1000 times.[]{data-label="fig:bootstraphist"}](mass_ratios_hist.pdf)
The TA model is extremely simplistic. While we have modified it above to incorporate $\Lambda$, there are other effects not taken into account in this model, such as tidal forces, non-radial motions etc. The only way to verify its validity is by testing it against N-body simulations.We used galaxy pairs that were generated by the CLUES simulation which was run by [@CLUES]. The galaxy pairs chosen were those that resembled the Local Group in terms of radius, virial mass, and approach velocity. These galaxy pairs were generated from simulations using Gadget-2 code, using the cosmological parameters from WMAP5 ([@wmap5year]). For our TA analysis of these simulation pairs, we assumed parameters close to those of WMAP5 for consistency, as opposed to the analysis we did for the LG, where we used current Planck 2013 values.
From the simulation data, 16 galaxy pairs were selected that displayed similar morphology to that of the LG: the pairs have similar masses, radial distances, and velocities when compared to M31 and the Milky Way. The data for each simulated galaxy pair was used to set the initial conditions for our radial differential equation model. The TA masses were then evaluated for both the Dark Energy and the classical ($\Lambda = 0$) cases. The resulting mass estimates were then compared to the virial masses that were determined from the simulation data to see if the addition of the Dark Energy term had a significant effect on the TA mass estimations.
As can be seen in Table \[simtable\], the resulting TA mass estimates are consistently higher when the influence of $\Lambda$ is included in the TA model. The mass estimates including Dark Energy led to a TA mass ratio of $\frac{\langle\mtade\rangle}{\langle\mta\rangle} = 1.13$, or an average increase of 13% over classical mass estimates. This is in accord with the 13% mass increase that we found for the LG when using input parameters from [@vdm12].
![The distribution of TA mass estimates, showing that as mass increases, the difference between the classical $M_{\textrm{TA}}$ and $M_{\textrm{TA}\Lambda}$ also increases.[]{data-label="fig:massratios"}](mass_ratios_dist.pdf)
Pair ID $M_{vir}$ $M_{\textrm{TA}}$ $M_{\textrm{TA}\Lambda}$
--------- ----------- ------------------- -------------------------- -- -- --
**LG** **4.0** **5.30** **5.95**
1 5.80 2.78 3.50
2 4.24 0.51 0.55
3 4.22 0.43 0.47
4 4.05 4.39 4.84
5 3.04 0.96 1.14
6 2.91 3.91 4.58
7 2.67 3.42 3.97
8 2.53 1.84 1.99
9 2.55 2.74 2.98
10 2.97 3.40 3.79
11 1.72 0.73 0.75
12 2.69 2.09 2.51
13 2.84 2.30 2.66
14 1.47 4.43 5.15
15 1.07 0.26 0.28
16 0.83 0.81 0.89
: The virial masses and calculated TA masses, both with and without Dark Energy, for the LG and the 16 LG-like pairs from the CLUES simulation. Masses are given in units of $10^{12}\,\text{M}_{\sun}$. []{data-label="simtable"}
We wish now to use the simulations to calibrate the derived TA masses with the virial masses, and to quantify the systematic uncertainties. In order to check the robustness to outliers (e.g. pair number 14) , the 16 pairs were used in a bootstrap analysis, where 1000 sets of 16 pairs were created allowing repetition, and the average mass ratios found for each of the 1000 sets. The distribution of the average values for the ratios of virial mass to classical TA mass $\frac{\langle\mvir\rangle}{\langle\mta\rangle}$ and virial mass to Dark Energy TA mass $\frac{\langle\mvir\rangle}{\langle\mtade\rangle}$ is shown in the histogram in Fig. \[fig:bootstraphist\]. The overall average mass ratios from the bootstrap analysis were $\frac{\langle\mvir\rangle}{\langle\mta\rangle} = 1.34 \pm 0.26$ and $\frac{\langle\mvir\rangle}{\langle\mtade\rangle} = 1.04 \pm 0.16$. The average ratio of Dark Energy TA mass to classical TA mass from the bootstrap analysis was $\frac{\langle\mtade\rangle}{\langle\mta\rangle} = 1.29 \pm 0.15$ (and similarly for the median). This somewhat differs from the above ratio of 13% which is a reflection of the large scatter in the data.
In [@timingargwhite], they analysed LCDM N-body simulations and found a calibration ratio of TA mass to $M_{200}$ mass (which somewhat differs from $\mvir$) for the LG to be $\frac{M_{200}}{\mta} \approx 1.6$ where $M_{200} = 5.27 \times10^{12}\,\text{M}_{\sun}$. In their paper, they only considered the classical TA and pointed out this discrepancy between the masses. Similarly, Bar Asher & Hoffman (unpublished 2010) found a ratio of $\mvir / \mta = 1.55 \pm 0.26$ from their LCDM CLUES simulations. We propose that most of the shift can be explained by the fact the classical TA model has historically neglected to include Dark Energy.
Discussion
==========
In this study we have modified the classical TA to include the effect of the Cosmological Constant. We find in the case of the LG (using values from [@vdm12]) and the latest parameters from Planck that the TA mass is 13% higher when $\Lambda$ is included in the TA. This agrees with earlier contributions from [@chernin2009]. Lynden-Bell (2013) derived an approximate analytical solution that gives a very similar mass increase. We believe that this explains in part the discrepancy found by [@timingargwhite] between their LCDM simulations and the classical TA (in the absence of Dark Energy). We conclude that this TA example illustrates that in physical coordinates $\Lambda$ has imprints on Megaparsec scales.
When we repeat our TA analysis with and without Dark Energy over 16 LG-like pairs from the CLUES simulation, we find an average increase of 13% over classical TA masses. Applying it to the LG mass estimation we find a calibrated $\mvir = (4.92 \pm 1.08 \textrm{(obs.)} \pm 0.79 \textrm{(sys.)} )\times 10^{12} M_{\sun}$. However, even with the inclusion of $\Lambda$, the TA may not capture the reality of nature because of tidal effects ([@TAtidal]), and also because the objects are not point-like. Additionally, in the TA, all motion is assumed to be purely radial, ignoring any transverse motion. Despite the complexity of the problem, we find that the systematic effects account to only 16%, compared with the 21% attributed to the observational errors on the input parameters. This conclusion should be further investigated with a larger number of simulation pairs, and with a wider range of Dark Energy models.
The Timing Argument by [@kahnwoltjer1959] was among the first methods that illustrated the dark matter problem (e.g. [@freeman2013] for historical perspective). Given the latest results on baryon fraction from cosmology, where $\Omega_b/\Omega_m = 0.185 \pm 0.003$, we can speculate that under the simplistic assumption that the LG baryon fraction is the same as the universal one, then $(0.910 \pm 0.015) \times 10^{12}\,\text{M}_{\sun}$ of the LG virial mass is in baryonic form, where the erros bar here is just due to the uncertainty in the universal baryonic fraction.
Acknowledgements
================
We thank O. Host for his help with the numerical work, D. Lynden-Bell for deriving an analytic approximation to check our numerical results, and the CLUES Team and S. Bar-Asher for their contribution to the simulation analyses. We also acknowledge helpful discussion with J. Frieman, M. Milgrom and S. White. OL acknowledges a Royal Society Wolfson Research Merit Award, a Leverhulme Senior Research Fellowship and an Advanced Grant from the European Research Council. YH has been supported by the ISF (1013/12).
\[lastpage\]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
[We examine the decay of $Z_1$ in electrons with recent data from LEP. The partial width $\Gamma(Z_1\rightarrow e^-e^+)$ is studied in the framework of a left-right symmetric model with standard electroweak corrections. Processes measured near the resonance has served to measure the neutral coupling constants very precisely, which is useful to set bounds on the parameters of the model. This partial decay occurs in the resonance zone. As a consecuence the process is independent of the mass of the additional $Z_2$ heavy gauge boson which appears in this kind of models and so we have the mixing angle $\f$ between the left and the right bosons as the only additional parameter. In this paper we take advantage of this fact to set a bound for $\f$: $-9\times 10^{-3}\leq\f\leq
4\times 10^{-3}$, which is in agreement with other constraints previously reported.]{}
---
[*CINVESTAV-FIS-02/95*]{}
[**CONSTRAINTS ON $Z_1$ - $Z_2$ MIXING FROM THE DECAY $Z_1\rightarrow e^-e^+$ IN THE LEFT-RIGHT SYMMETRIC MODEL**]{}
[M. Maya $^1$, O. G. Miranda $^2$]{}\
$^1$Facultad de Ciencias Físico Matemáticas Universidad Autónoma de Puebla A. P. 1364, 72000, Puebla, México\
$^2$ Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados del IPN Dpto. de Física, A. P. 14-740, México 07000, D. F., México, (e-mail: [email protected])
[*(Submitted to [**Z. Phys. C**]{})*]{}
Introduction
============
The Standard Model (SM) \[1\] of the electroweak interaction between the fermions has resisted all tests within the limits of the experimental errors. On the other hand there are several questions for which the SM have not answer. One of these is the origin of the parity violation at the present energies. The Left-Right symmetric models (LR) based on the $SU(2)_R\times SU(2)_L\times U(1)$ group \[2\] give an answer to that problem, since restore the parity symmetry at high energies and give their violation at low energies as a result of the breaking of gauge symmetry. At present the experiments are finest and we have excellent measures of neutral processes so we can put better restrictions to the parameters of the LR model. In the present work we consider the partial decay width for the neutral boson in an electron-positron pair, as is measured at LEP, in the framework of the LR model with two neutral bosons: $Z_1$ which is predominantly left and $Z_2$ which is predominantly right and heavier. The partial width $\Gamma(Z_1\rightarrow e^-e^+)$ can be written as a function of the mixing angle $\f$ between $W_L^3$, $W_R^3$ and $B$ gauge bosons of the model to give the physical bosons $Z_1$, $Z_2$ and the photon, being $\f$ the only extra parameter besides the SM parameters. We use the recent LEP results \[3\] for the neutral coupling constant $g_{_A}$ for constraining the mixing angle $\f$ and found that $g_{_A}$ is a good place to look for constraints on new physics. The fact that the decay $Z_1\rightarrow e^-e^+$ occurs at the energies near the resonance of the $Z_1$ gives a good place for looking for new physics.\
In the Sec. 2 we describe the model with the Higgs sector having two doublets and one bidoublet and we find the masses of the physical bosons. In Sec. 3 we calculate the decay rate $\Gamma(Z_1\rightarrow e^-e^+)$ including radiative corrections and using the LEP data we find the constraint for $\f$ and in Sec. 4 we summarizes the results.
The LR model
============
We consider a LR model having one bidoublet $\Phi$ and two doublets $\chi_{_L}$, $\chi_{_R}$ whose vacuum expectation values break the gauge symmetry to give a mass to the right gauge bosons heavier than the mass of the left ones. This is the origin of the parity violation at low energies \[4\], that is, at energies available at actual accelerators and reactors. The lagrangian for the Higgs sector of the model is given by \[5\] \_[LR]{}=(D\_\_[\_L]{})\^(D\^\_[\_L]{}) +(D\_\_[\_R]{})\^(D\^\_[\_R]{})+Tr(D\_)\^(D\^). In this lagrangian appears the covariant derivatives D\_\_[\_L]{}&=&\_\_[\_L]{} -ig\_L\_[\_L]{} -ig’B\_[\_L]{},\
D\_\_[\_R]{}&=&\_\_[\_R]{} -ig\_R\_[\_R]{} -ig’B\_[\_R]{},\
D\_&=&\_ -ig(\_L -).Then in this model there are seven gauge bosons: $W_{L,R}^1$ and $W_{L,R}^2$ that are charged and $W_{L,R}^3$ and $B$ that are neutral. The coupling constants for left and right sector are equal: $g_L=g_R$, since we assume manifiest left-right symmetry \[6\].\
When we introduce the vacuum expectation values of the multiplets of Higgs, i. e. =(
[cc]{} k&0\
0&k’
), =(
[c]{} 0\
v\_L
), =(
[c]{} 0\
v\_R
), in the lagrangian (1), the interaction bosons get their masses. The part of the lagrangian that contains the mass terms for the charged bosons is \_[mass]{}\^C=(
[cc]{}W\_L\^+&W\_R\^+
)M\^C (
[c]{}W\_L\^-\
W\_R\^-
), where $W^{\pm}$ are the linear combinations $$W^{\pm}=\frac{1}{\r}(W^1\mp W^2).$$ The mass matrix $M^C$ is M\^C=(
[cc]{} v\_L\^2+k\^2+k’\^2&-2kk’\
-2kk’&v\_R\^2+k\^2+k’\^2
). Since the process $Z\rightarrow e^-e^+$ is neutral, we fix our attention to the mass lagrangian for the neutral sector: \_[mass]{}\^N= (
[ccc]{}W\_L\^3&W\_R\^3&B
)M\^N (
[c]{}W\_L\^3\
W\_R\^3\
B
), where the mass matrix is given by M\^N=(
[ccc]{} g\^2(v\_L\^2+k\^2+k’\^2)& -g\^2(k\^2+k’\^2) & -gg’v\_L\^2\
-g\^2(k\^2+k’\^2) &g\^2(v\_R\^2+k\^2+k’\^2)& -gg’v\_R\^2\
-gg’v\_L\^2 & -gg’v\_R\^2 & g’\^2(v\_L\^2+v\_R\^2)
). The mass matrices (5) and (7) are diagonalized by orthogonal transformations. The charged mass matrix (5) is diagonalized with a rotation which is parametrized \[6\] by an angle $\zeta$ which is severely restringed \[7\]. The matrix that diagonalize the neutral mass matrix $M^N$ is \[8\] U\^N=(
[ccc]{} c\_Wc\_&-s\_Wt\_Wc\_-r\_Ws\_/c\_W&t\_W(s\_-r\_Wc\_)\
c\_Ws\_&-s\_Wt\_Ws\_+r\_Wc\_/c\_W&-t\_W(c\_+r\_Ws\_)\
s\_W & s\_W & r\_W
), with the definitions $c_W=\cos\t_W$, $s_W=\sin\t_W$, $t_W=\tan\t_W$ and $r_W=\sqrt{\cos{2\t_W}}$, where $\t_W$ is the electroweak mixing angle. Also $c_\f=\cos\f$ and $s_\f=\sin\f$. Here $\f$ can be considered as the angle that mix the left and right handed neutral gauge bosons $W_{L,R}^3$ respectively, and $B$ to give the physical bosons $Z_1$, $Z_2$ and the photon: (
[c]{}Z\_1\
Z\_2\
A
)=U\^N (
[c]{}W\_L\^3\
W\_R\^3\
B
). The diagonalization of (5) and (7) gives the mass of the charged $W^\pm_{1,2}$ and neutral $Z_{1,2}$ physical fields: M\_[W\_[1,2]{}]{}\^2= , M\_[Z\_[1,2]{}]{}\^2=B, respectively, with $$B=\frac{1}{8}[(g^2+g'^2)(v_L^2+v_R^2)+2g^2(k^2+k'^2)],$$ $$C=\frac{1}{64}g^2(g^2+2g'^2)[v_L^2v_R^2+(k^2+k'^2)(v_L^2+v_R^2)].$$ Taking into account that $M_{W_2}^2\gg M_{W_1}^2$, from the expressions for the masses of $M_{Z_1}$ and $M_{Z_2}$ we conclude that the relation $M_{W_1}^2=M_{Z_1}^2\cos^2\theta_W$ still holds in this model.\
To compare with experimental results \[9\], we introduce here a parametrization for matrix (8) used frecuently \[10, 11\]. In this parametrization the mixing angle $\theta_M$ is obtained as follows: first, the gauge fields $W_{3L}$, $W_{3R}$ and $B$ are transformed to interaction fields $Z_L$, $Z_R$ and $A$. The field $Z_R$ does not couple with left-handed currents whereas the photon $A$ interact only with the electromagnetic current. With these conditions, the relation between both sets of intermediate bosons is (
[c]{}Z\_L\
Z\_R\
A
)=U (
[c]{}W\_L\^3\
W\_R\^3\
B
), where U=(
[ccc]{} c\_W & -s\_Wt\_W & -t\_Wr\_W\
0 & r\_W/c\_W & -t\_W\
s\_W & s\_W & r\_W
).
Second, the interacting fields $Z_L$, $Z_R$ and $A$ are transformed to mass eigenstates $Z_1$, $Z_2$ and $A$. The photon do not mix at this stage. The transformation is realized with a matrix $U'$ (
[c]{}Z\_1\
Z\_2\
A
)=U’ (
[c]{}Z\_L\
Z\_R\
A
). The matrix $U'$ is a rotation that leave $A$ invariant: U’=(
[ccc]{} \_M & \_M & 0\
-\_M & \_M & 0\
0 & 0 & 1
), then the complete transformation is (
[c]{}Z\_1\
Z\_2\
A
)=U’U (
[c]{}W\_[3L]{}\
W\_[3R]{}\
B
). We see that the matrix (8) is related to $U'U$ by U\^N=U’U, if we set $\phi=-\theta_M$.
The decay $Z_1\rightarrow e^- e^+$
==================================
From the general lagrangian of the LR model we extract the terms for the neutral interaction of a fermion with the gauge bosons $W^3_{L,R}$ and $B$: \_[int]{}\^N=g(J\^3\_LW\^3\_L+J\^3\_RW\^3\_R)+J\_YB. Inverting the Eq. (9) for the fields $W^3_L$, $W^3_R$ and $B$ and inserting in (12) we find for $Z_1\rightarrow e^-e^+$ \[12\]: \_[int]{}\^N=Z\_1 , where the left (right) current for the electrons are $$J_{L,R}=J_{L,R}^3-\sin^2\theta_W J_{em},$$ and $$J_{em}=J_L^3+J_R^3+\frac{1}{2}J_Y,$$ is the electromagnetic current. From Eq. (19) we can find the amplitude $M$ for the decay of the $Z_1$ boson with polarization $\epsilon^\lambda$ into an electron-positron pair: M= \_\^, with =c\_-s\_, =c\_+r\_Ws\_. If we consider radiative corrections for the standard model then we will have M= \_\^, with g\_[\_[V\_[LR]{}]{}]{}= |[g]{}\_[\_V]{}-s\_g\_[\_[V\_R]{}]{}, g\_[\_[A\_[LR]{}]{}]{}= |[g]{}\_[\_A]{}+s\_g\_[\_[A\_R]{}]{}, here $\bar{g}_{_V}$ ($\bar{g}_{_A}$) is the value for $g_{_V}$ ($g_{_A}$), but including radiative corrections whereas $g_{_{V_R}}$ ($g_{_{A_R}}$) is the value for $g_{_V}$ ($g_{_A}$) but free of radiative corrections. This is because in this kind of models only standard model radiative corrections are taking into account \[11\].\
As we can see, in Eq. (23) we have made definitions for the vector and axial-vector constants as effective coupling constants in the LR model. The plots for $g_{_{V_{LR}}}$ and $g_{_{A_{LR}}}$ (Eqs. (24) and (25) respectively) are shown in Figures 1 and 2 as functions of the left-right mixing angle $\f$ and the electroweak mixing angle $s_W^2$. We can see how $g_{_{V_{LR}}}$ has a stronger dependence on $s_W^2$ than on $\f$, while $g_{_{A_{LR}}}$ presents the opposite situation, a stronger dependence on $\f$ than on $s_W^2$. This is not a surprise because in the SM at tree level $g_A$ is independent on $s_W^2$, so the only dependence on this angle in $g_A$ is through radiative corrections and through the LR correction, meanwhile in $g_V$ the $s_W^2$ dependence is presented already at tree level what makes it more important. It has been noted \[12\] that $g_{_A}$ is a good place to looking for deviations from the standard model at low energies. As we can see from discussion above and from Figs. 1 and 2 this is also valid for high energy experiments.\
In Fig. 3 we have ploted $g_{_{A_{LR}}}$ as a function of $\f$, where we put $s_W^2=0.2247$ which is a result which comes from the $M_Z$ measure in the On-Shell scheme \[13\]. The values for $\bar{g}_{V}$ and $\bar{g}_{A}$ are given by \[13\] |[g]{}\_[V]{}= (-+2\_f\^2\_W), |[g]{}\_[A]{}=(-), with $\rho_f=1.0031$ and $\kappa_f=1+0.0031/\tan^2\theta_W$. The values for $g_{V_R}$ and $g_{A_R}$ are those with $\rho_f=\kappa_f=1$. The horizontal lines in the plot give us the experimental region of Ref. \[3\]: $$g_{_A}^{exp}=-0.4998\pm 0.0014,$$ with a 90% C. L.. With this experimental data from LEP for $g_{_A}$ we found for the mixing angle between $Z_1$ and $Z_2$ the constraint - 910\^[-3]{}410\^[-3]{}, with a 90% C. L.. This limit is in good agreement with theoretical results \[14\] previously reported. In our computation the advantage is that the fit is independent on the mass of the $Z_2$ heavy gauge boson because we are in the $Z_1$ resonance zone. Our result also agrees with the experimental estimation of Ref. \[9\], if we take the angle $\theta_M$ of that reference as the negative of $\phi$ as was explained in Sec. 2.
Summary
=======
As a conclusion we can say that $g_{_{A}}$ is a good place for looking for constraints on the mixing angle $\f$ and in general for new physics because it has not a strong dependence on the electroweak mixing angle $\sin^2\theta_W$ which has different values depending on the experiment and on the renormalization scheme \[13\]. Besides, studing $g_{_A}$ in the resonance zone has the extra advantage that the mass of an extra neutral heavy boson does not appear in the computation, leaving only an extra parameter in the case of the LR model and in any other model with only one additional neutral gauge boson as in the case, for example, of the $SU(2)_L\times U(1)\times U(1)$ coming from $E_6$ models. Further, this computation has the virtue that is necessary only one experimental quantity, that is, the axial coupling constant $g_A$.
[**Acknowledgments**]{}We would to thank Miguel Angel Soriano for useful discussions. This work was supported in part by CONACYT-México.
[99]{}
S. L. Glashow: [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**22**]{} (1961) 579; S. Weinberg: Phys. Rev. Lett, 19 (1967) 1264; A. Salam: in [*Elementary Particle Theory*]{}, Ed. N. Svartholm (Almquist and Wiskell, Stockholm, 1968) 367. J. C. Pati, A. Salam: [*Phys. Rev.*]{} D[**10**]{} (1974) 275; R. N. Mohapatra, J. C. Pati: [*Phys. Rev.*]{} D[**11**]{} (1975) 566, [*ib*]{} 2558; R. N. Mohapatra: in [*Quarks, Leptons and Beyond*]{}, Ed. H. Fritzsch [*et al*]{}, Nato ASI Series B. Vol. 122 (Plenum, New York, 1985) 219. M. Acciarri et al., L3 Coll.: [*Z. Phys.*]{} C[**62**]{} (1994) 551. R. N. Mohapatra: [*Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.*]{} [**26**]{} (1992) 1. G. Senjanovic: [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B[**153**]{} (1979) 334. M. A. B. Beg, R. V. Budny, R. Mohapatra, A. Sirlin: [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**22**]{} (1977) 1252. M. Aquino, A. Fernández, A. García: [*Phys. Lett.*]{} B[**261**]{} (1991) 280. J. Polak, M. Zralek: [*Nucl. Phys.*]{} B[**363**]{} (1991) 385. O. Adriani et al., L3 Coll.: [*Phys. Lett.*]{} B [**306**]{} (1993) 187. J. Sirkka: hep-ph/9410227 preprint. O. G. Miranda, M. Maya, R. Huerta: [*Phys. Rev.*]{} D[**49**]{} (1994) 6148. P. Langacker, M. Luo, A. K. Mann: [*Rev. Mod. Phys.*]{} [**64**]{} (1992) 87. Particle Data Group, L. Montanet et al.:[*Phys. Rev.*]{} D[**50**]{} (1994) 1173. J. Polak, M. Zralek: [*Phys. Rev.*]{} D[**46**]{} (1992) 3871.
Fig. 1 Plot of $g_{_{V_{LR}}}$ as a function of $s_W^2$ and $\f$. $g_{_{V_{LR}}}$ is highly dependent on $s_W^2$.
Fig. 2 Plot of $g_{_{A_{LR}}}$ as a function of $s_W^2$ and $\f$. $g_{_{A_{LR}}}$ is almost independent on $s_W^2$ compared with the dependence on $\f$.
Fig. 3 Plot of $g_{_{A_{LR}}}$ as a function of the LR parameter $\f$ with the value $s_W^2=0.2247$. The horizontal lines give the experimental region with\
a 90 % C. L.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Abstract:</span> In this paper we study optimal estimates for two functionals involving the anisotropic $p$-torsional rigidity $T_p(\Omega)$, $1<p<+\infty$. More precisely, we study $\Phi(\Omega)=\frac{T_p(\Omega)}{|\Omega|M(\Omega)}$ and $\Psi(\Omega)=\frac{T_p(\Omega)}{|\Omega|[R_{F}(\Omega)]^{\frac{p}{p-1}}}$, where $M(\Omega)$ is the maximum of the torsion function $u_{\Omega}$ and $R_F(\Omega)$ is the anisotropic inradius of $\Omega$.
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Keywords:</span> torsional rigidity, anisotropic operators, optimal estimates
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">MSC 2010:</span> 49Q10, 35J25
author:
- |
Francesco Della Pietra, Nunzia Gavitone, Serena Guarino Lo Bianco\
[*Università degli studi di Napoli Federico II, Dipartimento di Matematica e Applicazioni “R. Caccioppoli”*]{}\
[*Via Cintia, Monte S. Angelo - 80126 Napoli, Italia.*]{}[^1]
title: On functionals involving the torsional rigidity related to some classes of nonlinear operators
---
Introduction
============
Let $F : \mathbb{R}^N \to [0, +\infty[$, $N\ge 2$, be a convex, even, $1$-homogeneous and $C^{3,\beta}(\mathbb{R}^N\setminus \{0\})$ function such that $[F^{p}]_{\xi\xi}\text{ is positive definite in } {\mathbb{R}}^{N}\setminus\{0\}$, $1<p<+\infty$. The anisotropic $p-$laplacian is the operator defined by $$\mathcal Q_{p}u:=\sum_{i=1}^N \frac{\partial}{\partial x_i} (F(\nabla u)^{p-1}F_{\xi_i}(\nabla u)).$$ For $p=2$, $\mathcal Q_2$ is the so-called Finsler Laplacian, while when $F(\xi)= |\xi|$ is the Euclidean norm, $\mathcal Q_p$ reduces to the well known $p$-Laplace operator. Given a bounded domain $\Omega$ in $\mathbb{R}^{N}$, let us consider the torsion problem for $\mathcal Q_p$: $$\label{intro:pb_tor}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}-\mathcal Q_{p}u=1 &\text{in}\ \Omega \\
u=0 &\text{on}\ \partial\Omega.
\end{array}
\right.$$ The anisotropic $p$-torsional rigidity of $\Omega$ is the number $T_p(\Omega)>0$ defined by $$ T_p(\Omega)=\int_\Omega F(\nabla u_{\Omega})^p dx = \int_\Omega u_{\Omega} dx,$$ where $u_{\Omega}\in W_0^{1,p}(\Omega)$ is the torsion function, that is the unique solution of .
The main aim of the paper is the study of optimal estimates for the following two functionals involving $T_p(\Omega)$: $$\Phi(\Omega)=\frac{T_p(\Omega)}{|\Omega|M(\Omega)},\qquad
\Psi(\Omega)=\frac{T_p(\Omega)}{|\Omega|[R_{F}(\Omega)]^{q}}.$$ Here and after we will denote by $q$ the Hölder conjugate of $p$, $q=\frac{p}{p-1}$, by $M(\Omega)$ the maximum of the torsion function $u_{\Omega}$ and by $R_F(\Omega)$ the anisotropic inradius of $\Omega$ (see Section \[notprel\] for the precise definitions). Observe that the functionals $\Phi$ and $\Psi$ are scaling invariant with respect to the domain. Indeed: $$T_p(t\Omega)= t^{N+q}T_p(\Omega),\quad |t\Omega|=t^{N}|\Omega|,\quad M(t\Omega)=t^{q}M(\Omega), \quad R_F(t \Omega)=t R_F(\Omega) .$$ Our main result is the following.
\[main\] Let $\Omega$ be a convex bounded domain in ${\mathbb{R}}^{N}$. It holds that
1. $\dfrac{q}{N^{q-1}(N+q)} \le\Phi(\Omega)\le \dfrac{q}{q+1}.$
The right-hand side inequality is optimal for a suitable sequence of thinning rectangles.
2. $
\displaystyle \frac{1}{N^{q-1}}\frac{1}{N+q} \le \Psi(\Omega) \le \frac{1}{q+1}.$
The left-hand side inequality holds as an equality if and only if $\Omega$ is a Wulff shape, that is a ball in the dual norm $F^{o}$; the right-hand side inequality is optimal for a suitable sequence of thinning rectangles.
When $F=\mathcal E$ is the Euclidean norm, there is a wide literature on sharp estimates for $T_{p}(\Omega)$ related to several geometrical quantities depending on $\Omega$. For example, in the classical case of the torsional rigidity for the Laplace operator ($p=2$), with $N=2$, it is known that $$\frac{1}{8} \le \Psi(\Omega)= \frac{T_{2}(\Omega)}{R^{2}_{\mathcal E}|\Omega|}\le \frac{1}{3},$$ where $R_{\mathcal E}(\Omega)$ is the standard Euclidean inradius of $\Omega$. The left-hand side inequality is due to Pólya and Szegő (see [@pz]), while the right-hand side inequality was proved by Makai in [@m]. As regards the case $p\ne 2$, in [@fgl], among other results, estimates for $\Psi(\Omega)$ are given in the planar case, obtaining an upper bound and a sharp lower bound. In the anisotropic case, in [@bgm] the estimates in *ii)* are proved for $p=2$.
As regards the functional $\Phi(\Omega)$, up to our knowledge, it seems that the only known result is in the Euclidean case for $p=2$. Indeed, in [@hlp] the authors prove the following estimates: $$\displaystyle \frac{1}{(N+1)^2}\le\Phi(\Omega)=\frac{T_{2}(\Omega)}{|\Omega|M(\Omega)} \le \frac{2}{3}.$$ Moreover, they show the optimality of the upper bound, while they conjecture that the lower bound is not optimal, and that the sharp constant in the plane is $\frac 13$, achieved on a sequence of thinning isosceles triangles. In our result, we improve the constant ${(N+1)^{-2}}$, replacing it with $[N(N+2)]^{-1}$. Anyway, we believe that $[N(N+2)]^{-1}$ is not optimal, and for $N=2$ we show that there is a sequence of thinning isosceles triangles $\tau_n$ such that $\Phi(\tau_n)\to \frac 13$.
In order to prove our main result, among the main tools involved, the following estimate for the maximum $M(\Omega)$ of the torsion function $u_{\Omega}$ plays a key role.
\[intro:sperb\] Let $\Omega$ be a bounded convex domain in $ {\mathbb{R}}^{N}$, $ N \ge 2$, and let $R_F(\Omega)$ the anisotropic inradius of $\Omega$. Let $u_\Omega$ be the solution of . For $1<p< +\infty$ it holds that $$\label{intro:stima_max}
\frac{R_{F}^{q}(\Omega)}{qN^{q-1}}\le M(\Omega)\le \frac{R_{F}^{q}(\Omega)}{q}.$$ The right-hand side inequality is optimal for a suitable sequence of thinning $N$-rectangular domains. The other inequality, holds as an equality if and only if $\Omega$ is the Wulff shape $\mathcal W_{R}(x_{0})$.
The upper bound in has been proved in [@pay] in the Euclidean case for $p=2$, $N=2$ (see also [@sp]), by using a $\mathcal P$-function computation and a maximum principle. Anyway, many other estimates for the torsion function are known; the interested reader can refer, for example, to [@vdB; @bor; @hlp] and the reference therein contained. We prove inequality generalizing the $\mathcal P$-function technique to the case $1<p<+\infty$, and in the anisotropic case.
Finally, we recall that in the Euclidean case, several other estimates for the $p$-torsional rigidity, involving different geometrical quantities, are known (for the Eucidean case, see for instance [@vdBBB; @vdBFNT; @sp] ($p=2$), [@fgl] ($1<p<+\infty$), and [@dgmana] for the anisotropic case ($1<p<+\infty$)).
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we fix some notation and recall prelimiary results about Finsler metrics and the anisotropic $p$-torsional rigidity. In Section 3 we prove Theorem \[intro:sperb\] by using the $\mathcal P$-function method. Finally, in Section 4 we give the proof of the main Theorem \[main\]. We will split it in several partial results.
Notation and preliminaries {#notprel}
==========================
Throughout the paper we will consider a convex even 1-homogeneous function $$\xi\in {\mathbb{R}}^{N}\mapsto F(\xi)\in [0,+\infty[,$$ that is a convex function such that $$\label{eq:omo}
F(t\xi)=|t|F(\xi), \quad t\in {\mathbb{R}},\,\xi \in {\mathbb{R}}^{N},$$ and such that $$\label{eq:lin}
a|\xi| \le F(\xi),\quad \xi \in {\mathbb{R}}^{N},$$ for some constant $a>0$. The hypotheses on $F$ imply there exists $b\ge a$ such that $$\label{upb}
F(\xi)\le b |\xi|,\quad \xi \in {\mathbb{R}}^{N}.$$ Moreover, throughout the paper we will assume that $F\in C^{3,\beta}(\mathbb R^{N}\setminus \{0\})$, and $$\label{strong}
[F^{p}]_{\xi\xi}(\xi)\text{ is positive definite in } {\mathbb{R}}^{N}\setminus\{0\},$$ with $1<p<+\infty$.
The hypothesis on $F$ ensures that the operator $$\operatorname{\mathcal Q_{p}}u:= \operatorname{div}\left(\frac{1}{p}\nabla_{\xi}[F^{p}](\nabla u)\right)$$ is elliptic, hence there exists a positive constant $\gamma$ such that $$\frac1p\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}{\nabla^{2}_{\xi_{i}\xi_{j}}[F^{p}](\eta)
\xi_i\xi_j}\ge
\gamma |\eta|^{p-2} |\xi|^2,$$ for some positive constant $\gamma$, for any $\eta \in
{\mathbb R^n}\setminus\{0\}$ and for any $\xi\in {\mathbb R^n}$.
We stress that for $p\ge 2$ the condition $$\nabla^{2}_{\xi}[F^{2}](\xi)\text{ is positive definite in } {\mathbb{R}}^{N}\setminus\{0\},$$ implies .
The polar function $F^o\colon {\mathbb{R}}^N \rightarrow [0,+\infty[$ of $F$ is defined as $$F^o(v)=\sup_{\xi \ne 0} \frac{\langle \xi, v\rangle}{F(\xi)}.$$ It is easy to verify that also $F^o$ is a convex function which satisfies properties and . Furthermore, $$F(v)=\sup_{\xi \ne 0} \frac{\langle \xi, v\rangle}{F^o(\xi)}.$$ From the above property it holds that $$\label{imp}
|\langle \xi, \eta\rangle| \le F(\xi) F^{o}(\eta), \qquad \forall \xi, \eta \in {\mathbb{R}}^{N}.$$ The set $$\mathcal W = \{ \xi \in {\mathbb{R}}^N \colon F^o(\xi)< 1 \}$$ is the so-called Wulff shape centered at the origin. We put $\kappa_n=|\mathcal W|$, where $|\mathcal W|$ denotes the Lebesgue measure of $\mathcal W$. More generally, we denote with $\mathcal W_r(x_0)$ the set $r\mathcal W+x_0$, that is the Wulff shape centered at $x_0$ with measure $\kappa_nr^n$, and $\mathcal W_r(0)=\mathcal W_r$.
We observe that $F$ is the support function of $\overline{\mathcal W}$. In general for a nonempty closed convex set $K \subset {\mathbb{R}}^N$, the support function $h_K$ is defined by $$\label{suppfunc}
h_K(x):=\sup \{ \langle x, \xi \rangle, \xi \in K\}, \quad \text{ for } x \in {\mathbb{R}}^N .$$ The following properties of $F$ and $F^o$ hold true: $$\begin{gathered}
\label{prima}
\langle F_\xi(\xi) , \xi \rangle= F(\xi), \quad \langle F_\xi^{o} (\xi), \xi \rangle
= F^{o}(\xi),\qquad \forall \xi \in
{\mathbb{R}}^N\setminus \{0\}
\\
\label{seconda} F( F_\xi^o(\xi))=F^o( F_\xi(\xi))=1,\quad \forall \xi \in
{\mathbb{R}}^N\setminus \{0\},
\\
\label{terza}
F^o(\xi) F_\xi( F_\xi^o(\xi) ) = F(\xi)
F_\xi^o\left( F_\xi(\xi) \right) = \xi\qquad \forall \xi \in
{\mathbb{R}}^N\setminus \{0\}. \end{gathered}$$
Anisotropic mean curvature
--------------------------
Let $\Omega$ be a $C^{2}$ bounded domain, and $\nu(x)$ be the unit outer normal at $x\in{\partial}\Omega$, and let $u\in C^{2}(\overline\Omega)$ such that $\Omega_t=\{u>t\}$, ${\partial}\Omega_t=\{u=t\}$ and $\nabla u\ne 0$ on ${\partial}\Omega_t$. The anisotropic outer normal $n_{F}$ to ${\partial}\Omega_t$ is given by $$n_F(x)= F_{\xi}(\nu(x))= F_{\xi}\left(-\nabla u\right),\quad x\in {\partial}\Omega.$$ It holds $$F^o(n_F)=1.$$ The anisotropic mean curvature of $\partial \Omega_t$ is defined as $$\label{H_F}
\mathcal H_{F}(x)= \operatorname{div}\left( n_{F}(x)\right)=
\operatorname{div}\left[ \nabla_{\xi}
F\left(-{\nabla u(x)}\right) \right], \quad x\in
{\partial}\Omega_t.$$ It holds that $$\label{der_nf}
\frac{{\partial}u}{{\partial}n_F}= \nabla u\cdot F_{\xi}(-\nabla u)= -F(\nabla u).$$ In [@xiath] it has been proved that for a smooth function $u$, on its level sets $\{u=t\}$ it holds $$\label{xiaformula}
\mathcal Q_2 u= \frac{{\partial}u}{{\partial}n_F}\mathcal H_F+\frac{{\partial}^2 u}{{\partial}n_F^2},$$ where $\frac{{\partial}u}{{\partial}n_F}=\nabla u\cdot n_F$. In the next result we generalize for $\mathcal Q_p u$.
Let $u$ be a $C^2(\overline\Omega)$ function with a regular level set ${\partial}\Omega_t$. Then we have $$\label{Q_H}
\mathcal Q_p u=F^{p-2}(\nabla u) \left( \frac{{\partial}u}{{\partial}n_F}\mathcal H_F+(p-1)\frac{{\partial}^2 u}{{\partial}n_F^2}\right),$$ where $\mathcal H_F$ is the anisotropic mean curvature of ${\partial}\Omega_{t}$ as defined in .
By definition of $\mathcal{Q}_p$, and , we have $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{Q}_p u&= \operatorname{div}\left(F^{p-2}(\nabla u) F(\nabla u)F_\xi(\nabla u)\right)\\
&=
F^{p-2}(\nabla u) \left( Q_2u +(p-2) F_{\xi_i}(\nabla u)F_{\xi_j}(\nabla u)u_{x_ix_j}\right)\\
&=F^{p-2}(\nabla u) \left( \frac{{\partial}u}{{\partial}n_F}\mathcal H_F+\frac{{\partial}^2 u}{{\partial}n_F^2} +(p-2) F_{\xi_i}(\nabla u)F_{\xi_j}(\nabla u)u_{x_ix_j}\right)\\
&=F^{p-2}(\nabla u) \left( \frac{{\partial}u}{{\partial}n_F}\mathcal H_F+(p-1)\frac{{\partial}^2 u}{{\partial}n_F^2}\right),\end{aligned}$$ that is the thesis.
Finally we recall the definition of the anisotropic distance from the boundary and the anisotropic inradius.
Let us consider a domain $\Omega$, that is a connected open set of $ {\mathbb{R}}^N$, with non-empty boundary.
The anisotropic distance of $x\in\overline\Omega$ to the boundary of ${\partial}\Omega$ is the function $$d_{F}(x)= \inf_{y\in {\partial}\Omega} F^o(x-y), \quad x\in \overline\Omega.$$
We stress that when $F=|\cdot|$ then $d_F=d_{\mathcal{E}}$, the Euclidean distance function from the boundary.
It is not difficult to prove that $d_{F}$ is a uniform Lipschitz function in $\overline \Omega$ and, using the property of $F$ we have $$ F(\nabla d_F(x))=1 \quad\text{a.e. in }\Omega.$$ Obviously, assuming $\sup_{\Omega} d_{F}<+\infty$, $d_F\in W_{0}^{1,\infty}(\Omega)$ and the quantity $$\label{inrad}
R_{F}(\Omega)=\sup \{d_{F}(x),\; x\in\Omega\},$$ is called anisotropic inradius of $\Omega$.
For further properties of the anisotropic distance function we refer the reader to [@cm07].
Anisotropic TEXT-torsional rigidity
-----------------------------------
In this subsection we summarize some properties of the anisotropic $p$-torsional rigidity. We refer the reader to [@dgmana] for further details.
Let $\Omega$ be a bounded domain in $ {\mathbb{R}}^{N}$, and $1<p<+\infty$. Throughout the paper we will denote by $q$ the Hölder conjugate of $p$, $$q:=\frac{p}{p-1}.$$ Let us consider the torsion problem for the anisotropic $p-$Laplacian $$\label{pb_tor}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}-\mathcal Q_{p}u:=-\operatorname{div}\left(F^{p-1}(\nabla u) F_\xi (\nabla u)\right)=1 &\text{in}\ \Omega \\
u=0 &\text{on}\ \partial\Omega.
\end{array}
\right.$$ By classical result there exists a unique solution of , that we will always denote by $u_{\Omega}$, which is positive in $\Omega$. Moreover, by and being $F\in C^{3}({\mathbb{R}}^{n}\setminus \{0\})$, then $u_{\Omega}\in C^{1,\alpha}(\Omega)\cap C^{3}(\{\nabla u_{\Omega}\ne 0\})$ (see [@ladyz; @tk84]).
In view of the above considerations, we define the $p$-torsional anisotropic rigidity of $\Omega$ the number $T_p(\Omega)>0$ such that $$\label{eq:ptor1}
T_p(\Omega)=\int_\Omega F(\nabla u_{\Omega})^p dx = \int_\Omega u_{\Omega} dx.$$
A characterization of $T_p$ is provided by the equality $T_p(\Omega)=\sigma(\Omega)^{\frac{1}{p-1}}$, where $\sigma(\Omega)$ is the best constant in the Sobolev inequality $$\|\varphi\|_{L^1(\Omega)}^p \le \sigma(\Omega) \|F(\nabla \varphi)\|^p_{L^p(\Omega)},$$ that is $$\label{tors0}
T_p(\Omega)^{p-1} = \sigma(\Omega)= \max_{\substack{\psi \in
W_0^{1,p}(\Omega) \setminus\{0\}}}
\dfrac{\left(\displaystyle\int_\Omega |\psi| \,
dx\right)^p}{\displaystyle\int_\Omega F(\nabla\psi)^p dx},$$ and the solution $u_{\Omega}$ of realizes the maximum in .
It is immediate to see that if $\Omega\subset\tilde\Omega$, then $$\label{monotonia}
T_p(\Omega)\le T_p(\tilde\Omega).$$ Moreover, by the maximum principle it holds that $$\label{monotoniamax}
M(\Omega)\le M(\tilde\Omega),$$ where $M(\Omega)$ is the maximum of the torsion function in $\Omega$.
A consequence of the anisotropic Pólya-Szegő inequality (see [@aflt]) is the following upper bound for $T_p(\Omega)$ in terms of the measure of $\Omega$.
Let $\Omega$ be a bounded open set of $\mathbb R^N$. Then, $$\label{uptor}
T_p(\Omega) \le T_p(\mathcal W_R),$$ where $\mathcal W_R$ is the Wulff shape centered at the origin with the same Lebesgue measure as $\Omega$.
\[pb\_rad\] If $\Omega = \mathcal W_R$, by the simmetry of the problem, $T_p(\mathcal W_R)$ and the solution $u$ of can be explicity calculated. We have: $$\label{pb_rad2}
u_{\mathcal W}(x)= \frac{R^{q}- F^{o}(x)^q}{qN^{q-1}} \quad\text{and}\quad T_p(\mathcal W_R)=\frac{1}{N^{q-1}} \frac{|\mathcal W_R|}{N+q}{R^q}.$$
We point out that the lower bound in statement *ii)* of Theorem \[main\] gives a stability type inequality for . Indeed we have $$0 \le T_p(\mathcal W_R)- T_p(\Omega) \le \frac{1}{8} \left( R^2-R^2_F(\Omega)\right),$$ where $|\mathcal W_R|=|\Omega|.$
An estimate of the maximum of the torsion function
==================================================
In order to give a sharp upper bound for the maximum $M(\Omega)$ of the torsion function $u_{\Omega}$, we will take into account the following $\mathcal P$-function: $$\mathcal P(x)= \frac{p-1}{p} F^p (\nabla u_{\Omega}) + u_{\Omega} - M(\Omega),$$ where $M(\Omega)=\max_{\Omega} u_{\Omega}$. The following result is proved in [@cfv].
\[cfvprop\] Let $\Omega$ be a domain in $ {\mathbb{R}}^{N}$, $ N\ge 2$, and $u_{\Omega}\in W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega)$ be a solution of . Set $$d_{ij}:= \frac{1}{F(\nabla u_{\Omega})}{\partial}_{\xi_{i}\xi_{j}}\left[\frac{F^{p}}{p}\right](\nabla u_{\Omega}),$$ Then it holds that $$\left( d_{ij}\mathcal P_{i} \right)_{j} -b_{k}\mathcal P_{k} \ge 0 \quad\text{ in }\{\nabla u_{\Omega}\ne 0 \}$$ where $$b_{k}=\frac{p-2}{F^{3}(\nabla u_{\Omega})} F_{\xi_{\ell}}(\nabla u_{\Omega})\mathcal P_{x_{\ell}} F_{\xi_{k}}(\nabla u_{\Omega})+\frac{2p-3}{F^{2}(\nabla u_{\Omega})} \left( \frac{F_{\xi_{k}\xi_{\ell}}(\nabla u_{\Omega})\mathcal P_{x_{\ell}}}{p-1} -F_{\xi_{k}}(\nabla u_{\Omega})\right)$$
As a consequence of the previous result we get the following maximum principle for $\mathcal P$.
\[prsperb\] Let $\Omega$ be a bounded $C^{2}$ domain in $ {\mathbb{R}}^{N}$, $ N \ge 2$, with nonnegative anisotropic mean curvature $\mathcal H_{F}\ge 0$ on ${\partial}\Omega$, and $u_{\Omega}$ the torsion function. Then $$\frac{p-1}{p}F^p(\nabla u_{\Omega})+u_{\Omega} \le M(\Omega) \quad \text{ in } \overline{\Omega},$$ that is the function $\mathcal P$ achieves its maximum at the points $x_M \in \Omega$ such that $u_{\Omega}(x_M)=M(\Omega)$.
Let us denote by $E_{u_{\Omega}}$ the set of the critical points of $u_{\Omega}$, that is $E_{u_{\Omega}}=\{x \in \overline\Omega \colon \nabla u_{\Omega}(x) =0\}$. Being ${\partial}\Omega$ $C^{2}$, by the Hopf Lemma (see for example [@ct]), $E_{u_{\Omega}}\cap {\partial}\Omega=\emptyset$.
Applying Proposition \[cfvprop\], the function $\mathcal P$ verifies a maximum principle in the open set $\Omega \setminus E_{u_{\Omega}}$. Then we have $$\max_{\Omega \setminus E_{u_{\Omega}}} \mathcal P = \max_{{\partial}\left(\Omega \setminus E_{u_{\Omega}}\right)}\mathcal P.$$ Hence one of the following three cases occur
1. the maximum point of $\mathcal P$ is on ${\partial}\Omega$;
2. the maximum point of $\mathcal P$ is on $E_u$;
3. the function $\mathcal P $ is constant in $\overline \Omega$.
In order to prove the theorem we have to show that statement 1 cannot happen. Let us compute the derivative of $\mathcal P$ in the direction of the anisotropic normal $n_F$, in the sense of . Hence we get $$\begin{gathered}
\label{derivata}
\frac{{\partial}\mathcal P}{{\partial}n_F}= \dfrac{p-1}{p}\frac{{\partial}}{{\partial}n_F}\left(-\frac{{\partial}u_{\Omega}}{{\partial}n_F}\right)^p+\frac{{\partial}u_{\Omega}}{{\partial}n_F} =-(p-1) \left(-\frac{{\partial}u}{{\partial}n_F}\right)^{p-1} \frac{{\partial}^2 u_{\Omega}}{{\partial}n_F^2}+\frac{{\partial}u_{\Omega}}{{\partial}n_F}=\\= -F(\nabla u_{\Omega}) \mathcal Q_p[u]-F^{p-1}(\nabla u_{\Omega}) \mathcal H_F-F(\nabla u_{\Omega})=-F^{p-1}(\nabla u_{\Omega}) \mathcal H_F,\end{gathered}$$ where last identity follows by . On the other hand, if a maximum point $\bar x$ of $\mathcal P$ is on ${\partial}\Omega$, by Hopf Lemma either $\mathcal P$ is constant in $\overline\Omega$, or $\frac{{\partial}\mathcal P}{{\partial}n_F}(\bar x)> 0$. Hence being $\mathcal H_F\ge 0$ we have a contradiction.
As a consequence of the previous result we get the following optimal estimate for the maximum of $u_{\Omega}$.
\[sperb\] Let $\Omega$ be a bounded convex domain in $ {\mathbb{R}}^{N}$, $ N \ge 2$, and $1<p< +\infty$. It holds that $$\label{stima_max}
\frac{R_{F}^{q}(\Omega)}{qN^{q-1}}\le M(\Omega)\le \frac{R_{F}^{q}(\Omega)}{q}.$$
In the next section we will show that the right-hand side inequality in is optimal on a suitable sequence of thinning rectangles (see Proposition \[rect\] and . We stress that, in general, the quotient $\frac{R^{q}_{F}(\Omega)}{qM(\Omega)}$ approaches the value $1$ also for different sequences of sets (see the example \[exHen\]).
The left-hand side inequality of follows by and . Hence, let us prove the other inequality.
First of all, suppose that $\Omega$ is a $C^2$, strictly convex domain. Let $v$ be a direction in $ {\mathbb{R}}^N$. By Theorem \[prsperb\] and property we have $$\label{der_dir}
\displaystyle \frac{du_{\Omega}}{dv}=\langle \nabla u, v \rangle \le F(\nabla u_{\Omega}) F^o(v) \le \left[ \frac{p}{p-1}\left(M(\Omega)-u_{\Omega}\right)\right]^{\frac{1}{p}}F^o(v),$$ where $M(\Omega)$ is the maximum of $u_{\Omega}$ in $\overline \Omega.$ Let us denote by $x_M$ the point of $\Omega$ such that $M(\Omega )=u_{\Omega}(x_M)$, by $\bar x \in {\partial}\Omega$ such that $F^o(x_M- \bar x)=d_F(x_M)$ and by $v$ the direction of the straight line joining the points $x_m$ and $\bar x$. Then by we get $$\displaystyle \int_{u(\bar x)}^{M(\Omega)} \displaystyle \frac{1}{\left(M(\Omega)-u_{\Omega}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}}du \le \displaystyle \left( \frac{p}{p-1}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}F^o(v)|\bar x-x_{M}|= \left( \frac{p}{p-1}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}F^{o}(\bar x-x_{M}).$$ Being $F^{o}(\bar x-x_{M}) \le R_{F}(\Omega) $, we get $$\left( \frac{p}{p-1}\right)M(\Omega)^{ \frac{p-1}{p}}\le \displaystyle \left( \frac{p}{p-1}\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}R_{F}(\Omega),$$ which gives the estimate for smooth convex domains. To prove the estimate in the case of a general convex body $\Omega$, we proceed by approximation. It is well-known (see for example [@bf]) that a convex body $\Omega$ can be approximated in the Hausdorff distance by an increasing sequence of smooth strictly convex bodies $\Omega_n\subseteq\Omega$. Clearly, $R_F(\Omega_n)\nnearrow R_F(\Omega)$.
Let $u_n\ge 0$ be the torsion function in $\Omega_n$. In order to conclude the proof we have to show that $M(\Omega_n)\to M(\Omega)$ as $n\to\infty$. We first observe that by , $$\label{maxapp}
M(\Omega_n)\le \frac{R_{F}^{q}(\Omega_n)}{q}\le \frac{R_{F}^{q}(\Omega)}{q},$$ hence $u_n$ are bounded in $L^\infty(\Omega_n)$. Furthermore, applying Theorem \[prsperb\] in $\Omega_n$ we have $$\frac{p-1}{p}F^p(\nabla u_n)+u_n \le M(\Omega_n) \quad \text{ in } \overline\Omega_n.$$ Then by property $$\label{app2}
|\nabla u_n| \le C \quad \text{ in } {\overline\Omega}_n.$$ Hence by and , using Ascoli-Arzelà theorem we get that $u_n \to u_{\Omega}$ uniformly in $\Omega$ and this allows to pass to the limit in and the proof is completed.
We point out that if we take $\Omega$ smooth, the thesis of Theorem \[sperb\] holds if we assume only that the anisotropic mean curvature of $\Omega$ is nonnegative.
Proof of Theorem \[main\]
=========================
We split the proof in various theorems.
We first prove the lower bound for $\Psi(\Omega)$ in *ii)*.
\[torsion\] If $\Omega\in\mathbb{R}^N$ is a convex bounded domain, $ N \ge 2$, and $1<p<+\infty$, then $$\label{stimaT}
\frac{T_p(\Omega)}{|\Omega|} \ge \frac{1}{N^{q-1}} \frac{1}{N+q}{R_F(\Omega)^{q}},$$ where $R_F(\Omega)$ is the anisotropic inradius of $\Omega$ defined in . Moreover the equality holds when $\Omega $ is a Wulff shape.
Let us assume first that $\Omega$ is a strictly convex domain and then we remove this assumption with a proof that follows by approximation as in Theorem \[sperb\]. Let us consider as test function into the following $$\varphi(x)= \frac{1-\mathcal K^{o}(x)^q}{qN^{q-1}}$$ where $\mathcal K^{o}$ is the support function of the polar set of $\Omega$, defined in . Then $\Omega=\{\mathcal K^{o}<1\}$. By , we observe that when $\Omega =\mathcal W$ then $\varphi$ is exactly the torsion function of the Wulff shape.
We start computing $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{\Omega} \mathcal K^{o}(x)^q\, dx &= \int_{0}^1 \int_{\mathcal K^o=t} \frac{t^{q}}{|\nabla \mathcal K^o(x)|}\, d\mathcal{H}^{N-1}\, dt = \int_{0}^{1} t^{q} \int_{\mathcal K^o=t} \frac{\mathcal K(\nabla \mathcal K^o(x))}{|\nabla \mathcal K^o|}\, d\mathcal{H}^{N-1}\, dt,\\
&= \int_{0}^{1} t^{q+N-1} \int_{\partial\Omega} \mathcal K(\nu_\Omega (x)) \, d\mathcal{H}^{N-1}\, dt = \frac{1}{N+q} \int_{\partial\Omega} x\cdot \nu_{\Omega}(x) \, d\mathcal{H}^{N-1} \\
&= \frac{1}{N+q} \int_{\Omega} \mbox{div } x \, dx = \frac{N |\Omega|}{N+q},
\end{aligned}$$ where $\mathcal K=(\mathcal K^{o})^{o}$. Then we have $$\label{uguaglianza}
\left(\int_{\Omega} \varphi\, dx \right)^p = \frac{|\Omega|^p}{N^q(N+q)^p}=\left(\frac{|\Omega|}{N^{q-1}(N+q)}\right)^p.$$ Let us now compute $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{\Omega} F^p(\nabla \varphi) \, dx &= \frac{1}{q^p N^q} \int_{\Omega} F^p\left(\nabla (\mathcal K^o(x)^q)\right)\, dx =
\frac{1}{ N^q} \int_{0}^{1}t^{p(q-1)} \int_{\mathcal K^o=t} \frac{F^p(\nabla \mathcal K^o)}{|\nabla \mathcal K^o|}\, d\mathcal{H}^{N-1}\, dt\\[.3cm]
&
= \frac{1}{ N^q} \int_{0}^{1} t^{q+N-1} \int_{\partial\Omega} |\nabla \mathcal K^o|^{p-1} F^p(\nu_\Omega)\, d\mathcal{H}^{N-1}\, dt \\
&=\frac{1}{ N^q} \int_{0}^{1} t^{q+N-1} \int_{\partial\Omega} \frac{F^{p}(\nu_{\Omega})}{\mathcal K^{p-1}(\nu_{\Omega})}\, d\mathcal{H}^{N-1}\, dt,
\end{aligned}$$ where last equality follows by the identity $\mathcal K(\nabla \mathcal K^{o}(x))=1$. Being $\mathcal W_{R_{F}(\Omega)}\subseteq \Omega$, it follows that $\mathcal K(x) \ge R_{F}(\Omega)F(x)$, so we have $$\begin{gathered}
\label{stima}
\int_{\Omega} F^p(\nabla \varphi) \, dx \le \frac{1}{(N+q)N^{q}}\cdot \frac{1}{R_{F}(\Omega)^{p}} \int_{\partial\Omega} \mathcal K(\nu_\Omega (x)) \, d\mathcal{H}^{N-1}=\\ =
\frac{1}{(N+q)N^{q-1}}\cdot \frac{|\Omega|}{R_{F}(\Omega)^{p}}.
\end{gathered}$$ Joining together and , we have the thesis.
Now we prove the validity of without the assumption on the strict convexity of the domain $\Omega$. As in the proof of Theorem \[sperb\], let $\Omega_n$ be a sequence of smooth strictly convex bodies such that $\Omega_n\to\Omega$. Such a convergence ensures that, as $n\to\infty$, $$\label{converg}
|\Omega_n|\to|\Omega|\qquad\hbox{and}\qquad R_F(\Omega_n)\to R_F(\Omega).$$ By , it follows that $$T_p(\Omega)\ge T_p(\Omega_n),$$ and by applying to each $\Omega_n$, we find $$T_p(\Omega)\ge \frac{{|\Omega_n|}}{N^{q-1}(N+q)}R_F(\Omega_n)^q,$$ which, combined with , gives the desired result. Finally we stress that if $\Omega$ is a Wulff shape, the equality case follows from Remark \[pb\_rad\]. On the other hand, if the equality holds in , then equality must hold in , and then $\mathcal K(x)=R_{F}(\Omega)F(x)$, which implies $\Omega=\mathcal W_{R_{F}}$.
Let us consider the functional $$\label{func}
\Phi(\Omega)=\frac{T_p(\Omega)}{|\Omega|M(\Omega)}.$$ As consequence of theorems \[torsion\] and \[sperb\], we can prove the following estimates for which is statement i) of Theorem \[main\].
For any bounded convex domain $\Omega\subset {\mathbb{R}}^N$, $ N\ge 2$, $1<p<+\infty$ it holds that $$\label{bounds}
\frac{q}{N^{q-1}(N+q)} \le\Phi(\Omega)\le \frac{q}{q+1}$$
We first prove the lower bound for the functional $\Phi$. By and we have $$\Phi(\Omega)= \frac{T_p(\Omega)}{|\Omega|M(\Omega)} \ge \frac{q}{N^{q-1}(N+q)},$$ which gives the lower bound in .
In order to prove the inequality in the right-hand side in , by Theorem \[prsperb\] we have $$\frac{p-1}{p}F^p(\nabla u_{\Omega})+u_{\Omega} \le M(\Omega) \quad\text{in } \overline \Omega.$$ Integrating in both sides and recalling , we get $$\left(\frac{p-1}{p}+1\right)T_p(\Omega) \le M(\Omega)|\Omega|,$$ which implies the upper bound in .
In the following last result we prove the upper bound in statement *ii)* of Theorem \[main\], which follows immediately by the preceding results. We stress that in the anisotropic setting, the case $p=2$ was previously considered in [@bgm] with a completely different proof.
\[torsion\_up\] Let $\Omega\in\mathbb{R}^N$ be a bounded convex domain, $ N \ge 2$, $1<p<+\infty$. It holds that $$\label{stimaT2}
\frac{T_p(\Omega)}{|\Omega|} \le \frac{R_F(\Omega)^{q}}{q+1}.$$
By the right-hand side inequality in , and , we have $$\label{catena1}
\frac{T_p(\Omega)}{|\Omega|} \le \frac{q}{q+1} M(\Omega)\le
\frac{R_{F}^{q} (\Omega)}{q+1}.$$
The final part of the section is devoted to prove the optimality of . As a consequence, by this will give the optimality of the right-hand side inequality of , and of .
\[rect\] Let $\O_\varepsilon$ be the $N$-rectangle $]-\varepsilon,{\varepsilon}[\times]-a_2,a_2[\times\ldots\times]-a_N,a_N[$, and suppose that $R_{F}(\Omega)={\varepsilon}F^{o}(e_{1})$. Then $$\lim_{{\varepsilon}\to 0^+}\frac{T_{p}(\O_{\varepsilon})}{\left(R_{F}(\O_{\varepsilon})\right)^{q}|\O_{\varepsilon}|}=\frac{1}{q+1}\,.$$
The hypothesis $R_{F}(\Omega)={\varepsilon}F^{o}(e_{1})$ is not restrictive, in the sense that if it is not true we can choose a rotated $N$-rectangle where $R_{F}(\Omega)={\varepsilon}F^{o}(\nu)$ for some direction $\nu$, and use the remark below.
If $A\in\textrm{SO}(N)$ is a rotation matrix, then, denoting by $F_{A}(\xi)=F(A\xi)$, it holds that $$(F_{A})^{o}(\xi)=(F^{o})_{A}(\xi),\quad \text{and then}\quad R_{F_{A^{T}}}(A\Omega)=R_{F}(\Omega)$$ (see [@dgp] for the details). Hence, emphasizing the dependence on $F$ by denoting $T_{p}(\Omega)=T_{p,F}(\Omega)$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
T_{p,F}{(\Omega)}&=\max_{\varphi\in W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega)}\frac{{\displaystyle}\left(\int_{\Omega}|\varphi(x)|dx\right)^{p}}{{\displaystyle}\int_{\Omega}F^{p}(\nabla \varphi(x))dx}
=
\max_{\varphi\in W_{0}^{1,p}(\Omega)}\frac{{\displaystyle}\left(\int_{A\Omega}|\varphi(A^{T}x)|dx\right)^{p}}{{\displaystyle}\int_{A\Omega}F_{A^{T}}^{p}(\nabla \varphi(A^{T}x))dx}\\
&=T_{p,F_{A^{T}}}(A\Omega)\ge \frac{|\Omega|}{q+1} R_{F_{A^{T}}}(A\Omega)^{q}=\frac{|\Omega|}{q+1}R_{F}(\Omega)^{q}.\end{aligned}$$
First of all, we observe that $$F^{o}(e_{1})=\frac{1}{F(e_{1})}.$$ Indeed, being $R_{F}(\Omega)={\varepsilon}F^{o}(e_{1})$, it holds that $$\nu_{\Omega}({\varepsilon}e_{1})=e_{1}=\frac{F^{o}_{\xi}(e_{1})}{|F^{o}_{\xi}(e_{1})|},$$ where $\nu_{\Omega}({\varepsilon}e_{1})$ is the Euclidean outer normal vector to ${\partial}\Omega$. Hence by and , we have $$F(e_{1})= \frac{1}{|F_{\xi}^{o}(e_{1})|}=\frac{1}{F^{o}(e_{1})},$$ where last equality follows by $F^{o}(e_{1})=F^{o}_{\xi}(e_{1})\cdot e_{1}=|F^{o}_{\xi}(e_{1})|$.
Let $\O_{\varepsilon}=C_{\varepsilon}\cup D_{\varepsilon}$, where $C_{\varepsilon}=]-{\varepsilon},{\varepsilon}[\times]a_2+{\varepsilon},a_2-{\varepsilon}[\times\ldots\times]-a_N+{\varepsilon},a_N-{\varepsilon}[$, and $D_{\varepsilon}= {\O_{\varepsilon}}\setminus C_{\varepsilon}$. Setting $x=(x_1,z)$ with $z\in{\mathbb{R}}^{N-1}$ and $a=(a_2,\ldots,a_N)$, we consider the function $\varphi_{\varepsilon}$ defined by $$\begin{cases}
\varphi_{\varepsilon}(x_1,z)={\displaystyle}\frac{{\varepsilon}^q-x_1^q}{q}&\mbox{in }C_{\varepsilon}\\
\varphi_{\varepsilon}(x_1,z)={\displaystyle}\min\big\{|a-z|,|-a-z|\big\}\frac{{\varepsilon}^q-x_1^q}{q{\varepsilon}}&\mbox{in }D_{\varepsilon}.
\end{cases}$$
We can estimate the anisotropic $p$-torsional rigidity by using $\varphi_{{\varepsilon}}$ as test function. We have: $$T_{p}(\O_{\varepsilon})^{p-1}\ge\frac{{\displaystyle}\left(\int_{\O_{\varepsilon}}\varphi_{\varepsilon}\right)^p}{{\displaystyle}\int_{\O_{\varepsilon}} F^{p}(\nabla \varphi_{\varepsilon})dx}=\frac{{\displaystyle}\left(\int_{C_{\varepsilon}}\varphi_{\varepsilon}+\int_{D_{\varepsilon}}\varphi_{\varepsilon}dx\right)^p}{{\displaystyle}\int_{C_{\varepsilon}}F^{p}(\nabla \varphi_{\varepsilon})dx+\int_{D_{\varepsilon}}F^{p}(\nabla \varphi_{\varepsilon})dx}\;.$$ We now compute $$\int_{C_{\varepsilon}}\varphi_{\varepsilon}\,dx=\int_{C_{\varepsilon}}\frac{{\varepsilon}^q-x_1^q}{q}\,dx=\frac{|C_{\varepsilon}|{\varepsilon}^q}{q+1}$$ and $$\int_{C_{\varepsilon}}F^p(\nabla \varphi_{\varepsilon})\,dx=F^{p}(e_1)\int_{C_{\varepsilon}} x_1^{q}\,dx=F^p(e_1)\frac{|C_{\varepsilon}|{\varepsilon}^q}{q+1}\;.$$ We notice that both $\int_{D_{\varepsilon}}\varphi_{\varepsilon}\,dx$ and $\int_{D_{\varepsilon}}F^{p}(\nabla \varphi_{\varepsilon})\,dx$ are negligible, since they go to zero as ${\varepsilon}^{N+q-1}$. By recalling that $$\left(R_{F}(\Omega)\right)^q={\varepsilon}^{q}F^{o}(e_{1})^{q}=\frac{{\varepsilon}^q}{F(e_1)^q}\;,$$ we have $$\frac{1}{q+1} \ge \lim_{{\varepsilon}\to 0}\frac{T_{p}(\O_{\varepsilon})}{\left(R_{F}(\O_{\varepsilon})\right)^q|\O_{\varepsilon}|}
\ge \frac{1}{q+1}
$$ which concludes the proof.
We believe that the lower bound of $\Phi(\Omega)$ in is not optimal. Actually, in the Euclidean setting, with $p=2$ our bound improves the analogous result of [@hlp]: $$\Phi(\Omega)\ge \frac{2}{N(N+2)}>\frac{1}{(N+1)^2}$$
Moreover in [@hlp] the authors conjecture that for $F=\mathcal E$, $p=2$ and $N=2$ it holds $$\Phi(\Omega) \ge \frac13,$$ and $$\label{limite}
\Phi(\Omega_n)\to \frac 13,\quad\text{as }n\to\infty,$$ where $\Omega_n$ is a sequence of isosceles triangles degenerating to a segment.
In the following example, for $F=\mathcal E$, $N=2$ and $p=2$, we find a sequence of degenerating triangles $\Omega_n$ such that holds.
\[exHen\] Let $$N=2,\quad F(\xi)=\sqrt{\xi_1^2+\xi_2^2},\quad p=2.$$ We want to show that there exists a sequence of thinning isosceles triangles $\tau_{a}$ of the plane such that $$\label{henrot}
\Phi(\tau_{a})=\frac{T_2(\tau_{a})}{|\tau_{a}|M(\tau_{a})} \to \frac{1}{3} \quad\text{as}\quad a\to 0,$$ where $T_{2}(\tau_{a})$ is the torsional rigidity of $\tau_{a}$, $M(\tau_{a})$ is the maximum of the torsion function in $\tau_{a}$ and $|\tau_{a}|$ is the area of the triangle.
First of all, we recall that by a result contained in [@fgl], for any sequence of isosceles triangles $\tau_{n}$ such that the ratio $\frac{R(\tau_{n})}{w(\tau_{n})}\to 0$, where $w(\tau_{n})$ is the width of $\tau_{n}$, then $$\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{T_2(\tau_{n})}{|\tau_{n}|} \frac{P^2(\tau_n)}{|\tau_n |^2}= \frac{2}{3}.$$
Hence, recalling that in a triangle it holds that $R(\tau_{n})= \frac{2 |\tau_{n}|}{P(\tau_{n})}$ then $$\Phi(\tau_n)= \frac{T_2(\tau_{n})}{|\tau_{n}|} \frac{P^2(\tau_n)}{|\tau_n |^2}\frac{R^2(\tau_n)}{4M(\tau_n)},$$ the result is proved if we find a sequence of triangles with vanishing ratio $R(\tau_n)/w(\tau_n)$ and such that $\frac{R^{2}(\tau_n)}{2M(\tau_n)}$ tends to $1$.
(-3.5,-0.453) – (3.5,-0.453); (0.,-.6) – (0.,.7); (0pt,-16pt) node\[right\] [$0$]{}; (0.,0.) ellipse (0.8915105159222746cm and 0.453cm); (-3.2656304690483924,-0.453)– (0.,0.5259598154674863); (0.,0.5259598154674863) node\[anchor=south east\][$V_{1}$]{} – (3.2656304690483924,-0.453); (3.2656304690483924,-0.453)– (-3.2656304690483924,-0.453); (3.25,-0.457) node\[anchor=north\] [$V_{2}$]{}; (-3.25,-0.457) node\[anchor=north\] [$V_{3}$]{}; (-0.45,0.35) node\[anchor=south east\][$(-a,y_a)$]{}; (0.45,0.35) node\[anchor=south west\][$(a,y_a)$]{}; (-0.04,0.45) node\[anchor=north west\][$2a$]{};
To this aim, let $$\mathcal E_{a}=\left\{(x,y)\in{\mathbb{R}}^{2}\colon\frac{x^{2}}{1-a^{2}}+\frac{(y-a)^{2}}{a^{2}}=1\right\},$$ and consider a point $(a,y_{a})$, with $y_{a}=a+a\sqrt{\frac{1-2a^{2}}{1-a^{2}}}$. Let $\tau_{a}$ be the isosceles triangle constructed with one side on the $x$-axis and with each side tangent to the ellipse at the points $(0,0),$ $ (a,y_{a}),$ $ (-a,y_{a})$, as in Figure \[fig1\].
The vertices of the triangle are: $$V_{1}=\left(0, y_a+ \frac{a^{4}}{(1-a^{2})(y_a-a)}\right),\quad V_{2}=\left( a+ \frac{y_a(y_a-a)}{a^{3}}(1-a^{2}),0\right),\quad V_{3}=-V_{2}.$$ Let us observe that $V_{1}\to (0,0)$ as $a\to 0$, while the first coordinate of $V_{2}$ diverges.
Then, denoting by $A(\tau_{a})$ and $P(\tau_{a})$ respectively the area and the perimeter of $\tau_{a}$, and by $$h= y_a+ \frac{a^{4}}{(1-a^{2})(y_a-a)},\quad
\frac b 2=a+ \frac{y_a(y_a-a)}{a^{3}}(1-a^{2}),$$ we have: $$R(\tau_{a})= \frac{2 |\tau_{a}|}{P(\tau_{a})} = \frac{bh}{b+\sqrt{2 h^{2}+{b^{2}}}}.$$ Now, being $\mathcal E_{a}\subset \tau_{a}$, by the comparison principle and it holds that $$M(\mathcal E_{a})\le M(\tau_{a}) \le \frac{R^{2}(\tau_{a})}{2},\qquad M(\mathcal E_{a})=\frac{a^{2}(1-a^{2})}{2},$$ where the maximum of the torsion function on $\mathcal E_{a}$ follows by a direct computation. Then, being $h=2a+o(a^{2})$ and $b\to +\infty$ as $a\to 0$, we have
$$\begin{gathered}
1\le\frac{R(\tau_{a})^{2}}{2 M(\mathcal E_{a})}= \left(\frac{b}{b+\sqrt{2h^{2}+b^{2}}}\right)^{2}\frac{h^{2}}{a^{2}(1-a^{2})}=\left(\frac{1}{1+\sqrt{2\frac{h^{2}}{b^{2}}+1}}\right)^{2}\cdot\frac{h^{2}}{a^{2}(1-a^{2})}\longrightarrow 1\\ \text{ as }a\to 0\end{gathered}$$
and is proved.
We explicitly observe that, from the above computations, it holds $$\frac{R^{2}(\mathcal E_{a})}{2M(\mathcal E_{a})}\to 1 \qquad\text{as }a\to 0.$$
Acnowledgements {#acnowledgements .unnumbered}
===============
This work has been partially supported by the FIRB 2013 project “Geometrical and qualitative aspects of PDE’s” and by GNAMPA of INdAM.
[20]{} Alvino A., Ferone V., Lions P.-L., Trombetti G., *Convex symmetrization and applications*, [Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire]{}, 14(2):275–293, 1997.
: *Estimates for the Torsion Function and Sobolev Constants*, [Potential Anal.]{} [36]{}, 607–616 (2012).
: *Optimization problems involving the first Dirichlet eigenvalue and the torsional rigidity*, New trends in shape optimization, Internat. Ser. Numer. Math. [166]{}, pp. 19–41. Birkhäuser/Springer (2015).
,*On Pólya’s Inequality for Torsional Rigidity and First Dirichlet Eigenvalue*, Integr. Equ. Oper. Theory [ 86]{}, 579–600 (2016).
Bonnesen T., Fenchel W. Theorie der Konvexen Körper. Springer, Berlin, 1934.
Borisov D., Freitas P., *Asymptotics for the Expected Lifetime of Brownian Motion on Thin Domains in ${\mathbb{R}}^{n}$*, J. Theor. Probab. 26:284-309 (2013).
Buttazzo G., Guarino Lo Bianco S., Marini M., *Sharp estimates for the anisotropic torsional rigidity and the principal frequency*, J. Math. Anal. Appl. to appear, DOI:10.1016/j.jmaa.2017.03.055.
Cozzi M., Farina A., Valdinoci E., *Gradient Bounds and Rigidity Results for Singular, Degenerate, Anisotropic Partial Differential Equations*, Comm. Math. Phys., 189-214 (2014).
Crasta G., Malusa A., *The distance function from the boundary in a Minkowski space*. [Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.]{}, 359(12):5725–5759 (2007).
Cuesta M., Takáč P., *A strong comparison principle for positive solutions of degenerate elliptic equations*. Diff. Int. Eq. 13 (2000): 721-746.
Della Pietra F., Gavitone N., *Sharp bounds for the first eigenvalue and the torsional rigidity related to some anisotropic operators*, Math. Nachr. 287, 194-209 (2014).
Della Pietra F., Gavitone N., Piscitelli G., *A sharp weighted anisotropic Poincaré inequality for convex domains*, preprint, 2017.
Fragalà I., Gazzola F., Lamboley J., *Sharp Bounds for the $p$-Torsion of Convex Planar Domains*, Geometric Properties for Parabolic and Elliptic PDE’s Springer INdAM Series Volume 2, 97-115 (2013).
Henrot A., Lucardesi I., Philippin G., *On two functionals involving the maximum of the torsion function*, preprint.
Ladyzhenskaya O. A., Ural’tseva N. N. [[Linear and quasilinear elliptic equations]{}]{}. Translated from the Russian by Scripta Technica, Inc. Translation editor: Leon Ehrenpreis. Academic Press, New York, 1968.
Makai E., *On the principal frequency of a membrane and the torsional rigidity of a beam*, Studies in mathematical analysis and related topics, 227-231, Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford, Calif. 1962.
, *Bounds for the maximum Stress in the St-Venant problem*, Indian Journal of Mechanics and Mathematics, special issue in honor of B. Sen, part 1, 51–59 (1968)
Pólya G., Szegő G.: *Isoperimetric inequalities in Mathematical physics*. Ann. of Math. Stud. 27, Princeton University Press, Princeton 1951.
Tolksdorf P., *Regularity for a more general class of quasilinear elliptic equations*, J. Diff. Eq., 51(1):126–150 (1984).
Sperb R., *Maximum principles and applications*, Academic Press, 1981.
Xia C., On a class of anisotropic problems, Ph.D. Thesis.
[^1]: Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'On the largest scales, the Universe consists of voids and filaments making up the cosmic web. Galaxy clusters are located at the knots in this web, at the intersection of filaments. Clusters grow through accretion from these large-scale filaments and by mergers with other clusters and groups. In a growing number of galaxy clusters, elongated Mpc-size radio sources have been found, so-called radio relics . These relics are thought to trace relativistic electrons in the intracluster plasma accelerated by low-Mach number collisionless shocks generated by cluster-cluster merger events . A long-standing problem is how low-Mach number shocks can accelerate electrons so efficiently to explain the observed radio relics. Here we report on the discovery of a direct connection between a radio relic and a radio galaxy in the merging galaxy cluster Abell 3411-3412. This discovery indicates that fossil relativistic electrons from active galactic nuclei are re-accelerated at cluster shocks. It also implies that radio galaxies play an important role in governing the non-thermal component of the intracluster medium in merging clusters.'
author:
- 'Reinout J. van Weeren$^{1}$, Felipe Andrade-Santos$^{1}$, William A. Dawson$^{2}$, Nathan Golovich$^{3}$, Dharam V. Lal$^{4}$, Hyesung Kang$^{5}$, Dongsu Ryu$^{6,7}$, Marcus Brüggen$^{8}$, Georgiana A. Ogrean$^{9}$, William R. Forman$^{1}$, Christine Jones$^{1}$, Vinicius M. Placco$^{10}$, Rafael M. Santucci$^{11}$, David Wittman$^{3,12}$, M. James Jee$^{13}$, Ralph P. Kraft$^{1}$, David Sobral$^{14,15}$, Andra Stroe$^{16}$ & Kevin Fogarty$^{17}$'
title: 'The Case for Electron Re-Acceleration at Galaxy Cluster Shocks'
---
****
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, 60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
Lawrence Livermore National Lab, 7000 East Avenue, Livermore, CA 94550, USA
University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA
National Centre for Radio Astrophysics, TIFR, Pune University Campus, Post Bag 3, Pune 411007, India
Department of Earth Sciences, Pusan National University, Busan 46241, Korea
Department of Physics, UNIST, Ulsan 44919, Korea
Korea Astronomy and Space Science Institute, Daejeon 34055, Korea
Hamburger Sternwarte, Hamburg University, Gojenbergsweg 112, 21029 Hamburg, Germany
Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, Stanford University, 452 Lomita Mall, Stanford, CA 94305-4085, USA
Department of Physics and JINA Center for the Evolution of the Elements, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556, USA
Departamento de Astronomia - Instituto de Astronomia, Geofísica e Ciências Atmosféricas, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP 05508-900, Brazil
Instituto de Astrofísica e Ciências do Espaço, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon 1749-016, Portugal
Department of Astronomy and Center for Galaxy Evolution Research, Yonsei University, 50 Yonsei-ro, Seoul 03722, Korea
Department of Physics, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YB, UK
Leiden Observatory, Leiden University, PO Box 9513, NL-2300 RA Leiden, the Netherlands
European Southern Observatory, Karl-Schwarzschild-Stra[ß]{}e 2, D-85748 Garching bei Müchen, Germany
Department of Physics and Astronomy, The Johns Hopkins University, 3400 North Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218-2686, USA
Cluster mergers are the most energetic events in the Universe after the Big Bang, releasing energies up to $\sim10^{64}$ ergs on Gyr timescales. Most of the gravitational energy released during cluster merger events is converted into thermal energy via low-Mach number shocks ($\mathcal{M} \lesssim 3$) and turbulence in the intracluster medium (ICM) [@2003ApJ...593..599R]. A small fraction ($\lesssim 1$%) of the energy dissipated at shocks could be channeled into the acceleration of cosmic rays (CR). In the presence of magnetic fields, CR electrons would then emit synchrotron radiation which can be observed with radio telescopes. The origin of the large-scale magnetic fields, and the nature of particle acceleration processes that operate in these dilute cosmic plasmas, are still open questions.
The ICM has a high thermal-to-magnetic pressure ratio, or $\beta$, and electron acceleration by low-Mach number collisionless shocks in such high-$\beta$ plasmas is poorly understood, as analytical calculations cannot properly capture the non-linear behavior of this process . Radio relics, elongated sources that trace the CR at ICM shocks, provide us with rare opportunities to probe this process. While there is substantial evidence that relics trace CR electrons at shocks [@2011ApJ...728...82M; @2015MNRAS.449.1486S], previous work has found that the acceleration efficiency should be very low at these shocks, if these synchrotron emitting electrons are accelerated from the thermal pool of the ICM via the diffusive shock acceleration (DSA) mechanism . This low efficiency is hard to reconcile with the observed brightness of some radio relics, suggesting a high acceleration efficiency [@2012ApJ...756...97K; @2013MNRAS.435.1061P; @2014MNRAS.437.2291V]. In addition, some relics have regions with rather flat radio spectra ($\alpha\approx -0.7$; $F_\nu \propto \nu^{\alpha}$, where $\alpha$ is the spectral index), but the corresponding shock Mach numbers measured via X-ray observations are low [@2015PASJ...67..113I; @2016ApJ...818..204V]. This contradicts with the prediction from DSA [@1987PhR...154....1B]. This long-standing problem has so far remained unsolved. Furthermore, large merger shocks have also been found without corresponding radio relics[@2011MNRAS.417L...1R], indicating that our understanding of particle acceleration by low-Mach number shocks is still incomplete.
Recently, new insights into the acceleration by low-Mach number shocks have been obtained by particle-in-cell (PIC) simulations [@2014ApJ...797...47G]. These PIC simulations show that acceleration from the thermal pool could be possible. However, for some relics an unrealistic fraction of the shock energy needs to be transferred into the non-thermal electron population to explain their radio brightness [@2016ApJ...818..204V; @2016MNRAS.460L..84B; @2016MNRAS.461.1302E] and the PIC simulations do not solve this problem. A solution to explain the apparent very efficient acceleration, is to invoke the presence of a population of fossil relativistic electrons [@2005ApJ...627..733M], with Lorentz factors $\gamma \gtrsim 10^2$. The synchrotron lifetime of relativistic electrons in the ICM is relatively short ($\sim 10^{8}$ yrs). Once these electrons have lost most of their energy, they do not radiate within the observable radio band and they thus become invisible to radio telescopes. It has been suggested that these fossil electrons, which have Gyr lifetimes, can be efficiently re-accelerated at shocks and are therefore able to create bright radio relics [@2013MNRAS.435.1061P; @2015ApJ...809..186K]. Obvious candidates for these fossil electrons are the (old) lobes and tails of radio galaxies . This fossil radio plasma can occupy a significant volume of the ICM due to turbulent diffusion, aided by the random galaxy motions throughout the ICM and the ICM motion itself. Indeed, observational evidence has been found that provides support for this model. The complex morphologies of some radio relics resemble those of disturbed tailed radio galaxies that are often found in merging galaxy clusters[@2014ApJ...785....1B; @2015MNRAS.449.1486S]. The relics in the Bullet Cluster and PLCKG287.0+32.9 are two prime examples [@2015MNRAS.449.1486S; @2011ApJ...736L...8B]. However, for the cluster PLCKG287.0+32.9, no redshift for the putative radio galaxy connected to the relic could be obtained, since the proposed core of the radio galaxy did not have an optical counterpart [@2014ApJ...785....1B]. Similarly, no direct link between the relic in the Bullet cluster and a tailed radio galaxy could be established [@2015MNRAS.449.1486S]. The relic in the Coma cluster provides another interesting case. Here a confirmed cluster radio galaxy seems to be connected to a relic . Adiabatic compression of fossil plasma by a shock was proposed as a model for its origin . While the electrons do gain energy by the adiabatic compression, this model does not invoke any Fermi-type re-acceleration processes.
Here we present optical, radio, and X-ray observations of the merging galaxy cluster Abell 3411-3412 located at $z=0.162$. This cluster contains a Mpc-size radio relic with an irregular shape [@2013ApJ...769..101V; @2013MNRAS.435..518G]. Chandra observations, totaling 211 ks, reveal a cluster with a cometary morphology undergoing a major merger event, with the compact core of one of the subclusters being the “head” of the comet (Fig. \[fig:mergeroverview\]). A dynamical analysis based on Keck spectra of 174 cluster members and Subaru imaging, indicates that this is an approximately 1:1 mass ratio merger viewed $\sim 1$ Gyr after core passage, with the merger axis being located close to the plane of the sky. The two subclusters are both very massive, with individual masses of $\sim 10^{15}$ M$_{\odot}$. The core of the cluster coming in from the south (and currently observed in the north) was compact enough to survive the collision with the other cluster up to the present time, while the gas core of the subcluster that came in from the north was largely disrupted during the core passage.
The Giant Metrewave Radio Telescope (GMRT) radio images at 610 and 325 MHz show the complex, large radio relic located in the southern outskirts of the merging cluster (Fig. \[fig:gmrt610\]). Most interestingly, a close inspection of the northeastern component of the radio relic reveals an elongated narrow extension that leads from the relic towards a galaxy (source A, Figs. \[fig:gmrt610\] and \[fig:spix\]a). This galaxy is a spectroscopically confirmed cluster member ($z=0.164$). A high-resolution 3 GHz Very Large Array (VLA) image shows an active galactic nucleus (AGN; radio core) at the galaxy’s center. From the core, a narrow tail “feeds” into the radio relic located $\approx90$ kpc to its south. This reveals a direct connection between the relativistic plasma of an AGN and that of a radio relic. The probability of a chance projection of a tailed radio galaxy with this relic is $0.004$.
Our radio spectral index measurements, between 0.325 and 3.0 GHz show that the radio spectrum steepens away with distance from the compact nucleus from $\alpha = -0.5\pm0.1$ to $ \alpha = -1.3\pm0.1$ ($1\sigma$ errors), as is expected for synchrotron and Inverse Compton losses (Fig. \[fig:spix\]b). Remarkably, where the radio plasma from the AGN connects to the radio relic, the spectrum flattens back to $\alpha = -0.9 \pm 0.1$. This flattening is strong evidence for the re-acceleration of electrons from the radio tail at a shock. Moreover, we find evidence for spectral steepening across the relic in the direction towards the cluster center. These gradients have routinely been found for other relics and they are explained by electron energy losses in the downstream region of an outwards traveling shock [@2010Sci...330..347V]. We also find the outer edge of the relic is polarized, with a maximum polarization fraction of $40\%$. The emission weighted average polarization fraction is 13% (Fig. \[fig:spix\]c). The relatively modest spectral flattening at the shock suggests that the shock cannot be very strong. Furthermore, the existence of a downstream spectral index gradient (see Fig. \[fig:spix\]b) suggests that the relic cannot be solely caused by the adiabatic compression of a lobe of fossil radio plasma.
To search for the shock, we extracted a 0.5–2 keV Chandra surface brightness profile in a sector containing the relic and fitted the profile by assuming an underlying broken power-law density model. At large radii, the density profiles of galaxy clusters are typically described by single power-laws. However, the profile across the NE part of the relic steepens swiftly near the relic’s outer edge and shows a significant departure from a single power-law, indicating a deviation from hydrostatic equilibrium as expected for a shock (Fig. \[fig:profile\]). From the profile we find that the shock must be rather weak, with $\mathcal{M} \lesssim 1.7$. This upper limit should be considered an approximate estimate due to the idealized assumptions about the shock geometry and projection effects.
Our observations of (1) a direct connection between a radio galaxy and the relic, (2) spectral flattening at the location where the radio tail meets the relic, (3) the presence of an X-ray surface brightness discontinuity at the relic’s outer edge, and (4) a high polarization fraction at the location of flattest spectral indices provide the best evidence to date that radio galaxies in clusters provide seed electrons that can be re-accelerated and revived by merger shocks. Re-acceleration (and also adiabatic compression) alleviates the problem of the low-acceleration efficiency from the thermal pool. In addition, it provides a natural explanation why some cluster merger shocks have no corresponding radio relics. Those cases may lack a sufficient supply of fossil radio plasma. Finally, re-acceleration also solves the problem of the relatively flat spectral indices observed from relics, which for DSA, requires shocks that have higher Mach numbers than observed in X-rays [@2015PASJ...67..113I; @2016ApJ...818..204V].
Different re-acceleration models have been proposed. [In one of these models, fossil relativistic electrons are re-accelerated by a DSA-like process [@2005ApJ...627..733M; @2015ApJ...815..116F] in combination with adiabatic compression. In another model, the re-acceleration happens in the shock downstream region by magneto-hydrodynamical turbulence [@2015ApJ...815..116F].]{} Future work is needed to determine which of these re-acceleration mechanisms operates at radio relics [@2015MNRAS.451.2198V], and determine whether re-acceleration is required to explain all relics. We evaluate one of these re-acceleration models in the *Supplementary Information* to investigate what Mach number is required to flatten the spectral index by the observed amount and examine the relatively uniform spectral index along the length of the shock front.
The Abell 3411-3412 cluster contains at least two additional radio galaxies about 2 to the south and 2 to southwest of the one described above (sources B and C; Fig. \[fig:gmrt610\]). One of the radio galaxies is embedded within the relic emission, for the other, a tail of steep spectrum radio emission extends towards the relic. We argue that it is therefore likely that the other components of the complex relic in Abell 3411-3412 also trace revived fossil plasma, either by the process of adiabatic compression or by re-acceleration. Re-acceleration should also operate in other clusters because more examples of radio galaxies near relics have been found (i.e., in the Coma Cluster ). Our findings imply that PIC simulations and laboratory laser experiments[@laser] for collisionless shocks should include a relativistic fossil electron distribution in the upstream plasma. This study also indicates that to understand the non-thermal component of the ICM, the presence and distribution of radio galaxies needs to be taken into account, in addition to particle acceleration at shocks. Observations at low radio frequencies, in particular with LOFAR, will be key to unveiling the connections between relics and AGN, because low-frequency observations are sensitive to older, fossil radio plasma.
### Radio observations, data reduction, and spectral indices {#radio-observations-data-reduction-and-spectral-indices .unnumbered}
Abell 3411-3412 was observed with the GMRT on 21 Oct and 19 Nov, 2012, at 610 and 325 MHz, respectively. A total bandwidth of 32 MHz was recorded. The on source time was 4.5 hrs at 325 MHz and 3.6 hrs at 610 MHz. The initial calibration and visual removal of radio frequency interference (RFI) were carried out with AIPS (<http://www.aips.nrao.edu/>). The initial calibration consisted of bandpass calibration, bootstrapping of the flux-density scale, and the transfer of gains from the calibrator sources to the target field. The calibration solutions were further refined via the process of self-calibration using the CASA package[@2007ASPC..376..127M]. For the imaging, W-projection was employed to account for the non-coplanar nature of the array[@2008ISTSP...2..647C; @2005ASPC..347...86C]. For the weighting, we employed the Briggs scheme with a robust parameter of $0.0$, unless mentioned. The 610 MHz image has a rms noise ($\sigma_{\rm{rms}}$) of 35 $\mu$Jy beam$^{-1}$ and a resolution of 6.1$\times$ 5.1. The 325 MHz image has a resolution of $10.5\arcsec\times 8.3\arcsec$ and $\sigma_{\rm{rms}}=87$ $\mu$Jy beam$^{-1}$.
The cluster was also observed with the Karl G. Jansky VLA, covering the 2–4 GHz S-band in B-array on 26 Feb, 2015 and in DnC-array on 7 Jan, 2016 (project SG0455). The time on source was 1.2 hr for both observing runs. In addition, 1–2 GHz L-band observations (project 15A-270) were obtained in BnA-array on 18 May, 2015 with a total time on source of 0.5 hr. These observations were reduced and calibrated with CASA following the process outlined in[@2016ApJ...817...98V]. RFI was automatically removed with the AOFlagger[@2010MNRAS.405..155O]. The calibration consisted of delay, bandpass, and gain corrections. The channel dependent polarization leakage and angles were calibrated using the calibrators 3C147 and 3C138. The solutions were transferred to the target field and the solutions were further refined via the process of self-calibration. The imaging was carried out in the same way as the GMRT data. For imaging of the L-band data, we also used 1.4 GHz VLA D-array observations (project AC0696) to include emission on larger scales that are missed by the B-array observations. The reduction and calibration of the D-array observations have been described in[@2013ApJ...769..101V]. All images were corrected for the primary beam attenuation.
For making spectral index maps, we created images at 0.325 and 3.0 GHz. To correct for the different sampling densities in the uv-plane, uniform weighting was employed. We also placed inner uv-range cuts to image only common uv-ranges. The images were then convolved to the lowest resolution, given by the 325 MHz GMRT observations ($9.1\arcsec \times 6.5\arcsec$). The spectral index map for the area around A (for the labeling see Fig. \[fig:gmrt610\]) is shown in the Supplementary Information (SI). We also computed a higher signal-to-noise spectral index map, including the 0.61 and 1.5 GHz observations. As before, the 0.61 and 1.5 GHz observations were imaged with uniform weighing and inner uv-range cuts. To compute the spectral index, we fitted power-law spectra through the four data points, ignoring any possible curvature. Pixels with values below $4\sigma_{\rm{rms}}$ were “blanked”. The use of four frequencies decreases the noise on the derived spectral indices compared to only using the 0.325 and 3.0 GHz images. The spectral index map and corresponding uncertainties, under the assumption that the spectra can be described by power-laws, are shown in the SI (a cutout around source A is shown in Fig. \[fig:spix\]b).
The S-band polarization image is shown in Fig \[fig:spix\]c. This images has a resolution of $10\arcsec \times 8\arcsec$. No vectors are plotted for pixels where the signal-to-noise ratio of the polarized intensity is $< 4$. Given the low Galactic Faraday Rotation Measure of $\approx -7$ rad m$^{-1}$, we did not correct the polarization angles for Faraday Rotation [@2009ApJ...702.1230T]. The high-resolution S-band continuum map, showing the radio core associated with the AGN of source A, is shown in the SI.
We computed the probability of a chance projection of the tailed radio galaxy with the relic attached to it. This was done by taking the ratio of the area covered by the relic and the cluster, with the cluster area given by $\pi*R_{500}^2$, and $R_{500}\approx 1.4$ Mpc. This results in $p=0.002$. Taking the conservative approach, considering that the cluster contains two disturbed radio galaxies, the probability of a chance projection increases to $p=0.004$.
The cluster contains at least two more radio galaxies (B and C, see Fig. \[fig:gmrt610\]) to the south and southwest of the one described above. One of the radio galaxies (source B) is embedded within the relic emission. Source C is a distorted FR-I[@1974MNRAS.167P..31F] source. The spectral index map and the 325 MHz image (SI and Fig. \[fig:gmrt610\]) reveal a hint of a connection between source’s C southern lobe/tail and the southernmost part of the relic. The spectral index steepens along the lobes of source C, as expected due to synchrotron and Inverse Compton losses. Given that the relic emission around sources B and C is located further to south than the relic near source A, it is seems unlikely that the same shock is responsible for reviving the fossil plasma in all these regions. This would suggest that the ICM in the extreme southern outskirts of the cluster is disturbed by other shocks. Our Chandra observations do show the presence of additional substructure in the general area around sources B and C. However, given the low counts rates it is not possible to extract detailed information on the thermal properties of the ICM in this region.
### Chandra observations and data reduction. {#chandra-observations-and-data-reduction. .unnumbered}
The cluster was observed with ACIS-I on the Chandra X-ray Observatory for a total of 8 times between 2012 and 2015. This resulted in a total exposure time of 211 ks . The data were reduced with the [chav]{} package, following the processing described in[@2005ApJ...628..655V] and applying the CALDB 4.6.7 calibration files. This processing includes filtering of bad events by checking for periods of high background, corrections for the time dependence of the charge transfer inefficiency and gain, removal of readout artifacts, background subtraction, and exposure correction. For the background subtraction, we used standard blank sky background files. The images of the separate exposures were then combined into a single image, binning with a factor of 4 (i.e., 2 pixel$^{-1}$).
### Surface brightness profile fitting. {#sec:proffit .unnumbered}
We fit the X-ray surface brightness profile with an updated version of Proffit. We model the profile using an underlying broken power-law density model $$n(r)= \begin{cases}
C n_0 \left(\frac{r}{r_{\rm{edge}}} \right)^{a_2} \mbox{ ,} &\text{$r < r_{\rm{edge}}$} \\
\\
n_0 \left(\frac{r}{r_{\rm{edge}}} \right)^{a_1} \mbox{ ,}&\text{$r > r_{\rm{edge}}$} \mbox{ .}
\end{cases}
\label{eq:densmodel}$$ The subscripts 1 and 2 refer to the up and downstream regions, respectively. The parameter $r_{\rm{edge}}$ denotes the location of the jump, $n_0$ is the normalization constant, $C$ the shock compression factor, $a_1$ and $a_2$ are the slopes of the power-laws. This density model is then projected along the line of sight to obtain an X-ray surface brightness profile, assuming prolate spheroidal geometry within the sector. The emissivity is taken to be proportional to the density squared.
In the case of a shock, the compression factor can be related to the shock Mach number $${\cal M}=\left[\frac{2 C}{\gamma + 1 - C(\gamma -1)}\right]^{1/2} \mbox{ ,}
\label{eq:machne}$$ where $\gamma$ is the adiabatic index of the gas. We assume $\gamma=5/3$ for the thermal plasma.
We fit the surface brightness profile in an elliptical sector that crosses the radio relic (see the SI), using the model given in Eq. \[eq:densmodel\]. The opening angles ($210\degr - 250\degr$) were chosen after visual inspection of the Chandra image (see the SI), which indicates a possible surface brightness edge at the relic location and extending $\sim 10\degr$ further to the west. For the radial binning of photons, we require a SNR of 5 per bin. We exclude the regions affected by point sources during the fitting. The observed profile and most best fitting model is shown in Fig. \[fig:profile\]. We find a break in the X-ray surface brightness profile at the location of the radio relic. The resulting density jump is small $C=1.31^{+0.10}_{-0.09}$ ($\mathcal{M}=1.2$), with a 90% confidence upper limit of $C<1.56$, indicating that the Mach number is low $\mathcal{M}<1.4$. The 90% lower confidence limit is $C > 1.16$. The location of the jump is indicated in Fig. \[fig:spix\]b.
We also extracted a profile in a spherical sector (see the SI). The resulting fitted compression factor is slightly lower with $C\approx1.2$, but consistent with the previous results. In addition, we checked whether the results changed for a smaller opening angle, corresponding to the relic’s visible extent in the 610 and 325 MHz images (i.e., an opening angle of $210\degr - 240\degr$). This did not result in significant changes for the values of the compression factor or discontinuity location. We also slightly varied the placement of the sector, again obtaining consistent results. Therefore we conclude that the presence of a jump does not depend on the precise sector placement and shape. For comparison, in the SI we show a model with a density jump of $C=2.3$ ($\mathcal{M}=2.0$) in the elliptical sector, which does not provide a good match to the data.
A small “bump” is visible in the X-ray surface brightness profile at a radial distance of 4.5- 5.0 (Fig. \[fig:profile\]). The nature of this bump is unclear. Ignoring this bump increases the best-fitting compression factor and the 90% confidence upper limit to $C<2.0$ ($\mathcal{M}< 1.7$).
From the X-ray surface brightness profile we conclude that there is evidence for a deviation from hydrostatic equilibrium as expected if a shock were present. The location of the discontinuity coincides with the location of the relic, and also agrees with the location found by visual inspection of the Chandra image. The modeling suggests that the underlying density jump must be rather low ($C<2.0$, $\mathcal{M}< 1.7$). Some caution is required in interpreting the derived Mach number and upper limits, since it depends on the assumptions made in the modeling. Given the extra substructure in this region, as seen in the Chandra image, some of the assumptions might be incorrect. The unknown projection effects and shock geometry typically result in underestimation of the Mach number and our derived values should therefore be considered as lower limits.
Another way to constrain the Mach number, and rule out the presence of a cold front, is to determine the temperatures on both sides of the discontinuity (in a small enough region not be affected by other cluster substructure). An advantage of this method is that temperature measurements are less affected by the unknown geometry. However, the count rate in the region south of the discontinuity is very low, and therefore we are not able to obtain useful constraints on the pre-shock X-ray gas temperature.
### SOAR spectroscopy and data reduction. {#soar-spectroscopy-and-data-reduction. .unnumbered}
The optical spectrum of the AGN host galaxy that “fuels” the relic (RA 08$^{\rm{h}}$42$^{\rm{m}}$13$^{\rm{s}}$.73; DEC $-$173112.1) was acquired using the Goodman Spectrograph on the Southern Astrophysical Research Telescope (SOAR) telescope. The observations were conducted on November 19, 2015, as part of program SO2015B-020. The basic setup included the 600 l mm$^{\rm{-1}}$ grating (blue setting), and a 1${\mbox{\ensuremath{.\!\!^{\prime\prime}}}}$03 slit. The wavelength range of the observed spectrum was 3500-5500[Å]{}, with a resolving power of $R\sim1500$ and S/N$\sim10$ pixel$^{-1}$ at 4500[Å]{}. Calibration frames included Cu and HgAr arc-lamp exposures, quartz-lamp flat-fields, and bias frames. The data reduction, including spectral extraction and wavelength calibration, were performed using standard IRAF routines (<http://iraf.noao.edu>).
A SOAR optical spectrum of the AGN host galaxy is shown in the SI. From the spectrum we determine a redshift of $z=0.164\pm0.001$, consistent with the galaxy being a cluster member.
### Subaru and Keck observations. {#sec:SubaruKeck .unnumbered}
We carried out deep imaging observations of the Abell 3411-3412 system with Subaru SuprimeCam[@2002PASJ...54..833M] on 2014 February 24 in $g$, $r$ and $i$ with integrations of 720s, 2880s, and 720s, respectively (P.I. D. Wittman). We took 4 exposures for $g$ and $i$, and 8 exposures for $r$. We rotated the field between each exposure (30 for $g$ and $i$, and 15 for $r$) in order to distribute the bleeding trails and diffraction spikes from bright stars azimuthally and later removed them by median-stacking exposures. This scheme enables us to maximize the number of detected galaxies, especially considering the number of stars at A3411-3412’s low galactic latitude (+15). The average seeing for the images was $\sim0.\arcsec85$. The details of the Subaru data reduction are similar to those presented in[@2015ApJ...802...46J].
The primary objective for the spectroscopic survey was to maximize the number of cluster member spectroscopic redshifts. Since the SuprimeCam imaging was unavailable at the time of the spectroscopic survey planning, we took images with the Isaac Newton Telescope Wide Field Camera (INT/WFC), on 2013 October 31 in $g$ and $i$ bands, to determine the approximate red sequence of the cluster and preferentially selected those galaxies followed by potential blue cloud galaxies. These INT/WFC data were reduced with our in-house PYTHON-based pipeline[@2014MNRAS.438.1377S; @2015MNRAS.450..630S] Briefly, the sky flats for each filter were median-combined to obtain a ‘master-flat’. A ‘master-bias’ was obtained by median-combining biases. The individual exposures were then bias-subtracted and sky-flattened. Astrometric solutions were obtained by using SCAMP[@2006ASPC..351..112B], and images were zero-point calibrated with the fourth United States Naval Observatory (USNO) CCD Astrograph Catalog (UCAC4)[@2013AJ....145...44Z], before being stacked/combined using SWARP[@2002ASPC..281..228B]. The difficulty of star-galaxy separation is compounded by the 1.5$\arcsec$-2$\arcsec$ seeing of the INT/WFC imaging, which results in many blended pairs of stars passing morphological cuts designed to eliminate point sources. We observed the Abell 3411-3412 system with the DEIMOS[@2003SPIE.4841.1657F] instrument on the Keck II 10m telescope on 2013, December 3 and 4. Observations were taken using 1 wide slits with the 1200linemm$^{-1}$ grating, resulting in a pixel scale of $0.33$Åpixel$^{-1}$ and a resolution of $\sim1$Å (50kms$^{-1}$). The grating was tilted to a central wavelength of 6650Å, resulting in a typical wavelength coverage of 5350Å to 7950Å, which encompasses the spectral features H$\beta$, \[[O$\;$]{}\] 4960 & 5008, [Mg$\;$]{} (b), [Fe$\;$]{}, [Na$\;$]{} (D), \[[O$\;$]{}\], H$\alpha$, and the \[[N$\;$]{}\] doublet for galaxies near the cluster redshift. The actual wavelength coverage may be shifted by $\sim\pm410$ Å depending on where the slit is located along the width of the slitmask. We observed a total of four slit masks with approximately 120 slits per mask. For each mask we took three 900s exposures. The data reduction followed the same procedure outlined in detail in[@2015MNRAS.450..630S; @2015ApJ...805..143D].
We obtained 484 spectra with DEIMOS. Of these, we obtained reliable redshifts for 447 objects (92%), leaving 37 spectra that were either too noisy, had ambiguous redshift solutions (e.g., those with a single emission line), or failed to reduce properly. Of the 447 reliable redshifts, 221 (49%) are stars, indicating the difficulty of star/galaxy discrimination with low-resolution imaging at low Galactic latitude. Adopting the quality rating system of[@2013ApJS..208....5N], in which only galaxies with secure redshifts ($Q>3$) are considered high-quality, the removal of the stars results in 226 high quality DEIMOS galaxy spectra. Of these, 174 (77%) fall within $0.148 \leq z \leq 0.176$ (see the SI, which is $z_\mathrm{cluster}\pm 3\times\sigma$, where $z_\mathrm{cluster}=0.162$ and $\sigma$ is the approximate velocity dispersion ($1000\,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$). The remaining 52 high-quality spectra consist of one foreground and 51 background galaxies, comprising 0.4% and 23% of the high-quality spectra respectively. The subcluster identification and the dynamical modeling are described in the SI.
Supplementary Information
=========================
Additional radio images.
------------------------
\[fig:sbandhighres\]
Images for the X-ray surface brightness profile modeling.
=========================================================
SOAR optical spectrum
---------------------
Radio spectral re-acceleration modeling.
----------------------------------------
We this section we evaluate one possible re-acceleration model to investigate the spectral index distribution across the relic. We first created a radio profile across the width of the relic, using the regions indicated in Supplementary Fig. \[fig:radioregion\]. The resulting radio profiles are displayed in Supplementary Fig. \[fig:profileKang\].
For modeling the spectral change during re-acceleration and the radio profiles in the shock downstream region, we follow the method outlined by[@2015ApJ...809..186K] for re-acceleration. We assume that a spherical shock sweeps through a magnetized gas cloud containing fossil relativistic electrons, while propagating through a density gradient of $r^{-2}$ in the cluster outskirts. The simulated profiles are convolved to a spatial resolution of 20 kpc. The post-shock temperature is set to $6.4^{+0.6}_{-0.5}$ keV, which was determined from the Chandra data in the region north of the relic. The radius of the shock is assumed to be 1.0 Mpc. The geometry of the cloud is the same as described in[@2015ApJ...809..186K]. The pre-shock magnetic field is 1.5 $\mu$Gauss, and the magnetic field strength across the shock transition is assumed to increase due to the compression of two perpendicular components. Note that the shock speed and the post-shock magnetic field strength vary in time as the shock slows in the cluster outskirts.
The fossil electrons are assumed to have the energy spectrum, $N(\gamma_e)\propto \gamma_e^{-2.5} \exp[-(\gamma_e/\gamma_{e,c})^2]$, where the cutoff Lorentz factor is $\gamma_{e,c} = 1.8 \times 10^4$. The slope of $s=2.5$ is a typical injection index for AGN [@2008MNRAS.390..595M], which corresponds to a radio spectral index of $\alpha = -0.75$ ($\alpha = (s-1)/2$). The cutoff ($\gamma_{e,c} = 1.8 \times 10^4$) at the end of the tail, just before re-acceleration, is set to match the $\alpha=-1.3$ between 0.325 and 3.0 GHz. The “extension angle" is $\psi\approx 12^{\degr}$[@2015ApJ...809..186K].
The best matching model has a sonic Mach number of $\mathcal{M}_s = 1.9$ at the time shown in Supplementary Fig. \[fig:profileKang\], where we can reproduce the spectral change from $\alpha=-1.3$ just before re-acceleration to $\alpha=-0.9$ at the relic. The post-shock magnetic field has a value of 2.9 $\mu$Gauss. We note that the observed profiles are wider than the simulated ones and that the Mach number is somewhat higher than the upper limit determined from the X-ray observations. In our modeling, we assumed the relic is seen edge-on with respect to the shock normal. If this is not the case, the observed profiles would widen. Our Mach number estimates are also somewhat uncertain due to the assumptions that were made when fitting the X-ray surface brightness profile. We also evaluated a model with a flatter injection index of $s=2.2$ ($\alpha=-0.6$). In that case, we find a best matching sonic Mach number of $\mathcal{M}_s = 1.7$. Given the uncertainties in the geometry, simplifying assumptions made in the modeling, and unknown distribution of fossil plasma before re-acceleration, we consider the match with the data reasonable.
It is expected that for a tailed radio galaxy, the shape of the energy spectrum of the fossil electrons changes with distance from the nucleus. Thus the spectral index along the shock front, towards the west, is expected to steepen. However, the observed spectral index along the relic’s extent is rather uniform. We therefore extended our model to investigate what spectral index trend is to be expected, taking into account the predicted spectral steepening along the original tail of fossil plasma.
We first estimate the amount of spectral steepening that is expected along the 150 kpc extent of the relic in the spectral index map. Assuming that the distance between the core and the end of the tail (where $\alpha= -1.3$) is about 90 kpc, the mean jet velocity is estimated to be $1.2 \times 10^3$ km s$^{-1}$ (for $s=2.5$, $\gamma_{e,c} = 1.8 \times 10^4$, and a cooling time of $7.3 \times10{^7}$ yr). The distance from the NE corner to the SW corner of the relic is about 150 kpc. The cooling or advection time of the jet is estimated to be $1.2\times10^8$ yr over this 150 kpc. In that case, the cutoff Lorentz factor should decrease from $\gamma_{e,c}=1.8\times10^4$ to $\gamma_{e,c} = 1.2\times10^4$. This leads to spectral ageing from $\alpha = -1.3$ to $\alpha = -1.6$ along the relic’s length. When then rerun our model, changing the input $\gamma_{e,c}$. The resulting spectral profiles after re-acceleration are shown in Supplementary Fig. \[fig:profilesteeperfossiltrend\]. At the relic’s NE corner with $\alpha = -1.3$, re-acceleration changes the spectral index to $-0.9$, the result we obtained before. At the SW corner with $\alpha = -1.6$, re-acceleration changes the spectral index back to $\alpha=-1.0$. So we can see that the re-acceleration leads to a relatively uniform spectral index along the relic’s extent, even though the original fossil distribution shows considerable change. While this model does explain the relatively uniform spectral index along this particular relic, it is worth noting that it might have trouble explaining the constant spectral indices for Mpc-size relics along their lengths (unless the shock Mach number is higher or the spectral index distribution of the fossil plasma does not show extremely large variations). In addition, there could be other challenges for the “DSA-type” re-acceleration model described in this section, see [@2014MNRAS.437.2291V; @2015MNRAS.451.2198V].
Subaru and Keck observations. {#sec:SubaruKeck2}
-----------------------------
![Redshift distribution of the Keck DEIMOS high quality (Q $\geq$ 3) galaxy spectroscopic redshifts within the cluster redshift range. The north (A3411) brightest-cluster-galaxy (BCG) redshift is indicated by the red arrow, and the southern (A3412) BCG redshift is indicated by the blue arrow. []{data-label="fig:hist_deimos_spec"}](clustredshifthist){width="0.8\columnwidth"}
### Subcluster identification {#sec:Subclusters}
To determine which galaxies are members of the Abell 3411 and 3412 subclusters, we utilize both spectroscopic and red sequence cluster member selection methods. The spectroscopic sample has the advantage of being a purer sample and the precise redshifts are a necessity for many of the following analyses. While the red sequence sample is not as pure, it is more complete and it is not subject to the under sampling bias that affects the spectroscopic sample; thus it is advantageous for some analyses.
For the red sequence sample, we selected cluster members by first separating galaxies from stars using a size-magnitude relation based on the Subaru imaging (note that this separation is much more effective for the Subaru imaging than for the INT/WFC imaging described in the Methods section of the main article). We identified the red sequence in a color-magnitude diagram with $g-r$ as the color and $r$ as the magnitude. We used the spectroscopic survey to inform the red sequence selection (see Supplementary Fig. \[fig:ColorMagDiag\]) and estimate the purity of the red sequence selection. For the spectroscopic objects, we find that 196 lie within the red sequence selection bounds. Of these 78% are cluster galaxies, 0 are foreground galaxies, 13% are background galaxies, and 9% are stars.
{width="\columnwidth"}
No one subcluster identification method is optimal for all types of subcluster configurations, so we employ three separate complementary methods of subcluster identification. The first is a projected galaxy number/luminosity over-density analysis, the second is an Expectation-Maximization Gaussian Mixture Model (EM-GMM) clustering analysis, and the third is a Markov Chain Monte Carlo Gaussian Mixture Model (MCMC-GMM) clustering analysis.
We generated red sequence galaxy number density and luminosity density maps and bootstrapped to estimate the projected separation between the peaks of the two subclusters. From Fig. 1 (main article), it is clear that there are two dominant subclusters in projected space (corresponding to A3411 and A3412), but there are also small substructures to the north of A3411 and one northeast of A3412. We find that the corresponding spectroscopic cluster galaxy density maps agree well (see Supplementary Fig. \[fig:speczdensity\]), except that they do not show the smaller substructures since these lie outside the DEIMOS spectroscopic survey area.
![ The spectroscopic galaxy density maps discussed in §\[sec:Subclusters\]. [Left:]{} The cluster spectroscopic sample number density map. The cluster spectroscopic number density contours (black) begin at 20galaxiesMpc$^{-2}$ and increase linearly with increments of 20galaxiesMpc$^{-2}$. [Right: ]{} The cluster spectroscopic luminosity density map. Each map has a linear scaling with black being fewer and white being more galaxiesMpc$^{-2}$. Each map has been convolved with a 60 Gaussian smoothing kernel.[]{data-label="fig:speczdensity"}](galaxy_density_specz.pdf){width="1.0\columnwidth"}
For the EM-GMM, we use *scikit-learn*’s GMM package and apply it to the three-dimensional galaxy distribution (right ascension, declination, and redshift) of the spectroscopic sample of cluster members. We consider mixtures of 1 to 7 multivariate Gaussian components with a diagonal (*diag*) covariance structure, where each Gaussian component has an uncorrelated covariance structure. While this covariance structure prevents angled elliptical halos, we find that the other covariance structures in *scikit-learn*’s GMM package offer too much flexibility (e.g., the *full*, where each Gaussian component can have a different unstructured covariance, results in unphysical solutions where some subclusters have substantial coherent rotations). For each number of components ($n$), we calculate the BIC (Bayesian information criterion) and use this to infer the optimal number of subclusters. We plot these results as, $$\Delta\mathrm{BIC}_{n} = \mathrm{BIC}_{n} - \min\left(\mathrm{BIC}_{n}|n\in\mathbb{Z}_{1...7}\right)$$ where $\mathbb{Z}_{1...7}$ is the set of integers from 1 to 7. For convenience of interpretation, we color-code regions of the $\Delta$BIC plot according to the broad model comparison categories suggested by[@Kass:1995].
We find that, of the models considered, the two-component Gaussian model is the most favored one (see Supplementary Fig. \[fig:3D-gmmselect\]). In Supplementary Fig. \[fig:3D-gmmtriangle\], we plot the three-dimensional distribution of the spectroscopic cluster members and their most likely subcluster membership assignment for this lowest-BIC model. For the projected one-dimensional distributions, we plot the marginalized Gaussian components for the lowest-BIC model (dashed lines). For the projected two-dimensional distributions we plot marginalized 68% confidence ellipses of the lowest-BIC model Gaussian components. The EM-GMM identifies two subclusters that correspond to A3411 and A3412. We also employed a more sophisticated MCMC-GMM analysis which is similar to the EM-GMM, but facilitates the implementation of informative priors on the model parameters (e.g., location of the halos, typical cluster scales, and typical cluster ellipticities). For this system, the results of the two GMM analyses produce nearly identical results.
![ A $\Delta$BIC plot comparing GMM fits to the three-dimensional (right ascension, declination, and redshift) distribution of all the cluster member spectroscopic galaxies, with varying number of Gaussian components and a diagonal covariance type. The purple shaded regions roughly denote how a given model compares with the model that has the lowest BIC score. The most favored is a 2 component model with *diag* covariance structure. The two components closely correspond to A3411 and A3412. []{data-label="fig:3D-gmmselect"}](gmm_select_z34.pdf){width="0.6\columnwidth"}
![ Three-dimensional distribution of the spectroscopic cluster members (§\[sec:Subclusters\]) and their most likely subcluster membership assignment for the lowest-BIC EM-GMM (see Supplementary Fig. \[fig:3D-gmmselect\]). For the projected one-dimensional distributions, we plot the marginalized Gaussian components for the lowest-BIC model (dashed lines). For the projected two-dimensional distributions we plot projected ellipses that encompass $\sim68\%$ of the corresponding members in the lowest-BIC model Gaussian components. []{data-label="fig:3D-gmmtriangle"}](gmmTriangle_2diag.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
### Dynamical analysis and masses. {#sec:dynamics}
To investigate the redshift and velocity dispersion of each subcluster, we subdivide the cluster spectroscopic sample (§\[sec:SubaruKeck2\]) according to MCMC-GMM analysis (§\[sec:Subclusters\]) maximum likelihood membership probabilities. The redshift distributions of each of these selections are shown in Supplementary Fig. \[fig:SubclustSpecProps\].
We estimate each subcluster’s redshift and velocity dispersion using the biweight-statistic and bias-corrected 68% confidence limit[@1990AJ....100...32B] applied to 100,000 bootstrap samples of each subcluster’s spectroscopic redshifts. We find very similar redshifts for the A3411 and A3412 subclusters, $0.16194^{+0.00045}_{-0.00046}$ and $0.16226^{+0.00047}_{-0.00048}$, respectively. These translate to a relative line-of-sight (LOS) velocity difference in the frame of the cluster of $v_\mathrm{\rm{A3411}}-v_\mathrm{\rm{A3412}}=-80\pm 170\,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$. This suggests that either they are both nearly in the plane of the sky, have slowed as they near the apocenter of the merger, or a combination of the two. Comparing the relative redshift of each subcluster’s BCG with respect to the median subcluster redshift, we find relative line-of-sight velocity differences of $v_\mathrm{\rm{A3411}}-v_\mathrm{\rm{A3411\,BCG}} = -270\pm120$kms$^{-1}$ and $v_\mathrm{\rm{A3412}}-v_\mathrm{\rm{A3412\,BCG}} = +40\pm120$kms$^{-1}$.
We find similar velocity dispersions for the northern (A3411) and southern (A3412) subclusters, $1110^{+100}_{-80}\,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$ and $1190^{+100}_{-90}\,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$, respectively. Converting these velocity dispersions into $M_{200}$ mass estimates using the[@2008ApJ...672..122E] scaling relation, we estimate masses of $14^{+4}_{-3}\times 10^{14}$M$_\odot$ and $18^{+5}_{-4}\times 10^{14}$M$_\odot$ for the A3411 and A3412 subclusters, respectively. Velocity dispersion mass estimates can be biased high in disturbed systems, however this bias primarily exists when the merging halos are separated by $\lesssim R_{200}$ in the $\sim1$Gyr pre/post collision, and is approximately a factor of three worse for mergers occurring along the line-of-sight[@1996ApJS..104....1P]. We expect that the velocity dispersion mass estimates of A3411 and A3412 are not significantly biased because they have a projected separation of $1.4\pm0.2$Mpc, the dynamics analysis suggests (see the next paragraph) that the time-since-collision (TSC) is $>0.9$Gyr, and the angle of the merger axis with respect to the plane-of-the-sky ($\alpha$) is $23\degr^{+18}_{-14}$. Note that $\alpha$ is largely insensitive to the mass of the subclusters[@2012ApJ...747L..42D].
For the subcluster two-body dynamical analyses, we use the MCMAC Monte Carlo merging cluster dynamics analysis method [@2013ApJ...772..131D]. The MCMAC program takes PDF’s (probability density functions) for the mass, redshift, and projected separation of two subclusters as input. We use the aforementioned redshifts, velocity dispersion based mass estimates, and red sequence luminosity density based projected separation estimate. Additionally, we incorporate a 20% radio polarization fraction of the relic as a prior that $\alpha<48\degr$. We summarize the geometric and dynamic parameter constraints in Supplementary Table \[tbl:dynresultparam\]. While there is some ambiguity in whether the two subclusters are on an outbound trajectory or if they have reached their apocenter and are on a return trajectory, we find that the system is near apocenter and the time-since-collision for the outbound case ($TSC_0$) is close to that of the return case ($TSC_1$), see Supplementary Table \[tbl:dynresultparam\]. Supplementary Fig. \[fig:SubclustSpecProps\] (right panel) provides an example of the marginal posterior parameter constraints from the dynamics analysis and the impact of the polarization prior.
We thus conclude that core passage for the A3411-A3412 merger event occurred about $\sim 1$ Gyr ago and the merger event is seen relatively close (9– 41) to edge on.
![ Left: Redshift distributions for the two subclusters, following the label and color scheme of Supplementary Fig. \[fig:3D-gmmtriangle\]. Redshift locations and velocity dispersions are listed in the upper left of each subpanel. The galaxy membership of each subcluster is based on the MCMC-GMM analysis (see §\[sec:Subclusters\]). Right: Marginal posterior of the relative three-dimensional subcluster velocity at the time of collision $v_\mathrm{3D} (t_\mathrm{col})$ and the time since collision given their observed state, inferred from the Dawson (2013) dynamics analysis. Dark and light blue contours represent the 68 and 95% confidence regions, respectively, for the case with the radio relic polarization prior based on a polarization fraction of 20%. The gray dashed contours represent the 68 and 95% confidence regions, respectively, for the case of no prior. []{data-label="fig:SubclustSpecProps"}](SubclusterRedshiftHists.pdf "fig:"){width="0.49\columnwidth"} ![ Left: Redshift distributions for the two subclusters, following the label and color scheme of Supplementary Fig. \[fig:3D-gmmtriangle\]. Redshift locations and velocity dispersions are listed in the upper left of each subpanel. The galaxy membership of each subcluster is based on the MCMC-GMM analysis (see §\[sec:Subclusters\]). Right: Marginal posterior of the relative three-dimensional subcluster velocity at the time of collision $v_\mathrm{3D} (t_\mathrm{col})$ and the time since collision given their observed state, inferred from the Dawson (2013) dynamics analysis. Dark and light blue contours represent the 68 and 95% confidence regions, respectively, for the case with the radio relic polarization prior based on a polarization fraction of 20%. The gray dashed contours represent the 68 and 95% confidence regions, respectively, for the case of no prior. []{data-label="fig:SubclustSpecProps"}](A3411_v3dtcol-TSC0_PolPrior.pdf "fig:"){width="0.49\columnwidth"}
Parameter Units Location 68% LCL–UCL 95% LCL–UCL
--------------------------- -------------------- ---------- ----------------- -----------------
M$_{200_1}$ $10^{14}$M$_\odot$ 14 11 – 19 7 – 22
M$_{200_2}$ $10^{14}$M$_\odot$ 18 13 – 22 9 – 27
$z_1$ 0.1620 0.1615 – 0.1624 0.1612 – 0.1628
$z_2$ 0.1622 0.1619 – 0.1627 0.1614 – 0.1632
$d_{\rm proj}$ Mpc 1.4 1.2 – 1.6 0.9 – 1.9
$\alpha$ degree 23 9 – 41 2 – 47
$d_{\rm 3D}$ Mpc 1.5 1.2 – 1.9 0.9 – 2.3
$d_{\rm max}$ Mpc 1.6 1.3 – 1.9 0.9 – 2.5
$v_{\rm 3D}(t_{\rm obs})$ kms$^{-1}$ 330 50 – 760 50 – 1880
$v_{\rm 3D}(t_{\rm col})$ kms$^{-1}$ 2600 2400 – 3000 2000 – 3400
$TSC_0$ Gyr 0.9 0.9 – 1.3 0.7 – 1.7
$TSC_1$ Gyr 1.2 1.0 – 1.6 0.9 – 2.5
$T$ Gyr 2.2 1.9 – 2.6 1.6 – 3.3
: A3411-3412 dynamic analysis parameter estimates including the radio relic polarization prior\[tbl:dynresultparam\]
$^{a}$[$M_{200}$ mass; $z$ redshift; $d_{\rm{proj}}$ projected subcluster separation; $\alpha$ merger axis’ angle with respect to the plane-of-the-sky; $d_{\rm 3D}$ 3-D subcluster separation; $d_{\rm max}$ 3-D maximum subcluster separation after core passage; $v_{\rm 3D}(t_{\rm obs})$ current 3-D velocity difference between the subclusters; $v_{\rm 3D}(t_{\rm col})$ subcluster velocity difference at the time of core passage; $TSC_0$ time-since-collision (time after core passage) for the outbound case; $TSC_0$ time-since-collision for the return case; $T$ time between collisions. See[@2013ApJ...772..131D] for more details on the these quantities.]{}\
$^{b}$[Biweight-statistic location[@1990AJ....100...32B].]{}\
$^{c}$[Bias-corrected lower and upper confidence limits, LCL and UCL respectively[@1990AJ....100...32B].]{}
Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to R.J.W.\
([email protected]).
We thank the anonymous referees for comments. Support for this work was provided by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration through Chandra Award Number GO5-16133X issued by the Chandra X-ray Observatory Center, which is operated by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory for and on behalf of the National Aeronautics Space Administration under contract NAS8-03060. We thank the staff of the GMRT who have made these observations possible. The GMRT is run by the National Centre for Radio Astrophysics of the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research. The National Radio Astronomy Observatory is a facility of the National Science Foundation operated under cooperative agreement by Associated Universities, Inc. Based on observations obtained at the Southern Astrophysical Research (SOAR) telescope, which is a joint project of the Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia, e Inovação (MCTI) da República Federativa do Brasil, the U.S. National Optical Astronomy Observatory (NOAO), the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC), and Michigan State University (MSU). Based on data collected at Subaru Telescope, which is operated by the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan. Part of this work performed under the auspices of the U.S. DOE by LLNL under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344. Some of the data presented herein were obtained at the W.M. Keck Observatory, which is operated as a scientific partnership among the California Institute of Technology, the University of California and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The Observatory was made possible by the generous financial support of the W.M. Keck Foundation. The Isaac Newton Telescope is operated on the island of La Palma by the Isaac Newton Group in the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias. R.J.W. is supported by a Clay Fellowship awarded by the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. V.M.P. acknowledges support for this work from grant PHY 14-30152; Physics Frontier Center/JINA Center for the Evolution of the Elements (JINA-CEE), awarded by the US National Science Foundation. D.R. was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea through grant 2016R1A5A1013277. H.K. was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea through grant 2014R1A1A2057940. R.M.S. acknowledges CAPES (PROEX), CNPq, PRPG/USP, FAPESP and INCT-A funding. M.J.J. acknowledges the support from NRF of Korea to CGER. D.S. acknowledges financial support from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific research (NWO) through a Veni fellowship. G.A.O. is supported by NASA through Hubble Fellowship grant \#HST-HF2-51345.001-A, awarded by the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., for NASA, under contract NAS5-26555.
R.J.W. coordinated the research, wrote the manuscript, reduced the VLA data, and led the Chandra observing proposal. F.A.-S., K.F., and G.A.O. performed the Chandra data reduction and worked on the X-ray surface brightness profile fitting. H.K. and D.R. carried out the re-acceleration modeling. M.B., W.R.F., and C.J. helped with the interpretation of the radio and X-ray results and provided extensive feedback on the manuscript. C.J. led the GMRT observing proposal. D.V.L. obtained the GMRT observations and carried out the GMRT data reduction. V.M.P. and R.M.A. obtained the SOAR observations and performed the corresponding data reduction. D.S. and A.S. provided the INT observations and reduced the data. W.A.D. carried out the dynamical modeling of the merger event. W.A.D, N.G. and M.J.J. obtained the Keck and Subaru observations and reduced the data. D.W. helped with the interpretation of the dynamical modeling and led the Keck and Subaru observing proposals. R.P.K. assisted with the writing of the Chandra observing proposal.
[1]{}
, L., [Giovannini]{}, G., [Govoni]{}, F., [Murgia]{}, M. Clusters of galaxies: observational properties of the diffuse radio emission. [*[[Astron. Astrophys. Rev.]{}]{}*]{} [ **20**]{}, 54 (2012).
, G., [Jones]{}, T. W. Cosmic Rays in Galaxy Clusters and Their Nonthermal Emission. [*Int. J. Mod. Phys. D*]{} [**23**]{}, 30007 (2014).
, T. A., [Biermann]{}, P. L., [Klein]{}, U., [Kohle]{}, S. Cluster radio relics as a tracer of shock waves of the large-scale structure formation. [*[[Astron. Astrophys.]{}]{}*]{} [**332**]{}, 395-409 (1998).
, D., [Kang]{}, H., [Hallman]{}, E., [Jones]{} T. W. Cosmological Shock Waves and Their Role in the Large-Scale Structure of the Universe [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**593**]{}, 599-610 (2003).
, H., [Ryu]{}, D. Cosmic ray spectrum from diffusive shock acceleration. [*[[Astrophys. Space Sci.]{}]{}*]{} [**336**]{}, 263-268 (2011).
, G. , [Markevitch]{}, M., [Giacintucci]{}, S., [Brunetti]{}, G., [Venturi]{}, T., [Murray]{}, S. S. A Shock Front in the Merging Galaxy Cluster A754: X-ray and Radio Observations. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**728**]{}, 82 (2011).
, T. W., [Markevitch]{}, M., [Brown]{}, S., [Feretti]{}, L., [Gaensler]{}, B. M., [Johnston-Hollitt]{}, M., [Lage]{}, C., [Srinivasan]{}, R. Another shock for the Bullet cluster, and the source of seed electrons for radio relics. [*[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{} [**449**]{}, 1486-1494 (2015).
, H. and [Ryu]{}, D. and [Jones]{}, T. W. Diffusive Shock Acceleration Simulations of Radio Relics. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**756**]{}, 97 (2012).
, A. and [Oh]{}, S. P. and [Pfrommer]{}, C. Giant radio relics in galaxy clusters: reacceleration of fossil relativistic electrons? [*[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{} [**435**]{}, 1061-1082 (2013).
, F. and [Br[ü]{}ggen]{}, M. Do radio relics challenge diffusive shock acceleration? [*[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{} [**437**]{}, 2291-2296 (2014).
, M., [Takizawa]{}, M., [Akamatsu]{}, H., [Ohashi]{}, T., [Ishisaki]{}, Y., [Kawahara]{}, H., [van Weeren]{}, R. J. Suzaku observations of the galaxy cluster 1RXS J0603.3+4214: Implications of particle acceleration processes in the “Toothbrush” radio relic. [*[[Publ. Astron. Soc. Jpn.]{}]{}*]{} [**67**]{}, 113 (2015).
, R. J., [Brunetti]{}, G., [Br[ü]{}ggen]{}, M., [Andrade-Santos]{}, F., [Ogrean]{}, G. A., [Williams]{}, W. L., [R[ö]{}ttgering]{}, H. J. A., [Dawson]{}, W. A., [Forman]{}, W. R., [de Gasperin]{}, F., [Hardcastle]{}, M. J., [Jones]{}, C., [Miley]{}, G. K., [Rafferty]{}, D. A., [Rudnick]{}, L., [Sabater]{}, J., [Sarazin]{}, C. L., [Shimwell]{}, T. W., [Bonafede]{}, A., [Best]{}, P. N., [B[î]{}rzan]{}, L., [Cassano]{}, R., [Chy[ż]{}y]{}, K. T., [Croston]{}, J. H., [Dijkema]{}, T. J., [En[ß]{}lin]{}, T., [Ferrari]{}, C., [Heald]{}, G., [Hoeft]{}, M., [Horellou]{}, C., [Jarvis]{}, M. J., [Kraft]{}, R. P., [Mevius]{}, M., [Intema]{}, H. T., [Murray]{}, S. S., [Orr[ú]{}]{}, E., [Pizzo]{}, R., [Sridhar]{}, S. S., [Simionescu]{}, A., [Stroe]{}, A., [van der Tol]{}, S., [White]{}, G. J. LOFAR, VLA, and Chandra Observations of the Toothbrush Galaxy Cluster. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**818**]{}, 204 (2016).
, R. and [Eichler]{}, D. Particle acceleration at astrophysical shocks: A theory of cosmic ray origin. [*[[Phys. Rep.]{}]{}*]{} [**154**]{}, 1-75 (1987).
, H. R., [van Weeren]{}, R. J., [Edge]{}, A. C., [McNamara]{}, B. R., [Sanders]{}, J. S., [Fabian]{}, A. C., [Baum]{}, S. A., [Canning]{}, R. E. A., [Donahue]{}, M., [O’Dea]{}, C. P. A merger mystery: no extended radio emission in the merging cluster Abell 2146. [*[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{} [**417**]{}, 1-5 (2011).
, X. and [Sironi]{}, L. and [Narayan]{}, R. Non-thermal Electron Acceleration in Low Mach Number Collisionless Shocks. II. Firehose-mediated Fermi Acceleration and its Dependence on Pre-shock Conditions. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**797**]{}, 47 (2014).
, A., [Gastaldello]{}, F., [Brunetti]{}, G., [Dallacasa]{}, D. A shock at the radio relic position in Abell 115. [*[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{} [**460**]{}, 84-88 (2016).
, D., [Jauzac]{}, M., [Vazza]{}, F., [Owers]{}, M. S., [Kneib]{}, J.-P., [Tchernin]{}, C., [Intema]{}, H., [Knowles]{}, K. A shock front at the radio relic of Abell 2744. [*[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{} [**461**]{}, 1302-1307 (2016).
, M., [Govoni]{}, F., [Brunetti]{}, G., [Jerius]{}, D. Bow Shock and Radio Halo in the Merging Cluster A520. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [ **627**]{}, 733-738 (2005).
, H. and [Ryu]{}, D. Curved Radio Spectra of Weak Cluster Shocks. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**809**]{}, 186 (2015).
, A., [Intema]{}, H. T., [Br[ü]{}ggen]{}, M., [Girardi]{}, M., [Nonino]{}, M., [Kantharia]{}, N., [van Weeren]{}, R. J., [R[ö]{}ttgering]{}, H. J. A. Evidence for Particle Re-acceleration in the Radio Relic in the Galaxy Cluster PLCKG287.0+32.9. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**785**]{}, 1 (2014).
, G., [Feretti]{}, L., [Stanghellini]{}, C. The Coma cluster radio source 1253 + 275, revisited. [*[[Astron. Astrophys.]{}]{}*]{} [**252**]{}, 528-537 (1991).
, J., [Sirothia]{}, S. K., [Werner]{}, N., [Pandge]{}, M. B., [Kantharia]{}, N. G., [Ishwara-Chandra]{}, C. H., [Gopal-Krishna]{}, [Paul]{}, S., [Joshi]{}, S. Discovery of the First Giant Double Radio Relic in a Galaxy Cluster Found in the Planck Sunyaev-Zel’dovich Cluster Survey: PLCK G287.0+32.9. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**736**]{}, 8 (2011).
, T. A. & [Gopal-Krishna]{}, Reviving fossil radio plasma in clusters of galaxies by adiabatic compression in environmental shock waves. [*[[Astron. Astrophys.]{}]{}*]{}, [**366**]{}, 26-34 (2001).
, T. A. & [Br[ü]{}ggen]{}, M. On the formation of cluster radio relics. [*[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{}, [**331**]{}, 1011-1019 (2002).
, R. J., [Fogarty]{}, K., [Jones]{}, C., [Forman]{}, W. R., [Clarke]{}, T. E., [Br[ü]{}ggen]{}, M., [Kraft]{}, R. P., [Lal]{}, D. V., [Murray]{}, S. S., [R[ö]{}ttgering]{}, H. J. A. Complex Diffuse Radio Emission in the Merging Planck ESZ Cluster A3411. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**769**]{}, 101 (2013).
, G. and [Vacca]{}, V. and [Girardi]{}, M. and [Feretti]{}, L. and [Govoni]{}, F. and [Murgia]{}, M. The nature of the giant diffuse non-thermal source in the A3411-A3412 complex. [*[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{} [**435**]{}, 518-523 (2013).
, R. J., [R[ö]{}ttgering]{}, H. J. A., [Br[ü]{}ggen]{}, M., [Hoeft]{}, M. Particle Acceleration on Megaparsec Scales in a Merging Galaxy Cluster. [*Science*]{} [**330**]{}, 347 (2010).
, Y., [Takizawa]{}, M., [Yamazaki]{}, R., [Akamatsu]{}, H., [Ohno]{}, H. Turbulent Cosmic-Ray Reacceleration at Radio Relics and Halos in Clusters of Galaxies. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**815**]{}, 116 (2015).
, F., [Eckert]{}, D., [Br[ü]{}ggen]{}, M., [Huber]{}, B. Electron and proton acceleration efficiency by merger shocks in galaxy clusters. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**451**]{}, 2198-2211 (2015).
, A. and [Fiuza]{}, F. and [Bret]{}, A. and [Fonseca]{}, R. A. and [Silva]{}, L. O. Exploring the nature of collisionless shocks under laboratory conditions. [*Nature Scientific Reports*]{} [**3934**]{} (2014).
, R. J., [Ogrean]{}, G. A., [Jones]{}, C., [Forman]{}, W. R., [Andrade-Santos]{}, F., [Bonafede]{}, A., [Br[ü]{}ggen]{}, M., [Bulbul]{}, E., [Clarke]{}, T. E., [Churazov]{}, E., [David]{}, L., [Dawson]{}, W. A., [Donahue]{}, M., [Goulding]{}, A., [Kraft]{}, R. P., [Mason]{}, B., [Merten]{}, J., [Mroczkowski]{}, T., [Murray]{}, S. S., [Nulsen]{}, P. E. J. and [Rosati]{}, P., [Roediger]{}, E., [Randall]{}, S. W., [Sayers]{}, J., [Umetsu]{}, K., [Vikhlinin]{}, A., [Zitrin]{}, A. The Discovery of Lensed Radio and X-Ray Sources behind the Frontier Fields Cluster MACS J0717.5+3745 with the JVLA and Chandra. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**817**]{}, 98 (2016).
, J. P., [Waters]{}, B., [Schiebel]{}, D., [Young]{}, W. , [Golap]{}, K. CASA Architecture and Applications. [ *Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XVI, R. A. [Shaw]{}, F. [Hill]{}, D. J. [Bell]{} eds. Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series*]{} [**376**]{}, 127 (2007).
, T. J., [Golap]{}, K., [Bhatnagar]{}, S. The Noncoplanar Baselines Effect in Radio Interferometry: The W-Projection Algorithm. [*IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process.*]{} [**2**]{}, 647-657 (2008).
, T. J., [Golap]{}, K., [Bhatnagar]{}, S. W Projection: A New Algorithm for Wide Field Imaging with Radio Synthesis Arrays. [*Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XIV P. [Shopbell]{}, M. [Britton]{}, R. [Ebert]{}, eds. Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series*]{} [**347**]{}, 86 (2005).
, A. R., [de Bruyn]{}, A. G., [Biehl]{}, M., [Zaroubi]{}, S., [Bernardi]{}, G., [Pandey]{}, V. N. Post-correlation radio frequency interference classification methods [*[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{} [**405**]{}, 155-167 (2010).
, A. R., [Stil]{}, J. M., [Sunstrum]{}, C. A Rotation Measure Image of the Sky. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**702**]{}, 1230-1236 (2009).
, B. L. and [Riley]{}, J. M. The morphology of extragalactic radio sources of high and low luminosity. [*[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{} [**167**]{}, 31-36 (1974).
, A., [Markevitch]{}, M., [Murray]{}, S. S., [Jones]{}, C., [Forman]{}, W., [Van Speybroeck]{}, L. Chandra Temperature Profiles for a Sample of Nearby Relaxed Galaxy Clusters. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**628**]{}, 655-672 (2005).
, D., [Molendi]{}, S., [Paltani]{}, S. The cool-core bias in X-ray galaxy cluster samples. I. Method and application to HIFLUGCS. [*[[Astron. Astrophys.]{}]{}*]{} [**526**]{}, 79 (2011).
, G. A., [Br[ü]{}ggen]{}, M., [van Weeren]{}, R. J., [R[ö]{}ttgering]{}, H., [Croston]{}, J. H., [Hoeft]{}, M. Challenges to our understanding of radio relics: X-ray observations of the Toothbrush cluster. [*[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{} [**433**]{}, 812-824 (2013).
, S., [Komiyama]{}, Y., [Sekiguchi]{}, M., [Okamura]{}, S., [Doi]{}, M., [Furusawa]{}, H., [Hamabe]{}, M., [Imi]{}, K., [Kimura]{}, M., [Nakata]{}, F., [Okada]{}, N., [Ouchi]{}, M., [Shimasaku]{}, K., [Yagi]{}, M. , [Yasuda]{}, N. Subaru Prime Focus Camera – Suprime-Cam. [*[[Publ. Astron. Soc. Jpn.]{}]{}*]{} [**54**]{}, 833-853 (2002).
, M. J., [Stroe]{}, A., [Dawson]{}, W., [Wittman]{}, D., [Hoekstra]{}, H., [Br[ü]{}ggen]{}, M., [R[ö]{}ttgering]{}, H., [Sobral]{}, D., [van Weeren]{}, R. J. MC $^{2}$: Constraining the Dark Matter Distribution of the Violent Merging Galaxy Cluster CIZA J2242.8+5301 by Piercing through the Milky Way. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**802**]{}, 46 (2015).
, A., [Sobral]{}, D., [R[ö]{}ttgering]{}, H. J. A., [van Weeren]{}, R. J. The role of cluster mergers and travelling shocks in shaping the H[$\alpha$]{} luminosity function at $z \sim 0.2$: ‘sausage’ and ‘toothbrush’ clusters. [ *[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{} [**438**]{}, 1377-1390 (2014).
, D., [Stroe]{}, A., [Dawson]{}, W. A., [Wittman]{}, D., [Jee]{}, M. J., [R[ö]{}ttgering]{}, H., [van Weeren]{}, R. J., [Br[ü]{}ggen]{}, M. MC$^{2}$: boosted AGN and star formation activity in CIZA J2242.8+5301, a massive post-merger cluster at z = 0.19. [*[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{} [**450**]{}, 630-645 (2015).
, E., [*Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XV, C. [Gabriel]{}, C. [Arviset]{}, D. [Ponz]{}, S. [Enrique]{}, eds., Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series*]{} [**351**]{}, 112 (2006).
N. [Zacharias]{}, [*et al.*]{}, [*[[Astron. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**145**]{}, 44 (2013).
, E., [Mellier]{}, Y., [Radovich]{}, M., [Missonnier]{}, G., [Didelon]{}, P., [Morin]{}, B. The TERAPIX Pipeline. [*Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XI, D. A. [Bohlender]{}, D. [Durand]{}, T. H. [Handley]{}, eds., Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series*]{} [**281**]{}, 228 (2002).
, S. M., [Phillips]{}, A. C., [Kibrick]{}, R. I., [Alcott]{}, B., [Allen]{}, S. L., [Burrous]{}, J., [Cantrall]{}, T., [Clarke]{}, D., [Coil]{}, A. L., [Cowley]{}, D. J., [Davis]{}, M., [Deich]{}, W. T. S., [Dietsch]{}, K., [Gilmore]{}, D. K., [Harper]{}, C. A., [Hilyard]{}, D. F., [Lewis]{}, J. P., [McVeigh]{}, M., [Newman]{}, J., [Osborne]{}, J., [Schiavon]{}, R., [Stover]{}, R. J., [Tucker]{}, D., [Wallace]{}, V., [Wei]{}, M., [Wirth]{}, G., [Wright]{}, C. A. The DEIMOS spectrograph for the Keck II Telescope: integration and testing. [*Instrument Design and Performance for Optical/Infrared Ground-based Telescopes, M. [Iye]{}, A. F. M. [Moorwood]{}, eds. (2003), [[Proc. SPIE Int. Soc. Opt. Eng.]{}]{}*]{} [**4841**]{}, 1657-1669 (2003).
, W. A., [Jee]{}, M. J., [Stroe]{}, A., [Ng]{}, Y. K., [Golovich]{}, N., [Wittman]{}, D., [Sobral]{}, D., [Br[ü]{}ggen]{}, M., [R[ö]{}ttgering]{}, H. J. A. and [van Weeren]{}, R. J. MC$^{2}$: Galaxy Imaging and Redshift Analysis of the Merging Cluster CIZA J2242.8+5301. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**805**]{}, 143 (2015).
, J. A, [Cooper]{}, M. C., [Davis]{}, M., [Faber]{}, S. M., [Coil]{}, A. L., [Guhathakurta]{}, P., [Koo]{}, D. C., [Phillips]{}, A. C., [Conroy]{}, C., [Dutton]{}, A. A., [Finkbeiner]{}, D. P., [Gerke]{}, B. F., [Rosario]{}, D. J., [Weiner]{}, B. J., [Willmer]{}, C. N. A., [Yan]{}, R., [Harker]{}, J. J., [Kassin]{}, S. A., [Konidaris]{}, N. P., [Lai]{}, K., [Madgwick]{}, D. S., [Noeske]{}, K. G., [Wirth]{}, G. D., [Connolly]{}, A. J., [Kaiser]{}, N., [Kirby]{}, E. N., [Lemaux]{}, B. C., [Lin]{}, L., [Lotz]{}, J. M., [Luppino]{}, G. A., [Marinoni]{}, C., [Matthews]{}, D. J., [Metevier]{}, A., [Schiavon]{}, R. P. The DEEP2 Galaxy Redshift Survey: Design, Observations, Data Reduction, and Redshifts. [*[[Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.]{}]{}*]{} [**208**]{}, 5 (2013).
, L. M., [Riley]{}, J. M., [Hardcastle]{}, M. J. Observed properties of FRII quasars and radio galaxies at $z < 1.0$. [*[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{} [**390**]{}, 595-621 (2008).
, J., [Roettiger]{}, K., [Burns]{}, J. O., [Bird]{}, C. M. Evaluation of Statistical Tests for Substructure in Clusters of Galaxies. [*[[Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.]{}]{}*]{} [ **104**]{}, 1 (1996).
, M., [Vennik]{}, J., [Nurmi]{}, P., [Tempel]{}, E., [Ahvensalmi]{}, A., [Tago]{}, E., [Liivam[ä]{}gi]{}, L. J., [Saar]{}, E., [Hein[ä]{}m[ä]{}ki]{}, P., [Einasto]{}, J., [Mart[í]{}nez]{}, V. J. Multimodality in galaxy clusters from SDSS DR8: substructure and velocity distribution. [*[[Astron. Astrophys.]{}]{}*]{} [**540**]{}, 123 (2012).
, R. E., [Raftery]{} A. E. Bayes Factors. [*J. Am. Stat. Assoc.*]{} [**90**]{}, 773-795 (1995).
, T. C.m [Flynn]{}, K., [Gebhardt]{}, K. Measures of location and scale for velocities in clusters of galaxies - A robust approach [*[[Astron. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**100**]{}, 32-46 (1990).
, A. E., [Bialek]{}, J., [Busha]{}, M., [White]{}, M., [Habib]{}, S., [Heitmann]{}, K., [Warren]{}, M., [Rasia]{}, E., [Tormen]{}, G., [Moscardini]{}, L., [Power]{}, C., [Jenkins]{}, A. R., [Gao]{}, L., [Frenk]{}, C. S., [Springel]{}, V., [White]{}, S. D. M. , [Diemand]{}, J. Virial Scaling of Massive Dark Matter Halos: Why Clusters Prefer a High Normalization Cosmology. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**672**]{}, 122-137 (2008).
, W. A., [Wittman]{}, D., [Jee]{}, M. J., [Gee]{}, P., [Hughes]{}, J. P., [Tyson]{}, J. A., [Schmidt]{}, S., [Thorman]{}, P., [Brada[č]{}]{}, M., [Miyazaki]{}, S., [Lemaux]{}, B., [Utsumi]{}, Y., [Margoniner]{}, V. E. Discovery of a Dissociative Galaxy Cluster Merger with Large Physical Separation. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**747**]{}, 42 (2012).
, W. A. The Dynamics of Merging Clusters: A Monte Carlo Solution Applied to the Bullet and Musket Ball Clusters. [*[[Astrophys. J.]{}]{}*]{} [**772**]{}, 131 (2013).
, K. Y., [Dawson]{}, W. A., [Wittman]{}, D., [Jee]{}, M. J., [Hughes]{}, J. P., [Menanteau]{}, F., [Sif[ó]{}n]{}, C. The return of the merging galaxy subclusters of El Gordo? [*[[Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.]{}]{}*]{} [**453**]{}, 1531-1549 (2015).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Although some non-trivial photon number resolving detectors exist, it may still be convenient to discriminate photon number states with the method of multiplexed detection. Multiplexing can be performed with paths in real space, with paths in time, and in principle with any degree of freedom that has a sufficient number of eigenstates and that can be coupled to the photon number. Previous works have addressed the probabilities involved in these measurements with Monte Carlo simulations, or by restricting the number of detectors to powers of 2, or without including quantum efficiency or noise. In this work we find an analytical expression of the detection probabilities for any number of input photons and any number of on/off photon detectors with a quantum efficiency $0\%\leq\eta\leq100\%$ and a false count probability $\varepsilon\geq0$. This allows us to retrodict the number of photons that we had at the input in the least unbiased way possible. We conclude our work with some examples.'
author:
- 'Filippo. M. Miatto$^{1}$, Akbar Safari$^{1}$, Robert W. Boyd$^{1,2}$'
bibliography:
- 'multiplexingBibliography.bib'
title: Theory of multiplexed photon number discrimination
---
Introduction
============
For practical applications of quantum optics it would be a great advantage to have a detector that can discriminate between different photon number states [@silberhorn2007detecting]. There are currently several different solutions that allow one to achieve this to some extent [@miller2003demonstration; @fujiwara2005multiphoton; @gansen2007photon; @kardynal2007photon; @divochiy2008superconducting; @namekata2010non], but the resources that such detectors require (such as very low temperatures, costly materials and/or optical configurations) make them rather costly to obtain and operate. There are workarounds that involve squeezing more information out of the conventional detectors [@kim1999multiphoton; @kardynal2008avalanche], or by multiplexing the photons towards multiple single-photon detectors [@achilles2003fiber; @fitch2003photon; @achilles2004photon; @jiang2007photon; @lantz2008multi; @avenhaus2010accessing; @thomas2012practical].
The most common single-photon detectors are only able to tell us whether they detected “zero photons” or “more than zero photons”. Furthermore they are subject to noise and a sub-optimal efficiency, which means that sometimes they click when they shouldn’t have clicked or that they fail to click when they should have clicked [@hadfield2009single].
In this work we explore photon-number discrimination by multiplexing, our novel contribution is to take into account quantum efficiency and noise, as well as any number of detectors.
Discrimination probability
==========================
Consider a linear device that converts $D$ inputs into $D$ outputs. A single-mode input then becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\hat a_\mathrm{in}^\dagger\rightarrow\sum_{j=1}^D\beta_j \hat b_j^\dagger,\end{aligned}$$ where the vector with entries $\beta_j$ corresponds to a row of the corresponding transformation matrix. If the device is balanced, we have $|\beta_j|^2=\frac1D$. A possible physical model for this device can be a cascaded sequence of $D-1$ conventional beamsplitters, with reflectivities $\frac{1}{D}$, $\frac{1}{D-1}$ …$\frac{1}{2}$, but other possibilities exist, including on-chip solutions. We note that all-optical solutions are just one area of applicability of our results, which can be applied to any multiplexer with a final set of detectors, which can be even as large as the set of pixels in an EMCCD or an ICCD. Configurations of the multiplexing part with closed paths are to be avoided, because the bosonic nature of photons would make them bunch and bypass the loops. For the same reason, we are not required to take phases into account. The multiplexer finally couples to a set of on/off single photon detectors. We wish to calculate the probability of observing $C$ clicks, given an initial photon number state of $N$ photons and given that all $D$ detectors have a quantum efficiency $\eta$ and a dark count probability $\varepsilon$. We start from the ideal case $\eta=1,\ \varepsilon=0$ and then move on to the general case $0\leq\eta\leq1,\ 0\leq\varepsilon\leq1$ and from the general case we retrieve a simple Corollary that holds for $0\leq\eta\leq1,\ \varepsilon\ll N/D$.
Ideal detectors
---------------
The fundamental ingredient for our analysis is the probability of distributing $N$ photons into exactly $C$ out of $D$ detectors. We start by numbering the detectors from 1 to $D$, then a certain string of numbers will describe an event, where the detectors numbered in the string are the ones that clicked. Note that in absence of noise the number of events cannot exceed the number of input photons, i.e. $C\leq N$.
\[lemma\] The probability of observing $C$ clicks by distributing a Fock state of $N$ photons evenly amongst $D$ ideal (i.e. noiseless and with 100% quantum efficiency) on/off detectors is given by $$P_D(C|N)={D\choose C}\frac{C!}{D^N}\mathcal{S}_N^C,$$ where $\mathcal{S}$ is the Stirling number of second kind.
Our goal is to compute the number of detection strings (i.e. the strings of numbers describing a detection event) that include exactly $C$ out of $D$ detectors.
Call $S_i$ the set of strings corresponding to $N$ input photons that do not include the $i$-th detector. Then select a specific subset $\mathcal K$ of cardinality $|\mathcal K|=k$ from the $D$ detectors. The set of strings that do not include any of the detectors in $\mathcal K$ is the intersection of the sets excluding each of the elements of $\mathcal K$: $\bigcap_{i\in \mathcal K}S_i$ and its cardinality is $$\begin{aligned}
\left|\bigcap_{i\in \mathcal K}S_i\right|=(D-k)^N\end{aligned}$$ as we have $N$ choices with repetition, from $(D-k)$ possible detectors. Of course, we are also counting strings that exclude *any other* detector, in addition to the ones in $\mathcal K$. To get around this problem, we use the inclusion-exclusion rule to count the elements in unions of sets $S_i$. In particular, we need the union of $S_i$ for $i\in\{1,\dots,D\}$, i.e. the set of all strings that exclude *at least* 1 detector, whose cardinality is $$\begin{aligned}
\left|\bigcup_{i=1}^D S_i\right|=\sum_{j=1}^D(-1)^{j+1}{D\choose j}(D-j)^N\end{aligned}$$ The complement of this set is the set of strings that include all $D$ detectors (if they missed any they would fall in $\bigcup_{i=1}^D S_i$), so by De Morgan’s law we have $$\begin{aligned}
\left|\overline{\bigcup_{i=1}^D S_i}\right|=\left|\bigcap_{i=1}^D\overline{S_i}\right|=\sum_{j=0}^D(-1)^{j}{D\choose j}(D-j)^N\end{aligned}$$ Finally, we can compute the number of strings that include precisely $C$ out of $D$ detectors: pick $D-C$ detectors to be excluded (there are $D\choose C$ ways of doing this) and compute the number of strings that include all of the remaining $C$ detectors: $$\begin{aligned}
{D\choose C}\left|\bigcap_{i=1}^C\overline{S_i}\right|&={D\choose C}\sum_{j=0}^{C}(-1)^{j}{C\choose j}(C-j)^N\\
&={D\choose C}C!\,\mathcal{S}_N^C,\end{aligned}$$ where $\mathcal{S}_N^C$ is the Stirling number of the second kind. So the probability of ending up with exactly $C$ clicks is the result above divided by the total number of possible strings $D^N$: $$\begin{aligned}
P_D(C|N)&={D\choose C}\frac{C!}{D^N}\mathcal{S}_N^C
\label{stirling}\end{aligned}$$ and our proof is complete.
Nonideal detectors
------------------
Nonideal detectors are subject to mainly two effects: sub-unity quantum efficiency and noise, which can come from various sources. We model these as Bernoulli trials, where for each detector we have a probability $\eta$ of missing the photon and a probability $\varepsilon$ of a false count within the measurement window, in which case we learn that the detector clicked regardless of a photon hitting it or not (we don’t worry about the source of noise, be it a dark count where the detector really fires albeit for no reason, or just electronic noise where we are informed of a click without it necessarily happening). Whether a detector detects an actual photon or gives a false count, we consider it out of order until the electronics have enough time to reset (e.g. about 40 ns for avalanche photodiodes). In this section we take both of these effects into account.
The probability of observing $C$ clicks by distributing a Fock state of $N$ photons evenly amongst $D$ on/off detectors with quantum efficiency $\eta$ and false count probability $\varepsilon$ is given by $$P_{D,\eta,\varepsilon}(C|N)=\sum_{i=0}^C p_\varepsilon(i|D)\sum_{j=C-i}^N p_{\frac{D-i}{D}}(j|N)\sum_{k=C-i}^j p_\eta(k|j)P_{D-i}(C-i|k),$$ where $p_\xi(m|n)={n\choose m}\xi^m(1-\xi)^{n-m}$ is the probability of having $m$ successes out of $n$ trials when the success probability of a single trial is $\xi$.
The proof comprises of 3 steps, each of which is of a similar nature: we consider in which ways an event can happen and we sum the relative probabilities. In the first step we split the observed number of clicks into spurious and real clicks. In the second step we split the initial photons into those that landed onto inactive detectors (the noisy ones) and those that landed onto active ones. In the third step we split the photons that landed onto active detectors into those that made it past the quantum efficiency and those that didn’t. Finally, we use the ideal detection Lemma.
*Step 1* We sum over the probability of obtaining $C$ total clicks by having $i$ of them come from noise and $C-i$ come from actual detections. We write the probability of $i$ false events given $D$ detectors as $p_\varepsilon(i|D)={D\choose i}\varepsilon^i(1-\varepsilon)^{D-i}$.
*Step 2* Now $C-i$ clicks must come from real detection events from the remaining $D-i$ active detectors. The probability that $j$ out of $N$ photons make to the $D-i$ active detectors is $p_{\frac{D-i}{D}}(j|N)$.
*Step 3* As our detectors have a quantum efficiency $\eta\leq1$, the probability of remaining with $k$ out of $j$ photons is given by $p_\eta(k|j)$.
Now we can now apply the Lemma to write the probability of detecting $C-i$ out of $k$ survivor photons with $D-i$ detectors and combine these steps in the final result.
There is a simple corollary of this theorem, which describes the case $\varepsilon=0$. Such corollary can be used even for noisy detectors as long as $D\varepsilon\ll N$:
The probability of observing $C$ clicks by distributing a Fock state of $N$ photons evenly amongst $D$ noiseless on/off detectors with quantum efficiency $\eta$ is given by $$P_{D,\eta}(C|N)=\sum_{k=C}^N p_\eta(k|N)P_{D}(C|k).$$
We use the identity $p_0(m|n)=\delta_{m,0}$ to replace every occurrence of $i$ in the noisy detection Theorem by 0, and the identity $p_1(m|n)=\delta_{m,n}$ to replace every occurrence of $j$ by $N$. This gets rid of the first two summations and the result follows.
retrodicting the photon number
==============================
To retrodict the photon number *given* an observed number of clicks, we have to invert the probability in the main theorem using Bayes’ rule: $$\begin{aligned}
P_{D,\eta,\varepsilon}(N|C)=\frac{P_{D,\eta,\varepsilon}(C|N)Pr(N)}{\sum_k P_{D,\eta,\varepsilon}(C|k)Pr(k)}
\label{bayes}\end{aligned}$$ This general formula is always valid, but it cannot be solved explicitly unless we specify the prior, which is what we will do next, for some special cases of particular relevance.
Poisson prior
-------------
In case of a Poissonian prior with mean photon number $\mu$ (which may occur when we deal with coherent states): $$\begin{aligned}
Pr(N)=\frac{\mu^N e^{-\mu}}{N!},\end{aligned}$$ we can find an explicit expression for the ideal retrodiction probability: $$\begin{aligned}
P_{D}^\mathrm{Poisson}(N|C)=\frac{C!\,\mathcal{S}_N^C}{N!\,\gamma^{N}}\frac{1}{(e^{1/\gamma}-1)^{C}}\end{aligned}$$ where $\gamma=D/\mu$.
Thermal prior
-------------
In case of a thermal prior with mean photon number $\mu$ (which occurs for instance for two-mode squeezed vacuum states or for EPR states) $$\begin{aligned}
Pr(N)=\frac{\mu^N}{(\mu+1)^{N+1}},\end{aligned}$$ the ideal retrodiction probability can be written as: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{thermal}
P_{D}^\mathrm{Therm}(N|C)=\frac{C!\,\mathcal{S}_N^C}{(D+\gamma)^{N}}\frac{\Gamma(D+\gamma)}{\Gamma(D+\gamma-C)!}\end{aligned}$$
Considerations
--------------
When one moves away from the ideal case, a sub-unity quantum efficiency plays a fundamental role, while the number of detectors is typically less important. One finds that the probability of detecting all the input photons with a noiseless apparatus, saturates at a value lower than 1 even for an infinite number of detectors: $$\begin{aligned}
\lim_{D\rightarrow\infty}P_{D,\eta}(N|N)=\eta^N\lim_{D\rightarrow\infty}P_{D}(N|N)=\eta^N\end{aligned}$$
The effect of noise in the detectors is tangible only when their number is sufficiently large, for instance when the number of spurious counts is comparable with the actual number of photons hitting the detectors i.e. when $D\varepsilon\approx N$.
Applications
============
We now would like to give a few examples of how to apply our results. The examples will be retrodiction of photon number for heralding quantum states.
Example 1: heralding of a NOON state
------------------------------------
For this example we consider the following setup: we replace the two mirrors in the middle of a Mach-Zehnder (MZ) interferometer with 50:50 beam splitters and add detectors to measure the photons that leak. This configuration (if the phase difference between the two arms of the MZ is set to $\pi/2$) will output a $(|4,0\rangle+|0,4\rangle)/\sqrt{2}$ state if we start with the state $|3,3\rangle$ and if each of the two detectors measures exactly 1 photon.
Now the question is how well do we know that we had exactly 1 photon at the detectors? If we resort to multiplexed detection, we first need to compute the prior joint probability $Pr(N_1,N_2)$ of having $N_1$ photons at detector 1 and $N_2$ photons at detector 2. This is achieved using simple input-output relations for 50:50 beam splitters; we report it in Fig.\[table\].
![\[table\]Joint probabilities of having $(i,j)$ photons (where $i$ and $j$ are listed in the headings on top and on the left) at the detectors in the modified MZ interferometer of the NOON state heralding example. These are computed assuming the input $|3,3\rangle$.](table.pdf){width="0.7\columnwidth"}
Then, we apply Bayes’ rule (assuming that the two sets of multiplexed detectors are identical, but we could easily modify the equation below to account for different configurations) and find $P_{D,\eta,\varepsilon}(N_1,N_2|C_1,C_2)$ to be given by $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{P_{D,\eta,\varepsilon}(C_1|N_1)P_{D,\eta,\varepsilon}(C_2|N_2)Pr(N_1,N_2)}{\sum_{k_1,k_2} P_{D,\eta,\varepsilon}(C_1|k_1)P_{D,\eta,\varepsilon}(C_2|k_2)Pr(k_1,k_2)}\end{aligned}$$ We finally use the quantity $P_{D,\eta,\varepsilon}(N_1,N_2|C_1,C_2)$ to infer the retrodictive power of our multiplexed detectors. To complete the example, in Fig. \[retroNOON\] we plot the retrodicted probabilities of four configurations: 4 and 16 detectors with 60% and 75% quantum efficiency (and 500 dark counts/sec, with 10 ns gated measurement window), given that they both reported a single click each.
-- --
-- --
For comparison, in Fig. \[retroNOON2\] we plot the retrodiction probabilities for a non-multiplexed measurement.
-- --
-- --
Example 2: single photon heralding from squeezed vacuum
-------------------------------------------------------
We now consider an example of single photon heralding from a two-mode squeezed vacuum, which is performed by producing photons in pairs and heralding one by detecting the other. Such two-mode state can be generated by pumping a nonlinear crystal with an intense coherent laser pulse. The output of the process is a state in the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
\hat S(\zeta)|0,0\rangle=\sum_{n=0}^\infty e^{in\phi}\frac{\sinh(g)^n}{\left(\sinh(g)^2+1\right)^{\frac{n+1}{2}}}|n,n\rangle,\end{aligned}$$ where $\zeta=g e^{i\phi}$ is the squeezing parameter. For small enough values of the gain $g$ one can indeed ignore components with photon number larger than 1, but if the gain is too large the heralded state can contain more than 1 photon. If such states were further used for crucial applications such as quantum cryptography, they would be vulnerable for example to the photon number splitting attack. Could a multiplexed detection scheme make for a better heralded single-photon source? First note that the amplitudes of the two-mode squeezed vacuum follow a thermal distribution, if we recognize that $\sinh(g)^2$ is the mean photon number per mode. Then, we apply Eq. to find the retrodicted photon number distribution, which we plot for a few examples in Fig. \[retroSqueezed\]. Note that as the gain increases, the probability of the various number states levels off and becomes stable.
-- --
-- --
conclusions and outlook
=======================
In conclusion, we have shown the most unbiased way of analyzing a detection event in a multiplexed measurement scheme, taking noise and efficiency into account. The corollary of our theorem can apply even to realistic situations if some conditions on the noise are met, which can be very advantageous as it is computationally much simpler to implement than the full theorem.
Our results can be applied also to optical engineering issues such as on-chip denoising in consumer imaging devices, where multiple pixels can fill an Airy disk and can be used to retrodict the intensity more accurately. There are still interesting questions to be asked, for instance whether it is possible to find closed form solutions of Eq. \[bayes\] for useful priors when the quantum efficiency is not unity, or if there is a reasonable way of relaxing the assumption of uniform illumination. We leave these to a future work.
Acknowledgements
================
This work was supported by the Canada Excellence Research Chairs program.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Binary systems where the axis of rotation (spin) of one or both components is tilted w.r.t. the axis of revolution are called *misaligned* binary systems. The angle of misalignment, obliquity, has been measured for a handful of stars and extrasolar planets to date. Here we present a mathematical framework for a complete and rigorous treatment of misalignment and introduce an extension to the public PHOEBE code that implements this framework. We discuss misalignment for the Roche geometry and introduce methods for computing stellar shapes, equilibrium (generalized Lagrange) points of the potential and minimal requirements for lobe existence. Efficient parameterization of misalignment is proposed in the plane-of-sky coordinates and implementation details in PHOEBE are given alongside the proof-of-concept toy model, comparison with a known misaligned binary DI Her, and comparison with a misaligned planetary system Kepler-13. We provide important mathematical details of the model in the Appendix. This paper accompanies the release of PHOEBE 2.1, which is available from its website `http://phoebe-project.org`.'
author:
- Martin Horvat
- 'Kyle E. Conroy'
- Herbert Pablo
- 'Kelly M. Hambleton'
- Angela Kochoska
- Joseph Giammarco
- Andrej Prša
bibliography:
- 'misaligned.bib'
title: 'Physics of Eclipsing Binaries. III. Spin-Orbit Misalignment'
---
Introduction
============
At first glance it is very tempting to think that stars in stellar systems would have their rotational axes aligned with the orbital axis: the total angular momentum during a protostellar cloud contraction is conserved, so we expect a high degree of retained symmetry. Yet this is not what we observe in nature.
Looking at our Solar System alone, we see that misalignment abounds. The angle between the axes of rotation and revolution (or, conversely, between the equatorial and orbital planes) is called *axial tilt* or *obliquity*. If obliquity is $0$, then the two axes are aligned. Starting with the Sun, its equator is tilted to the ecliptic by $7.25^\circ$. Earth’s equator is tilted on average $23.44^\circ$ and it precesses at a rate of $\sim50''$/year, so obliquity changes as a function of time. Solar system planets all orbit very close to the ecliptic plane (within $\sim7^\circ$), but their rotational axes are nowhere near aligned, ranging from $0.2^\circ$ to $82^\circ$ [@aa2018].
Transiting exoplanet host stars exhibit a wide range in their obliquities, from completely aligned (i.e. HD 189733; @winn2006), to moderately aligned (i.e. XO-3 at $37^\circ$; @hirano2011), to perpendicular (WASP-7; @albrecht2012) and even retrograde (WASP-17; @anderson2010). Giant extrasolar planets on very close, eccentric orbits (the so-called hot and warm Jupiters) also demonstrate a large range and oscillatory behavior in their obliquities [@dawson2014]. Two good reviews on the methodology and results of obliquity measurements in exoplanet systems are done by @winn2015 and @triaud2017.
Lastly, there are two shining examples for misalignment among eclipsing binary stars: DI Her [@albrecht2009; @philippov2013] and CV Vel [@albrecht2014]. DI Her is the current record holder with the sky-projected spin-orbit angles of $\beta_p = 72^\circ \pm 4^\circ$ and $\beta_s = -84^\circ \pm 8^\circ$ for the primary and secondary star, respectively, while CV Vel features a misaligned primary at $\beta_p = -52^\circ \pm 6^\circ$ and a (sky-projected) aligned secondary at $\beta_s = 3^\circ \pm 7^\circ$.
The most commonly used method to measure misalignment is to acquire spectroscopic observations of a binary star during the eclipse. The measured radial velocity is a weighted average of individual radial velocities across the visible elements of the star. In a misaligned system, the transiting star no longer passes along the parallel of the eclipsed star, resulting in an asymmetry in the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect (RME; @rossiter1924 [@mclaughlin1924]). Furthermore, as the obliquity affects the distortion of the eclipsed star, it will also affect the intensities and weighting of the individual eclipsed elements (most notably due to gravity brightening). Together, these deviations from the aligned case are called the *anomalous* Rossiter-McLaughlin effect.
The analytical formalism for binary systems with misaligned rotational and orbital angular velocity vectors has been discussed previously by [@limber1963; @kruszewski1966; @avni1982]. It was not until now, however, that this effect has been built into an eclipsing binary (EB) modeling code. A few recent reports [@winn2006; @albrecht2012; @triaud2013; @harding2013] use the anomalous RME to measure obliquity, but none of these provide any technical insight into their treatment of *tidally and gravitationally distorted* binary systems. Our goal is to provide that here, along with a publicly available tool to model misaligned cases. We discuss different aspects of modeling binary systems with spin-orbit misalignment. We focus on properly defining the model and its parameters in Section 2 and discuss equilibrium (generalized Lagrange) points of the misaligned potential in Section 3. In Section 4, we demonstrate the misalignment treatment with a toy model as implemented in the open-source software package [PHOEBE]{}[@prsa2016a], and on two observed systems: DI Her and Kepler-13. In the Appendix, we provide further technical details about the model, along with mathematical tools to compute poles, area,s and volumes that are used for a robust synthesis of observables (light curves, radial velocity curves, and spectral line profiles).
Effective potential {#sec:eff_pot}
===================
In this section we introduce the framework for misaligned spin axes in binaries. We use the following nomenclature: vectors are denoted with boldface (i.e. ${\bm{r}}$); vectors with unit magnitude (unit vectors) are denoted with a $\bm{\hat{}}$ symbol (i.e. ${\bm{\hat{r}}}$); vector magnitudes (norms) are slanted (i.e. $r \equiv \| {\bm{r}} \|$); and fractional, unitless values are denoted with greek letters (i.e. $\rho = r/a$) with $a$ being the semi-major axis of the considered binary system.
Let two stars (labeled A and B) rotate in the $xy$ plane of the inertial coordinate system about the common center of the mass (labeled C) with an angular frequency $\omega_{\rm L}$. The angular momentum ${\bm{L}}$ of the binary system points in the direction of the $z$-axis of the inertial coordinate frame. Let star A rotate uniformly with angular velocity ${\bm{\omega}}_\mathrm{S} = \omega_\mathrm{S} {\bm{\hat{S}}}$ about its center of mass, where ${\bm{\hat{S}}}$ is the unit spin vector. We introduce a *canonical* coordinate system with the origin at the center of star A, the $x$-axis pointing toward the center of star B and the $z$-axis aligned with orbital axis (i.e. the $z$-axis of the inertial system). We denote the orthogonal vector basis of the canonical coordinate system by $({\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}, {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\j}}}}, {\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}})$. A schematic of the binary system and the canonical coordinate system are depicted in Fig. \[fig:binary\].
![Schematic diagram of a binary system comprised of stars A and B. The center of mass is at point C. The canonical coordinate system, $(x,y,z)$, has the origin at and is co-rotating with the orbital motion of star A. The orbital angular momentum, denoted by ${\bm{L}}$, is aligned with the $z$-axis. The axis of rotation of star A is denoted by ${\bm{\hat{S}}}$. The distance between the centers of both stars is $d$.[]{data-label="fig:binary"}](binary_coord.pdf){width="80.00000%"}
The lobes of the stars are defined as the surfaces of constant pressure and density. These lobes are approximated by iso-surfaces of the potential $V$, which is written in the canonical coordinate system as: $$V({\bm{r}}) =
-\frac{GM_\mathrm{A}}{r}
-\frac{GM_\mathrm{B}}{\|{\bm{r}} - d {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}\|}
+\frac{GM_\mathrm{B}}{d^2} ({\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}\cdot {\bm{r}})
-\frac{1}{2} \omega_{\mathrm S}^2 \|({{\bm{\hat{S}}}} \cdot {\bm{r}}){{\bm{\hat{S}}}} - {\bm{r}} \|^2 \>,
\label{eq:kopal_potential}$$ with ${\bm{r}}$ denoting the position and $d$ denoting the distance between the stars. The masses of stars A and B are labeled by $M_\mathrm{A}$ and $M_\mathrm{B}$, respectively. A detailed discussion and derivation of the potential $V$ for a circular orbit can be found in @limber1963 and its generalization to the non-circular case, as used here, is presented in @avni1982 and is summarized in Appendix \[sec:deriv\_kopal\]. Eq. (\[eq:kopal\_potential\]) can be further simplified by introducing a dimensionless potential $\Omega({\bm{\rho}})$, where ${\bm{\rho}} = {\bm{r}}/a$: $$\label{eq:nodimpot}
V(a {{\bm{\rho}}}) =
-\frac{GM_\mathrm{A}}{a} \Omega({\bm{\rho}}; q, F, \delta, {\bm{\hat{S}}})$$ where: $$\Omega({\bm{\rho}}; q, F, \delta, {\bm{\hat{S}}})
= \frac{1}{\rho} +
q \left(\frac{1}{\| {\bm{\rho}} - \delta\, {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}\|} - \frac{{\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}\cdot {\bm{\rho}}}{\delta^2} \right)
+ \frac{1}{2} (1 + q) F^2 \| ({\bm{\hat{S}}} \cdot {\bm{\rho}}) {\bm{\hat{S}}} - {\bm{\rho}} \|^2.
\label{eq:poten_orig}$$ This form (for the aligned, circular, synchronous case) was first proposed by @kopal1978 and generalized to eccentric, asynchronous orbits by @wilson1979. Here $q=M_\mathrm B/M_\mathrm A$ is the mass ratio, $F = \omega_{\mathrm S}/\omega_{\mathrm L}$ is synchronicity parameter, and $\delta \equiv d/a$ is fractional instantaneous separation. We use Kepler’s third law to replace $\omega_{\rm L}^2 = (GM_{\mathrm A} + GM_{\mathrm B})/a^3$. Note that the Kopal potential is invariant to the sign of the vector ${\bm{\hat{S}}}$: $\Omega|_{ -{{\bm{\hat{S}}}} } = \Omega|_{{\bm{\hat{S}}}}$.
Next we introduce a rotated coordinate system about the $x$-axis w.r.t. the canonical coordinate system so that vector ${\bm{\hat{S}}}$ lies in the new $xz$ plane. The vector basis $({\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}', {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\j}}}}', {\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}}')$ of the rotated coordinate system is related to the canonical vector basis $({\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}, {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\j}}}}, {\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}})$ by the following relations: $${\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}' = {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}},\qquad
{\bm{\hat{\textbf{\j}}}}' = {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\j}}}}\cos\alpha + {\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}}\sin\alpha,\qquad
{\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}}' = -{\bm{\hat{\textbf{\j}}}}\sin\alpha + {\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}}\cos\alpha,
\label{eq:rot_basis}$$ where $\alpha = -\arctan ({\bm{\hat{S}}} \cdot {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\j}}}}/ {\bm{\hat{S}}} \cdot {\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}})$. The positions are denoted by ${\bm{r}}' = x' {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}' + y' {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\j}}}}' + z' {\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}}'$. Consequently, the vector ${\bm{\hat{S}}}$ can be given as $${\bm{\hat{S}}} = \sin\beta\, {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}' + \cos\beta\, {\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}}' \>,$$ with the angle $\beta = {\rm arcsin}({\bm{\hat{S}}}\cdot {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}') \in [-\pi/2,\pi/2]$. We can concentrate on $\beta\ge 0$ without any loss of generality because negative $\beta$ correspond to the mirroring across the $xy$ plane ($z \mapsto -z$), cf. Appendix \[sec:symm\].
We present our analysis on the rescaled Kopal potential ${\widetilde\Omega}$ where $\rho' \mapsto \rho' \delta$ and $\Omega \mapsto \Omega \delta$, defined in the rotated coordinate system as $$\begin{aligned}
{\widetilde\Omega}({\bm{\rho}}'; q, b, \beta)
&= \Omega ({\bm{\rho}}' \delta; q, F, \delta, {\bm{\hat{S}}}) \delta \nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{\rho'} +
q \left(\frac{1}{\| {\bm{\rho}}' - {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}'\|} - {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}' \cdot {\bm{\rho}}'\right)
+ \frac{1}{2} b\left[ (x' \cos \beta - z' \sin\beta)^2 + {y'}^2\right]\>,
\label{eq:poten_red} \end{aligned}$$ where $b = (1 + q)F^2 \delta^3$ is an auxiliary parameter. The shape of the star is fully determined by the value of ${\widetilde\Omega}$: it corresponds to the iso-surface of the potential. We refer to this shape as the *lobe* and denote it with ${\widetilde{\mathcal L}}$. Fig. \[fig:roche\_lobe\] depicts the ${\widetilde\Omega}$ contours that correspond to $q=1$, $b=2$ ($F = 1$, $\delta = 1$) and $\beta = 0.3\pi$ (left) and the lobe that corresponds to ${\widetilde\Omega}= 3.6$ (right).
![Misaligned equipotential ${\widetilde\Omega}$ for $b=2$, $\beta = 0.3\pi$ and $q=1$. Left: ${\widetilde\Omega}$ contours; a contour at ${\widetilde\Omega}=3.6$ is drawn in yellow. Right: a lobe that corresponds to ${\widetilde\Omega}= 3.6$.[]{data-label="fig:roche_lobe"}](misaligned_countour.pdf "fig:"){width="59.00000%"} ![Misaligned equipotential ${\widetilde\Omega}$ for $b=2$, $\beta = 0.3\pi$ and $q=1$. Left: ${\widetilde\Omega}$ contours; a contour at ${\widetilde\Omega}=3.6$ is drawn in yellow. Right: a lobe that corresponds to ${\widetilde\Omega}= 3.6$.[]{data-label="fig:roche_lobe"}](misaligned_lobe.pdf "fig:"){width="39.00000%"}\
Equilibrium points of the Kopal potential
=========================================
Equilibrium points of the Kopal potential $\Omega$ (Eq.\[eq:poten\_orig\]) are defined as the points where the gradient of the potential equals 0. The simplified case of the aligned ($\beta=0$), synchronous ($F=1$) equipotential has been extensively studied. The corresponding equilibrium points are called Lagrange points. There are 5 such points: $L_1$, $L_2$ and $L_3$ lie on the $x$-axis, while $L_4$ and $L_5$ lie in the $xy$ plane, forming an equilateral triangle with the two massive bodies. $L_4$ and $L_5$ can thus be computed analytically, while $L_1$, $L_2$ and $L_3$ are computed[^1] numerically. For a recent study of the analytic properties of Lagrange points see [@seidov2004].
In the aligned and non-synchronous ($F\neq 1$) case there are still five equilibrium points ${\bm{G}}_i (q,b)$, $i=1,\ldots,5$ [@kallrath2009], which are generalizations of the Lagrange points. In the $F \to 1$ limit, these points are identical to Lagrange points. For the purposes of binary star physics, the first three generalized Lagrange points are of most interest. Obtaining their values for arbitrary $q$ and $b$ using generic algorithms for solving nonlinear equations can be time-consuming and, in some cases, unstable. Because of this, we developed a specialized numerical solver to stabilize and speed up the process, which we have implemented into [PHOEBE]{}2.0 [@prsa2016]. The solver is based on novel analytical approximations of generalized Lagrange points in difference regimes of parameters $(q,b)$ that are further polished via the Newton-Raphson scheme or with the Laguerre method [@sirca2012].
For the reduced potential ${\widetilde\Omega}$ (Eq. \[eq:poten\_red\]), the condition $\nabla {\widetilde\Omega}({\bm{K}}_i)=0$ that determines the equilibrium points ${\bm{K}}_i = (x',y',z')$ can be written as $$\label{eq:poten_grad}
\left (
b \left [
\begin{array}{ccc}
\cos^2\beta & 0 & -\sin\beta \cos\beta \\
0 & 1 & 0 \\
-\sin\beta \cos\beta & 0 & \sin^2\beta
\end{array}
\right]
- \left (
\frac{1}{r_1^3} + \frac{q}{r_2^3}
\right) {\bf id}
\right) {\bm{K}}_i +
q \left (
\frac{1}{r_2^3} - 1
\right){\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}= 0 \>,$$ with $b = (1+q)F^2 \delta^3$, $r_1 \equiv \rho' = \| {\bm{K}}_i\|$ and $r_2 = \| {\bm{K}}_i - {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}\|$. The equilibrium points are crucial for understanding the global behavior of the potential and for determining the necessary condition for lobe existence. The solutions of Eq. (\[eq:poten\_grad\]) can be generally divided into two groups:
- The points outside the $xz$ plane: For $b - q \ge (\sqrt{2} |\cos\beta|)^{-3}$, we find that there are two equilibrium points of the reduced Kopal potential ${\widetilde\Omega}$: $$\left(
\xi,
\pm \sqrt{2\xi - \frac{\xi^2}{\cos^2\beta}},
-\xi \tan \beta
\right)\>,$$ with $\xi = \frac{1}{2} [b - q]^{-\frac{2}{3}}$, which is a further generalization of the Lagrange points ${\bm{G}}_{4,5}$. If, on the other hand, $b-q < (\sqrt{2} |\cos \beta |)^{-3}$, there are no real equilibrium points.
- The points in the $xz$ plane. In the aligned case ($\beta=0$), there are exactly three equilibrium points ${\bm{G}}_i(q,b)$ for $i=1,2,3$ and all are saddle points on the $x$-axis. In the misaligned case ($\beta\neq 0$), however, there can be more than three points and they can be of a different type (minimum, maximum or a saddle point).
The points in the latter group determine the smallest value of the potential for which the lobe of the primary star exists. We discuss this group of equilibrium points next.
Phenomenology
-------------
Finding the equilibrium points of the reduced potential ${\widetilde\Omega}$ (Eq.\[eq:poten\_red\]) in the $xz$ plane is a non-trivial computational task. Fig. \[fig:fps2\] depicts the equilibrium points as a function of the misalignment parameter $\beta$, $\beta \in [-\pi/2,\pi/2]$ and several values of $q$ and $b$. The color of the points corresponds to the value of $\beta$. We see that the position of the equilibrium points varies continuously with $\beta$ over a large range of values, but there are some discontinuities represented by the lack of points. Note the symmetry in the positions of points across the $x$-axis.
![Equilibrium points of the reduced Kopal potential ${\widetilde\Omega}(x, 0, z; q, b, \beta)$ at a given $q$ and $b$, as a function of $\beta \in [-\pi/2,\pi/2]$. The color of the points corresponds to the value of $\beta$.[]{data-label="fig:fps2"}](misaligned_fps2.pdf){width="15cm"}
We distinguish three types of equilibrium points in the $xz$ plane: saddle points, local minima, and local maxima. Let $\{h_k({\bm{r}}):k=1,2\}$ be the eigenvalues of the Hessian matrix $(\nabla_{xz} \otimes \nabla_{xz}) {\widetilde\Omega}({\bm{r}})$. These are proportional to the local principal curvatures, and the type of an equilibrium point is determined by the sign of the principal curvatures, $\mathrm{sign}(h_k({\bm{K}}_i))$ [@carmo2016]. The types of equilibrium points are important for drawing qualitative conclusions about the shape of the nearby isosurfaces. Fig. \[fig:fps1\] depicts the same equilibrium points as Fig. \[fig:fps2\], but here the colors denote their type. The saddle points are of most interest as they determine the separatrix, i.e. they yield the limiting value of the potential for which the lobes exist. If we consider equilibrium points of any given type as “branches”, we see that, by perturbing a certain parameter, branches can cross, meaning that parts of the branches change their type.
![Equilibrium points of the reduced Kopal potential ${\widetilde\Omega}(x, 0, z; q, b, \beta)$ for the positive $z$-axis at a given $q$ and $b$. Blue color corresponds to saddle points ${\bm{s}} = (-1,1), (1,-1)$ and red color corresponds to local minima ${\bm{s}} =(1,1)$. There are no local maxima.[]{data-label="fig:fps1"}](misaligned_fps1.pdf){width="15cm"}
A method for finding equilibrium points
---------------------------------------
We developed and present here an efficient method to obtain a subset of equilibrium points in the $xz$ plane. The location of the equilibrium points that correspond to the misaligned potential is found by tracing the variation in the $x$-location of the equilibrium points that correspond to the aligned potential as the misalignment parameter $\beta$ is varied. This procedure is significantly faster than the general nonlinear root finding algorithm employed in constructing Figs. \[fig:fps2\] and \[fig:fps1\]. The method is applicable for the values of $\beta = 0$ up to the value $\beta_{C,i}$ for the $i$th equilibrium point at which the Hessian becomes singular.
Let us denote with $\mathcal{I}$ an interval around the aligned value $\beta = 0$ at which the location of the equilibrium point ${\bm{K}}_i$ varies smoothly with $\beta$ at any constant $q$ and $b$. We can then write: $$\nabla {\widetilde\Omega}({\bm{K}}_i(\beta); q, b, \beta) = 0
\qquad \forall \beta \in {\cal I} \>,
\label{eq:crit_curve}$$ where ${\bm{K}}_i$ is the $i$th generalized Lagrange point at $\beta=0$: $${\bm{K}}_i(\beta = 0) = {\bm{G}}_i(q,b).$$ By differentiating Eq. (\[eq:crit\_curve\]) w.r.t. $\beta$, we obtain a differential equation that determines the equilibrium point manifold as a function of $\beta$: $$\frac{{\rm d}}{{\rm d} \beta }{\bm{K}}_i(\beta) =
- \left[(\nabla\otimes \nabla) {\widetilde\Omega}({\bm{K}}_i(\beta); q, b, \beta)\right]^{-1}
\cdot
\nabla \frac{\partial}{\partial \beta}{\widetilde\Omega}({\bm{K}}_i(\beta); q, b, \beta) \>.
\label{eq:rc_evol}$$ To obtain the $i$th equilibrium point for a given $(q,b,\beta_0)$, we integrate Eq. (\[eq:rc\_evol\]) over the range $[0,\beta_0]$ with the initial condition ${\bm{K}}_i(0) = {\bm{G}}_i(q,b)$. This can be done numerically by an ordinary differential equation integrator, e.g. a 4th order Runge-Kutta [@sirca2012], as long as the Hessian $(\nabla \otimes \nabla) {\widetilde\Omega}$ is non-singular. The Hessian is for all three Lagrange points non-singular on the entire $\beta_0 \in [-\pi/2, \pi/2]$ range only for $q=F=\delta=1$; for other parameter values, $\beta_0 \in [-\beta_{C,i}, \beta_{C,i}]$ for the $i$th equilibrium point. Typically, the smallest is $\beta_{C,3}$. Thus, a singular Hessian pinpoints the transition between the types of equilibrium points, as depicted in Fig.\[fig:fps1\].
Minimal value of the Kopal potential for the existence of lobes
---------------------------------------------------------------
![The value of the reduced potential $\widetilde\Omega$ (Eq.\[eq:poten\_red\]) in equilibrium points ${\bm{K}}_1(q,b,\beta)$ and ${\bm{K}}_2(q, b,\beta)$ as a function of the misalignment angle $\beta$ for various values of parameters $q$ and $b$ with $\delta=1$.[]{data-label="fig:omega_min"}](OmegaMin){width="12cm"}
With ${\bm{K}}_i(q, b; \beta)$ being the misaligned generalizations of their aligned counterparts $G_i(q, b)$, the existence of a detached primary star lobe is determined by the values of ${\bm{K}}_1(q, b; \beta)$ and ${\bm{K}}_2(q, b; \beta)$. If the potential is smaller than either value, the equipotential will not delimit a closed surface. The minimal value of the reduced Kopal potential ${\widetilde\Omega}_{\rm min}$ for which a detached primary lobe exists is thus the maximal value of the potentials at equilibrium points ${\bm{K}}_1$ and ${\bm{K}}_2$: $${\widetilde\Omega}_{\rm min} (q,b,\beta) =
\max
\left\{
{\widetilde\Omega}\left({\bm{K}}_1(q,b;\beta)\right),
{\widetilde\Omega}\left({\bm{K}}_2(q,b;\beta)\right)
\right\} \>.
\label{eq:omega_min}$$ The lobe at ${\widetilde\Omega}_{\rm min} (q,b,\beta)$ thus represents a generalized Roche lobe. Fig.\[fig:omega\_min\] demonstrates how the value of the potential changes with $\beta$ for ${\bm{K}}_1(\beta; q, b)$ and ${\bm{K}}_2(\beta; q, b)$. As already pointed out by [@avni1982], the curves of the potential values associated with both equilibrium points can intersect, meaning that the roles of the equilibrium points in constraining the lobes can change as $\beta$ changes. The angle of intersection, referred to as the *critical angle*, was closely analyzed by @avni1982. The minimum value of the potential for which a lobe exists at a certain angle $\beta$ is the maximum value of both of these curves.
Orbital misalignment in the plane-of-sky
========================================
------------------------------------------ --------------- --------- -----------------
parameter: system:
primary star: secondary star:
semi-major axis $a[R_\odot]$ 3.98
period $P[{\rm d}]$ 0.65
mass ratio $q$ 0.7
eccentricity $\epsilon$ 0
inclination $i [^\circ]$ 80
long. of ascending node $\Omega[^\circ]$ 0
systemic velocity $\gamma[{\rm km/s}]$ 0
atmosphere blackbody blackbody
equivalent radius $R[R_\odot]$ 1.3 0.8
effective temperature $T_{\rm eff}[K]$ 6500 5500
synchronicity parameter $F$ 1 3.61
LD model logarithmic logarithmic
LD coefficient $x_{\rm LD}$ 0.5 0.5
LD coefficient $y_{\rm LD}$ 0.5 0.5
gravity darkening $\beta_\mathrm{grav}$ 0.32 0.32
$\Delta \Omega[{}^\circ]$ 0 45
$\Delta i [{}^\circ]$ 0 45
------------------------------------------ --------------- --------- -----------------
: \[tab:params\] Principal parameters of the toy model of a misaligned binary star.
The orbit of a binary system is described in the canonical coordinate system, where the orbital plane coincides with the $xy$ plane. The plane-of-sky is the plane perpendicular to the line-of-sight. The corresponding coordinate system, spun by unit vectors ${\bm{\hat{\textbf{u}}}}$, ${\bm{\hat{\textbf{v}}}}$ and ${\bm{\hat{\textbf{w}}}}$, is oriented so that ${\bm{\hat{\textbf{u}}}}$ and ${\bm{\hat{\textbf{v}}}}$ lie in the plane-of-sky and point toward east and north, respectively, and ${\bm{\hat{\textbf{w}}}}$ points toward the observer. To place the orbit in space w.r.t. the observer, we use three angles: longitude of the ascending node $\Omega$, argument of periastron $\omega$ and inclination $i$. The transformation from the orbital plane to the plane-of-sky is given by the following rotation: $${\bm{R}}_{uw} (i,\Omega) = {\bm{R}}_w(\Omega) {\bm{R}}_u(-i),$$ where ${\bm{R}}_w$ and ${\bm{R}}_u$ are rotation matrices about the $w$ and $u$ axes, respectively. The definitions of rotation matrices here in use are given in Appendix \[sec:rot\_mat\]. The direction of the angular momentum ${\bm{\hat{L}}}$ is then given by $${\bm{\hat{L}}} = {\bm{R}}_{uw} (i, \Omega) {\bm{\hat{\textbf{w}}}}= [-\sin i \sin \Omega, \sin i \cos \Omega, \cos i ]^T \>.$$ Likewise, the spin vector ${\bm{\hat{S}}}$ can be written as $${\bm{\hat{S}}} = {\bf R}_{uw}(i', \Omega') \hat {\bf w} = [-\sin i' \sin \Omega', \sin i' \cos \Omega', \cos i' ]^T \>,$$ where $i'$ and $\Omega'$ denote the inclination and longitude of the ascending node w.r.t. the rotated coordinate system, and are related to the orbital inclination $i$ and longitude of the ascending node $\Omega$ by $$\Omega' = \Omega + \Delta \Omega,\qquad i' = i + \Delta i \>.$$ The angle differences $\Delta \Omega$ and $\Delta i$ uniquely describe spin misalignment. The spin vector ${\bm{\hat{S}}}$ in the canonical coordinate system can then be written as $${\bm{\hat{S}}} = {{\bm{R}}}_w (-\varpi){{\bm{R}}}_u(i) {{\bm{R}}}_w (\Delta \Omega) {{\bm{R}}}_u(-i - \Delta i) {\bm{\hat{\textbf{w}}}},$$ where $\varpi = \omega + \omega_0 + \nu$ is argument o latitude of the considered star and is a sum of the true anomaly $\nu$, argument of periastron $\omega$ and its positional offset $\omega_0$, which depends on the star: $\omega_0=\pi$ for the primary star and $\omega_0=0$ for the secondary star.
Implementation in [PHOEBE]{}
----------------------------
[PHOEBE]{}is an open source modeling suite developed for the analysis of single, binary and multiple stellar systems. Its initial version, released in 2005 and described in @prsa2005, was built on top of the widely used @wilson1971 code and it was specifically designed for the modeling of eclipsing binary stars (hence the name, PHysics Of Eclipsing BinariEs). The updated version, PHOEBE 2.0, was released in 2016 and described by @prsa2016. It constitutes a complete rewrite that generalizes the algorithms to single and multiple stellar systems. This work further expands the functionality of PHOEBE 2 by the implementation of misalignment described in the sections above and in the Appendices, and is accompanied by the PHOEBE 2.1 release. It is available at `http://phoebe-project.org`.
![Comparison of the light curves (a) and radial velocity curves (b) for an aligned and a misaligned binary system with parameters given in Table \[tab:params\]. Designations $p$ and $s$ stand for primary and secondary star, respectively. As reference, the radial velocity plot depicts dynamical radial velocity curves for both stars. The effect of misalignment is clearly pronounced in both types of observables.[]{data-label="fig:lc_rv"}](lc_cases_simplified.pdf "fig:"){width="60.00000%"}\
![Comparison of the light curves (a) and radial velocity curves (b) for an aligned and a misaligned binary system with parameters given in Table \[tab:params\]. Designations $p$ and $s$ stand for primary and secondary star, respectively. As reference, the radial velocity plot depicts dynamical radial velocity curves for both stars. The effect of misalignment is clearly pronounced in both types of observables.[]{data-label="fig:lc_rv"}](rv_cases_simplified.pdf "fig:"){width="60.00000%"}
PHOEBE 2.1 introduces spectral line profiles as a new type of dataset. The line profiles are computed from fiducial spectral lines (i.e. a Gaussian or a Lorentzian profile) at the user-provided rest wavelength, Doppler-shifted at each local surface element and weighted by the passband brightness distribution across the visible surfaces. Line profiles are provided in normalized flux units and do not include any slopes due to continuum or passband effects.
Using PHOEBE, we demonstrate the effect of misalignment on astrophysical observables (light curves, radial velocity curves and spectral line profiles) for a toy-model binary system with a misaligned secondary star. The parameters of the toy model are given in Table \[tab:params\]. Fig. \[fig:lc\_rv\] showcases the comparison between the misaligned system and the aligned system with the matching equivalent radius (the radius of the sphere that has the same volume as the bounding equipotential) of each component. Spin misalignment clearly has a significant effect on all observables. A telltale sign of misalignment is an asymmetry in light curves, although asymmetries can arise from other physical effects as well, such as ellipsoidal variation and reflection in eccentric systems, spots, etc. Radial velocity curves are similar, with the telltale difference obvious in the eclipses (the Rossiter-McLaughlin effect). Fig. \[fig:lp\] depicts line profiles for several phases in the aligned system (dashed line), the misaligned system (solid line) and the spherical system (dashed-dotted line) with matching equivalent radii. As expected, the differences are the largest during eclipses, as the main driver for the line profile is the sum of the local intensities weighted by the projected surface element area. Even outside the eclipses, though, the widths of the line profiles can be substantially different (top left panel) because of the modified surface brightness distribution across the disk of the secondary star. Other effects, such as relativistic gravitational redshift [@takeda2012], convective blueshift [@shporer2011], micro- and macroturbulence [@steffen2013], also affect the line profiles; while those can in principle be included in the computation within the PHOEBE framework, we did not include them in the simulation in order to quantify the influence of misalignment by itself.
![Comparison of the position of lobes projected to plane of sky (left panel) and line profiles (right panel) at phases $\phi = 0.40$ and $0.46$ (top), and $0.49$ and $0.55$ (bottom). The lobe of the primary star is represented by its mesh used in computing and the lobe of the secondary star is color-coded by the surface temperature. The dashed gray line denotes rest wavelength of the line; the solid green, the dashed red and the dashed-doted blue lines represent the line profiles of the misaligned, the aligned systems and the spherical star system, respectively.[]{data-label="fig:lp"}](frame02.pdf "fig:"){width="49.50000%"} ![Comparison of the position of lobes projected to plane of sky (left panel) and line profiles (right panel) at phases $\phi = 0.40$ and $0.46$ (top), and $0.49$ and $0.55$ (bottom). The lobe of the primary star is represented by its mesh used in computing and the lobe of the secondary star is color-coded by the surface temperature. The dashed gray line denotes rest wavelength of the line; the solid green, the dashed red and the dashed-doted blue lines represent the line profiles of the misaligned, the aligned systems and the spherical star system, respectively.[]{data-label="fig:lp"}](frame10.pdf "fig:"){width="49.50000%"}\
![Comparison of the position of lobes projected to plane of sky (left panel) and line profiles (right panel) at phases $\phi = 0.40$ and $0.46$ (top), and $0.49$ and $0.55$ (bottom). The lobe of the primary star is represented by its mesh used in computing and the lobe of the secondary star is color-coded by the surface temperature. The dashed gray line denotes rest wavelength of the line; the solid green, the dashed red and the dashed-doted blue lines represent the line profiles of the misaligned, the aligned systems and the spherical star system, respectively.[]{data-label="fig:lp"}](frame13.pdf "fig:"){width="49.50000%"} ![Comparison of the position of lobes projected to plane of sky (left panel) and line profiles (right panel) at phases $\phi = 0.40$ and $0.46$ (top), and $0.49$ and $0.55$ (bottom). The lobe of the primary star is represented by its mesh used in computing and the lobe of the secondary star is color-coded by the surface temperature. The dashed gray line denotes rest wavelength of the line; the solid green, the dashed red and the dashed-doted blue lines represent the line profiles of the misaligned, the aligned systems and the spherical star system, respectively.[]{data-label="fig:lp"}](frame21.pdf "fig:"){width="49.50000%"}\
Due to the selected misalignment parameters of the toy model, the corresponding light curve has a brighter out-of-eclipse region than the aligned model light curve. This is because the hotter polar regions are tilted toward the observer, thus contributing excess flux w.r.t. the aligned case. The generally asymmetric excess flux is more prominent in distorted (i.e. close) and/or rapidly rotating systems, where gravity darkening causes a significant variation of surface brightness across the stellar disk(s).
Radial velocity curves exhibit a well-known Rossiter-McLaughlin effect [@rossiter1924; @mclaughlin1924], which describes a deviation from the dynamical (i.e. center-of-mass) radial velocity curve due to eclipses that block certain parts of the star and thus induce a bias in the photometrically weighted mean radial velocity curve for each component. The Rossiter-McLaughlin effect is symmetric for the aligned case, but is generally[^2] asymmetric in the misaligned case. This is depicted in Fig. \[fig:lc\_rv\]: the effect is symmetrical near timestamp 0 where the aligned primary star is eclipsed, and asymmetrical near timestamp 0.32 where the misaligned secondary star is eclipsed.
In consequence, light and radial velocity curves in conjunction allow us to solve for both misalignment parameters, $\Delta i$ and $\Delta \Omega$. If spectral line profiles are also available, further improvement in the accuracy of these two parameters can generally be attained [@albrecht2007; @philippov2013].
The treatment of misalignment in PHOEBE 2.1 is warranted whenever the tidal and rotational distortion of misaligned stars are non-negligible. Depending on the precision of acquired data points and the degree of misalignment, this detailed treatment may or may not be warranted and spherical models might be adequate in terms of precision and superior in terms of computation time. We are not aware of any other public codes that deal with misalignment in deformed stars. The computational time cost is only marginally impacted by the addition of misalignment.
### The DI Herculis system
@albrecht2009 reported that DI Her is strongly misaligned, with the spin axes nearly perpendicular to the orbital axis. We use this example to further test and demonstrate the implementation of misaligned binary systems in [PHOEBE]{}. Fig. \[fig:diher\_rvs\] depicts the RV curves synthesized using the DI Her parameters summarized in Table \[tab:diher\] plotted over the observed radial velocities from @albrecht2009. The misalignment parameters are taken from @philippov2013. We did not refit the data as that is beyond the scope of the current paper; we only report qualitative agreement with the published results.
------------------------------------------ --------------- -------------- -----------------
parameter: system:
primary star: secondary star:
semi-major axis $a[R_\odot]$ 42.8731
period $P[{\rm d}]$ 10.550164
mass ratio $q$ 0.815
eccentricity $\epsilon$ 0.489
inclination $i [^\circ]$ 89.3
long. of ascending node $\Omega[^\circ]$ 330.2
systemic velocity $\gamma[{\rm km/s}]$ 9.1
time of sup. conjunction $[{\rm d}]$ 2442233.3481
atmosphere blackbody blackbody
equivalent radius $R[R_\odot]$ 2.68 2.48
effective temperature $T_{\rm eff}[K]$ 17300 15400
synchronicity parameter $F$ 8.4819 9.8487
mass $m[M_\odot]$ 5.1 4.4
LD model logarithmic logarithmic
LD coefficient $x_{\rm LD}$ 0.5 0.5
LD coefficient $y_{\rm LD}$ 0.5 0.5
gravity darkening $\beta_\mathrm{grav}$ 1 1
$\Delta \Omega[{}^\circ]$ 72 -84
$\Delta i [{}^\circ]$ 62 100
------------------------------------------ --------------- -------------- -----------------
: \[tab:diher\] Principal parameters of the DI Herculis system.
![Synthetic radial velocity curves of the primary (blue) and secondary star (green), plotted over the measured radial velocities from @albrecht2009 for the primary (red) and secondary star (cyan) as the function of the phase $t/P$ with time $t$ measured from the primary eclipse.[]{data-label="fig:diher_rvs"}](rvs_diher.pdf){width="60.00000%"}
### The Kepler-13Ab system
Kepler-13Ab is a transiting hot Jupiter system with an A-type host star. It was first discovered as a misaligned system by [@szabo2011], the only such system ever found without the accompanying Rossiter-McLaughlin affect. Since then the system has been widely studied, yet the models feature inconsistent parameter values. For this paper, we take a representative sample of these values, given in Table \[tab:kepler13\], and create a model light curve of this system.
----------------------------------------- ----------------- ------------------ -------------------
parameter: system:
Kepler 13A : Kepler 13b:
semi-major axis $a[R_\odot]$ 7.36$^{\rm{a}}$
period $P[{\rm d}]$ 1.763586522[^3]
mass ratio $q$ 0.0037
eccentricity $\epsilon$ 0.0
inclination $i [^\circ]$ 85.82$^{\rm{a}}$
atmosphere interpolated blackbody
equivalent radius $R[R_\odot]$ 1.69$^{\rm{a}}$ 0.144$^{\rm{b}}$
effective temperature $T_{\rm eff}[K]$ 7650[^4] 2750$^{\rm{b}}$
synchronicity parameter $F$ 0.591[^5] 1.0
mass $m[M_\odot]$ 1.72$^{\rm{b}}$ 0.0063$^{\rm{b}}$
LD model interpolated logarithmic
LD coefficient $x_{\rm LD}$ – 0.5
LD coefficient $y_{\rm LD}$ – 0.5
gravity darkening $\beta_\mathrm{grav}$ 0.32 0.32
$\Delta \Omega[{}^\circ]$ 4.52[^6] –
$\Delta i [{}^\circ]$ 58.6[^7] –
----------------------------------------- ----------------- ------------------ -------------------
: \[tab:kepler13\] Principal parameters of the Kepler-13 System
For comparison purposes we computed the light curves of the Kepler-13 system using different geometrical models: Roche, rotating star and spherical star. We kept the volume and misalignment of each star fixed between these different models. The light curves are normalized w.r.t. their corresponding integrals in order to make them more comparable to each other. The results are depicted in Fig. \[fig:kepler13\]. The differences between light curves are the largest in the ingress and egress of the primary eclipse. In the middle panel we compare light curves computed by different distortion models with the light curve obtained by the spherical model while keeping the volume and the degree of misalignment constant. We see that the largest discrepancy is in the Roche model, of the order of $\sim 3 \times 10^{-4}$, and it changes the signs depending on alignment. The bottom panel depicts the comparison of light curves of the misaligned model with the light curve of the aligned model, where we again see that the largest differences are in the Roche model, approximately equal to $\sim 6 \times 10^{-4}$. Thus, the effect in Kepler-13 is under 1 mmag, however that is well within *Kepler*’s precision reach of $\sim 20$-$30$ppm. Note that computing these differences accurately requires a sufficiently precise eclipsing algorithm, which is provided by [PHOEBE]{}.
![Light curves normalized w.r.t. their integrals of the Kepler-13 system across the whole period (left panels) and a zoomed-in egress region of the primary eclipse (right panels) using different models. Upper panel: light curves that correspond to different models (Roche, sphere and rotating star), with $M$ and $A$ denoting misaligned and aligned realizations of the model. Middle panel: differences between model light curves and the corresponding spherical model. Bottom panel: differences between the misaligned and aligned realization of the models.[]{data-label="fig:kepler13"}](k13_paper2.pdf){width="15cm"}
Conclusion
==========
This paper summarizes the mathematical formalism of binary systems with the misaligned spin and orbital axes and introduces a new version of the modeling suite [PHOEBE]{}that implements this formalism. The topic has been studied in the past, i.e. by @avni1982, but to the best of our knowledge this is the first public implementation for the Roche-based geometry.
Beyond the anticipated systematic treatment of misalignment in eclipsing binary and extrasolar planet systems, a thorough study of the parameter space can yield some very interesting and readily testable predictions. For example, by varying the misalignment parameter $\beta$, we can find a local minimum near the lobes as depicted in Fig. \[fig:pot\_center\]. Such islands of stability could harbor Trojan objects that are synchronized with the rotation of the primary star and reminiscent of the features seen in Tabby’s star, KIC 8462852 [@boyajian2016]. Such hypotheses clearly merit further investigation beyond the scope of this introductory paper. The complexities of the nonlinear space spun by the parameters of misaligned objects predict many unexpected and intuition-challenging scenarios to exist in nature.
![A contour plot of the Kopal potential $\widetilde\Omega(x,0,z; q, b,\beta)$ (Eq. \[eq:poten\_orig\]) in the $xz$ plane at $q=0.1$ and $b=(1+q) F^2 \delta^3$ for $F=1.1$, $\delta=1$ and $\beta=0.8$.[]{data-label="fig:pot_center"}](pot_center.pdf){width="10cm"}
We would like to thank Simon Albrecht for his attentive review of the manuscript, pointing out several deficiencies and suggesting the discussion of photometric effects of misalignment in the case of Kepler-13. This work was supported by the NSF AAG grant \#1517474, which we gratefully acknowledge. A.P. and K.H. also acknowledge partial funding from the Slovenian Research Agency Grant P1-0188. K.H. acknowledges the NASA ADAP grant 16-ADAP16-0201. KC is supported under NASA NESSF Fellowship \#NNX15AR87H.
Derivation of the potential for a misaligned system {#sec:deriv_kopal}
===================================================
A binary system consists of two stars, labeled $A$ and $B$. Their positions in the inertial (center-of-mass) coordinate system are denoted by ${\bm{r}}_\mathrm{A}$ and ${\bm{r}}_\mathrm{B}$. We assume that the center of mass of the binary system is at rest or moving with a constant velocity. Star A rotates as a rigid body about a misaligned axis ${\bm{\hat{S}}}$ with the angular velocity ${\bm{\omega}}_S$. The rigid body assumption asserts that every point on the primary star lobe co-rotates with the star. The equation of motion that describes the dynamics of the particle at position ${\bm{r}}$ is given by $$\ddot{{\bm{r}}} = -\nabla U - \frac{1}{\rho}\nabla p \>,$$ where $p$ is the pressure, $\rho$ is the particle density and $U$ is the gravitational potential of both stars: $$U =
\frac{G M_\mathrm{A}}{\|{\bm{r}} - {\bm{r}}_\mathrm{A} \|} +
\frac{G M_\mathrm{B}}{\|{\bm{r}} - {\bm{r}}_\mathrm{B} \|}.$$ We now introduce a canonical coordinate system that is centered in star A, its $x$-axis points toward star B, its $z$-axis is aligned with the revolution axis ${\bm{L}}$, and it co-rotates with the center of star A in orbit about the common center of mass. We express vector ${\bm{r}}$ as the sum of the vector to the center of star A (${\bm{r}}_\mathrm{A}$) and the vector relative to the center of star A (${\bm{r'}}$): $${\bm{r}} = {\bm{r}}_\mathrm{A} + {\bm{r'}}, \qquad {{\bm{\ddot r}}} = {{\bm{\ddot r}}_\mathrm{A}} + {{\bm{\ddot r'}}} \>.$$ The term ${\bm{\ddot r}}_\mathrm{A}$ describes the acceleration of star A caused by gravity: $${\bm{\ddot r}}_\mathrm{A} = G M_\mathrm{B} \frac{{\bm{r_B}}-{\bm{r_A}}}{\| {\bm{r_B}} - {\bm{r_A}} \|^3} \>.$$ The term ${\bm{\ddot r'}}$ corresponds to the acceleration relative to the center of the primary star. To express it, we introduce a third coordinate system $S$ that co-rotates with the primary star itself about the rotation axis ${\bm{\hat{S}}}$. The relative vector ${\bm{\ddot r'}}$ is then $${\bm{\ddot r'}} =
({\bm{\ddot r'}})_S
+ 2 {\bm{\omega}}_S \times ({{\bm{\dot r'}}})_S
+ {\bm{\dot \omega}}_S \times {\bm{r'}}
+ {\bm{\omega}}_S \times {\bm{\omega}}_S \times {\bm{r'}}\>.
\label{eq:rel_accel}$$ We assume that the angular velocity is constant in time, so ${{\bm{\dot \omega}}}_S=0$, and both the velocity and the acceleration in the co-rotating frame $S$ are zero: $({\bm{\ddot r'}})_S = 0$, $({\bm{\dot r'}})_S = 0$. The equation of motion thus takes the following form: $$\label{eq:motion}
G M_\mathrm{B} \frac{{\bm{r_B}} - {\bm{r_A}}}{\| {\bm{r_B}} - {\bm{r_A}} \|^3}
+ {\bm{\omega}}_S \times {\bm{\omega}}_S \times {\bm{r'}}
= -\nabla U -\frac{1}{\rho} \nabla p\>.$$ The first term in Eq. (\[eq:motion\]) can be written as the radial gradient $\nabla_{{\bm{r'}}}$ of the potential, where $\nabla_{{\bm{r'}}} \equiv \mathrm{d}/\mathrm{d}{\bm{r'}}$ operates in the canonical coordinate system spun by the basis vectors $({\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}, {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\j}}}}, {\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}})$: $$G M_\mathrm{B} \frac{{\bm{r_B}} - {\bm{r_A}}}{\| {\bm{r_B}} - {\bm{r_A}} \|^3}
\equiv G M_B \frac{{\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}}{d^2} =
\nabla_{{\bm{r'}}} \left\{
G M_\mathrm{B} \frac{{\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}\cdot {\bm{r'}}}{d^2} \right\},$$ with $d$ being the distance between the stars, and similarly, by using the triple product rule ${\bm{a}} \times {\bm{b}} \times {\bm{c}} = {\bm{b}} ({\bm{a}} \cdot {\bm{c}}) - {\bm{c}} ({\bm{a}} \cdot {\bm{b}})$, the last term in Eq. (\[eq:rel\_accel\]) can be written as $${\bm{\omega}}_S \times {\bm{\omega}}_S \times {\bm{r'}} \equiv
\omega_S^2
\left[ ({\bm{\hat{S}}} \cdot {\bm{r'}}) {\bm{\hat{S}}} - {\bm{r'}} \right] =
\nabla_{{\bm{r'}}} \left\{ \frac{1}{2} \omega_S^2
\left[ ({\bm{\hat{S}}} \cdot {\bm{r'}}) {\bm{\hat{S}}} - {\bm{r'}} \right]^2 \right\}.$$ Using these two expressions in the equation of motion yields $$\nabla_{{\bm{r'}}} \left\{
U + GM_\mathrm{B} \frac{{\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}\cdot {\bm{r'}}}{d^2}
+ \frac{1}{2}
\left[ ({\bm{\hat{S}}} \cdot {\bm{r'}}) {\bm{\hat{S}}} - {\bm{r'}} \right]^2
\right\} = -\frac{1}{\rho}\nabla_{{\bm{r'}}} p.$$ We can now readily recognize the expression within the curly braces as the (negative) potential $V$ of the misaligned binary system, as given in Eq. (\[eq:kopal\_potential\]).
Symmetries of the reduced Kopal potential {#sec:symm}
=========================================
The reduced potential has several useful symmetries that have been implicitly used in the paper: $$\begin{aligned}
\widetilde\Omega(x', y', z'; q, b, \beta) &=
\widetilde\Omega(x', -y', z'; q, b, \beta)\>,\\
\widetilde\Omega(x', y', z'; q, b, \beta) &=
\widetilde\Omega(x', y', z'; q, b, \beta+\pi)\>,\\
\widetilde\Omega(x', y', z'; q, b, \beta) &=
\widetilde\Omega(x', y', -z'; q, b, -\beta)\>.\end{aligned}$$
Poles of misaligned lobes {#sec:poles}
=========================
The *poles* are defined as the radii of the lobes ${\widetilde{\mathcal L}}$ along the positive and negative direction of the spin vector ${\bm{\hat{S}}}$. In order to investigate this in more detail, we further rotate a coordinate system with the vector basis $({\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}',{\bm{\hat{\textbf{\j}}}}',{\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}}')$, given by Eq. (\[eq:rot\_basis\]), so that the new $z$-axis is aligned with the spin vector. The vector basis of this new coordinate system is: $${\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}'' = {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}' \cos\beta - {\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}}' \sin\beta\>,\qquad
{\bm{\hat{\textbf{\j}}}}'' = {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\j}}}}'\>,\qquad
{\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}}'' = {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}' \sin\beta + {\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}}' \cos\beta\>,
\label{eq:pole_basis}$$ and position denoted by ${\bm{\rho}}'' = r (\sin\theta \cos\phi \, {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\i}}}}'' + \sin\theta\sin\phi \, {\bm{\hat{\textbf{\j}}}}'' + \cos\theta \, {\bm{\hat{\textbf{k}}}}'')$. In this coordinate system, the reduced Kopal potential can be rewritten as $$\begin{split}
W(r,\theta,\phi; q, b,\beta) &= \widetilde\Omega({\bm{\rho}}''; q, b, \beta)\>, \\
&= \frac{1}{r} + \frac{1}{2} b r^2 \sin ^2\theta - q r (\sin\beta\cos\theta+\cos\beta\sin\theta\cos\phi)\\
& + \frac{q}{\sqrt{1-2 r (\sin\beta\cos\theta +\cos\beta \sin\theta\cos\phi)+r^2}}\>.
\end{split}
\label{eq:poten_red1}$$ We see that $W$ does not have a quadratic term for the distance from the origin, which is associated with the centrifugal contribution to the potential. In general, the lobe is not symmetric across $z=0$ for the new coordinate frame and so the poles in the positive and negative directions of the rotating axis are not equal.
For a given set of parameters $(q,b,\beta)$ and the reference potential value $\widetilde \Omega_0$, the pole in the positive direction of the spin, $r_+$, and in the negative direction, $r_-$, are defined as $$W(r_+, 0, 0; q, b, \beta) = W(r_-, \pi, 0; q, b, \beta) = \widetilde\Omega_0\>.$$ This yields the following equation for the poles: $$\frac{1}{r_\pm} +
q \left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{1 \mp 2 \sin\beta r_\pm + r_\pm^2}} \mp \sin\beta r_\pm\right) =
\widetilde\Omega_0 \>.$$ In the case of lobes with spin-orbit misalignment, it is more meaningful to discuss the diameter $r_+ + r_-$ along the rotation axis as a measure of the characteristic size of the object. These equations are solved in [PHOEBE]{}by employing the standard Newton-Raphson method.
In the limit of large potential reference values, ${\widetilde\Omega}_0 \gg 1$, the poles can be approximated by a power series in $s = {{\widetilde\Omega}_0}^{-1}$, obtained by the inverse series method. The expansion of poles $r_\pm$ in the positive (+) and negative (-) direction are identical up to the 4th degree in $s$: $$r_\pm = s + q s^2 + q^2 s^3 + \frac{1}{2} q s^4 (2q^2 + 3 \sin^2\beta - 1) + O(s^5) \>,$$ with the difference between the poles found only in terms of degree 5 and higher: $$r_+ - r_- = q (-3 + 5 \sin^2\beta) s^5 + O(s^6)\>.$$ We see that, in the limit of a large potential, the lobe size depends only weakly on the misalignment parameter.
In general, the pole $r_\pm$ can be obtain by integrating the differential of the pole w.r.t. the reciprocal potential $s$, given by: $$\frac{{\rm d} r_\pm}{{\rm d} s} =
\frac{g (g + q r_\pm \mp q g\sin\beta r_\pm^2)^2}
{g^3 \pm q (g^3 - 1) \sin\beta r_\pm^2 + q r_\pm^3}\>,$$ for $s \in [0,\widetilde \Omega_0^{-1}]$ and the initial condition $r_\pm(s=0) = 1$ and $g = \sqrt{1 \mp 2 \sin\beta r_\pm + r_\pm^2}$.
Volume and area calculation
===========================
We now turn our attention to the surface area ($\widetilde A$) and volume ($\widetilde V$) of the lobes ${\widetilde{\mathcal L}}$ and the derivative of the volume w.r.t. the value of the potential ($\widetilde V_{,{\widetilde\Omega}_0})$. We present a numerical method to compute these quantities using spherical coordinates $(r,\theta, \phi)$ and the reduced Kopal potential $W$ (Eq.\[eq:poten\_red1\]). We write a partial derivative of a function $f$ w.r.t. variable $x$ as $f_{,x} = \partial f/\partial x$.
If $r(\theta,\phi)$ is known, the quantities are given by the following integrals: $$\begin{aligned}
&\widetilde A = \int_0^\pi \dot {\widetilde A}(\theta) \, {\rm d} \theta
&&\dot{\widetilde A}(\theta) = \frac{2}{3}
\int_0^\pi r(\theta, \phi) \sqrt{r_{,\phi}^2 + \sin^2\theta(r^2 + r_{,\theta}^2)} \, {\rm d} \phi\>, \label{eq:A_def} \\
&\widetilde V = \int_0^\pi \dot{\widetilde V} (\theta) \, {\rm d} \theta
&&\dot{\widetilde V}(\theta) = \frac{2}{3} \sin\theta\int_0^\pi r^3(\theta, \phi) \, {\rm d} \phi\>, \label{eq:V_def} \\
&\widetilde V_{,\widetilde \Omega_0} = \int_0^\pi \dot{\widetilde V}_{,\widetilde \Omega_0}(\theta) \, {\rm d} \theta
&&\dot{\widetilde V}_{,\widetilde \Omega_0}(\theta) =
2 \int_0^\pi \frac{r^2(\theta, \phi)}{W_{,r}(r(\theta,\phi), \theta, \phi)} \, {\rm d} \phi\>, \label{eq:dV_def}\end{aligned}$$ where we took into account the symmetry over the $xz$ plane. The derivatives of the radius $r$ w.r.t. spherical angles $(\theta,\phi)$ are given by $$r_{,\theta}(r,\theta,\phi) = -\frac{W_{,\theta} (r,\theta,\phi)}{W_{,r}(r,\theta,\phi)}\>,
\qquad
r_{,\phi} (r,\theta,\phi) = -\frac{W_{,\phi}(r,\theta,\phi)}{W_{,r}(r,\theta,\phi)} \>.
\label{eq:r_deriv}$$ The derivative $\widetilde V_{,\widetilde \Omega_0}$ is needed in the volume conservation process, whereby we find the value of the potential $\widetilde \Omega_0$ corresponding to a certain volume $\widetilde V_0$ as other parameters are fixed. This is analogous to calculating the inverse of ${\widetilde\Omega}_0 = {\widetilde V}^{-1} (\widetilde V_0)$ by the Newton-Raphson method: $$\widetilde \Omega_{0, k+1} =
\widetilde \Omega_{0,k} -
\frac{\widetilde V(\widetilde \Omega_{0,k}) - \widetilde V_0}{V_{,\widetilde \Omega_0} (\widetilde \Omega_{0,k})}\>.
\label{eq:vol_cons}$$ We perform the calculation of $\widetilde A$, $\widetilde V$, and $\widetilde V_{,\widetilde \Omega_0}$ using two techniques: the integration across the surface and the asymptotic approximation in the limit of small lobes (large values of the potential). We explain both methods below.
Integration over the surface
----------------------------
The quantities $\widetilde A$, $\widetilde V$, and $\widetilde V_{,{\widetilde\Omega}_0}$ are written as definite integrals of their derivatives $\dot{\widetilde A}$, $\dot{\widetilde V}$ and $\dot{\widetilde V}_{,\Omega_0}$ over the azimutal angle $\theta \in [0, \pi]$ per Eqs. \[eq:A\_def\], \[eq:V\_def\] and \[eq:dV\_def\]. The derivatives are given as integrals over the polar angles $\phi\in[0,\pi]$. We start the calculation by first approximating the derivatives and then integrate them across the total range of azimutal angle.
The integrals defining derivatives are calculated by discretizing the polar angle domain and using the Legendre-Gauss quadrature [@sirca2012], whereby an integral of a function $g$ over the interval $[0,\pi]$ is approximated by: $$\int_0^\pi g(\phi) \, {\rm d} \phi =
\sum_{i=1}^n u_i g(\phi_i) + \frac{\pi^{2n+1}(n!)^4}{(2n+1)[(2n)!]^3}g^{(2n)}(\zeta) \>,
\label{eq:lg_derived}$$ where $u_i$ and $\phi_i$ are appropriately chosen weights and nodes, respectively, and $\zeta \in [0,\pi]$. The weights and nodes are given by $$u_i = \frac{\pi}{2} w_i\>,\qquad \phi_i =\frac{\pi}{2} (1+x_i) \>,$$ where $w_i$ and $x_i$ are standard Legendre-Gauss weights and nodes, respectively, determined for functions integrated over range $[-1,1]$.
The radius $r(\theta,\phi)$ of the lobe at arbitrary angles $\theta$ and $\phi$ can be obtained by integrating $$\frac{{\rm d} r }{{\rm d} \theta} \equiv r_{,\theta} (r, \theta, \phi_i) \>,
\label{eq:int_surf}$$ with the initial condition $r(\theta=0,\phi) = r_+$, where the derivative $r_{,\theta}$ is given by Eq. (\[eq:r\_deriv\]). For each polar angle $\phi_i$ we introduce a radius $r_i(\theta) = r(\theta,\phi_i)$ along the azimuthal angle $\theta$. By using Legendre-Gauss quadrature (Eq. \[eq:lg\_derived\]) we approximate the integrals defining derivatives $\dot{\widetilde A}$, $\dot{\widetilde V}$ and $\dot{\widetilde V}_{,\widetilde \Omega_0}$ as sums over the set of functions $\{r_i\}_{i=1}^n$. Then, by taking into account Eq. (\[eq:int\_surf\]), we rewrite $\widetilde A$, $\widetilde V$ and ${\widetilde V}_{,\widetilde \Omega_0}$ as a solution to $n+3$ ordinary differential equations: $$\begin{aligned}
&\frac{{\rm d} r_i }{{\rm d} \theta }
= r_{,\theta} (r_i(\theta), \theta, \phi_i) \qquad i = 1,\ldots, n \>,& \\
&\frac{{\rm d} \widetilde A }{{\rm d} \theta}
= 2 \sum_{i=1}^n u_i r_i(\theta)
\sqrt{r_{,\phi}^2(r_i(\theta),\theta,\phi_i) + \sin^2\theta \left(r_i^2(\theta) + r_{,\theta}^2(r_i(\theta),\theta,\phi_i)\right)} \>,& \\
&\frac{{\rm d} \widetilde V }{{\rm d} \theta}
= \frac{2}{3} \sin\theta \sum_{i=1}^n u_i r_i^3(\theta) \>,&\\
&\frac{{\rm d}\widetilde V_{,\widetilde \Omega_0} }{{\rm d} \theta}
= 2 \sum_{i=1}^n u_i \frac{r_i^2(\theta)}{W_{,r}(r_i(\theta),\theta,\phi_i)} \>,&\end{aligned}$$ which are integrated for $\theta \in [0,\pi]$ with the initial conditions $$\begin{aligned}
&r_i(\theta = 0) = r_+ \qquad\qquad i = 1,\ldots, n\>,\\
&\widetilde A(\theta=0) =
\widetilde V(\theta=0) =
\widetilde V_{,\widetilde \Omega_0}(\theta=0) = 0\>. \end{aligned}$$ The quantities in question are then obtained at $\theta=\pi$: $$\widetilde A = \widetilde A(\theta=\pi),\qquad
\widetilde V = \widetilde V(\theta=\pi),\qquad
\widetilde V_{,\widetilde\Omega_0} = \widetilde V_{,\widetilde \Omega_0}(\theta=\pi)\>.$$ Note that $r_i(\theta=\pi) = r_-$, which can be used as a numerical check of integration.
The limit of small lobes
------------------------
In the limit of large ${\widetilde\Omega}_0$, the radius can be expressed as a power series of $s ={\widetilde\Omega_0}^{-1}$ using the inverse series technique, which we can symbolically write as $$r(\theta,\phi; q, b, s,\beta) = \sum_{k=1}^\infty a_k(\theta,\phi;q,b,\beta) s^k \>.
\label{eq:r_ser}$$ By plugging Eq. (\[eq:r\_ser\]) into the formulæ for area $\widetilde A$ (Eq.\[eq:A\_def\]) and volume $\widetilde V$ (Eq.\[eq:V\_def\]), we obtain their own expansions in $s$ and write them as $$\widetilde A = \frac{4 \pi}{{\widetilde \Omega_0}^2} {\cal A}(s;q,b,\beta) \qquad
\widetilde V = \frac{4 \pi}{3 \widetilde\Omega_0^3} {\cal V} (s;q,b,\beta) \>,
\label{eq:AV_asymp}$$ with auxiliary expressions $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
{\cal A}(s;q,b,\beta)
&= 1+2 q s+3 q^2 s^2+s^3 \left(\frac{2 b}{3}+4 q^3\right)+ 5 s^4 \left(\frac{2 b q}{3}+q^4\right) + s^5 \left(10 b q^2+6 q^5\right)\\
& +s^6 \left(b^2+\frac{70 b q^3 - bq}{3}+b q \cos (2\beta) +7 q^6+2 q^2\right) + \ldots\>,
\end{split} \label{eq:A_ser} \\
\begin{split}
{\cal V}(s;q,b,\beta)
&= 1+3 q s+6 q^2 s^2+s^3 \left(b+10 q^3\right)+s^4 \left(6 b q+15 q^4\right)+21 s^5 \left(b q^2+q^5\right)\\
& + \frac{2}{5} s^6 \left(4 b^2+140 b q^3+3 b q \cos (2\beta)-b q+70 q^6+6 q^2\right)+ \ldots\>.
\end{split} \label{eq:V_ser}\end{aligned}$$ The influence of misalignment is thus very weak in the limit of small lobes and it affects only the terms of the 6th degree and higher in the series expansion.
The expression for $\widetilde V_{, \widetilde\Omega_0}$, needed in the volume conservation procedure defined by Eq. (\[eq:vol\_cons\]), is obtained by taking the derivative of the volume $\widetilde V$ (Eq. \[eq:AV\_asymp\]) w.r.t. the reference potential value ${\widetilde\Omega}_0$: $$\widetilde V_{,\widetilde \Omega_0} =
-\frac{4\pi}{3 {\widetilde \Omega_0}^4}
\left(3{\cal V}(s; q,b,\beta) + s \frac{{\rm d} {\cal V}(s; q,b,\beta)}{{\rm d} s}\right) \>.$$
Rotation matrices {#sec:rot_mat}
=================
In the paper we use the following convention for the rotation matrices in three dimensions with rotation angle $\phi$: $${\bf R}_u(\phi) =
\begin{bmatrix}
1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & \cos\phi & -\sin\phi \\
0 & \sin\phi & \cos\phi
\end{bmatrix}
\quad
{\bf R}_v(\phi) =
\begin{bmatrix}
\cos\phi & 0 & \sin\phi \\
0 & 1 & 0 \\
-\sin\phi & 0 & \cos\phi
\end{bmatrix}
\quad
{\bf R}_w(\phi) =
\begin{bmatrix}
\cos\phi & -\sin\phi & 0 \\
\sin\phi & \cos\phi & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{bmatrix}$$
[^1]: Good analytic approximations exist for $L_1$, $L_2$ and $L_3$, given, i.e., by @taff1985.
[^2]: We say generally because a obliquity of $\pm 90^\circ$ would also lead to a symmetric effect.
[^3]: [@muller2013]
[^4]: [@shporer2014]
[^5]: [@szabo2014]
[^6]: [@masuda2015]
[^7]: [@johnson2014]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We generalize to quantum weighted projective spaces in any dimension previous results of us on K-theory and K-homology of quantum projective spaces ‘tout court’. For a class of such spaces, we explicitly construct families of Fredholm modules, both bounded and unbounded (that is spectral triples), and prove that they are linearly independent in the K-homology of the corresponding $C^*$-algebra. We also show that the quantum weighted projective spaces are base spaces of quantum principal circle bundles whose total spaces are quantum lens spaces. We construct finitely generated projective modules associated with the principal bundles and pair them with the Fredholm modules, thus proving their non-triviality.
*Dedicated to Marc Rieffel on the occasion of his 75th birthday*
address:
- 'Dipartimento di Matematica e Applicazioni, Università di Napoli “Federico II” and I.N.F.N. Sezione di Napoli, Complesso MSA, Via Cintia, 80126 Napoli, Italy'
- 'Matematica, Università di Trieste, Via A. Valerio 12/1, I-34127 Trieste, Italy and I.N.F.N. Sezione di Trieste, Trieste, Italy.'
author:
- 'Francesco D’Andrea and Giovanni Landi'
title: Quantum weighted projective and lens spaces
---
Introduction {#se:intro}
============
This paper deals with the geometry of quantum *weighted* projective spaces. For any weight vector ${\underline}{\ell}=(\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_n)$, the quantum weighted projective space ${\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}\ell)$ is the quotient of the odd-dimensional quantum sphere $S^{2n+1}_q$ by a weighted action of U(1). The latter acts by automorphisms on the coordinate algebra ${\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n+1}_q)$: on generators $z_i$ just by $$\alpha_t(z_i)=t^{\ell_i}z_i \;,\qquad\forall\;t\in{\mathrm{U}}(1),\,i=0,\ldots,n$$ (cf. §\[sec:due\] for details). The fixed point algebra ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}\ell))$ is defined to be the coordinate algebra of ${\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}\ell)$. For $\ell_0=\ldots=\ell_n=1$, one gets in this way the quantum projective space ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^n_q$.
Quantum weighted projective lines ${\mathbb{P}}_q(\ell_0,\ell_1)$ were studied in [@BF12], with a particular attention to quantum teardrops (for which $\ell_0=1$), and with more generality in [@AKL14]. The present paper is devoted to the case of arbitrary dimension. While the most general case of an arbitrary weight vector seems intractable at the moment, we select a particularly nice class of weight vectors which allows us to push things considerably. We focus on weight vectors ${\underline}{\ell}=(\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_n)$ for which the classical ${\mathbb{P}}({\underline}\ell)$ is homeomorphic to the ordinary projective space ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^n$. (An algebraic characterization of these weight vectors is in §\[sec:tre\].)
By a fortunate stroke of serendipity, for such a class of weight vectors the coordinate algebra ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}\ell))$ is generated by simple elements, of length 2 (see §\[sec:quattro\]). This gives an alternative characterization of such a class of weight vectors: one belongs to this class if and only if the corresponding coordinate algebra has a set of generators with length no greater than 2.
We next generalize some of the results of [@DL10] to ${\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell})$. After an interlude on irreducible representations in §\[sec:irreps\], we construct a family of $1$-summable Fredholm modules in §\[sec:Khom\], and a class of Dirac operators (and then spectral triples) in §\[sec:otto\].
In §\[sec:sei\], a quantum weighted projective space ${\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell})$ is shown to be the base space of a quantum principal circle bundle whose total space is a quantum lens space $L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell})$, with explicit examples in §\[sec:sette\]. For the weighted projective lines this was done in [@BF12] and in generality in [@AKL14].
In §\[sec:nove\], we construct projections in the $C^*$-algebra of quantum weighted projective spaces and prove that the Fredholm modules of §\[sec:Khom\] are linearly independent in K-homology.
We finish by mentioning possible uses of quantum projective lines (and more general quantum projective spaces) for Chern-Simons theories. These theories were generalised in [@BT13] to circle-bundles over orbifolds (such as weighted projective spaces). However, these applications go beyond the scope of the present paper and should await a future time.
*General notations.* By a *$*$-algebra* we mean a complex unital involutive associative algebra and by a representation of a $*$-algebra we always mean a unital $*$-representation. We will denote by ${\underline}{m}=(m_0,m_1,\ldots,m_n)$ a vector with $n+1$ components (labelled from $0$ to $n$), and by $\vec{m}=(m_1,\ldots,m_n)$ a vector with $n$ components (labelled from $1$ to $n$), when $n\geq 1$ is the complex dimension of the space considered.
*Acknowledgments.* We are grateful to A. De Paris, M. Frank and T. Brzezi[ń]{}ski for useful discussions and correspondences. Part of the work was done at the Hausdorff Research Institute for Mathematics in Bonn during the 2014 Trimester Program “Non-commutative Geometry and its Applications". We thank the organizers of the Program for the invitation and all people at HIM for the nice hospitality.
Weighted projective spaces {#sec:tre}
==========================
Classical weighted projective spaces ${\mathbb{P}}({\underline}\ell)$ are among the best known examples of projective toric varieties. As quotient spaces they have a natural orbifold structure and include, in complex dimension 1, the orbifolds named teardrops by Thurston in [@Thu80]. We start by recalling some basic facts about their classification as done in [@BFNR13].
A *weight vector* ${\underline}{\ell}=(\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_n)$ is a finite sequence of positive integers, called *weights*. A weight vector is *normalized* if for any prime $p$ at least two weights are not divisible by $p$. One says that a weight vector is *coprime* if $\gcd(\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_n)=1$; and it is *pairwise coprime* if $\gcd(\ell_i,\ell_j)=1$, for all $i\neq j$. For $n=1$, the only normalized weight vector is $(1,1)$; if $n=2$, a weight ${\underline}{\ell}$ is pairwise coprime if and only if it is normalized; if $n\geq 3$, every pairwise coprime weight vector is normalized but the converse is not true, e.g. $(1,1,\ell_2,\ldots,\ell_n)$ is normalized but not necessarily pairwise coprime.
Fixed a weight vector ${\underline}{\ell}=(\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_n)$, an action of $t\in {\mathbb{C}}^*$ on $z=(z_0,\ldots,z_n)\in {\mathbb{C}}^{n+1}\smallsetminus\{0\}$ is given by $z\mapsto (t^{\ell_0}z_0,\ldots,t^{\ell_n}z_n)$. If the action is restricted to the subgroup ${\mathrm{U}}(1)\subset {\mathbb{C}}^*$, the unit sphere $S^{2n+1}\subset {\mathbb{C}}^{n+1}$ is an invariant submanifold.
The quotient ${\mathbb{C}}^{n+1}\smallsetminus\{0\} / {\mathbb{C}}^*$ yields the weighted projective space ${\mathbb{P}}({\underline}{\ell})={\mathbb{P}}(\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_n)$; when $\ell_0=\ldots=\ell_n=1$, this is the ordinary complex projective space ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^n$. In general there is an embedding ${\mathbb{P}}({\underline}{\ell})\hookrightarrow{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^n$ realizing ${\mathbb{P}}({\underline}{\ell})$ as a complex projective (toric) variety. As a topological space, ${\mathbb{P}}({\underline}{\ell})$ is homeomorphic to the quotient $S^{2n+1}/{\mathrm{U}}(1)$ with respect to the weighted action defined above, a quotient which has a natural structure of orbifold.
It is known that two weighted projective spaces are isomorphic as projective varieties if and only if they are homeomorphic [@BFNR13]. Moreover, every isomorphism class can be represented by a normalized weight, and two such spaces are isomorphic if and only if they have the same normalized weights, up to order. As a corollary, for $n=1$ every such space is isomorphic to ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^1$. Let us stress that, despite this, ${\mathbb{P}}(\ell_0,\ell_1)$ has orbifold singularities in every case except $\ell_0=\ell_1=1$; the spaces ${\mathbb{P}}(\ell_0,\ell_1)$ are all homeomorphic to ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^1$, but not isomorphic as orbifolds.
It is useful to have in mind few basic examples.
The map $S^3\to{\mathbb{R}}^3$, $(z_1,z_2)\mapsto (x_1,x_2,x_3):=\big({\mathrm{Re}}(z_1^*z_2^3),{\mathrm{Im}}(z_1^*z_2^3),z_1z_1^*\big)$, factors to a homeomorphism between ${\mathbb{P}}(3,1)$ and the variety in ${\mathbb{R}}^3$ defined by the equation $x_1^2+x_2^2=x_3(1-x_3)^3$. The latter has an orbifold singularity (a cusp) at $x=(0,0,1)$. As a toric variety, the map is an isomorphism ${\mathbb{P}}(3,1)\to{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^1$.
As the ${\mathbb{P}}(3,1)$ example shows, ${\mathbb{P}}({\underline}{\ell})$ may be isomorphic to ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^n$ as complex algebraic variety and, at the same time, have orbifold singularities.
There is an isomorphism of algebraic varieties between ${\mathbb{P}}(1,1,2)$ and the cone in ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^3$ with equation $y_0y_2-y_1^2=0$; the isomorphism is given by $$[z_0{\hspace{-1pt}:\hspace{-1pt}}z_1{\hspace{-1pt}:\hspace{-1pt}}z_2]\mapsto [y_0{\hspace{-1pt}:\hspace{-1pt}}y_1{\hspace{-1pt}:\hspace{-1pt}}y_2{\hspace{-1pt}:\hspace{-1pt}}y_3]{\hspace{-1pt}:\hspace{-1pt}}=[z_0^2{\hspace{-1pt}:\hspace{-1pt}}z_0z_1{\hspace{-1pt}:\hspace{-1pt}}z_1^2{\hspace{-1pt}:\hspace{-1pt}}z_2] \;,$$
As a preliminary step, we investigate the conditions on the weight vector ${\underline}{\ell}$ for which . Firstly, the observation that ${\mathbb{P}}({\underline}{\ell})\simeq{\mathbb{P}}(m{\underline}{\ell})$ for all $m\geq 1$ allows one to consider coprime weight vectors only (cf. Lemma \[lemma:obs\] for the quantum case).
If ${\underline}{\ell}=(\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_n)$ is a weight vector, we denote by ${\underline}{\ell}^{\,\sharp}$ the weight vector whose $i$-th component is equal to $\prod_{j\neq i}\ell_j$, for all $i=0,\ldots,n$.
For all $p\geq 1$ and $0\leq k\leq n$, we further define an operation ${\mathcal}{M}_k(p)$ on weight vectors as follows: we let ${\mathcal}{M}_k(p){\underline}{\ell}$ be the weight vector whose $i$-th component is equal to $\ell_i$ if $i=k$, and to $p\ell_i$ otherwise.
The left inverse of ${\mathcal}{M}_k(p)$ is the operation ${\mathcal}{D}_k(p)$ partially defined as follows: if $p$ divides $\ell_j$ for all $j\neq k$, then ${\mathcal}{D}_k(p){\underline}{\ell}$ is defined as the weight vector whose $i$-th component is equal to $\ell_i$ if $i=k$, and to $p^{-1}\ell_i$ otherwise.
The map ${\underline}{\ell}\mapsto{\underline}{\ell}^{\,\sharp}$ is not exactly an involution, but it satisfies $$({\underline}{\ell}^{\,\sharp})^{\,\sharp}=m \hspace{1pt} {\underline}{\ell}$$ with $m:=(\ell_0\ell_1\cdots\ell_n)^{n-1}$. Therefore, from the above mentioned fact that ${\mathbb{P}}({\underline}{\ell})\simeq{\mathbb{P}}(m{\underline}{\ell})$, every isomorphism class of weighted projective spaces can be obtained from a weight that is in the image of this map. A similar result holds for the quantum case as well, cf. Lemma \[lemma:obs\] below.
Let ${\underline}{\ell}$ be a weight vector. The *multiplication* ${\mathcal}{M}_k(p)$ is *admissible* on ${\underline}{\ell}$ if $p$ is a prime number and is not a divisor of $\ell_k$. The *division* ${\mathcal}{D}_k(p)$ is *admissible* on ${\underline}{\ell}$ if $p$ is prime, divides $\ell_i$ for all $i\neq k$ and does not divide $\ell_k$.
Classically, two (coprime) weight vectors correspond to isomorphic weighted projective spaces if and only if one can be obtained from the other with an iterated application (in any order) of admissible multiplications and divisions [@BFNR13]. So for example, one has ${\mathbb{P}}(1,2,2)\simeq{\mathbb{P}}(2,3,6)\simeq{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^2$ while ${\mathbb{P}}(1,1,2)\not\simeq{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^2$ (in particular, ${\mathcal}{D}_0(2)$ is admissible in the former case, while ${\mathcal}{M}_2(2)$ is not admissible in the latter case).
A weight vector ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{m}^{\sharp}$ is coprime if and only if ${\underline}{m}$ is pairwise coprime.
Note that $\gcd(\ell_i,\ell_j)=\gcd(m_i,m_j)\prod_{k\neq i,j}m_k$ for all $i\neq j$.
Let ${\underline}{m}$ be pairwise coprime. We prove by induction that $\gcd(\ell_0,\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_k)=\prod_{i>k}m_i$ for all $1\leq k\leq n$ (with the convention that empty products are $1$). It follows from the equation above when $k=1$. Assume it is true for some $k\in\{1,\ldots,n-1\}$. Then $$\gcd(\ell_0,\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_{k+1})=
\big(\gcd(\ell_0,\ell_1,\ldots,\ell_k),\ell_{k+1}\big)=
\gcd(1,m_0\cdots m_{k})\prod_{i>k+1}m_i=
\prod_{i>k+1}m_i \;.$$
*Proof of “$\,\Rightarrow$”.* Fix $i,j$ with $i\neq j$. Since $m_i$ divides $\ell_k$ for all $k\neq i$ and $m_j$ divides $\ell_i$, $\gcd(m_i,m_j)$ divides $\ell_k$ for all $k$. Hence if ${\underline}{\ell}$ is coprime, $\gcd(m_i,m_j)=1$, for all $i\neq j$.
\[thm:6\] Let ${\underline}{\ell}$ be coprime. Then ${\mathbb{P}}({\underline}{\ell})\simeq{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^n$ if and only if there is a pairwise coprime weight vector ${\underline}{p}$ such that ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$.
Let ${\underline}{p}$ be pairwise coprime and ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$.
For any prime $m$, ${\mathcal}{M}_k(m)$ is admissible if and only if $m$ does not divide $\ell_k=\prod_{i\neq k}p_i$. It follows that $\gcd(m,p_i)=1$ for all $ i\neq k$. The effect of ${\mathcal}{M}_k(m)$ is multiplying $p_k$ by $m$. Note that the new weight vector has still the form ${\underline}{\ell}'={\underline}{p}'^{\,\sharp}$ with ${\underline}{p}'$ pairwise coprime.
The division ${\mathcal}{D}_k(m)$ is admissible if and only if $m$ divides $\ell_j=\prod_{i\neq j}p_i$ for all $j\neq k$ and does not divide $\ell_k$. It follows that $\gcd(m,p_i)=1$ for all $i\neq k$, and $m$ divides $p_k$. The effect of ${\mathcal}{D}_k(m)$ is to divide $p_k$ by $m$. The new weight vector has still the form ${\underline}{\ell}'={\underline}{p}'^{\,\sharp}$ with ${\underline}{p}'$ pairwise coprime. Thus, any iterated application of admissible multiplications or divisions transforms ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ into ${\underline}{\ell}'={\underline}{p}'^{\,\sharp}$, with ${\underline}{p}'$ pairwise coprime. Starting with ${\underline}{p}={\underline}{\ell}=(1,\ldots,1)$ this proves the implication “$\,\Rightarrow$”.
*Proof of “$\,\Leftarrow$”.* Let ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ with ${\underline}{p}$ pairwise coprime. From the discussion above, ${\mathcal}{D}_k(m)$ is admissible for any prime factor $m$ of $p_k$. By repeated application of admissible divisions, we can transform ${\underline}{p}$ into $(1,\ldots,1)$, and this proves that ${\mathbb{P}}({\underline}{\ell})\simeq{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^n$.
Quantum spaces ${\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell})$ with weight vectors as in Theorem \[thm:6\] form a nice class of spaces and will be of primary interest in the rest of the paper. The class include any quantum weighted projective line (and in particular all quantum teardrops), since for $n=1$ any weight vector is such that $(\ell_0,\ell_1)=(\ell_1,\ell_0)^{\,\sharp}$.
Quantum weighted projective and lens spaces {#sec:due}
===========================================
Fix an integer $n\geq 1$. The coordinate algebra ${\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n+1}_q)$ of the $2n+1$-dimensional quantum sphere is generated by $2(n+1)$ elements $\{z_i,z_i^*\}_{i=0,\ldots,n}$ with relations [@VS91] (see also [@We00]):
\[eq:defrel\] $$\begin{aligned}
z_iz_j &=q^{-1}z_jz_i &&\forall\;0\leq i<j\leq n \;, \\
z_i^*z_j &=qz_jz_i^* &&\forall\;i\neq j \;, \label{eq:defrelB} \\
[z_i^*,z_i] &=(1-q^2)\sum\nolimits_{j=i+1}^n z_jz_j^* &&\forall\;i=0,\ldots,n-1 \;, \label{eq:defrelC} \\
[z_n^*,z_n] &=0 \;, \qquad \; \\
z_0z_0^*+z_1z_1^* &+\ldots+z_nz_n^*=1 \;. \label{eq:defrelE}\end{aligned}$$
We use the notations of [@DL10]. We have denoted by $q$ the deformation parameter, and assume that $0<q<1$. The original notation of [@VS91] is obtained by setting $q=e^{h/2}$; the generators $x_i$ used in [@HL04] are related to ours by $x_i=z_{n+1-i}^*$ and replacing $q\to q^{-1}$.
Let ${\underline}{\ell}$ be a weight vector and ${\mathrm{U}}(1) = \{ t\in{\mathbb{C}}, \, |t|=1\}$. An action by $*$-automorphisms $\alpha:{\mathrm{U}}(1)\to{\mathrm}{Aut}\,{\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n+1}_q)$ is defined on generators by: $$\label{eq:act}
\alpha_t(z_i):=t^{\ell_i}z_i \;,\qquad\forall\;i=0,\ldots,n \, .$$ Invariant elements form a $*$-subalgebra $$\label{eq:WP}
{\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell})):=\big\{a\in{\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n+1}_q):\alpha_t(a)=a \;\forall\; t\in {\mathrm{U}}(1)\big\} \;.$$ The virtual underlying quantum space is called *quantum weighted (complex) projective space* ${\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell})$ in [@BF12] (with a slightly different notation for quantum spheres that the one used there). In particular, ${\mathbb{P}}_q(\,\underbrace{\!1,\ldots,1\!}_{n}\,)={\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^n_q$ is a quantum projective space ‘tout court’.
Next, let $p$ be a positive integer and ${\mathbb{Z}}_p\subset {\mathrm{U}}(1)$ the subgroup of $p$-th roots of unity. We call *quantum lens space* $L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell})$ the virtual space underlying the algebra $$\label{eq:Lq}
{\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell})):=\big\{a\in{\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n+1}_q):\alpha_t(a)=a \;\forall\; t\in {\mathbb{Z}}_p\big\} \;.$$
The above definition of quantum lens space in arbitrary dimension was introduced in [@HL03], in the framework of graph $C^*$-algebras.
Clearly $L_q(1,{\underline}{\ell})=S^{2n+1}_q$ and is a $*$-subalgebra of , for any $p$: $${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell})) \hookrightarrow {\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell})) \;.$$ We shall have a closer look at this inclusion later on in §\[sec:sei\].
As for $q=1$, we do not lose generality by working with coprime weights. Indeed,
\[lemma:obs\] For all $m\geq 1$, it holds that ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))\simeq {\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q(m{\underline}{\ell}))$.
Let $\alpha_{{\underline}{\ell}}(t)$ be the action in . The inclusion ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))\subset{\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q(m{\underline}{\ell}))$ is obvious: invariance under $\alpha_{{\underline}{\ell}}(t)$ for $t\in {\mathrm{U}}(1)$ implies invariance under $\alpha_{{\underline}{\ell}}(t^m)=\alpha_{m{\underline}{\ell}}(t)$ for $t\in {\mathrm{U}}(1)$.
The opposite inclusion follows from surjectivity of the map ${\mathrm{U}}(1)\to {\mathrm{U}}(1)$, $t\mapsto t'=t^m$: if $\alpha_{m{\underline}{\ell}}(t)(a)=a$ for $t\in {\mathrm{U}}(1)$, then $\alpha_{{\underline}{\ell}}(t')(a)=a$ for $t'=t^m\in {\mathrm{U}}(1)$.
Generators of the algebra {#sec:quattro}
-------------------------
Let us start again from the generators $\{z_i,z_i^*\}_{i=0,\ldots,n}$ of the sphere algebra ${\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n+1}_q)$. To simplify the notations, we also denote by $z_i^{-1}$ the adjoint $z_i^*$ (there is no ambiguity, since $z_i$ is not invertible). For ${\underline}{k}=(k_0,\ldots,k_n)\in{\mathbb{Z}}^{n+1}$, let $$z^{{\underline}{k}}:=z_0^{k_0}z_1^{k_1}\ldots z_n^{k_n} \;.$$ Let ${\underline}{x}\cdot{\underline}{y}=x_0y_0+\ldots+x_ny_n$ be the Euclidean inner product. Next lemma is true for an arbitrary weight vector ${\underline}{\ell}$.
\[lemma:2\] For any weight vector ${\underline}{\ell}$, a set of generators for the weighted projective space algebra ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ is given by the elements: $$\begin{aligned}
z_i^*z_i \;,\quad &\forall\;i=0,\ldots,n \\[2pt]
z^{{\underline}{k}} \;,\quad &\forall\;{\underline}{k}\in{\mathbb{Z}}^{n+1}\; \quad \textup{s.t.}\quad \;{\underline}{\ell}\cdot{\underline}{k}=0 \, .\end{aligned}$$
A linear basis of ${\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n+1}_q)$ is given by monomials $$z_0^{j_0}z_1^{j_1}(z_1^*)^{k_1}\ldots z_n^{j_n}(z_n^*)^{k_n} \;,\qquad
(z_0^*)^{k_0}z_1^{j_1}(z_1^*)^{k_1}\ldots z_n^{j_n}(z_n^*)^{k_n} \;,$$ where $j_0,\ldots,j_n,k_0,\ldots,k_n$ are non-negative integers. Using the commutation rules of $S^{2n+1}_q$, these can be always rewritten as sums of products of elements $z_i^*z_i$, which clearly belong to ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$, and elements $z^{{\underline}{k}}$. Under the action : $$z^{{\underline}{k}}\mapsto t^{{\underline}{k}\hspace{1pt}\cdot\hspace{1pt}{\underline}{\ell}}z^{{\underline}{k}} \;,$$ hence $z^{{\underline}{k}}$ belongs to ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ if and only if ${\underline}{k}\cdot{\underline}{\ell}=0$.
The number of non-zero components of ${\underline}{k}$ is called the *length* of $z^{{\underline}{k}}$.
With $\ell_{i:j}:=\ell_i/{\mathrm}{gcd}(\ell_i,\ell_j)$, consider the invariant elements $$\label{eq:conj}
\xi_{i,j}:=(z_i^*)^{\ell_{j:i}}z_{\smash[t]{j}}^{\ell_{i:j}}\;,\qquad\forall\;i,j=0,\ldots,n \;.\vspace{5pt}$$
Any length $2$ element $z^{{\underline}{k}}\in{\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ is a power of some $\xi_{i,j}$ as in .
Let $i\neq j$. A length $2$ element $z^{{\underline}{k}}=z_i^{\smash[b]{k_i}}z_{j}^{\smash[b]{k_j}}$ is invariant under the coaction if and only if $k_i\ell_{i:j}+k_j\ell_{j:i}=0$. Since $\ell_{i:j}$ and $\ell_{j:i}$ are coprime, this implies that $k_i=m\ell_{j:i}$ and $k_j=-m\ell_{i:j}$ for some $m\in{\mathbb{Z}}$. From , it follows that $z^{{\underline}{k}}=z_i^{\smash[b]{m\ell_{j:i}}}z_{j}^{\smash[b]{-m\ell_{i:j}}}$ is, modulo a multiplicative coefficient, either $(\xi_{i,j})^{|m|}$ or $(\xi_{j,i})^{|m|}$ (depending on the sign of $m$).
Clearly, $\xi_{i,i}=z_i^* z_i$ for all $i=0,\ldots,n$. We task ourself to select the class of quantum weighted projective spaces for which the elements generate the whole of ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$.
If $n=1$, and for every ${\underline}{\ell}$, it is clearly true: in this case $z^{{\underline}{k}}$ has at most length $2$, and there are no invariant monomials of length $1$. For arbitrary $n$, if $\ell_0=\ldots=\ell_n=1$ again gives a set of generators, the matrix elements of the defining projection of ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^n_q$, as shown in [@DL10].
On the other hand, it is not difficult to find examples that do not satisfy this property. If ${\underline}{\ell}=(1,2,3)$ the element $z_0z_1z_2^*$ is irreducible in ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ (it is not the product of invariant monomials of smaller length), hence one needs both monomials of length $2$ and $3$ to generate the algebra. Similarly, if ${\underline}{\ell}=(1,2,3,7)$ the element $z_0^2z_1z_2z_3^*$ is irreducible in ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$, and one needs elements of length $2$, $3$ and $4$ to generate the algebra.
It turns out (cf. Theorem \[thm:11\] below) that the set of elements $\xi_{i,j}$ as in generate the algebra ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ if and only if the weight vector ${\underline}{\ell}$ is as in Theorem \[thm:6\], hence classically ${\mathbb{P}}({\underline}{\ell})\simeq{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^n$. We need some preliminary lemmas. First of all, let us recall:
\[lemma:Bez\] Let $R$ be a principal ideal domain. For any $a,b\in R$ there exists $x,y\in R$ such that $\gcd(a,b)=ax+by$.
When $R={\mathbb{Z}}$ and $a,b\geq 1$, it is an easy exercise to prove that one can always choose $x,y$ different from zero and with opposite sign. So, as a corollary:
\[lemma:coprime\] For any three positive integers $a,b,k$ there exists two non-zero integers $r,s$ with opposite sign such that $ar+bs=k\gcd(a,b)$.
\[lemma:divide\] Let ${\underline}{\ell}$ be a coprime weight vector. There is a pairwise coprime weight vector ${\underline}{p}$ such that ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ if and only if $\ell_{i:j}=\ell_i/{\mathrm}{gcd}(\ell_i,\ell_j)$ divides $\ell_k$ for all $i\neq j$ and $j\neq k$.
If ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ with ${\underline}{p}$ pairwise coprime, one has $\ell_{i:j}=p_j$ for any $i\neq j$. Hence $\ell_{i:j}$ divides $\ell_k$ for all $k\neq j$.
*Proof of “$\,\Leftarrow$”.* We prove it by induction. The statement is trivial if $n=0,1$. Let $n\geq 2$.
Define $p_0=\ell_{1:0}$, $p_1=\ell_{0:1}$ and $p'_2=\gcd(\ell_0,\ell_1)$. Note that $p_0$ and $p_1$ are coprime. By construction $\ell_0=p_1p'_2$ and $\ell_1=p_0p'_2$. By hypothesis $p_0$ and $p_1$ divide $\ell_2,\ldots,\ell_n$. Since they are coprime, for all $k\geq 2$, there exists integers $r_k,s_k,\ell'_k\geq 1$ such that $\ell_k=\ell'_kp_0^{r_k}p_1^{s_k}$ and $\ell'_k$ is not divisible by $p_0$ or $p_1$ (this is just the decomposition of an integer number in prime factors). Since $\gcd(p_0,p'_2)$ divides all weights, it must be $1$. Hence $p'_2$ is coprime to $p_0$, and similarly is coprime to $p_1$. It follows that $\gcd(\ell_k,\ell_0)=p_1\gcd(\ell'_k,p'_2)$ and that $$\ell_{k:0}=\frac{\ell'_k}{\gcd(\ell'_k,p'_2)}\cdot p_0^{r_k}p_1^{s_k-1} \;.$$ By hypothesis $\ell_{k:0}$ divides $\ell_1$, hence $p_0^{r_k-1}$ and $p_1^{s_k-1}$ divides $p'_2$. Since $p_0,p_1,p'_2$ are pairwise coprime, this implies $r_k=s_k=1$.
Since again $\ell_{k:0}=p_0\ell'_k/\gcd(\ell'_k,p'_2)$ divides $\ell_1$, then $\ell'_k/\gcd(\ell'_k,p'_2)$ divides $p'_2$, which is only possible if $p'_2$ is a multiple of $\ell'_k$. Since $p'_2$ is coprime to $p_0$ and $p_1$, $\ell'_k$ is coprime to $p_0$ and $p_1$ for all $k\geq 2$. Furthermore, $\gcd(\ell'_2,\ldots,\ell'_n)$ divides $\ell_i$ for all $i=0,\ldots,n$, but ${\underline}{\ell}$ is coprime, so ${\underline}{\ell}'$ must be coprime too.
The next step is to show that the weight vector ${\underline}{\ell}'$ satisfies the condition of Lemma \[lemma:divide\]. Let $i\neq j$ and $i,j\geq 2$. Being $\ell'_i$ coprime to $p_0$ and $p_1$, so is $\ell'_{i:j}$. But $\ell'_{i:j}=\ell'_i/\gcd(\ell'_i,\ell'_j)=\ell_{i:j}$ and $\ell_{i:j}$ divides $\ell_k$; hence $\ell'_{i:j}$ divides $\ell'_k$ (for all $k\neq j$, $k\geq 2$).
Now we use the inductive hypothesis, ${\underline}{\ell}'=({\underline}{p}^{\geq 2})^{\,\sharp}$ for some ${\underline}{p}^{\geq 2}=(p_2,p_3,\ldots,p_n)$ pairwise coprime. Since $\ell'_2,\ldots,\ell'_n$ are coprime to $p_0$ and $p_1$, the vector ${\underline}{p}:=(p_0,\ldots,p_n)$ is pairwise coprime. Moreover, $\ell_i=\prod_{j\neq i}p_j$ for all $i\geq 2$. It remains to prove that $p'_2=p_2p_3\ldots p_n$.
For all $i\neq j$ with $i,j\geq 2$, $\ell_{i:j}=p_j$ divides $\ell_0$. Hence $\ell_0=rp_1p_2^{k_2}p_3^{k_3}\ldots p_n^{k_n}$ for integers $r,k_2,\ldots,k_n\geq 1$. Since $\ell_{0:2}=rp_2^{k_2}p_3^{k_3-1}\ldots p_n^{k_n-1}$ divides $\ell_3$, $p_3^{k_3-1}$ divides $\ell_3$, and then $k_3=1$. Similarly one shows that $k_i=1$ for all $i\geq 2$. So, $p'_2=rp_2p_3\ldots p_n$. From the above expression for $\ell_{0:2}$ it follows that $r$ divides $\ell_3$, and similarly $\ell_i$ for all $i\geq 2$. On the other hand, $r$ divides $p'_2$ and then $\ell_0$ and $\ell_1$. Since ${\underline}{\ell}$ is a coprime vector, it must be $r=1$.
\[thm:11\] Let ${\underline}{\ell}$ be a coprime weight vector. Then ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ is generated by the elements $\xi_{i,j}$ if and only if there is a pairwise coprime weight vector ${\underline}{p}$ such that ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$.
Since the statement is trivial for $n=1$, we assume $n\geq 2$. We assume the thesis is false, and prove that this contradicts the hypothesis, i.e. we assume there is no ${\underline}{p}$ such that ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$, and prove the existence of an irreducible monomial with length $3$.
By Lemma \[lemma:divide\], there exists indices $i,j,k$ with $i\neq j$ and $j\neq k$ such that $\ell_{i:j}$ does not divide $\ell_k$. It must be $k\neq i$, since $\ell_{i:j}$ always divides $\ell_i$. To simplify the notations, we may assume $i=0$, $j=1$, $k=2$, the general case being the same.
Using Corollary \[lemma:coprime\] for $a=\ell_0$, $b=\ell_2$ and $k=\ell_1$ one can find non-zero integers $r,s$ with opposite sign such that $\ell_0 r+\ell_2 s=\ell_1\gcd(\ell_0,\ell_2)$. If $r$ is positive, the length $3$ monomial $$\label{eq:notgen}
(z_0^*)^{|r|}z_1^{\gcd(\ell_0,\ell_2)}z_2^{|s|}$$ belongs to ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$. By hypothesis $\ell_{0:1}$ does not divide $\ell_2$, thus it does not divide $\gcd(\ell_0,\ell_2)$. On the other hand, if an invariant element of the form $(z_0^*)^{k_0}z_1^{k_1}z_2^{k_2}$ (with positive $k_0,k_1,k_2$) is generated by element $\xi_{i,j}$ as in , then $\ell_{0:1}$ divides $k_1$ (since $\xi_{0,1}^\alpha\xi_{0,2}^\beta=(z_0^*)^{\alpha\ell_{1:0}+\beta\ell_{2:0}}
z_1^{\alpha\ell_{0:1}}z_2^{\beta\ell_{0:2}}$ for all $\alpha,\beta\geq 1$). This proves that is not a product of elements in . For $r$ negative, we repeat the proof with the monomial $z_0^{|r|}z_1^{\gcd(\ell_0,\ell_2)}(z_2^*)^{|s|}$.
*Proof of “$\,\Leftarrow$”.* Let ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ with ${\underline}{p}$ pairwise coprime. If $z^{{\underline}{k}}$ is ${\mathrm{U}}(1)$-invariant, one has that $$-k_0\ell_0=k_1\ell_1+\ldots+k_n\ell_n \;.$$ Since $p_0$ divides every weight in the right hand side, it divides $k_0\ell_0$; since it does not divide $\ell_0$, it has to divide $k_0$. Similarly $p_i$ divides $k_i$ for all $i=1,\ldots,n$. After reparametrization, any invariant monomial $z^{{\underline}{k}}$ in Lemma \[lemma:2\] is of the form $\zeta^{{\underline}{k}}:=\zeta_0^{k_0}\zeta_1^{k_1}\ldots \zeta_n^{k_n}$ with $\zeta_i:=z_i^{p_i}$. Note that for all $i\neq j$, being $\ell_{i:j}=p_j$, elements in are given by $$\xi_{i,j}=\zeta_i^*\zeta_j \, .$$ Named $p:=\prod_{j=0}^np_j$, since $\alpha_t(\zeta_i)=t^p\zeta_i$ for all $i=0,\ldots,n$ ($p_i\ell_i=p$ for all $i$), an invariant monomial $\zeta^{{\underline}{k}}$ contains the same number of $\zeta_i$’s and of $\zeta_i^*$’s (each counted with multiplicities). Using the relation the factors can be reordered so that $\zeta_i$’s and $\zeta_i^*$’s are alternating, i.e. we can write an invariant $\zeta^{{\underline}{k}}$ as a product of elements $\xi_{i,j}=\zeta_i^*\zeta_j$.
For the classes of spaces in Theorem \[thm:11\], it is clear from the proof that ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ is a of the algebra generated by the elements: $$\label{eq:genLq}
x_i:=z_iz_i^* \;,\quad
\zeta_i:=z_i^{p_i} \;,\quad
\zeta_i^* \;, \qquad \textup{for} \quad i=0,\ldots,n \, .$$ If ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ with ${\underline}{p}$ pairwise coprime, this algebra is the lens space algebra ${\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell}))$ defined in , for the action of the cyclic group ${\mathbb{Z}}_p$, with parameter $p$ now given by $p:=p_0p_1\ldots p_n$.
\[thm:13\] Let ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ with ${\underline}{p}$ pairwise coprime, and let $p:=p_0p_1\ldots p_n$. Then the algebra ${\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell}))$ is generated by the elements .
By arguing as in the proof of Lemma \[lemma:2\], clearly ${\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell}))$ is generated by the elements $x_i=z_iz_i^*$ and by monomials $z^{{\underline}{k}}$ that are ${\mathbb{Z}}_p$-invariant, which happens if and only if ${\underline}{k}\cdot{\underline}{\ell}\in p{\mathbb{Z}}$. Using ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ the invariance condition becomes $$\sum_{i=0}^nk_i\prod_{j\neq i}p_j\in (p_0\ldots p_n) {\mathbb{Z}}.$$ Every summand in the equation above besides the $0$-th is divisible by $p_0$, hence $k_0\ell_0$ must be divisible by $p_0$, i.e. $k_0$ is divisible by $p_0$. Similarly $k_i\in p_i{\mathbb{Z}}$ for all $i$. Thus $z^{{\underline}{k}}=\zeta_0^{h_0}\zeta_1^{h_1}\ldots\zeta_n^{h_n}$ where $h_i=k_i/p_i$. Since each $\zeta_i$ is ${\mathbb{Z}}_p$-invariant, such a monomial clearly belongs to ${\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell}))$, thus concluding the proof.
We close this section by computing the relations among the generating elements .
\[prop:relLens\] The elements $x_i$, $\zeta_i$, $\zeta_i^*$ satisfy the commutation relations
\[eq:relLens\] $$\begin{aligned}
x_ix_j &= x_jx_i && \textup{for all} \quad i,j \;, \label{eq:relLensA} \\
x_i\zeta_j &=\zeta_jx_i && \textup{for all} \quad 0\leq i<j\leq n \;, \label{eq:relLensB} \\
x_j\zeta_i &=q^{2p_i}\zeta_ix_j && \textup{for all} \quad 0\leq i<j\leq n \;, \label{eq:relLensC} \\
\zeta_i\zeta_j &=q^{-p_ip_j}\zeta_j\zeta_i && \textup{for all} \quad 0\leq i<j\leq n \;, \label{eq:relLensD} \\
\zeta_i^*\zeta_j &=q^{p_ip_j}\zeta_j\zeta_i^* && \textup{for all} \quad i\neq j \;, \label{eq:relLensE} \\
[x_i,\zeta_i] &=(1-q^{2p_i})\,\zeta_i\sum\nolimits_{j>i}x_j
\hspace{-1cm} && \textup{for all} \quad i=0,\ldots,n \;, \label{eq:relLensF} \\
\intertext{together with the relations:}
x_0 & +x_1+\ldots +x_n =1 \;, \label{eq:relLensG} \\
\zeta_i\zeta_i^* &=\prod_{k=0}^{p_i-1}\Big\{x_i+(1-q^{-2k})\sum\nolimits_{j>i}x_j\Big\}
&& \textup{for all} \quad i=0,\ldots,n \;, \label{eq:relLensH} \\
\zeta_i^*\zeta_i &=\prod_{k=1}^{p_i}\Big\{x_i+(1-q^{2k})\sum\nolimits_{j>i}x_j\Big\}
&& \textup{for all} \quad i=0,\ldots,n \;. \label{eq:relLensL} \end{aligned}$$
It is understood that an empty sum is $0$.
The relations from to are easy to derive. We move to the next. Let $$X_i:=\sum\nolimits_{j>i}x_j$$ and note that $X_iz_i=q^2z_iX_i$. It follows by induction on $k\geq 1$ that $$\label{eq:zstarzi}
[z_i^*,z_i^k] = (1-q^{2k})\,z_i^{k-1}X_i \;.$$ For $k=1$ this is just , and from the algebraic identity $$\begin{aligned}
[z_i^*,z_i^{k+1}] &=
[z_i^*,z_i^k]z_i+z_i^k[z_i^*,z_i]
=(1-q^{2k})z_i^{k-1}X_iz_i+(1-q^2)z_i^kX_i
\\
&=(1-q^{2k})q^2z_i^kX_i+(1-q^2)z_i^kX_i
=(1-q^{2k+2})z_i^kX_i\end{aligned}$$ the inductive step follows. From and $[x_i,z_i^{k+1}]=z_i[z_i^*,z_i^{k+1}]$ we get for $k=p_i$.
For $k\geq 1$, it follows from that $$z_i^{k+1}(z_i^*)^{k+1}=
z_iz_i^*z_i^k(z_i^*)^k-z_i[z_i^*,z_i^k](z_i^*)^k=
\big\{x_i+(1-q^{-2k})X_i\big\}z_i^k(z_i^*)^k \;.$$ That is $$\label{eq:Yk}
Y_i(k)=\big\{x_i+(1-q^{-2(k-1)})X_i\big\}Y_i(k-1) \;,$$ where $Y_i(k):=z_i^k(z_i^*)^k$ if $k\geq 1$ and $Y_i(0)=1$. By iterated use of we find: $$Y_i(k)=\prod_{j=0}^{k-1}\big\{x_i+(1-q^{-2j})X_i\big\} \;.$$ This gives when $k=p_i$. Note that the order in the product does not matter, since it follows from that $x_i$ and $X_i$ commute.
Similarly, using the conjugate of : $$-[z_i,(z_i^*)^k] = (1-q^{2k})X_i(z_i^*)^{k-1} \;,$$ and $$(z_i^*)^{k+1}z_i^{k+1}=z_i^*z_i(z_i^*)^kz_i^k-z_i^*[z_i,(z_i^*)^k]z_i^k \;,$$ for $Z_i(k):=(z_i^*)^kz_i^k$, we find $$\begin{aligned}
Z_i(k+1)&=\Big\{z_i^*z_i+(1-q^{2k})q^2X_i\Big\}Z_i(k) \\
&=\Big\{x_i+(1-q^2)X_i+(1-q^{2k})q^2X_i\Big\}Z_i(k)
=\Big\{x_i+(1-q^{2k+2})X_i\Big\}Z_i(k) \;.\end{aligned}$$ By iterated use of this equation we arrive at: $$Z_i(k)=\prod_{j=1}^k\big\{x_i+(1-q^{2j})X_i\big\} \;.$$ This implies . Last relation is simply .
From and one also computes for all $i=0,\ldots,n$, the commutator: $$[\zeta_i^*,\zeta_i]=(q-q^{-1})\sum_{k=0}^{p_0}{\genfrac{[}{]}{0pt}{}{p_0}{k}_{\!q}}[\hspace{1pt}p_0k]_q
\left(-q\sum\nolimits_{j\geq i}x_j\right)^k
\left(\sum\nolimits_{j\geq i+1}x_j\right)^{p_0-k} \;,$$ where ${\genfrac{[}{]}{0pt}{}{p_0}{k}_{\!q}}$ is the $q$-binomial (cf. ). In the equations we separated a first group of relations, reducing to the property of the algebra being commutative when $q=1$, and a second group which is a deformation of the algebraic equations defining the lens space $L(p;{\underline}{\ell})$.
For $n=1$, the algebra ${\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;1,p))$ is isomorphic to the abstract unital $*$-algebra generated by elements as in with relations as in Proposition \[prop:relLens\] (essentially meaning there are no additional relations among the generators). While it ought to be possible to establish an analogous statement for general $n$ and any weight ${\underline}{\ell}$ as in Theorem \[thm:13\], such a result is not needed in the following.
Irreducible representations {#sec:irreps}
===========================
Irreducible representation of quantum spheres were constructed in [@HL04]. From these, by restriction one gets irreducible representations of quantum lens and weighted projective spaces. They will be used in the next section to construct Fredholm modules.
Denote by ${\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}}\right>}$ the canonical orthonormal basis of $\ell^2({\mathbb{N}}^n)$, where $\vec{k}=(k_1,\ldots,k_n)\in{\mathbb{N}}^n$, and by $\vec{e}_i$ the vector with $i$-th component equal to $1$ and all the others equal to zero (for $i=1,\ldots,n$). A faithful representation of ${\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n+1}_q)$ on $\ell^2({\mathbb{N}}^n)$ is given on generators by $$\begin{aligned}
z_i{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}}\right>} &=q^{k_1+\ldots+k_i}\sqrt{1-q^{2(k_{i+1}+1)}}{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}+\vec{e}_{i+1}}\right>} \;, \qquad \textup{for} \;\; 0\leq i<n \, , \\
z_n{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}}\right>} &=q^{k_1+\ldots+k_n}{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}}\right>} \, ,\end{aligned}$$ where we omit the representation symbol. This is the representation $\psi_1^{(2n+1)}$ of [@HL04], modulo a renaming of the generators and a redefinition of the parameters.
Assume now that the hypothesis of Theorem \[thm:13\], are satisfied, that is let ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ be a weight vector, with ${\underline}{p}$ pairwise coprime, and let $p:=p_0p_1\ldots p_n$. On the generators of ${\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell}))$ the representation above gives: $$\begin{aligned}
x_i{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}}\right>} &=q^{2(k_1+\ldots+k_i)}\big(1-q^{2k_{i+1}}\big){\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}}\right>} \;, & \textup{for} \;\; 0\leq i<n, \\
x_n{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}}\right>} &=q^{2(k_1+\ldots+k_n)}{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}}\right>} \;, \\
\zeta_i{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}}\right>} &=q^{p_i(k_1+\ldots+k_i)}\sqrt{ {\genfrac{ \{ }{ \} }{0pt}{1}{k_{i+1}+p_i}{k_{i+1}}_{\!q}} }{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}+p_i\vec{e}_{i+1}}\right>} \;, & \textup{for} \;\; 0\leq i<n, \\
\zeta_n{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}}\right>} &=q^{p_n(k_1+\ldots+k_n)}{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}}\right>} \;,\end{aligned}$$ where, for $0\leq k<m$, $${\genfrac{ \{ }{ \} }{0pt}{}{m}{k}_{\!q}} := (1 - q^{2k+2})(1 - q^{2k+4})\ldots (1 - q^{2m})$$ is just a shorthand notation for the $q$-shifted factorial $(q^{2k+2};q^2)_{m-k-1}$.
This representation breaks into irreducible components for ${\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell}))$. To see this, we relabel the basis vectors as follows. For all $i=1,\ldots,n$ let $$k_i=p_{i-1}(m_i-m_{i-1})+r_{i-1}\, ,$$ where $\vec{m}=(m_1,\ldots,m_n)\in{\mathbb{N}}^n$ satisfies $0\leq m_1\leq m_2\leq\ldots\leq m_n$, we set $m_0:=0$, and $r_i\in\{0,\ldots,p_i-1\}$ are the remainders. The inverse transformation is then $$\label{eq:inverse}
m_i=\sum_{j=1}^i\frac{k_j-r_{j-1}}{p_{j-1}} \;.$$ Basis vectors will be renamed accordingly ${\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m};{\boldsymbol}{r}}\right>}$ and the representation breaks into the irreducible sub-representations of ${\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell}))$ given in the next proposition.
\[prop:A\] Fix a vector ${\boldsymbol}{r}=(r_0,\ldots,r_{n-1}) \in{\mathbb{N}}^n$ with constraints on the components $$\begin{gathered}
\quad 0 \leq r_i<p_i\;, \quad \textup{for} \, \, \, i=0,\ldots,n-1 \, .\end{gathered}$$ Let ${\mathcal{H}}_{{\boldsymbol}{r}}$ be the Hilbert space with orthonormal basis ${\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m};{\boldsymbol}{r}}\right>}$ and such that $$\begin{gathered}
0\leq m_1\leq m_2\leq\ldots\leq m_n \, .\end{gathered}$$ An irreducible representation of the lens algebra ${\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell}))$ is given on generators by $$\begin{aligned}
x_i{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m};{\boldsymbol}{r}}\right>} &=
q^{2\sum_{j=0}^{i-1}r_j}q^{2\sum_{j=1}^ip_{j-1}(m_j-m_{j-1})}
\big(1-q^{2r_i}q^{2p_i(m_{i+1}-m_i)}\big){\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m};{\boldsymbol}{r}}\right>} \;, \\[2pt]
\zeta_i{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m};{\boldsymbol}{r}}\right>} &=
q^{p_i\sum_{j=0}^{i-1}r_j}q^{\sum_{j=1}^ip_{j-1}(m_j-m_{j-1})}
\sqrt{ {\genfrac{ \{ }{ \} }{0pt}{}{ p_i(m_{i+1}-m_i+1) }{ p_i(m_{i+1}-m_i) }_{\!q}} }{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}+\vec{e}_{in};{\boldsymbol}{r}}\right>} \;, \\[-3pt]
\intertext{for all $i=0,\ldots,n-1$ and\vspace{-3pt}}
x_n{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m};{\boldsymbol}{r}}\right>} &=
q^{2\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}r_j}q^{2\sum_{j=1}^np_{j-1}(m_j-m_{j-1})}
{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m};{\boldsymbol}{r}}\right>} \;, \\[2pt]
\zeta_n{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m};{\boldsymbol}{r}}\right>} &=
q^{p_n\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}r_j}q^{\sum_{j=1}^np_{j-1}(m_j-m_{j-1})}
{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m};{\boldsymbol}{r}}\right>} \;,\end{aligned}$$ where $\vec{e}_{in}:=(\, \stackrel{i\;{\mathrm}{times}}{\overbrace{0,0,\ldots,0}}\,,\stackrel{n-i\;{\mathrm}{times}}{\overbrace{1,1,\ldots,1}}\, )$, for all $0\leq i<n$, with $m_0:=0$.
Fredholm modules {#sec:Khom}
================
Here we present some basic Fredholm modules for the algebra ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ constructed using faithful representations. Additional Fredholm modules can then be obtained by iterated pullbacks from ‘lower dimensions’. Indeed, the epimorphism ${\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n+1}_q)\twoheadrightarrow{\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n-1}_q)$ given by $z_n\mapsto 0$ induces an epimorphism ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q(\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_n))\twoheadrightarrow{\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q(\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_{n-1}))$.
The building block representations are the ones described in §\[sec:irreps\]. As done there, we assume that the hypothesis of Theorem \[thm:13\] are satisfied: that is ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ with ${\underline}{p}$ pairwise coprime. The next definition is the analogue of [@DL10 Def. 1]. Through the whole section, we assume we fixed a sequence of integers ${\boldsymbol}{r}=(r_0,\ldots,r_{n-1})$ satisfying $$\label{eq:ri}
0\leq r_i<p_i \;,\qquad \textup{for} \quad i=0,\ldots,n-1 \, .$$
\[def:15\] Let ${\mathcal{H}}_n:=\ell^2({\mathbb{N}}^n)$, with orthonormal basis ${\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>}$, $\vec{m}=(m_1,\ldots,m_n)\in{\mathbb{N}}^n$. For $0\leq k\leq n$ let ${\mathcal}{V}^n_k\subset{\mathcal{H}}_n$ be the linear span of basis vectors ${\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>}$ satisfying the constraints $$\label{eq:mconstr}
0\leq m_1\leq m_2\leq\ldots\leq m_k\;,\qquad\quad m_{k+1}>m_{k+2}>\ldots>m_n\geq 0 \;,$$ the former condition being empty if $k=0$, and the latter one being empty if $k=n$. For every $0\leq k\leq n$, a representation is defined as follows (all the representations are on the same Hilbert space). Firstly, for $0\leq i<k\leq n$, denote by $\vec{e}_{ik}\in\{0,1\}^n$ the array $$\vec{e}_{ik}:=
(\,\,\stackrel{i\;{\mathrm}{times}}{\overbrace{0,0,\ldots,0}}\,,
\stackrel{k-i\;{\mathrm}{times}}{\overbrace{1,1,\ldots,1}}\,,
\stackrel{n-k\;{\mathrm}{times}}{\overbrace{0,0,\ldots,0}}) \;.$$ Then, we set $\pi^{(n)}_k(x_i)=\pi^{(n)}_k(\zeta_i)=0$ if $i>k$, while the remaining generators are given by: $$\begin{aligned}
\pi^{(n)}_k(x_i){\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>} &=
q^{2\sum_{j=0}^{i-1}r_j}q^{2\sum_{j=1}^ip_{j-1}(m_j-m_{j-1})}
\big(1-q^{2r_i}q^{2p_i(m_{i+1}-m_i)}\big){\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>} \, , \quad \textup{for} \;0\leq i<k, \\[5pt]
\pi^{(n)}_k(x_k){\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>} &=
q^{2\sum_{j=0}^{k-1}r_j}q^{2\sum_{j=1}^kp_{j-1}(m_j-m_{j-1})}
{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>} \;, \\
\pi^{(n)}_k(\zeta_i){\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>} &=
q^{p_i\sum_{j=0}^{i-1}r_j}q^{\sum_{j=1}^ip_{j-1}(m_j-m_{j-1})}
\sqrt{ {\genfrac{ \{ }{ \} }{0pt}{}{ p_i(m_{i+1}-m_i+1) }{ p_i(m_{i+1}-m_i) }_{\!q}} }{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}+\vec{e}_{ik}}\right>} \;, \\
& \hspace{11cm} \textup{for} \;0\leq i<k, \\[-5pt]
\pi^{(n)}_k(\zeta_k){\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>} &=
q^{p_k\sum_{j=0}^{k-1}r_j}q^{\sum_{j=1}^kp_{j-1}(m_j-m_{j-1})}
{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>} \;,\end{aligned}$$
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(with $m_0:=0$) on the subspace ${\mathcal}{V}^n_k$ and they are zero on the orthogonal subspace.
The representation $\pi^{(n)}_k$, when restricted to ${\mathcal}{V}^n_k$, is the direct sum of several copies of the irreducible representation for ${\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p_0\ldots p_k;\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_k))$ given in Proposition \[prop:A\], and pulled back to ${\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_n))$: one copy of the representation for each value of the additional labels $m_{k+1},\ldots,m_n$.
Lemma 2 of [@DL10] still holds (and we do not repeat the proof here):
\[le:pl\] The spaces $\mathcal{V}^n_k$ are such that $\mathcal{V}^n_j\perp\mathcal{V}^n_k$ if $|j-k|>1$, while $\mathcal{V}^n_{k-1}\cap\mathcal{V}^n_k$, for $1\leq k\leq n$, is the span of vectors ${\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>}$ satisfying: $$\label{eq:capconstr}
0\leq m_1\leq m_2\leq\ldots\leq m_k\;, \qquad\quad m_k>m_{k+1}>\ldots>m_n\geq 0 \;.$$
As a consequence $\pi^{(n)}_j(a)\pi^{(n)}_k(b)=0$ for all $a,b\in{\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell}))$, if $|j-k|>1$, and the maps $\pi_\pm^{(n)}:{\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell}))\to{\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal{H}}_n)$ defined by $$\label{irreps+-}
\pi_+^{(n)}(a):=\sum_{\substack{0\leq k\leq n \\[1pt] k\;{\mathrm}{even}}}\pi^{(n)}_k(a) \;,\qquad
\pi_-^{(n)}(a):=\sum_{\substack{0\leq k\leq n \\[1pt] k\;{\mathrm}{odd}}}\pi^{(n)}_k(a) \;,$$ are representations of the algebra ${\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;{\underline}{\ell}))$. We then generalize [@DL10 Prop. 3].
\[prop\] For all $a\in{\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$, the operator $\pi_+^{(n)}(a)-\pi_-^{(n)}(a)$ is of trace class on ${\mathcal{H}}_n$; furthermore, the trace is given by a series which — as a function of $q$ — is absolutely convergent in the open interval $0<q<1$.
The space ${\mathcal{H}}_n$ is the orthogonal direct sum of ${\mathcal}{V}^n_{k-1}\cap{\mathcal}{V}^n_k$, for all $1\leq k\leq n$, plus the joint kernel of all the representations involved. From Lemma \[le:pl\], on ${\mathcal}{V}^n_{k-1}\cap{\mathcal}{V}^n_k$ only the representations $\pi^{(n)}_{k-1}$ and $\pi^{(n)}_k$ are different from zero (accordingly to the parity of $k$ one contributes to $\pi_+^{(n)}$ and the other to $\pi_-^{(n)}$). It then suffices to prove that $\pi^{(n)}_{k-1}(a)-\pi^{(n)}_k(a)$ is of trace class, and that the trace is absolutely convergent for any $0<q<1$. Moreover, it is enough to show this for $a=\xi_{i,j}$ a generator of ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ as given in , with $0\leq i\leq j\leq n$. Remember that $\xi_{i,i} =z_i^*z_i$ (these can be replaced by the generators $x_i=z_iz_i^*$), and that $\xi_{i,j}=\zeta_i^*\zeta_j$ for all $i\neq j$.
The explicit expressions in Definition \[def:15\], yields that both $\pi^{(n)}_{k-1}(\xi_{i,j})$ and $\pi^{(n)}_k(\xi_{i,j})$ vanish if $j>k$. For $j=k$, $\pi^{(n)}_{k-1}(\xi_{i,k})$ vanishes and $\pi^{(n)}_k(\xi_{i,k})$ has matrix coefficients bounded by $$\label{eq:bound}
q^{\sum_{j=1}^kp_{j-1}(m_j-m_{j-1})} \;.$$ For $j=k-1$, one uses the inequality $|1-\sqrt{1-x^2}|\leq x$ (which is valid for $0\leq x\leq 1$) to prove that $\pi^{(n)}_{k-1}(\xi_{i,j})-\pi^{(n)}_k(\xi_{i,j})$ still has matrix coefficients bounded by . For $0\leq i\leq j\leq k-2$, the operators $\pi^{(n)}_{k-1}(\xi_{i,j})$ and $\pi^{(n)}_k(\xi_{i,j})$ coincide on ${\mathcal}{V}^n_{k-1}\cap{\mathcal}{V}^n_k$.
Since $m_j-m_{j-1}\geq 0$ for $1\leq j\leq k$ and $p_{j-1}\geq 1$, $q^{p_{j-1}(m_j-m_{j-1})}\leq q^{m_j-m_{j-1}}$ and the coefficient in is bounded by $q^{m_k}$. The observation that the series $$\sum_{\vec{m}\;\textrm{satisfying (\ref{eq:capconstr})}}q^{m_k}
=\sum_{m_k=n-k}^\infty\binom{m_k+k-1}{k-1}\binom{m_k}{n-k}q^{m_k}$$ is absolutely convergent for $0<q<1$ concludes the proof.
As a consequence of Proposition \[prop\], using the direct sum of the representation $\pi_+$ and $\pi_-$ we can construct a Fredholm module in a standard manner.
Let us introduce the label ${\boldsymbol}{r}$ for book-keeping. Let $\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^\pm$ be the representations in and ${\mathcal{H}}_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^\pm$ two copies of the underlying Hilbert space previously denoted ${\mathcal{H}}_n$. Let $$\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}=\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^+\oplus\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^- \;,\qquad
{\mathcal{H}}_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}={\mathcal{H}}_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^+\oplus{\mathcal{H}}_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^- \;,$$ let $\gamma_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$ be the obvious grading on ${\mathcal{H}}_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$ and $F_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$ the flip operator: $F_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(v\oplus w)=w\oplus v$. Then, for ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ with ${\underline}{p}$ a pairwise coprime weight vector, the datum $$\label{eq:fmn}
\big(\,
{\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))
\,,\,
{\mathcal{H}}_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,,\,
\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,,\,
F_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,,\,
\gamma_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,\big)$$ is a $1$-summable even Fredholm module. Due to , the number of such Fredholm modules is the number of possible values of the label ${\boldsymbol}{r}$, that is $p_0p_1\ldots p_{n-1}$.
Additional Fredholm modules are obtained by pullback, applying the same construction to ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q(\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_k))$, for all $k=1,\ldots,n-1$. Note that ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q(\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_k))$ coincides with the algebra having coprime weight vector $(p_0,\ldots,p_k)^{\,\sharp}$ (since $\gcd(\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_k)=p_{k+1}\ldots p_n$).
A final Fredholm module is the pullback of the canonical non-trivial Fredholm module of ${\mathbb{C}}$, given on ${\mathbb{C}}\oplus{\mathbb{C}}$ by the representation $c\mapsto c\oplus 0$ and by the usual $\gamma$ and $F$ operators.
The number of Fredholm modules we get in this way for the algebra ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ is then $$\label{eq:number}
1+\sum_{k=1}^np_0p_1\ldots p_{k-1} \;.$$ For $k\geq 1$ and ${\boldsymbol}{r}=(r_0,\ldots,r_{k-1})$, with $0\leq r_i<p_i$ for $0\leq i<k$, we will denote the class of the Fredholm module $({\mathcal{H}}_{k,{\boldsymbol}{r}},\pi_{k,{\boldsymbol}{r}},F_{k,{\boldsymbol}{r}},\gamma_{k,{\boldsymbol}{r}})$, pulled-back to ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$, by ${\mathcal}{F}_{k,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$. The class of last Fredholm module is denoted by ${\mathcal}{F}_{0,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$, with the convention that ${\boldsymbol}{r}=\emptyset$ in this case.
Spectral triples {#sec:otto}
================
Let $
\big(\,
{\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))
\,,\,
{\mathcal{H}}_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,,\,
\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,,\,
F_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,,\,
\gamma_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,\big)
$ be the (irreducible) Fredholm module in . Recall that ${\mathcal{H}}_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}={\mathcal{H}}_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^+\oplus{\mathcal{H}}_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^-\simeq\ell^2({\mathbb{N}}^n)\otimes{\mathbb{C}}^2$ and that $\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}=\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^+\oplus\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^-$, where each summand is the sum of several orthogonal representations $\pi^{(n)}_k$ (cf. equation and Definition \[def:15\]). Let us denote $\|\vec{m}\|_1:=m_1+\ldots+m_n$ and let $$D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}:=|D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|F_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$$ with $|D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|$ the selfadjoint operator on $\ell^2({\mathbb{N}}^n)$ defined by: $$\label{eq:lambdaD}
|D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>}=\|\vec{m}\|_1{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>}\;, \quad \forall\;\vec{m}\in{\mathbb{N}}^n\;.$$ Given $\vec{k}\in{\mathbb{N}}^n$ and a bounded function $c:{\mathbb{N}}^n\to{\mathbb{C}}$, we call the bounded operator $$\label{eq:WS}
S(\vec{k},c):{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>}\mapsto c(\vec{m}){\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}+\vec{k}}\right>}$$ and its adjoint *weighted shifts*. Weighted shifts are eigenvectors of the derivation $[|D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|,\,.\,]$, that is to say $[|D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|,S(\vec{k},c)]=\|\vec{k}\|_1S(\vec{k},c)$, and similarly for the adjoint.
\[prop:st\] The datum $
\big(\,
{\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))
\,,\,
{\mathcal{H}}_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,,\,
\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,,\,
D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,,\,
\gamma_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,\big)
$ is an even spectral triple of metric dimension $n$.
We have to show that $[D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}},\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(a)]$ is bounded for any generator $a$ of ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ (and thus for every element of the algebra, due to the Leibniz rule), and that $|D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|^{-k}$ is traceclass (outside $\ker|D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|$) for every $k>n$. Observe that: $$[D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}},\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(a)]=[|D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|,\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(a)]F_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}+|D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|[F_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}},\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(a)] \;.$$ Let $\xi_{i,j}$ be a generator as in . From the proof of Proposition \[prop\] we know that $$\label{eq:Fcomm}
[F_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}},\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(\xi_{i,j})]=
\text{\footnotesize$\bigg(\!\!\begin{array}{cr}0 & \!-1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{array}\!\!\bigg)$}
\Big\{\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^+(\xi_{i,j})-\pi^-_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(\xi_{i,j})\Big\} \;,$$ and $\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^+(\xi_{i,j})-\pi^-_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(\xi_{i,j})$ is either zero or a weighted shift with matrix coefficients bounded by $q^{m_k}$ on ${\mathcal}{V}^n_{k-1}\cap{\mathcal}{V}^n_k$, for each $1\leq k\leq n$. Furthermore, for $\vec{m}$ satisfying , one has $\|\vec{m}\|_1\leq nm_k$. Since the sequence $\{n\, m_kq^{m_k}\}_{m_k\geq 0}$ is bounded, $|D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|[F_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}},\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(a)]$ is bounded on each ${\mathcal}{V}^n_{k-1}\cap{\mathcal}{V}^n_k$, and then on the whole Hilbert space.
Since $\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^\pm(\xi_{i,j})$ is either zero or a weighted shift on each ${\mathcal}{V}^n_{k-1}\cap{\mathcal}{V}^n_k$, there $[|D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|,\pi^\pm_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(\xi_{i,j})]$ is proportional to $\pi^\pm_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(\xi_{i,j})$, hence bounded. This establishes the commutator condition.
Next, the multiplicity $\mu_\lambda$ of the eigenvalue $\lambda\in{\mathbb{N}}$ of $|D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|$ is given by the number of vectors $\vec{m}$ satisfying $\|\vec{m}\|_1= \lambda$. With the notation $k_i:=m_1+m_2+\ldots+m_i+i$, this $\mu_\lambda$ is the number of $\vec{k}\in{\mathbb{N}}^n$ satisfying $1\leq k_1<k_2<\ldots<k_n=\lambda+n$, that is the number of $n-1$ partitions of $\lambda+n-1$. So $\mu_\lambda=\binom{\lambda+n-1}{n-1}$. Since the latter is a polynomial of order $n-1$ in $\lambda$, $\sum_{\lambda\geq 1}\mu_\lambda\lambda^{-k}<\infty$ for all $n-1-k<-1$, that means $k>n$ as expected.
The metric dimension of the spectral triple in Proposition \[prop:st\] coincides with the classical *complex* dimension: $n=\dim_{{\mathbb{C}}}{\mathbb{P}}({\underline}{\ell})$. One gets additional spectral triples of any dimension $k<n$ by pulling back spectral triples from spaces ${\mathbb{P}}_q(\ell_0,\ldots,\ell_k)$.
One possible generalization of the previous proposition goes as follows. Recall first that the Lipschitz norm of a function $g:{\mathbb{R}}\to{\mathbb{R}}$ is defined as $$\|g\|_{\mathrm{Lip}}:=\sup_{t\neq s}\left|\frac{g(t)-g(s)}{t-s}\right| \;.$$ A function is Lipschitz continuous if $\|g\|_{\mathrm{Lip}}<\infty$. Lipschitz continuous functions are a.e. differentiable, and their Lipschitz norm coincides with $\|g'\|_{\infty}$ (the sup norm of the derivative).
With $\lambda: {\mathbb{R}}_{\geq 0} \to {\mathbb{R}}_{\geq 0}$ an increasing function, replace the operator by the more general $$|D^\lambda_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>}=\lambda(\|\vec{m}\|_1){\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>}\;, \quad \forall\;\vec{m}\in{\mathbb{N}}^n\;,$$ and define $D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^\lambda:=|D_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^\lambda|F_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$. Then:
\[prop:stB\] If $\lambda$ is Lipschitz continuous, the datum $
\big(\,
{\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))
\,,\,
{\mathcal{H}}_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,,\,
\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,,\,
D^\lambda_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,,\,
\gamma_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}
\,\big)
$ is an even spectral triple.
The proof of Proposition \[prop:st\] can be repeated with minor changes. Following that proof, one has to show that the operators $$\textup{i)} \quad [|D^\lambda_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|,\pi^\pm_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(\xi_{i,j})] \qquad \textup{and} \qquad
\textup{ii)} \quad |D^\lambda_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|\big\{\pi_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}^+(\xi_{i,j})-\pi^-_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(\xi_{i,j})\big\}$$ are bounded on ${\mathcal}{V}^n_{k-1}\cap{\mathcal}{V}^n_k$, for each $1\leq k\leq n$ and for each $i,j$ (cf. ).
Concerning i): for a weighted shift like , it holds that $$[|D^\lambda_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|,S(\vec{h},c)]{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>}=c(\vec{m})\big\{\lambda(\|\vec{m}\|_1
+\|\vec{h}\|)-\lambda(\|\vec{m}\|_1)\big\}{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}+\vec{h}}\right>} \, .$$ Due to the Lipshitz condition, the matrix coefficients are bounded by $\|\lambda\|_{\mathrm{Lip}}\|h\|_1$ times the operator norm of $S(\vec{h},c)$. Hence the commutator is bounded. Since each $\pi^\pm_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(\xi_{i,j})$ is a weighted shift restricted to ${\mathcal}{V}^n_{k-1}\cap{\mathcal}{V}^n_k$, this proves that the commutators i) are bounded.
Concerning ii): from Lipschitz continuity we deduce $|\lambda(t)|\leq t$, which means that $$\label{eq:boundexp}
\widetilde{\lambda}(t) = q^{t/n}\lambda(t)$$ is a bounded function. Now, the operator ii) is a weighted shift with matrix coefficients bounded by $\lambda(\|\vec{m}\|_1)q^{m_k}$. Since $\lambda$ is increasing, and $\|\vec{m}\|_1\leq nm_k$ for every $\vec{m}$ satisfying , the matrix coefficients of ii) are bounded by $q^{m_k} \lambda(nm_k)$. Calling $t:=nm_k$, as said the function $\widetilde{\lambda}(t)=q^{t/n} \lambda(t)$ is bounded, thus the operator ii) is bounded.
From previous proposition one can get spectral triples of arbitrary metric dimension $d\geq n$.
Let $d\geq n$ be a real number. With the choice $\lambda(t):=t^{n/d}$ the spectral triple in Proposition \[prop:stB\] has metric dimension $d$.
Eigenvalues of $|D^\lambda_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|$ are given by $\lambda(j)$, with $j\in{\mathbb{N}}$. The multiplicity of $\lambda(j)$ is $\binom{j+n-1}{n-1}$, which is a polynomial of order $n-1$ in $j$ (as in the proof of Proposition \[prop:st\]). Let us write the leading term in the zeta-function of the Dirac operator: $${\mathrm{Tr}}(|D^\lambda_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}|^{-s})=\sum_{j\geq 1}j^{n-1}\lambda(j)^{-s}
+\text{lower order terms},$$ where the trace is on the orthogonal complement of the kernel of $D^\lambda_{n,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$. For $\lambda(t)=t^{n/d}$, this is convergent for ${\mathrm{Re}}(s)\geq d$ and has a pole at $s=d$, proving that the metric dimension is $d$.
For $d<n$, with $\lambda(t):=t^{n/d}$ the function $\widetilde{\lambda}(t) = q^{t/n}\lambda(t)$ is still bounded. What fails is Lipschits continuity: the derivative $\lambda'(t) = \frac{n}{d}\,t^{n/d-1}$ is unbounded if $n/d-1>0$. The example of ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^1_q$, that is the standard Podle[ś]{} [@DDLW07], would suggest that while boundedness of the function $\widetilde{\lambda}(t)$ in is necessary in order to have a spectral triple, the Lipschitz condition is sufficient but not necessary. Were this to be true, the above construction would yield spectral triples of any metric dimension, even $0^+$ with $\lambda(t):=q^{-\epsilon t}$ (for any $0<\epsilon<1/n$).
The spectral triples above have no classical analogue (the representation become trivial for $q=1$). For the quantum projective space ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^n_q$ there are additional equivariant, , spectral triples, which for $q=1$ give the Dolbeault-Dirac operator of ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^n$ twisted with a line bundle [@DD09] (see also [@DDL08]). For quantum weighted projective spaces it is not clear how to get a $q$-analogue of the Dolbeault-Dirac operator (a crucial ingredient in the construction — the action of ${\mathcal}{U}_q(\mathfrak{su}(n+1))$ — is missing in these cases).
Principal bundle structures {#sec:sei}
===========================
It is well-known that the inclusion ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^1_q) \hookrightarrow {\mathcal{O}}(S^3_q)$ is a quantum principal bundle [@BM96]. On the other hand, if $\ell_0\neq 1$, ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q(\ell_0,\ell_1)) \hookrightarrow {\mathcal{O}}(S^3_q)$ is not a quantum principal bundle (nor is a more general principal comodule algebra), since surjectivity of the canonical map fails [@BF12]. For $p=\ell_0\ell_1$, the inclusion ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q(\ell_0,\ell_1)) \hookrightarrow {\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p;\ell_0,\ell_1))$ is a quantum principal bundle: this was proved in [@BF12] for $\ell_0=1$ and in [@AKL14] for general weights $\ell_0,\ell_1$. In [@ABL14] there is the case of quantum lens spaces in any dimension $n$ but with weights all equal to 1 and any integer $p$; so that the ‘base space’ is now a quantum projective space.
In this section, we are going to extend these results to our class of quantum lens and weighed projective spaces, showing that the inclusion ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell})) \hookrightarrow {\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p,{\underline}{\ell}))$, for ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ with ${\underline}{p}$ pairwise coprime, is a quantum principal ${\mathrm{U}}(1)$-bundle.
Not needing the full fledged theory, we content ourself with the following definition [@BM96; @Ha96]. Let $H={\mathcal{O}}({\mathrm{U}}(1))$ be the Hopf $*$-algebra generated by a unitary group-like element $u$. Let $A$ be a right comodule algebra over $H={\mathcal{O}}({\mathrm{U}}(1))$, that is there is a coaction, $$\delta : A \to A \otimes H \, ,$$ with $B:=A^{\text{co}H}$ the subalgebra of $A$ consisting of coinvariant elements. One says that $A$ is *principal* or that $B \hookrightarrow A$ is a *quantum principal ${\mathrm{U}}(1)$-bundle*, if the canonical map, $$\mathrm{can} : A \otimes_{B} A \to A \otimes H \, , \quad x \otimes y \mapsto x \, \delta (y) \, ,$$ is an isomorphism. Indeed, being $H$ cosemisimple with bijective antipode, the surjectivity of the canonical map implies its bijectivity and also faithfully flatness of the extension $B \hookrightarrow A$. With $H={\mathcal{O}}({\mathrm{U}}(1))$, the algebra $A$ gets naturally graded, $A=\bigoplus_{k\in{\mathbb{Z}}}{\mathcal}{L}_k$ where $${\mathcal}{L}_k:=\big\{ a\in A: \delta(a)=a\otimes u^{-k} \big\} \;,$$ and the principality of the algebra $A$ becomes then equivalent to $A$ being *strongly* ${\mathbb{Z}}$-graded [@NVO82 Cor. I.3.3], that is ${\mathcal}{L}_k {\mathcal}{L}_{k'} = {\mathcal}{L}_{k+k'}$. An efficient way to establish this is by use of the so-called strong connection, $A$ being principal (or equivalently strongly ${\mathbb{Z}}$-graded) if and only if such a strong connection exists [@Ha96]. For the case at hand with $H={\mathcal{O}}({\mathrm{U}}(1))$, a *strong connection* is a linear map $\omega:H\to A\otimes A$ satisfying the following conditions: $$\begin{aligned}
&\omega(1) = 1\otimes 1\;, \notag \\
&\omega(u^k)\in{\mathcal}{L}_{-k}\otimes {\mathcal}{L}_{k} &\hspace{-2cm} \forall\;k\in{\mathbb{Z}}\,, \notag \\
\qquad\qquad
\sum\nolimits_i&\omega(u^k )_i^{[1]}\omega(u^k)_i^{[2]} =1 &\hspace{-2cm} \forall\;k\in{\mathbb{Z}}\, . \label{eq:22nontrivial}\end{aligned}$$ Here we used the notation $$\omega(h) = \sum\nolimits_i\omega(h)_i^{[1]}\otimes\omega(h)_i^{[2]} \;,\qquad \textup{for} \,\, h \in H \, .$$ As a consequence, the matrix $E_k$ with entries $$\label{eq:proj}
(E_k)_{ij}:=\omega(u^k)_i^{[2]}\omega(u^k)_j^{[1]}$$ is a coinvariant idempotent, that is its entries are in the algebra $B = {\mathcal}{L}_0$ of coinvariants. Thus, the principality of $A$ implies that each ${\mathcal}{L}_{k}$ is finitely generated and projective as left and right ${\mathcal}{L}_0$-module. In fact, one can easily show the left (respectively right) ${\mathcal}{L}_0$-module isomorphisms $B^{N_k}E_k\simeq{\mathcal}{L}_{k}$ (and $E_kB^{N_k}\simeq{\mathcal}{L}_{-k}$), where $N_k$ is the size of $E_k$.
Back to quantum lens and weighted projective spaces. Firstly, dually to the ${\mathrm{U}}(1)$-action , one has a coaction of the Hopf algebra ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathrm{U}}(1))$ on the sphere: $${\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n+1}_q)\to {\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n+1}_q)\otimes {\mathcal{O}}({\mathrm{U}}(1)) \;,\quad
z_i\mapsto z_i\otimes u^{\ell_i}\; , \quad \forall\;i=0,\ldots,n.$$ Next, we take $A={\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p,{\underline}{\ell}))$ as in Theorem \[thm:13\], that is for ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ with ${\underline}{p}$ pairwise coprime and $p=p_0p_1\ldots p_n$. On the generators of $A$ the previous coaction becomes: $$\label{eq:coactA}
\zeta_i \mapsto \zeta_i\otimes u^p \, , \qquad x_i \mapsto x_i\otimes 1 \, , \qquad \forall\;i=0,\ldots,n \, .$$ The subalgebra of coinvariant elements is clearly $B = {\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$.
However, the coaction is not quite the one we are after. Classically the lens space $L(p,{\underline}{\ell})$ is a principal bundle over ${\mathbb{P}}({\underline}{\ell})$ with structure group ${\mathrm{U}}(1)/{\mathbb{Z}}_p\simeq{\mathrm{U}}(1)$. In algebraic terms, this amounts to taking as structure Hopf algebra $H$ the Hopf $*$-subalgebra of ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathrm{U}}(1))$ generated by $u':=u^p$, which clearly is still isomorphic to ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathrm{U}}(1))$. Renaming $u'$ to $u$, the ‘correct’ coaction $\delta:A\to A\otimes H$ on generators becomes: $$\label{eq:coactB}
\delta(\zeta_i)=\zeta_i\otimes u \, , \qquad \delta(x_i)=x_i\otimes 1 \, , \qquad \forall\;i=0,\ldots,n \, ,$$ for which the subalgebra of coinvariant elements is again $B = {\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$.
We next show that the algebra inclusion ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell})) \hookrightarrow {\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p,{\underline}{\ell}))$ (for the coaction $\delta$ in ) is a quantum principal ${\mathrm{U}}(1)$-bundle. We do this by establishing in general, the existence of a strong connection and by providing recursive relations that in principle would allow one to write down explicitly the connection case by case.
\[prop:aibi\] Consider the commuting generators $x_i$, $i=1, \dots n$, of ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$. Then\
i) There exists $a_0,a_1,\ldots,a_n\in{\mathbb{C}}[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$ such that
$$\label{eq:solu}
a_0\zeta_0\zeta_0^*+a_1\zeta_1\zeta_1^*+\ldots+a_n\zeta_n\zeta_n^*=1 \;.$$
ii\) There exists $b_0,b_1,\ldots,b_n\in{\mathbb{C}}[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$ such that $$\label{eq:solu-b}
b_0\zeta_0^*\zeta_0+b_1\zeta_1^*\zeta_1+\ldots+b_n\zeta_n^*\zeta_n=1 \;.$$
Note that due to and , the products $\zeta_i\zeta_i^*$ and $\zeta_i^*\zeta_i$ all belong to the commutative subalgebra generated by $x_0,\ldots,x_n$. Using we can eliminate $x_0$, hence it makes sense to look for solutions of the above equations that are polynomials in ${\mathbb{C}}[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$.
For $n=1$, we give a proof using B[é]{}zout’s identity as in Lemma \[lemma:Bez\] for the principal ideal domain $R:={\mathbb{C}}[x_1]$. For general $n$, we cannot use B[é]{}zout’s identity since ${\mathbb{C}}[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$ is not a principal ideal domain if $n\geq 2$, but we can use Hilbert’s weak Nullstellensatz, which states that the only ideal representing the empty variety is the entire polynomial ring.
\[lemma:Null\] An ideal $I\subset{\mathbb{C}}[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$ contains $1$ if and only if the polynomials in $I$ do not have any common zero, i.e. $\mathcal{Z}(I)=\emptyset$.
For arbitrary $n$, we give two alternative proofs of Proposition \[prop:aibi\], one using the Nullstellensatz and a second one which is more explicit and which will be useful later on to compute some pairings between K-theory and K-homology. We will only prove point (i) of the proposition, the proof of point (ii) being clearly analogous.
Let $R={\mathbb{C}}[x_1]$. Since $a:=\zeta_1\zeta_1^*=x_1^{p_1}$ and $b:=\zeta_0\zeta_0^* =\prod_{k=0}^{p_0-1}(1-q^{-2k}x_1)$ are coprime (they have no common zeros), by Lemma \[lemma:Bez\] there exist $x,y\in R$ such that $ax+by=1$, which is except for a different notation.
For $0\leq k\leq n$, let $I_k\subset{\mathbb{C}}[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$ be the ideal generated by $\{\zeta_j\zeta_j^*\}_{j=k}^n$. Clearly, the zero loci satisfy $\mathcal{Z}(I_k)=\mathcal{Z}(I_{k+1})\cap\mathcal{Z}(\{\zeta_k\zeta_k^*\})$.
By induction on $k\geq 1$ one proves that $(x_1,\ldots,x_n)\in\mathcal{Z}(I_k)$ if and only if $x_j=0$ for all $j\geq k$. This is is true for $k=n$, since $\zeta_n\zeta_n^*=x_n^{p_n}$. If it is true for some $k$, by simplifying using $x_k=x_{k+1}=\ldots=x_n=0$ one gets $\zeta_{k-1}\zeta_{k-1}^*=x_{k-1}^{p_{k-1}}$, which vanishes only if $x_{k-1}=0$. This proves the inductive step.
Now $\mathcal{Z}(I_1)=\{0\}$, but $x_1=\ldots=x_n=0$ implies $x_0=1$ and then $\zeta_0\zeta_0^*=1\neq 0$. Thus $\mathcal{Z}(I_0)=\emptyset$ and from Lemma \[lemma:Null\] it follows that $1\in I_0$. But any element in $I_0$ is a linear combination $a_0\zeta_0\zeta_0^*+a_1\zeta_1\zeta_1^*+\ldots+a_n\zeta_n\zeta_n^*$, with coefficients $a_0,\ldots,a_n\in {\mathbb{C}}[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$, thus proving that must admit a solution.
For $0\leq k\leq n+1$ consider the following statement: there exist elements $a_{0,k},\ldots,a_{n,k}\in{\mathbb{C}}[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$ such that $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:Pik}
\sum_{i=0}^{k-1}a_{i,k}\zeta_i\zeta_i^*+
\sum_{i=k}^na_{i,k}z_iz_i^*=1 \;. \tag{eq$_k$}\end{gathered}$$ We prove this by induction on $k$. It is understood that an empty sum is zero. The above is true for $k=0$ with $a_{0,0}=a_{1,0}=\ldots=a_{n,0}=1$.
Next, one takes the $p_k$-th power of both sides of . Note that the set of monomials $\zeta_i\zeta_i^*$, $z_iz_i^*$ and $a_{i,k}$ are mutually commuting. From the multinomial formula, it follows that $$\sum_{s_0+\ldots+s_n=p_k}[s_0,s_1,\ldots,s_n]!
\left(\prod_{j=0}^na_{j,k}^{s_j}\right)
\left(\prod_{j=0}^{k-1}(\zeta_j\zeta_j^*)^{s_j}\right)
\left(\prod_{j=k}^n(z_jz_j^*)^{s_j}\right)= 1 \;,$$ where $$[s_0,s_1,\ldots,s_n]!=\frac{(s_0+s_1+\ldots+s_n)!}{s_0!\,s_1!\,\ldots\hspace{1pt}s_n!}$$ is the ($q=1$) multinomial coefficient. We break the sum as follows: $$\sum_{s_0+\ldots+s_n=p_k}=
\sum_{\substack{ s_k=p_k \\[1pt] s_i=0\;\forall\;i\neq k} }
+\sum_{i\neq k}\sum_{\substack{s_0+\ldots+s_n=p_k \\[1pt] s_0=s_1=\ldots=s_{i-1}=0 \\[1pt] s_i\neq 0}} \, .$$ Using : $$\zeta_k\zeta_k^* =
x_k^{p_k}+A_k(x_k,\ldots,x_n)\sum\nolimits_{j>k}x_j \, ,$$ where $A_k(x_k,\ldots,x_n)$ is a polynomial of $x_k,\ldots,x_n$. Hence: $$(z_kz_k^*)^{p_k}=
\zeta_k\zeta_k^*-A_k(x_k,\ldots,x_n)\sum\nolimits_{j>k}z_jz_j^* \;.$$ Then (eq$_{k+1}$) is satisfied by defining recursively:
[$\bullet$]{}[=1em ]{}
for $i<k$: $$a_{i,k+1}:=
\sum_{\substack{s_i+\ldots+s_n=p_k \\[1pt] s_i\geq 1}}
[s_i,s_{i+1},\ldots,s_n]!
\left(\prod_{j=i}^na_{j,k}^{s_j}\right)
(\zeta_i\zeta_i^*)^{s_i-1}
\left(\prod_{j=i+1}^{k-1}(\zeta_j\zeta_j^*)^{s_j}\right)
\left(\prod_{j=k}^n(z_jz_j^*)^{s_j}\right) \;,$$
for $i=k$: $$a_{k,k+1}:=a_{k,k}^{p_k} \;,$$
and for $i>k$: $$\begin{gathered}
a_{i,k+1}:=
\sum_{\substack{s_i+\ldots+s_n=p_k \\[1pt] s_i\geq 1}}
[s_i,s_{i+1},\ldots,s_n]!
\left(\prod_{j=i}^na_{j,k}^{s_j}\right)
(z_iz_i^*)^{s_i-1}
\left(\prod_{j=i+1}^n(z_jz_j^*)^{s_j}\right) \\
-a_{k,k}^{p_k}A_k(x_k,\ldots,x_n) \; .\end{gathered}$$
The proof of Proposition \[prop:aibi\] is completed if one puts $a_i:=a_{i,n+1}$ for all $i=0,\ldots,n$.
\[eq:recurs\] For any weight vector ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$, with ${\underline}{p}$ pairwise coprime, a strong connection on ${\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p,{\underline}{\ell}))$, with $p:=p_0p_1\ldots p_n$, is defined recursively by $$\begin{aligned}
\omega(1) &=1\otimes 1 \;,\\
\omega(u^k) &=\sum_{i=0}^na_i\zeta_i \, \omega(u^{k-1})\, \zeta^*_i
\;, \qquad\textup{for}\;\; k\geq 1, \\
\omega(u^k) &=\sum_{i=0}^nb_i\zeta_i^* \, \omega(u^{k+1})\, \zeta_i
\;, \qquad\textup{for}\;\; k\leq -1,\end{aligned}$$ where $a_i$,$b_i$ are the polynomials in Proposition \[prop:aibi\]. Moreover, the quantum principal ${\mathrm{U}}(1)$-bundle ${\mathcal{O}}(L_q(p,{\underline}{\ell}))$ over ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ is not trivial.
The only non-trivial condition to check is the last one in , which we show by induction. If $k\geq 1$: $$\omega(u^k)=\sum_{i=0}^na_i\sum\nolimits_j\zeta_i \, \omega(u^{k-1})_j^{[1]}\otimes\omega(u^{k-1})_j^{[2]}\, \zeta_i^* \;.$$ By the inductive hypothesis: $$\sum\nolimits_i\omega(u^k)_i^{[1]}\omega(u^k)_i^{[2]} =\sum_{i=0}^na_i\zeta_i\zeta_i^*=1 \, ,$$ having used . Similarly, by using induction and one shows for $k\leq -1$.
As for the non-triviality of the bundle, one can repeat verbatim the proof of [@BF12 Lem. 3.4], which only uses the fact that the unique invertible elements of ${\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n+1}_q)$ are the multiples of $1$. Alternatively, the statement is a consequence of Proposition \[prop:21\] below.
For $n=1$ one can compute explicitly the two polynomials $a_0,a_1$ (cf. also [@AKL14 Prop. 6.4]).
We need some notations. We define the $q$-analogue of an integer $k$, for $q\neq 1$, as $$[k]_q:=\frac{q^k-q^{-k}}{q-q^{-1}} \;.$$ Clearly $[k]_q\to k$ when $q\to 1^-$. The $q$-factorial is defined recursively by $$[0]_q!:=1 \;,\qquad
[k]_q!:=[k]_q\cdot [k-1]_q! \quad\text{for}\;\;k\geq 1\,.$$ For $0\leq k\leq m$, we define the $q$-binomial through the identity of polynomials in $t$: $$\label{eq:qbinom}
\prod_{l=0}^{m-1}\big(1+q^{2l}t\big)=
\sum_{k=0}^{m}{\genfrac{[}{]}{0pt}{}{m}{k}_{\!q}}q^{k(m-1)}t^k \; ,$$ with the convention that an empty sum is $0$ and an empty product is $1$. Through the substitution $t\to q^{-2(m-1)}t$ one verifies that the $q$-binomial is invariant under $q\to q^{-1}$. From the recursive formula: $${\genfrac{[}{]}{0pt}{}{m+1}{k}_{\!q}}=q^{-k}{\genfrac{[}{]}{0pt}{}{m}{k}_{\!q}}+q^{m-k+1}{\genfrac{[}{]}{0pt}{}{m}{k-1}_{\!q}}$$ one deduces by induction that $${\genfrac{[}{]}{0pt}{}{m}{k}_{\!q}}=\frac{[m]_q!}{[k]_q![m-k]_q!} \;.$$
\[prop:coeffn1\] For $n=1$, two elements $a_0,a_1\in{\mathbb{C}}[x_1]$ satisfying are given by: $$a_0(x_1)=\sum_{k=1}^{p_1}\binom{p_1}{k}f(x_1)^{k-1} \big\{1-f(x_1)\big\}^{p_1-k} \;,\qquad
a_1(x_1)=\left(\frac{1-f(x_1)}{x_1}\right)^{p_1} \;,$$ where $$\label{eq:at}
f(t):=\sum_{k=0}^{p_0}{\genfrac{[}{]}{0pt}{}{p_0}{k}_{\!q}}q^{-k(p_0-1)}(-t)^k \;.$$
Note that ${(1-f(t))} / {t}$ is a well defined polynomial in $t$. From and one has: $$\zeta_0\zeta_0^*=\prod\nolimits_{k=0}^{p_0-1}(1-q^{-2k} x_1)=f(x_1) \;,$$ being $x_1=1-x_0$, with $f(t)$ given by . From $x_1=z_1z_1^*$ we get the algebraic identity $$\zeta_0\zeta_0^*+\frac{1-f(x_1)}{x_1} \, z_1z_1^*=1 \;.$$ We now take the $p_1$-th power and use the binomial formula to get: $$\zeta_0\zeta_0^* \, \sum_{k=1}^{p_1}\binom{p_1}{k}(\zeta_0\zeta_0^*)^{k-1} \big\{1-f(x_1)\big\}^{p_1-k}
+\left(\frac{1-f(x_1)}{x_1}\right)^{p_1}\zeta_1\zeta_1^*=1 \;,$$ where we used $(x_1)^{p_1}=\zeta_1\zeta_1^*$ (cf. ). If we call $a_0$ the first sum and $a_1$ the coefficient of $\zeta_1\zeta_1^*$, the proof is concluded.
\[prop:21\] Let $E=E_{1}$ be the idempotent defined in , for the strong connection of Theorem \[eq:recurs\]; let ${\mathcal}{F}_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$ the $1$-summable Fredholm module of §\[sec:Khom\]. Then ${\left<{\mathcal}{F}_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}, [E]\right>}=-1$.
In the present case ${\boldsymbol}{r}=(r_0)$ is an integer, $0\leq r_0<p_0$, and the Hilbert space is $\ell^2({\mathbb{N}})$ with orthonormal basis $\{{\left|\smash[t]{m_1}\right>},m_1\in{\mathbb{N}}\}$. The representations $\pi^\pm_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$ satisfy $\pi^\pm_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(x_i)=0$, for all $i\geq 2$, $\pi^\pm_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(x_0)=1-\pi^\pm_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(x_1)$, and $$\pi^+_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(x_1)=0\;,\qquad
\pi^-_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}(x_1){\left|\smash[t]{m_1}\right>}=q^{2r_0+2p_0m_1}{\left|\smash[t]{m_1}\right>} \;.$$ Let us write $a\sim b$ if $a-b$ is in the kernel of both $\pi^+_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$ and $\pi^-_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$. So, $x_i\sim 0$ for all $i\geq 2$ and $x_1\sim 1-x_0$. *De facto*, the computation reduces to the case $n=1$.
The pairing with any idempotent $E=(E_{ij})$ is $${\left<{\mathcal}{F}_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}, [E]\right>}={\mathrm{Tr}}_{\ell^2({\mathbb{N}})}
\big(\pi^+_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}-\pi^-_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}\big)\big({\mathrm{Tr}}(E)\big) \;.$$ If $E=E_1$ is the idempotent in , with strong connection $\omega(u)=\sum_{i=0}^na_i \, \zeta_i\otimes\zeta^*_i$ as in Theorem \[eq:recurs\], we get ${\mathrm{Tr}}(E)=\sum_{i=0}^n\zeta^*_ia_i\zeta_i$. Modulo elements in the kernel of $\pi^\pm_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$ the coefficients $a_0(x_1),a_1(x_1)$ are those in Proposition \[prop:coeffn1\], while all other coefficients $a_i$’s are zero. From $x_1\,\zeta_0=q^{2p_0}\zeta_0\,x_1$ and $x_1\,\zeta_1\sim\zeta_1\,x_1$ we get $$\begin{aligned}
{\mathrm{Tr}}(E)
&\sim a_0(q^{2p_0}x_1)\zeta^*_0\zeta_0+a_1(x_1)\zeta^*_1\zeta_1 \\
&\sim a_0(q^{2p_0}x_1)\prod_{k=1}^{p_0}(1-q^{2k}x_1)
+a_1(x_1) (x_1)^{p_1} \\
&\sim a_0(q^{2p_0}x_1)\prod_{k=1}^{p_0}(1-q^{2k}x_1)
+\big\{1-f(x_1)\big\}^{p_1}\end{aligned}$$ where we used and then Proposition \[prop:coeffn1\]; with $f(t)$ the function in . In the above expressions, we denoted by $a_0(q^{2p_0}x_1)$ the polynomial obtained from the element $a_0(x_1)$ in with a replacement $x_1\mapsto q^{2p_0}x_1$. From : $$\prod_{k=1}^{p_0}(1-q^{2k}x_1)=\prod_{l=0}^{p_0-1}(1-q^{2l}q^2x_1)=
\sum_{k=0}^{p_0}{\genfrac{[}{]}{0pt}{}{p_0}{k}_{\!q}}q^{k(p_0-1)}(-q^2x_1)^k=
f(q^{2p_0}x_1)
\;.$$ But the identity $a_0\zeta_0\zeta_0^*+a_1\zeta_1\zeta_1^*=1$ reads $a_0(q^{2p_0}x_1)f(q^{2p_0}x_1)+a_1(q^{2p_0}x_1)\cdot(q^{2p_0}x_1)^{p_1}=1$, when $x_1$ is replaced by $q^{2p_0}x_1$. Therefore: $${\mathrm{Tr}}(E)
\sim 1-\big\{1-f(q^{2p_0}x_1)\big\}^{p_1}+\big\{1-f(x_1)\big\}^{p_1} \;.$$ Since $x_1$ is diagonal in both representations and $f(0)=1$, $${\left<{\mathcal}{F}_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}, [E]\right>}
=\sum_{m_1\geq 0}\Big[\big\{1-f(q^{2p_0}x_1)\big\}^{p_1}-\big\{1-f(x_1)\big\}^{p_1}\Big]_{x_1=q^{2r_0+2p_0m_1}} \;.$$ From the condition $0<q<1$ it follows that $$|1-f(x_1)|_{x_1=q^{2r_0+2p_0m_1}}\leq q^{2p_0m_1}\sum_{k=1}^{p_0}{\genfrac{[}{]}{0pt}{}{p_0}{k}_{\!q}}q^{-k(p_0-1)}
\;,$$ and similar for $1-f(q^{2p_0}x_1)$. Thus, the series in $m_1$ is bounded by $q^{2p_0p_1m_1}$ times a constant. By Weierstrass M-test it is absolutely convergent in the open interval $[0,1[$ and then continuous. Being integer-valued in $]0,1[$, it is constant in the interval (including $0$) and it can be computed for $q\to 0^+$, by inverting summation and this limit. Now, $$1-f(q^{2p_0}x_1)\big|_{x_1=q^{2r_0+2p_0m_1}}
= 1-\prod_{k=0}^{p_0-1}(1-q^{2(p_0m_1+r_0+p_0-k)})
= 1-1+O(q)=O(q)
\;,$$ since $p_0m_1+r_0+p_0-k\geq p_0-k\geq 1$. Moreover $$1-f(x_1)\big|_{x_1=q^{2r_0+2p_0m_1}}=
1-\prod_{k=0}^{p_0-1}(1-q^{2(p_0m_1+r_0-k)})=:c_{m_1}
\;.$$ Being $0\leq r_0<p_0$, for $m_1=0$ at least one term in the product has $k=r_0$, so the product is zero and $c_{m_1=0}=1$. On the other hand, if $m_1\geq 1$, then $p_0m_1+r_0-k\geq p_0-k\geq 1$ and so the product is $1+O(q)$ and $c_{m_1}=O(q)$. We conclude that $$\lim_{q\to 0^+}{\left<{\mathcal}{F}_{1,{\boldsymbol}{r}}, [E]\right>}
=-\sum_{m_1\geq 0}\lim_{q\to 0^+}c_{m_1}^{p_1}=-c_0^{p_1}=-1 \;. \vspace{-10pt}$$
Proposition \[prop:21\] allows us to computes the pairing of $P$ with Fredholm modules that are pullbacks from ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q(\ell_0,\ell_1))$, thanks to the fact that for $n=1$ one has an explicit expression for the coefficients in (and then for the trace of $P$).
In order to compute the pairing with all the other Fredholm modules, one would need the expression of $P$ for arbitrary $n$. Such a computation seems intractable in full generality. We study some interesting examples in the next section.
Examples {#sec:sette}
========
Let us compute the coefficients in for particular values of the weight vector. In all of the examples below, we will assume that all the weights are equal but one, say $\ell_{i_0}$. In the cases $i_0=0$ and $i_0=n$, the coefficients in can be explicitly computed. We start with these two examples, in reverse order.
Let ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ with $p_i=1$ for all $i\neq n$. A set of elements $a_0,\ldots,a_n$ satisfying is given by: $$a_n=1 \;,\qquad
a_0=a_1=\ldots=a_{n-1}=\sum_{k=0}^{p_n-1}(x_n)^k \;.$$
Since $\zeta_i\zeta_i^*=z_iz_i^*=x_i$ for all $i\neq n$ and $\zeta_n\zeta_n^*=(z_nz_n^*)^{p_n}=x_n^{p_n}$ (using the relation and the fact that $z_n$ is normal), we get $$\begin{aligned}
a_0\zeta_0\zeta_0^*+\ldots+a_n\zeta_n\zeta_n^* & = (x_0+x_1+\ldots+x_{n-1})\sum_{k=0}^{p_n-1}(x_n)^k+x_n^{p_n} \\
& = (1-x_n) \sum_{k=0}^{p_n-1}(x_n)^k+x_n^{p_n} = (1-x_n^{p_n}) + x_n^{p_n} \\
& = 1 \; .\end{aligned}$$ Hence is satisfied.
Let ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ with $p_i=1$ for all $i\neq 0$. With $f(t)$ the function in , a set of elements $a_0,\ldots,a_n$ satisfying is given by: $$a_0=1 \;,\qquad
a_1=\ldots=a_n=\frac{1-f(x_1+\ldots+x_n)}{x_1+\ldots+x_n} \;.$$
We know from the proof of Proposition \[prop:coeffn1\] that $ (1-f(t) ) / t $ is a well defined polynomial of $t$. Now $t:=1-x_0 = x_1+x_2+\ldots+x_n$, and it still holds that $\zeta_0\zeta_0^*=f(t)$. Condition reduces to $$\zeta_0\zeta_0^*+\frac{1-f(t)}{t}(z_1z_1^*+\ldots+z_nz_n^*)=1 \; ,$$ since $z_1z_1^*+\ldots+z_nz_n^* = x_1+\ldots+x_n = t $ and $\zeta_0\zeta_0^*+1-f(t)=1$.
Fix $i_0\in\{0,\ldots,n\}$ and let ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ with $p_i=1$ for all $i\neq i_0$.\
From previous examples one may think that a solution to is given by $a_{i_0}=1$ and $a_i=(1-\zeta_{i_0}\zeta_{i_0}^*)/(1-x_{i_0})$. Indeed, with these choices $$\sum a_i\zeta_i\zeta_i^*=\zeta_{i_0}\zeta_{i_0}^*
+\frac{1-\zeta_{i_0}\zeta_{i_0}^*}{1-x_{i_0}}\sum_{i\neq i_0}z_iz_i^*=1$$ is a simple algebraic identity, since $\sum_{i\neq i_0}z_iz_i^*=1-x_{i_0}$ simplifies the denominator. Unfortunately, in general $1-x_{i_0}$ does not divide $1-\zeta_{i_0}\zeta_{i_0}^*$, so that the quotient is not a polynomial in $x_1,\ldots,x_n$. For example, for $n=2$, if ${\underline}{p}=(1,2,1)$ (so $i_0=1$) one has $1-\zeta_1\zeta_1^*=1-x_1(x_1+x_2-q^{-2}x_2)$, which is not divisible by $1-x_1$: that is it does not vanish if $x_1=1$, and arbitrary $x_2$, unless $q=1$.
On C\*-algebras and K-homology {#sec:nove}
==============================
For $\lambda\in{\mathrm{U}}(1)$, let $\psi^{(2n+1)}_\lambda$ be the representation of ${\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n+1}_q)$ given in §\[sec:irreps\] composed with the automorphism $z_n\mapsto\lambda z_n$. Every bounded irreducible representation of ${\mathcal{O}}(S^{2n+1}_q)$ is isomorphic to a representation $\psi^{(2k+1)}_\lambda$, for $0\leq k\leq n$, pulled back from ${\mathcal{O}}(S^{2k+1}_q)$, see [@HL04].
The direct sum of all these representations is faithful — it is the so-called *reduced atomic representation* —, and the $C^*$-completion of ${\mathcal{O}}(S^{2k+1}_q)$ in the associated norm is the universal $C^*$-algebra $C(S^{2k+1}_q)$ (cf. [@KR83 Prop. 10.3.10]).
In this section, we study the $C^*$-subalgebra $C({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ completion of ${\mathcal{O}}({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ in $C(S^{2k+1}_q)$. It is not obvious whether or not by restriction of $\psi^{(2n+1)}_\lambda$ one gets all equivalence classes of irreducible representations of $C({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$, so that their direct sum would be the reduced atomic representation and the $C^*$-algebra be universal. In fact, classifying irreducible representations of $C({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ goes beyond the scope of this paper.
We limit ourself to exhibit a family of projections in $C({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ and to compute their pairing with the Fredholm modules ${\mathcal}{F}_{k,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$ of §\[sec:Khom\]. This will show that the classes in K-homology of these Fredholm modules are linearly independent over ${\mathbb{Z}}$.
It is convenient to use the operators $X_i:=\sum_{j\geq i}x_j$, for $1\leq i\leq n$ (recall that $x_i=z_iz_i^*$), since one easily verifies that, for any $1\leq m\leq n$ and $\vec{k}\in{\mathbb{N}}^m$: $$\psi^{(2m+1)}_\lambda(X_i){\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}}\right>}=
\left\{\!\!\begin{array}{ll}
q^{2(k_1+\ldots+k_i)}{\left|\smash[t]{\vec{k}}\right>} &\text{if}\;i\leq m,\\[3pt]
0 &\text{if}\;i>m.
\end{array}\right.$$ Then, for each $\alpha\in{\mathbb{N}}$ and index $1\leq i\leq n$, the sequence $$q^{-2\alpha}X_i\prod_{\substack{\beta=0,\ldots,N \\[1pt] \beta\neq \alpha}}\frac{X_i-q^{2\beta}}{q^{2\alpha}-q^{2\beta}}
\xrightarrow[\;N\to\infty\;]{} P(X_i,q^{2\alpha})$$ is norm convergent to the spectral projection $P(X_i,q^{2\alpha})$ projecting onto the eigenspace of $X_i$ associated to the eigenvalue $q^{2\alpha}$. For $\vec{\alpha}=(\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_m)\in{\mathbb{N}}^m$ with $1\leq m\leq n$, let $$P_m(\vec{\alpha})=\prod_{i=1}^mP(X_i,q^{2(\alpha_1+\ldots+\alpha_i)}) \;.$$ We now compute the pairing between the class of the projection $P_m(\vec{\alpha})$ in $K_0(C({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell}))$ and the class of the Fredholm module ${\mathcal}{F}_{k,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$ of §\[sec:Khom\].
\[thm:9.1\] Let $1\leq h\leq n$, let ${\boldsymbol}{r}=(r_0,\ldots,r_{h-1})$ satisfy , let $1\leq m\leq n$, and $\vec{\alpha}=(\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_m)\in{\mathbb{N}}^m$. If $h\geq m$ and $\alpha_{i+1}-r_i\in p_i{\mathbb{N}}$ for all $0\leq i<m$, the pairing is $${\left<[{\mathcal}{F}_{h,{\boldsymbol}{r}}],[P_m(\vec{\alpha})]\right>}=
(-1)^m\binom{N({\boldsymbol}{r},\vec{\alpha})}{h-m}$$ where the integer $N({\boldsymbol}{r},\vec{\alpha})$ is given by $$N({\boldsymbol}{r},\vec{\alpha})=\sum_{0\leq i<m}\frac{\alpha_{i+1}-r_i}{p_i} \;,$$ and by convention a binomial $\binom{r}{s}$ is zero if $s>r$. In all other cases, the pairing is zero.
From Definition \[def:15\], the pairing is $${\left<[{\mathcal}{F}_{h,{\boldsymbol}{r}}],[P_m(\vec{\alpha})]\right>}
={\mathrm{Tr}}_{{\mathcal{H}}_n}\bigg\{\sum_{\substack{0\leq k\leq h\\[1pt] k\;\text{even}}}\pi^{(h)}_k-
\sum_{\substack{0\leq k\leq h\\[1pt] k\;\text{odd}}}\pi^{(h)}_k\bigg\}\big(P_m(\vec{\alpha})\big) \;.$$ We can start the sum from $m$, rather than $0$, because if $k<m$, the operator $y_m$ is in the kernel of the representation and then $\pi^{(h)}_k(P(y_m,q^\beta))$ vanishes for any $\beta\in{\mathbb{N}}$. So, the pairing is $0$ if $h<m$, while for $h\geq m$: $${\left<[{\mathcal}{F}_{h,{\boldsymbol}{r}}],[P_m(\vec{\alpha})]\right>}
={\mathrm{Tr}}_{{\mathcal{H}}_n}\sum_{m\leq k\leq h}(-1)^k\pi^{(h)}_k\big(P_m(\vec{\alpha})\big) \;.$$ Recall that ${\mathcal{H}}_n$ is the orthogonal direct sum of ${\mathcal}{V}_k^h\cap{\mathcal}{V}_{k-1}^h$ over $k=1,\ldots,n$, plus the joint kernel of all representations, and note that in fact ${\mathcal}{V}_0^h\subset{\mathcal}{V}_1^h$ and ${\mathcal}{V}_h^h\subset{\mathcal}{V}_{h-1}^h$.
A basis vector ${\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>}\in{\mathcal}{V}_k^h$ is in the range of $\pi^{(h)}_k\big(P_m(\vec{\alpha})\big)$ if and only if $$q^{2\sum_{j=1}^ir_{j-1}+p_{j-1}(m_j-m_{j-1})}=q^{2\sum_{j=1}^i\alpha_j} \quad\forall\;i=1,\ldots,m \;,$$ which is equivalent to $$\label{eq:rap}
r_i+p_i(m_{i+1}-m_i)=\alpha_{i+1} \quad\forall\;0\leq i<m \;.$$ So the range is zero (in all representations $\pi^{(h)}_k$) unless $\alpha_{i+1}\geq r_i$ and $p_i$ divides $\alpha_{i+1}-r_i$, for all $0\leq i<m$. Assume this is satisfied.
For all $1\leq k\leq h-1$, from and , $${\mathcal}{V}_k^h=({\mathcal}{V}_k^h\cap{\mathcal}{V}_{k-1}^h)\oplus({\mathcal}{V}_{k+1}^h\cap{\mathcal}{V}_k^h) \;.$$ For $m<k\leq h$, ${\left|\smash[t]{\vec{m}}\right>}\in{\mathcal}{V}_k^h\cap{\mathcal}{V}_{k-1}^h$ is in the range of $\pi^{(h)}_k\big(P_m(\vec{\alpha})\big)$ if and only if it is in the range of $\pi^{(h)}_{k-1}\big(P_m(\vec{\alpha})\big)$, and the total contribution to the pairing is zero. Similarly, vectors in ${\mathcal}{V}_{k+1}^h\cap{\mathcal}{V}_k^h$, for $m\leq k<h$, give no contribution. Non-zero contributions then can only come from the restriction of $\pi^{(h)}_m\big(P_m(\vec{\alpha})\big)$ to ${\mathcal}{V}_m^h\cap{\mathcal}{V}_{m-1}^h$: $${\left<[{\mathcal}{F}_{h,{\boldsymbol}{r}}],[P_m(\vec{\alpha})]\right>}
=(-1)^m{\mathrm{Tr}}_{{\mathcal}{V}_m^h\cap{\mathcal}{V}_{m-1}^h}\pi^{(h)}_m\big(P_m(\vec{\alpha})\big) \;.$$ It remains to compute the dimension of the range of the projection.
A basis vector ${\left|\smash[t]{\vec{\beta}}\right>}\in{\mathcal}{V}_m^h\cap{\mathcal}{V}_{m-1}^h$ in the range of $\pi^{(h)}_m\big(P_m(\vec{\alpha})\big)$ has labels $\beta_1,\beta_2,\ldots,\beta_m$ fixed, and from the dimension is the number of $(\beta_{m+1},\ldots,\beta_h)$ satisfying $$1\leq \beta_h +1< \beta_{h-1}+1<\ldots< \beta_{m+1} +1\leq \beta_m \;.$$ This is the number of $h-m$ partitions of $ \beta_m $, that is $\binom{\beta_m}{h-m}$ (it is zero if $h-m>\beta_m$).
From and , we get $$\beta_m=\sum_{j=1}^m\frac{\alpha_j-r_{j-1}}{p_{j-1}}$$ and this concludes the proof.
The K-homology classes $[{\mathcal}{F}_{h,{\boldsymbol}{r}}]$ are linearly independent over ${\mathbb{Z}}$.
Suppose we have elements $\{e_i\}$ of a ${\mathbb{Z}}$-module $M$ and ${\mathbb{Z}}$-linear maps $f_i:M\to {\mathbb{Z}}$ satisfying $f_i(e_j)=\delta_{ij}$. Then the maps $f_i$ are linearly independent: if $\sum_in_if_i=0$, then proving that all coefficients are zero. We need to find a family of K-theory classes of projections dual to the K-homology classes of the Fredholm modules ${\mathcal}{F}_{h,{\boldsymbol}{r}}$.
The trivial projection is dual to ${\mathcal}{F}_{0,\emptyset}$: ${\left<[{\mathcal}{F}_{h,{\boldsymbol}{r}}],[1]\right>}$ is $1$ if $h=0$ and is $0$ otherwise.
Let now $1\leq h\leq n$, $1\leq m\leq n$, ${\boldsymbol}{r}=(r_0,\ldots,r_{h-1})$ and ${\boldsymbol}{s}=(s_0,\ldots,s_{m-1})$ chosen to satisfy $$0\leq r_i<p_i \;,\qquad\quad 0\leq s_j<p_j \;,$$ as in , for all $0\leq i<h$ and $0\leq j<m$. For $\vec{\beta}=(\beta_1,\ldots,\beta_m)\in{\mathbb{N}}^m$ set $\beta_0:=0$ and $$\alpha_{i+1}({\boldsymbol}{s},\vec{\beta})=s_i+p_i(\beta_{i+1}-\beta_i) \;,\qquad\forall\;0\leq i<m \;.$$ From Theorem \[thm:9.1\], $\big<[{\mathcal}{F}_{h,{\boldsymbol}{r}}],[P_{m}(\vec{\alpha}({\boldsymbol}{s},\vec{\beta}))]\big>$ is zero unless $h\geq m$ and $\alpha_{i+1}-r_i$ is divisible by $p_i$ — i.e. $s_i-r_i$ is divisible by $p_i$ — for all $0\leq i<m$. Since $|r_i-s_i|<p_i$, the latter condition implies $s_i=r_i$ for all $0\leq i<m$. Therefore, by Theorem \[thm:9.1\]: $$\label{eq:par}
\big<[{\mathcal}{F}_{h,{\boldsymbol}{r}}],[P_{m}(\vec{\alpha}({\boldsymbol}{s},\vec{\beta}))]\big>=
\begin{cases}
0 & \text{if}\;h<m,\\[2pt]
\delta_{r_0,s_0}\ldots\delta_{r_m,s_m}
(-1)^m\binom{\beta_m}{h-m} & \text{if}\;h\geq m,
\end{cases}$$ where by convention $\binom{\beta_m}{h-m}=0$ if $h-m>\beta_m$. If we choose $\vec{\beta}=0$, $$\big<[{\mathcal}{F}_{h,{\boldsymbol}{r}}],[P_{m}(\vec{\alpha}({\boldsymbol}{s},0))]\big>=(-1)^m\delta_{h,m}\delta_{r_0,s_0}\ldots\delta_{r_m,s_m} \;.$$ We have our dual family of projections: the pairing is zero unless $h=m$ and ${\boldsymbol}{r}={\boldsymbol}{s}$.
The K-theory of weighted projective spaces is known. As an abelian group it is independent of the weights [@Amr94 Thm. 3.4]: $K^0({\mathbb{P}}({\underline}{\ell})) \simeq K^0({\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^n) \simeq{\mathbb{Z}}^{n+1}$. On the other hand, the multiplicative structure making $K^0({\mathbb{P}}({\underline}{\ell}))$ a ring does depend upon the weights [@Amr94 §5].
Notably, the K-theory of the quantum weighted projective spaces does not agree with the K-theory of their commutative counterparts. For $n=1$, it was shown in [@BF12] that $K_0(C({\mathbb{P}}_q(\ell_0,\ell_1)))={\mathbb{Z}}^{\ell_1 +1}$, while as said, in the commutative case $K^0({\mathbb{P}}(\ell_0,\ell_1))) = {\mathbb{Z}}^2$.
From the pairings computed in , one deduces that in the quantum case the $K_0$ and $K^0$ groups are bigger for $n\geq 1$. Indeed, both $K_0(C({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell})))$ and $K^0(C({\mathbb{P}}_q({\underline}{\ell})))$ contain a subgroup isomorphic to ${\mathbb{Z}}^N$, where, for ${\underline}{\ell}={\underline}{p}^{\,\sharp}$ and ${\underline}{p}$ pairwise coprime, $N$ is the number in : $$N=1+\sum_{k=1}^np_0p_1\ldots p_{k-1} \,.$$
[1]{}
A. Al Amrani, *Complex K-theory of weighted projective spaces*, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 93 (1994) 113–127.
F. Arici, S. Brain, and G. Landi, *The Gysin sequence for quantum lens spaces*, arXiv:1401.6788 \[math.QA\]; J. Noncomm. Geom. in press.
F. Arici, J. Kaad and G. Landi, *Pimsner algebras and Gysin sequences from principal circle actions*, arXiv:1409.5335 \[math.QA\]; J. Noncomm. Geom. in press.
A. Bahri, M. Franz, D. Notbohm and N. Ray, *The classification of weighted projective spaces*, Fund. Math. 220 (2013) 217–226.
M. Blau and G. Thompson, *Chern-Simons Theory on Seifert 3-Manifolds*, JHEP 09 (2013) 033.
T. Brzezi[ń]{}ski and S.A. Fairfax, *Quantum teardrops*, Commun. Math. Phys. 316 (2012) 151–170.
T. Brzezi[ń]{}ski and S. Majid, *Quantum group gauge theory on quantum spaces*, Comm. Math. Phys. 157 (1993), 591–638; Erratum 167 (1995), 235.
F. D’Andrea, L. Dabrowski, G. Landi and E. Wagner, [*Dirac operators on all Podles quantum spheres*]{}, J. Noncommut. Geom. 1 (2007) 213–239
F. D’Andrea, L. Dabrowski and G. Landi, *The Noncommutative geometry of the quantum projective plane*, Rev. Math. Phys. 20 (2008) 979–1006.
F. D’Andrea and L. Dabrowski, *Dirac operators on Quantum Projective Spaces*, Commun. Math. Phys. 295 (2010) 731–790.
F. D’Andrea and G. Landi, *Bounded and unbounded Fredholm modules for quantum projective spaces*, J. K-theory 6 (2010) 231–240.
P.M. Hajac, *Strong connections on quantum principal bundles*, Comm. Math. Phys. 182 (1996) 579–617.
E. Hawkins and G. Landi, *Fredholm modules for quantum Euclidean spheres*, J. Geom. Phys. 49 (2004) 272–293.
J.H. Hong, and W. Szyma[ń]{}ski, *Quantum lens spaces and graph algebras*, Pacific J. Math. 211 (2003) 249–263(2003).
R.V. Kadison and J.R. Ringrose, *Fundamentals of the Theory of Operator Algebras*, vol II, Academic Press, 1986.
C. Nastasescu and F. Van Oystaeyen, *Graded Ring Theory*, Elsevier, 1982.
W.P. Thurston, *The Geometry and Topology of Three-Manifolds*, Princeton University Press, 1980.
L. Vaksman and Ya. Soibelman, *The algebra of functions on the quantum group $SU(n+1)$ and odd-dimensional quantum spheres*, Leningrad Math. J. 2 (1991) 1023–1042.
M. Welk, *Differential calculus on quantum projective spaces*, in: “Quantum Groups and Integrable Systems” (Prague, 2000), Czech. J. Phys. 50 (2000) 219–224.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We prove that a countable group with an effective minimal non-elementary convergence group action is a Powers group. More strongly we prove that it is a strongly Powers group and thus its non-trivial subnormal subgroups are $C^*$-simple.\
Keywords: convergence group actions; Powers groups; reduced group $C^*$-algebras; relatively hyperbolic groups.\
2010MSC: 37B05; 20F65; 22D25.
address:
- 'Yoshifumi Matsuda, Graduate School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Tokyo, 3-8-1 Komaba, Meguro-ku, Tokyo, 153-8914 Japan'
- 'Shin-ichi Oguni, Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Ehime University, 2-5 Bunkyo-cho, Matsuyama, Ehime, 790-8577 Japan'
- 'Saeko Yamagata, Akashi National College of Technology, 674-8501 Akashi, Japan'
author:
- 'Yoshifumi Matsuda, Shin-ichi Oguni, Saeko Yamagata'
title: '$C^*$-simplicity for groups with non-elementary convergence group actions'
---
Introduction {#intro}
============
$C^*$-simplicity for countable groups have been studied very much since Powers proved that non-abelian free groups are $C^*$-simple ([@Pow75]), where a countable group is $C^*$-simple if the reduced $C^*$-algebra of it is simple. For example, it is known that torsion-free hyperbolic groups which are not cyclic are $C^*$-simple ([@Har88]). Also some criteria for $C^*$-simplicity for groups are established (refer to [@B-H], [@Har] and [@H-P]). In particular Powers groups are $C^*$-simple ([@Har Theorem 13]). See [@Har Definition 9] about the definition of Powers groups.
The following is our main theorem:
\[P\] Let $G$ be a countable group. If $G$ has an effective minimal non-elementary convergence group action, then $G$ is a Powers group.
On the above the case where $G$ is torsion-free is known ([@Har Corollary 12 (iv)]). See [@Har Corollary 12] and [@H-P] for other examples of Powers groups.
We give two corollaries. First one is the following:
\[simple\] Let $G$ be a countable group with a minimal non-elementary convergence group action. Then the following are equivalent:
1. the action is effective;
2. $G$ is a Powers group;
3. the reduced $C^*$-algebra of $G$ is simple;
4. the reduced $C^*$-algebra of $G$ has a unique normalized trace;
5. $G$ has infinite conjugacy classes;
6. $G$ does not have non-trivial amenable normal subgroups;
7. $G$ does not have non-trivial finite normal subgroups;
8. all minimal non-elementary convergence group actions of $G$ are effective.
See Section \[conv\] about convergence group actions. Corollary \[simple\] implies [@A-M Corollary 2], which deals with the case of relatively hyperbolic groups in the sense of Osin. We remark that if a countable group $G$ is a properly relatively hyperbolic group in the sense of Osin and is not virtually cyclic, then $G$ has a minimal non-elementary convergence group action (see Section \[conv\]).
Recall that each group has a unique maximal amenable normal subgroup, which is called its amenable radical. The second corollary is the following:
\[kernel’\] Let $G$ be a countable group with a minimal non-elementary convergence group action. Then the amenable radical $R_a(G)$ is finite and equal to the kernel of the action. Also $G/R_a(G)$ is a strongly Powers group.
Here a group is called a strongly Powers group when its non-trivial subnormal subgroups are Powers groups (see [@H-P 1. Introduction]).
It follows from Corollaries \[simple\] and \[kernel’\] that a countable group with an effective minimal non-elementary convergence group action is a strongly Powers group and thus its non-trivial subnormal subgroups are $C^*$-simple (see Corollary \[Powers’\]).
Properties of convergence group actions {#conv}
=======================================
The study of convergence groups was initiated in [@G-M87]. In this section we recall some definitions and properties related to convergence group actions (refer to [@Tuk94], [@Fre97] and [@Bow99a]).
Let $G$ be a countable group, $X$ be a compact metrizable space and $\rho:G\to \Homeo(X)$ be a homomorphism. The pair $(\rho,X)$ is a convergence group action if $X$ has at least three points, and for any infinite sequence $\{g_i\}$ of mutually different elements of $G$, there exist a subsequence $\{g_{i_j}\}$ of $\{g_i\}$ and two points $r,a\in X$ such that $\rho(g_{i_j})|_{X\setminus \{r\}}$ converges to $a$ uniformly on compact subsets of $X\setminus \{r\}$ and also $\rho(g_{i_j}^{-1})|_{X\setminus \{a\}}$ converges to $r$ uniformly on compact subsets of $X\setminus \{a\}$. The sequence $\{g_{i_j}\}$ is called a convergence sequence of $(\rho, X)$ and also the points $r$ and $a$ are called the repelling point of $\{g_{i_j}\}$ and the attracting point of $\{g_{i_j}\}$, respectively. When we consider a convergence group action $(\rho,X)$, for $l\in G$, we call $\rho(l)$ a loxodromic element if $\rho(l)$ is of infinite order and has exactly two fixed points. The sequence $\{l^i\}_{i\in \N}$ is a convergence sequence of $(\rho,X)$ with the repelling point $r$ and the attracting point $a$, which are distinct and fixed by $\rho(l)$. Hence we call $r$ the repelling fixed point of $\rho(l)$ and $a$ the attracting fixed point of $\rho(l)$.
Let $(\rho,X)$ be a convergence group action of a countable group $G$. Since $X$ has at least three points, $\Ker\rho$ has no convergence sequences and thus $\Ker\rho$ is finite. The set of all repelling points and attracting points is equal to the limit set $\Lambda(\rho)$ ([@Tuk94 Lemma 2M]). The cardinality of $\Lambda(\rho)$ is $0$, $1$, $2$ or $\infty$ ([@Tuk94 Theorem 2S, Theorem 2T]). We remark that $\#\Lambda(\rho)=0$ if $G$ is finite by definition. Also it is well-known that $G$ is virtually infinite cyclic if $\#\Lambda(\rho)=2$ (see [@Tuk94 Lemma 2Q,Lemma 2N,Theorem 2I] and also [@Fre97 Example 1.3]). We call $(\rho, X)$ a non-elementary convergence group action if $\#\Lambda(\rho)=\infty$. We note that if a countable group $G$ has a non-elementary convergence group action, then the induced action on the limit set is a minimal non-elementary convergence group action.
We briefly recall the notion of relatively hyperbolic group, which was introduced in [@Gro87]. Let $G$ be a countable group with a finite family of infinite subgroups $\mathbb H$. Assume that $G$ is not virtually cyclic for simplicity. We call $(G,{\mathbb H})$ a properly relatively hyperbolic group if there exists a geometrically finite convergence group action $(\rho,X)$ such that $\mathbb H$ is a set of representatives of conjugacy classes of maximal parabolic subgroups (refer to [@Bow97 Definition 1], [@Yam04 Theorem 0.1] and [@Hru10 Definition 3.1] for details). We remark that geometrically finite convergence group actions are minimal and non-elementary. Also we note that several definitions of relative hyperbolicity for a pair $(G,{\mathbb H})$ of a countable group and a family of subgroups are mutually equivalent if $\mathbb H$ is finite and each $H\in \mathbb H$ is infinite (refer to [@Hru10]).
\[rem\] If we consider a relatively hyperbolic group $(G,{\mathbb H})$ in the sense of Osin ([@Osi06 Definition 2.35]), then $\mathbb H$ can be infinite and each $H\in \mathbb H$ can be finite. However even if $G$ is hyperbolic relative to an infinite family $\mathbb H$ in the sense of Osin, then $G$ can be realized as a free product of two infinite subgroups $A$ and $B$ ([@Osi06 Theorem 2.44]), and thus $G$ is hyperbolic relative to $\{A, B\}$, which is a finite family of infinite subgroups.
\[rem’\] We do not know whether there exists a countable group $G$ such that it is not hyperbolic relative to any family of proper subgroups in the sense of Osin, but it has a non-elementary convergence group action.
We need two facts in order to prove Corollary \[kernel’\]. First one is claimed in [@Fre97 Section 1].
\[ker\] Let $G$ be a countable group with a minimal non-elementary convergence group action $(\rho, X)$. Then $\Ker \rho$ is the maximal finite normal subgroup of $G$.
We give its proof for readers in Appendix \[a\].\
Second one is [@Fre97 Proposition 3.1]. We give a proof for readers here.
\[normal\] Let $G$ be a countable group with a convergence group action $(\rho, X)$. Let $N$ be an infinite normal subgroup of $G$. We consider the restricted convergence group action $(\rho|_{N},X)$. Then we have $\Lambda(\rho|_{N})=\Lambda(\rho)$. In particular if $(\rho, X)$ is non-elementary, then $(\rho |_N, X)$ is also non-elementary.
We remark that $\Lambda(\rho |_N)$ is not empty since $N$ is infinite. Also obviously we have $\Lambda(\rho |_N)\subset \Lambda(\rho)$. Hence we have $\Lambda(\rho |_N)=\Lambda(\rho)$ if $\#\Lambda(\rho)=1$.
If $\#\Lambda(\rho)=2$, then $G$ is virtually infinite cyclic. Then $N$ is also virtually infinite cyclic. When we take an element $n\in N$ of infinite order, $\rho(n)$ is loxodromic and fixes $\Lambda(\rho)$ ([@Tuk94 Lemma 2Q, Theorem 2G]). Thus we have $\Lambda(\rho |_N)\supset \Lambda(\rho)$.
Suppose that $(\rho,X)$ is non-elementary. Moreover we can assume that it is minimal without loss of generality. We take a convergence sequence $\{n_i\}_{i\in \N}$ of $(\rho |_N,X)$ with the attracting point $a\in X$ and the repelling point $r\in X$. Then for any $g\in G$, the infinite sequence $\{gn_ig^{-1}\}_{i\in \N}$ is a convergence sequence of $(\rho,X)$ with the attracting point $\rho(g)a\in X$ and the repelling point $\rho(g)r\in X$. The infinite sequence $\{gn_ig^{-1}\}_{i\in \N}$ can be regarded as a convergence sequence of $(\rho |_N,X)$ since $N$ is normal. In particular we have $\rho(G)a\subset\Lambda(\rho |_N)$. Moreover the closure $\overline{\rho(G)a}$ of $\rho(G)a$ in $X$ is contained in $\Lambda(\rho |_N)$ since $\Lambda(\rho |_N)$ is closed. Since $\Lambda(\rho)=\overline{\rho(G)a}$ ([@Tuk94 Theorem 2S]), we have $\Lambda(\rho |_N)\supset \Lambda(\rho)$.
Proofs of results
=================
In this section we prove Theorem \[P\] and Corollaries \[simple\] and \[kernel’\].
We show the following in order to prove Theorem \[P\]:
\[freept\] Let $G$ be a countable group with a minimal non-elementary convergence group action $(\rho,X)$. Then $(\rho, X)$ is effective if and only if there exists a point $x\in X$ such that $\rho(g)x\neq x$ for any element $g\in G\setminus \{1\}$.
This claims that effectiveness of a minimal non-elementary convergence group action can be detected by some single point.
The following is a key lemma for Proof of Proposition \[freept\].
\[noint\] Let $G$ be a countable group with a minimal non-elementary convergence group action $(\rho,X)$. Then for any element $g\in G$ such that $\rho(g)$ is not the identity map, the fixed point set $\Fix(\rho(g))\subset X$ has an empty interior.
We take an element $g\in G$ such that $\rho(g)$ is not the identity map. We put $U:=X\setminus\Fix(\rho(g))$, which is clearly open and not empty. We assume that the interior $V$ of $\Fix(\rho(g))$ is not empty. Since $U$ and $V$ are mutually disjoint open sets which are not empty, we have an element $l\in G$ such that $\rho(l)$ is loxodromic, a fixed point $r$ of $\rho(l)$ is in $U$ and the other fixed point $a$ of $\rho(l)$ is in $V$ ([@Tuk94 Theorem 2R]). Then $\rho(glg^{-1})$ is loxodromic and satisfies $\Fix(\rho(glg^{-1}))=\{\rho(g)r,\rho(g)a\}$. Since $r\in U$ and $a\in V$, we have $\rho(g)r\neq r$ and $\rho(g)a=a$. This contradicts the fact that the fixed point sets of two loxodromic elements either coincide or have an empty intersection ([@Tuk94 Theorem 2G]).
The ‘if’ part is trivial. We prove the ‘only if’ part. Suppose that $(\rho, X)$ is effective. Then for each $g\in G\setminus \{1\}$, $\rho(g)$ is not the identity map. Hence the interior $\Int(\Fix(\rho(g)))$ is empty by Lemma \[noint\]. Then $\Int(\bigcup_{g\in G\setminus \{1\}}\Fix(\rho(g)))$ is also empty since $X$ is a Baire space. Thus $\bigcup_{g\in G\setminus \{1\}}\Fix(\rho(g))$ must be a proper subset of $X$ because $X$ is not empty.
Since Lemma \[noint\] claims that an effective minimal non-elementary convergence group action is ‘slender’ (see the paragraph just before [@H-P Corollary 10]), the argument of the proof of Proposition \[freept\] is parallel to an observation in the proof of [@H-P Corollary 10].
Suppose that $G$ has an effective minimal non-elementary convergence group action $(\rho,X)$. There exist two elements $l_1,l_2\in G$ such that $\rho(l_1)$ and $\rho(l_2)$ are loxodromic and have no common fixed points ([@Tuk94 Theorem 2T]). Since $\{l_1^i\}_{i\in \N}$ and $\{l_2^i\}_{i\in \N}$ are convergence sequences, then $\rho(l_1)$ and $\rho(l_2)$ are hyperbolic in the sense of [@Har Definition 10]. Therefore $(\rho,X)$ is strongly hyperbolic in the sense of [@Har Definition 10]. Also for any finite subset $F\subset G\setminus\{1\}$, there exists $x\in X$ such that $\rho(f)x\neq x$ for all $f\in F$ by Proposition \[freept\]. Therefore $(\rho,X)$ is strongly faithful in the sense of [@Har Definition 10]. Hence $G$ is a Powers group by [@Har Proposition 11 and the following remark].
Clearly (viii) implies (i). Also Theorem \[P\] claims that (i) implies (ii).
For general countable groups, the following relations hold among properties (ii), (iii), (iv), (v), (vi), (vii) and (viii): It is well-known that (ii) implies both (iii) and (iv) (see [@Har Theorem 13 and Remark (i) on it]); each of (iii) and (iv) implies both (v) and (vi) (see [@B-H Proposition 3]); each of (v) and (vi) obviously implies (vii); (vii) implies (viii) by definition of convergence group actions (see Section \[conv\]).
We have the following:
\[Powers’\] Let $G$ be a countable group with an effective minimal non-elementary convergence group action $(\rho,X)$. Then for every non-trivial subnormal subgroup $N$ of $G$, the restricted action $(\rho |_N,X)$ is an effective minimal non-elementary convergence group action. In particular $G$ is a strongly Powers group.
We take a non-trivial subnormal subgroup $N$ of $G$. There exists a finite chain of subgroups $N=N_k<N_{k-1}<\cdots<N_0=G$ such that $N_j$ is normal in $N_{j-1}$ for any $j=1,\ldots,k$. We suppose that $G$ has an effective minimal non-elementary convergence group action $(\rho, X)$. Then $N_1$ is infinite by Proposition \[ker\] and thus the restricted action $(\rho|_{N_1},X)$ is an effective minimal non-elementary convergence group action by Proposition \[normal\]. By induction on $j$, the restricted action $(\rho|_N,X)$ is an effective minimal non-elementary convergence group action. Hence $N$ is a Powers group by Theorem \[P\].
Suppose that $G$ has a minimal non-elementary convergence group action $(\rho,X)$. $\Ker \rho$ is the maximal finite normal subgroup of $G$ by Proposition \[ker\]. Now we prove that the amenable radical $R_a(G)$ is finite. We assume that $G$ has an infinite amenable normal subgroup $N$. Since $N$ does not contain any non-abelian free subgroups, the restricted convergence group action $\rho|_{N}$ is elementary ([@Tuk94 Theorem 2U]). This contradicts Proposition \[normal\].
Since $\Ker \rho$ is equal to $R_a(G)$, the quotient $G/R_a(G)$ has the induced effective minimal non-elementary convergence group action $(\bar{\rho},X)$. Hence Corollary \[Powers’\] can be applied to $G/R_a(G)$.
Proof of Proposition \[ker\] {#a}
============================
In this appendix we prove Proposition \[ker\]. In fact we prove Proposition \[kernel\] (compare with [@A-M-O Lemma 3.3] for the case of relatively hyperbolic groups).
Let $G$ be a countable group with a convergence group action $(\rho,X)$ and $l$ be an element of $G$ such that $\rho(l)$ is loxodromic. We put $E^+_{\rho}(l):=\Stab_{\rho}(r)\cap \Stab_{\rho}(a)$ and $E_{\rho}(l):=\Stab_{\rho}(\{r,a\})$, where $\Stab_{\rho}(r)$, $\Stab_{\rho}(a)$ and $\Stab_{\rho}(\{r,a\})$ are the stabilizer of subsets $\{r\}$, $\{a\}$ and $\{r,a\}$ in $G$, respectively. Also we define $E_{\rho}^+(G)$ (resp. $E_{\rho}(G)$) by the intersection of all the sets in the family $\{ E^+_{\rho}(l) ~|~ l
\in G, \rho(l)\text{ is loxodromic}\}$ (resp. $\{ E_{\rho}(l) ~|~ l \in G, \rho(l)\text{ is loxodromic}\}$).
\[kernel\] Let $G$ be a countable group with a non-elementary convergence group action. If $(\rho, X)$ is a minimal non-elementary convergence group action, then $\Ker \rho$ is the maximal finite normal subgroup of $G$ and equal to both $E_{\rho}^+(G)$ and $E_{\rho}(G)$.
In order to prove the above, we need some lemmas.
\[23\] Let $G$ be a countable group with a non-elementary convergence group action $(\rho,X)$. Then $E_{\rho}^+(G)$ is a finite normal subgroup of $G$.
For any element $l\in G$ such that $\rho(l)$ is loxodromic and for any element $h\in G$, $\rho(hlh^{-1})$ is loxodromic. Clearly we have $E_{\rho}^+(hlh^{-1})=hE_{\rho}^+(l)h^{-1}$.
We can take two elements $l_1,l_2\in G$ such that $\rho(l_1)$ and $\rho(l_2)$ are loxodromic and have no common fixed points ([@Tuk94 Theorem 2R]). Then $E_{\rho}^+(l_1)\cap E_{\rho}^+(l_2)$ is finite because $E_{\rho}^+(l_1)$ and $E_{\rho}^+(l_2)$ have no common elements of infinite order ([@Tuk94 Theorem 2G]) and they are virtually infinite cyclic by [@Tuk94 Theorem 2I].
We can prove the following in the same way as the proof of Lemma \[23\].
\[23’\] Let $G$ be a countable group with a non-elementary convergence group action $(\rho,X)$. Then $E_{\rho}(G)$ is a finite normal subgroup of $G$.
\[4’\] Let $G$ be a countable group with a non-elementary convergence group action $(\rho,X)$, $l\in G$ be an element such that $\rho(l)$ is loxodromic and $g$ be an element of $G$. If there exists a positive integer $n$ such that $gl^ng^{-1}=l^n$, then $g$ is an element of $E_{\rho}^+(l)$.
We take the repelling fixed point $r$ of $\rho(l)$ and the attracting fixed point $a$ of $\rho(l)$. Then $\rho(gl^ng^{-1})$ is a loxodromic element with the repelling fixed point $\rho(g)r$ and the attracting fixed point $\rho(g)a$. $gl^ng^{-1}=l^n$ implies that $\rho(g)r=r$ and $\rho(g)a=a$.
\[4\] Let $G$ be a countable group with a non-elementary convergence group action $(\rho,X)$. Then any finite normal subgroup $M$ of $G$ is contained in $E_{\rho}^+(G)$.
When we consider a finite normal subgroup $M$ of $G$, we have $[G: C_G(M)]<\infty$, where $C_G(M)$ is the centralizer of $M$ in $G$. Hence for any element $l\in G$ such that $\rho(l)$ is loxodromic, there exists a positive integer $n$ such that $l^n\in C_G(M)$, that is, $ml^nm^{-1}=l^n$ for any $m\in M$. Thus we have $m\in E_{\rho}^+(l)$ by Lemma \[4’\].
$E_{\rho}^+(G)$ is the maximal finite normal subgroup by Lemma \[23\] and Lemma \[4\].
Since $E_{\rho}(G)$ is a finite normal subgroup of $G$ by Lemma \[23’\], we have $E_{\rho}(G)\subset E_{\rho}^+(G)$. Also we have $E_{\rho}(G)\supset E_{\rho}^+(G)$ by definition.
We take an element $l\in G$ such that $\rho(l)$ is loxodromic and the repelling fixed point $r\in X$ of $\rho(l)$. Then for any $g\in E_{\rho}^+(G)$, $\rho(g)$ fixes every point of the orbit $\rho(G)r$. Since $(\rho, X)$ is non-elementary and minimal, $\rho(g)$ fixes every point of $X$ by [@Tuk94 Theorem 2S]. Thus we have $\Ker \rho\supset E_{\rho}^+(G)$. Also we have $\Ker \rho\subset E_{\rho}^+(G)$ by definition.
\
**Acknowledgements.** The authors would like to thank Professor Pierre de la Harpe for giving them useful comments and informing them of [@H-P].
The first author is supported by the Global COE Program at Graduate School of Mathematical Sciences, the University of Tokyo, and Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Researches for Young Scientists (B) (No. 22740034), Japan Society of Promotion of Science.
[100]{} G. Arzhantseva; A. Minasyan, Relatively hyperbolic groups are $C^\ast$-simple. J. Funct. Anal. 243 (2007), no. 1, 345–351.
G. Arzhantseva; A. Minasyan; D. Osin, The SQ-universality and residual properties of relatively hyperbolic groups. J. Algebra 315 (2007), no. 1, 165–177.
M. Bachir Bekka; Pierre de la Harpe, Groups with simple reduced $C^*$-algebras. Expo. Math. 18 (2000), no. 3, 215–230.
B. H. Bowditch, Convergence groups and configuration spaces. Geometric group theory down under (Canberra, 1996), 23–54, de Gruyter, Berlin, 1999.
B. H. Bowditch, Relatively hyperbolic groups. Preprint 1997, University of Southampton. http://www.maths.soton.ac.uk/pure/preprints.phtml
Eric M. Freden, Properties of convergence groups and spaces. Conform. Geom. Dyn. 1 (1997), 13–23 (electronic).
F. W. Gehring; G. J. Martin, Discrete quasiconformal groups. I. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 55 (1987), no. 2, 331–358.
M. Gromov, Hyperbolic groups, Essays in group theory (S. Gersten, ed.), 75–263, MSRI Publications 8, Springer-Verlag, 1987.
Pierre de la Harpe, Groupes hyperboliques, algebres d’operateurs et un theoreme de Jolissaint. (French) \[Hyperbolic groups, operator algebras and Jolissaint’s theorem\] C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Ser. I Math. 307 (1988), no. 14, 771–774.
Pierre de la Harpe, On simplicity of reduced $C^\ast$-algebras of groups. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 39 (2007), no. 1, 1–26.
Pierre de la Harpe; Jean-Philippe Préaux, C$^*$-simple groups: amalgamated free products, HNN extensions, and fundamental groups of 3-manifolds, ArXiv:0909.3528v2
G Christopher Hruska, Relative hyperbolicity and relative quasiconvexity for countable groups. Algebr. Geom. Topol. 10 (2010), no. 3, 1807–1856.
Denis V. Osin, Relatively hyperbolic groups: intrinsic geometry, algebraic properties, and algorithmic problems. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 179 (2006), no. 843
Robert T. Powers, Simplicity of the $C^{\ast} $-algebra associated with the free group on two generators. Duke Math. J. 42 (1975), 151–156.
Pekka Tukia, Convergence groups and Gromov’s metric hyperbolic spaces. New Zealand J. Math. 23 (1994), no. 2, 157–187.
Asli Yaman, A topological characterisation of relatively hyperbolic groups. (English summary) J. Reine Angew. Math. 566 (2004), 41–89.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We consider two distinct coupled cluster (CC) perturbation series that both expand the difference between the energies of the CCSD (CC with single and double excitations) and CCSDT (CC with single, double, and triple excitations) models in orders of the M[ø]{}ller-Plesset fluctuation potential. We initially introduce the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, in which the CCSD amplitude equations are satisfied at the expansion point, and compare it to the recently developed ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series \[J. Chem. Phys. $\bm{140}$, 064108 (2014)\], in which not only the CCSD amplitude, but also the CCSD multiplier equations are satisfied at the expansion point. The computational scaling is similar for the two series, and both are term-wise size extensive with a formal convergence towards the CCSDT target energy. However, the two series are different, and the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series is found to exhibit a more rapid convergence up through the series, which we trace back to the fact that more information at the expansion point is utilized than for the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series. The present analysis can be generalized to any perturbation expansion representing the difference between a parent CC model and a higher-level target CC model. In general, we demonstrate that, whenever the parent parameters depend upon the perturbation operator, a perturbation expansion of the CC energy (where only parent amplitudes are used) differs from a perturbation expansion of the CC Lagrangian (where both parent amplitudes [*and*]{} parent multipliers are used). For the latter case, the bivariational Lagrangian formulation becomes more than a convenient mathematical tool, since it facilitates a different and faster convergent perturbation series than the simpler energy-based expansion.'
author:
- Kasper Kristensen
- Janus Juul Eriksen
- 'Devin A. Matthews'
- Jeppe Olsen
- 'Poul J[ø]{}rgensen'
title: A view on coupled cluster perturbation theory using a bivariational Lagrangian formulation
---
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
Coupled cluster (CC) theory [@cicek_1; @cicek_2; @paldus_cikek_shavitt; @shavitt_bartlett_cc_book] is perhaps the most powerful method for describing dynamical electron correlation effects within the realm of modern quantum chemistry. The CC singles and doubles (CCSD) model [@ccsd_paper_1_jcp_1982], in which the cluster operator is truncated at the level of double excitations, is a robust and useful model, but it is well-known that the effects of triple (and higher-level) excitations need to be taken into account in order to obtain highly accurate results that may compete with the accuracy of experiments [@mest]. However, the steep scaling of the CC singles, doubles, and triples [@ccsdt_noga_bartlett_jcp_1987; @ccsdt_paper_2_cpl_1988] (CCSDT) and CC singles, doubles, triples, and quadruples [@ccsdtq_paper_1_jcp_1991; @ccsdtq_paper_2_jcp_1992] (CCSDTQ) models limits their use to rather modest molecular systems. For this reason, a computationally tractable alternative to the expensive iterative CCSDT and CCSDTQ models is to develop approximate models, for which the important triples and/or quadruples contributions are determined from a perturbation analysis, and hence included in a cheap and non-iterative fashion. A plethora of different models for the approximate treatment of triples and/or quadruples effects have been suggested, and we refer to Ref. for a recent theoretical overview of approximate non-iterative triples and quadruples models and Refs. and for a numerical comparison of many of these.
In the present work, we focus on perturbation theory within a CC framework, where a M[ø]{}ller-Plesset (MP) partitioning of the Hamiltonian is performed [@MP], and the energy difference between a zeroth-order (parent) CC model and a higher-level (target) CC model is expanded in orders of the perturbation (the fluctuation potential). In particular, we will base the perturbation analysis on a bivariational CC Lagrangian obtained by adding to the CC target energy the CC amplitude equations with associated Lagrange multipliers. We note that the linearly parametrized state formally spanned by the Lagrange multipliers is often referred to as the CC $\Lambda$-state [@handy_schaefer_lambda_ci_jcp_1984; @schaefer_lambda_cc_jcp_1987], and that this is in general different from the exponentially parametrized CC state. As pointed out by Arponen [@arponen_ann_phys_1983; @arponen_pra_1987], extensively exploited in the CC Lagrangian formulation[@helgaker_jorgensen_lagrangian_aqc_1988], and recently discussed by Kvaal [@kvaal_jcp_2012; @kvaal_mol_phys_2013], the CC energy may be interpreted as a CC functional in both the CC amplitudes and the $\Lambda$-state parameters. We will show that the fastest convergence is obtained when these two sets of state parameters are treated on an equal footing in the perturbative expansion of the energy difference between a parent and a target CC model. Thus, we will distinguish between a perturbation expansion of the CC energy, for which only parent amplitudes are used at the expansion point, and a perturbation expansion of the CC Lagrangian, for which both parent amplitudes [*and*]{} parent multipliers are used at the expansion point. At first sight, the bivariational Lagrangian formulation might seem like an unnecessary complication, since, for the target model, the Lagrangian formally equals the energy. The purpose of this work is, however, to highlight and exemplify that not only is the Lagrangian formulation a convenient mathematical tool that may simplify the derivation of various perturbation expansions; in many cases, the Lagrangian formulation will actually lead to different perturbation series than the corresponding energy formulation.
To exemplify this difference, we consider two perturbation series which both expand the difference between the energies of the CCSD and CCSDT models. We initially introduce the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, in which the CCSD amplitude equations are satisfied at the expansion point, and next compare it to the recently developed ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series [@eriksen2014lagrangian], in which not only the CCSD amplitude equations are satisfied at the expansion point, but also the CCSD multiplier equations. Despite depending on the fluctuation potential to infinite order in the space of all single and double excitations, the CCSD amplitudes are formally considered as zeroth-order parameters in both the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, since the CCSD model represents the expansion point. Similarly, the CCSD multipliers, which too depend on the fluctuation potential, are considered as zeroth-order parameters for the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, but not so for the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series. The path from the CCSD expansion point towards the CCSDT target energy, as defined by a perturbation expansion, is thus different within the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, and, as will be shown in the present work, the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series is the more rapidly converging of the two, since more information is utilized at the expansion point. We finally reiterate that the lowest-order contribution of the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series (that of the ${\text{CCSD(T--2)}}$ model) is identical to the triples-only part of the CCSD(2) model of Gwaltney and Head-Gordon [@ccsd_2_model_gwaltney_head_gordon_cpl_2000; @ccsd_2_model_gwaltney_head_gordon_jcp_2001] and the second-order model of the CC($2$)PT($m$) series of Hirata [*et al.*]{} [@ccsd_pt_models_hirata_jcp_2001; @ccsd_pt_models_hirata_jcp_2004; @ccsd_pt_models_hirata_jcp_2007], the ${\text{CCSD(T--3)}}$ model is identical to the triples-only part of the third-order CC($2$)PT($m$) model, while for fourth and higher orders, the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and CC($2$)PT($n$) series are different [@eom_cc_pert_theory_jcp_2014]. The ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, however, differs from the aforementioned perturbation series for all corrections.\
The present study is outlined as follows. In \[sec:theory\], we derive the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series and compare it to the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series in order to illustrate the importance of treating parent amplitudes and multipliers on an equal footing. In \[sec:results\], we present numerical results for the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ energies, while some concluding remarks are given in \[sec:conclusion\].
Theory {#sec:theory}
======
In this section, we consider two perturbation series that expand the difference between the CCSD and CCSDT energies in orders of the perturbation. In \[sec:eccsdt\], we develop a new energy-based perturbation series denoted the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, which can be formulated in terms of CC amplitudes without the need for invoking a CC Lagrangian. Next, in \[sec:general\], we develop a common bivariational framework, in which we recast the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series. Finally, we present a theoretical comparison between the two series in \[sec:comparison\] in order to exemplify how the CC Lagrangian framework may lead to a perturbation series that is inherently different from that which arise from the corresponding energy formulation.
Perturbation expansion based on the CCSDT energy {#sec:eccsdt}
------------------------------------------------
In this work, we use a MP partitioning of the Hamiltonian $$\begin{aligned}
\label{HFPhi}
\hat{H} = \hat{f} + \hat{\Phi}\end{aligned}$$ where $\hat{f}$ is the Fock operator and $\hat{\Phi}$ is the fluctuation potential. We consider first the CCSD model, which we choose as the common reference point for the perturbation expansions to follow. The CCSD energy, $E^{{\text{CCSD}}}$, and associated amplitude equations may be written as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ETs}
E^{{\text{CCSD}}} = \bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\label{CCSDamp}
0 = \bra{\mu_i} \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}
\qquad (i=1,2)\end{aligned}$$ where $\bra{\mu_1}$ and $\bra{\mu_2}$ represent a singly and a doubly excited state with respect to the HF determinant, $\ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}$, and the (non-Hermitian) CCSD similarity-transformed Hamiltonian is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{HTs}
\hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} &= e^{- { {^{*}}\hat{T}}} \hat{H} e^{ { {^{*}}\hat{T}}},
\qquad
{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}= { {^{*}}\hat{T}}_1 + { {^{*}}\hat{T}}_2\end{aligned}$$ with ${ {^{*}}\hat{T}}_1$ and ${ {^{*}}\hat{T}}_2$ being the CCSD singles and doubles cluster operators. Throughout the paper, we will use asterisks to denote CCSD quantities and generally use the generic notation $\hat{T}_i = \sum_{\mu_i} t_{\mu_i} \hat{\tau}_{\mu_i}$ for a cluster operator at excitation level $i$, where $\hat{\tau}_{\mu_i}$ is an excitation operator and $t_{\mu_i}$ is the associated amplitude.
We now parametrize the difference between the CCSD and CCSDT energy in terms of correction amplitudes, $\delta t_{\mu_i}$, which represent the difference between the CCSD and CCSDT amplitudes. The correction amplitudes are expanded in orders of the fluctuation potential, and the CCSDT amplitudes, $t_{\mu_i}$, may thus be written as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{CCSDT_CCSD_exp}
t_{\mu_i} = t_{\mu_i}^{(0)} + \delta t_{\mu_i}^{(1)} + \delta t_{\mu_i}^{(2)} + \ldots \qquad (i=1,2,3)\end{aligned}$$ where $t_{\mu_i}^{(0)} = { {^{*}}t}_{\mu_i}$ for $i=1,2$ and $t_{\mu_3}^{(0)} = 0$. We emphasize that, since we have chosen to expand the CCSDT amplitudes around the CCSD reference point, the CCSD amplitudes, $\{{ {^{*}}t}_{\mu_1},{ {^{*}}t}_{\mu_2}\}$, are zeroth-order by definition. The $\{\delta t_{\mu_1},\delta t_{\mu_2}\}$ amplitudes thus represent corrections to the CCSD amplitudes, while $\{\delta t_{\mu_3}\}$ are the CCSDT triples amplitudes.
The CCSDT cluster operator may now be written as $\hat{T} = { {^{*}}\hat{T}}+ \delta\hat{T}$, where $\delta\hat{T}$ contains the correction amplitudes, and the CCSDT energy may be obtained by projecting the CCSDT Schr[ö]{}dinger equation, ${e^{-\delta\hat{T}} \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} e^{\delta\hat{T}}}\ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} = E^{{\text{CCSDT}}} \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}$, against $\bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }}$ $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber
E^{{\text{CCSDT}}} &= \bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} {e^{-\delta\hat{T}} \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} e^{\delta\hat{T}}}\ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \\
&=
E^{{\text{CCSD}}} + \bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} [ { \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_1 + \delta\hat{T}_2] + \tfrac{1}{2} [[{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_1],\delta\hat{T}_1] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}
\label{ETf3}\end{aligned}$$ where we have carried out a Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff (BCH) expansion, while the CCSDT amplitude equations are obtained by projection against the combined excitation manifold of all single, double, and triple excitations out of the HF reference $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ampeq}
0 = \bra{\mu_i} {e^{-\delta\hat{T}} \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} e^{\delta\hat{T}}}\ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}
\qquad (i=1,2,3) \ .\end{aligned}$$ The order analysis of \[ampeq\] is identical to the one performed in Ref. (orders are counted in $\hat{\Phi}$), and the resulting amplitudes are thus the same. Compactly, these are given by
\[amp\_pert\_expand\] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ampeqSD}
\delta t_{\mu_i}^{(n)} &=
- \epsilon_{\mu_i}^{-1} \bigg(
\bra{\mu_i} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}]
+ \tfrac{1}{2} [ [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}] , \delta\hat{T}] + \ldots \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}
\bigg)^{(n)}
\qquad (i=1,2)
\\
\delta t_{\mu_3}^{(n)} &=
- \epsilon_{\mu_3}^{-1} \bigg(
\bra{\mu_3} { \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }+ [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}]
+ \tfrac{1}{2} [ [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}] , \delta\hat{T}] + \ldots \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}
\bigg)^{(n)}\end{aligned}$$
where $\epsilon_{\mu_i}$ is the orbital energy difference between the virtual and occupied spin-orbitals of excitation $\mu_i$, and the right-hand sides of the equations contain all terms of order $n$, i.e., the sum of the orders of all $\delta T$ operators plus one (for the fluctuation potential) equals $n$. For example, the first-order singles and doubles corrections are zero, $\delta t_{\mu_1}^{(1)} = \delta t_{\mu_2}^{(1)} = 0$, while the first-order triples corrections are given as $\delta t_{\mu_3}^{(1)} =- \epsilon_{\mu_3}^{-1} \bra{\mu_3} { \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }\ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}$. By collecting terms in orders of the fluctuation potential, the CCSDT energy in \[ETf3\] may now be expanded as
\[ECCSDTn\] $$\begin{aligned}
E^{{\text{CCSDT}}} &=
E^{{\text{CCSD}}} + \sum_{n=3}^{\infty} E^{(n)}
\\
\nonumber
E^{(n)} &= \bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} [ { \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_1^{(n-1)} + \delta\hat{T}_2^{(n-1)}] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}
\\
&+
\tfrac{1}{2} \sum_{m=2}^{n-3} \bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} [[{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_1^{(m)}], \delta\hat{T}_1^{(n-m-1)}] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}
\label{ECCSDTn2}\end{aligned}$$
where we have used the fact that the first-order singles and doubles amplitudes vanish to restrict the summations. We denote the perturbation series defined by \[ECCSDTn\] as the [*${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series*]{} to emphasize that it is based on a perturbation expansion of the CCSDT energy around the CCSD [*energy*]{} point, at which the CCSD amplitude equations are satisfied. We note that this notation is not to be confused with ECC, which is usually used as an acronym for extended coupled cluster theory in the literature [@arponen_ann_phys_1983; @arponen_pra_1987]
From \[ECCSDTn\], it follows that the first non-vanishing energy correction to the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series is of third order. The two lowest-order corrections are given in \[E3alt\_app\_n\_1\] and \[E4alt\_app\_n\_1\] of \[appendix\_comparison\]. The ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series is evidently different from the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series developed in Ref. , which starts at second order. Both series, however, describe the difference between the CCSD and CCSDT energies using a MP partitioning of the Hamiltonian, and the correction amplitudes are identical. The only apparent difference is that the CCSDT energy is the central quantity for the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, while the CCSDT Lagrangian forms the basis for the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series. In \[sec:general\], we develop a general Lagrangian framework to enable a direct comparison of the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series in \[sec:comparison\].
A general bivariational Lagrangian framework {#sec:general}
--------------------------------------------
The CCSDT Lagrangian may be obtained by adding to the CCSDT energy the amplitude equations in \[ampeq\] with associated (undetermined) multipliers $$\begin{aligned}
\label{LT1}
L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({\mathbf{t}^{(0)}},{ \mathbf{\bar{t}}^{(0)} },{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}}) = E^{{\text{CCSDT}}}
+ \sum_{j=1}^3 \sum_{\nu_j} ( {\bar{t}^{(0)}}_{\nu_j} + \delta {\bar{t}}_{\nu_j} ) \bra{\nu_{j}} {e^{-\delta\hat{T}} \hat{H}^{T^{(0)}} e^{\delta\hat{T}}}\ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}\end{aligned}$$ where we have chosen the following parametrization of the CCSDT multipliers in analogy with \[CCSDT\_CCSD\_exp\] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{multpara}
{\bar{t}}_{\mu_i} = {\bar{t}}_{\mu_i}^{(0)} + \delta {\bar{t}}_{\mu_i}^{(1)} + \delta {\bar{t}}_{\mu_i}^{(2)} + \ldots \qquad (i=1,2,3) \ .\end{aligned}$$ If the expansion of the CCSDT multipliers in \[multpara\] is left untruncated, these will equal the parameters of the linearly parametrized CCSDT $\Lambda$-state. The notation for the Lagrangian, $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({\mathbf{t}^{(0)}},{ \mathbf{\bar{t}}^{(0)} },{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}})$, highlights that the amplitudes and multipliers at the expansion point are ${\mathbf{t}^{(0)}}$ and ${ \mathbf{\bar{t}}^{(0)} }$, respectively, while ${\delta\mathbf{t}}$ and ${\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}}$ represent the correction amplitudes and correction multipliers, respectively. By setting ${\mathbf{t}^{(0)}}= { \mathbf{\bar{t}}^{(0)} }= {\mathbf{0}}$, we arrive at an MP-like perturbation expansion, albeit one that has the CCSDT energy as the target energy instead of the full configuration interaction (FCI) energy. In this work, however, we focus on the case for which the CCSD amplitudes are used as zeroth-order amplitudes ($t_{\mu_1}^{(0)} = { {^{*}}t}_{\mu_1}$, $t_{\mu_2}^{(0)} = { {^{*}}t}_{\mu_2}$, $t_{\mu_3}^{(0)} = 0$), while considering different choices of zeroth-order multipliers. In particular, we show below how the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series may be recovered by choosing ${\bar{t}}_{\mu_i}^{(0)} = 0$ (i=1,2,3), while the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series corresponds to using CCSD multipliers as zeroth-order multipliers (${\bar{t}}_{\mu_1}^{(0)} = { {^{*}}\bar{t}}_{\mu_1}$, ${\bar{t}}_{\mu_2}^{(0)} = { {^{*}}\bar{t}}_{\mu_2}$, ${\bar{t}}_{\mu_3}^{(0)} = 0$). Equations for the CCSD multipliers are obtained by requiring the CCSD Lagrangian $$\begin{aligned}
L^{{\text{CCSD}}} = \bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} { \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }\ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} + \sum_{j=1}^2 \sum_{\nu_j} { {^{*}}\bar{t}}_{\nu_j} \bra{\nu_{j}} { \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }\ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}
\label{LCCSD}\end{aligned}$$ to be stationary with respect to variations in the CCSD amplitudes $$\begin{aligned}
\label{CCSDmult}
0 = \frac{\partial L^{{\text{CCSD}}}}{\partial { {^{*}}t}_{\mu_i}} =
\bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} [ { \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \hat{\tau}_{\mu_i} ] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}
+ \sum_{j=1}^2 \sum_{\nu_j} { {^{*}}\bar{t}}_{\nu_j}
\bra{\nu_j} [ { \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \hat{\tau}_{\mu_i} ] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}
\qquad
(i=1,2) \ .\end{aligned}$$ In the following, we let ${\bar{t}}_{\mu_i}^{(0)}$ represent a general zeroth-order multiplier to treat the two series on an equal footing. Equations for the correction amplitudes are determined by requiring $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{ \mathbf{\bar{t}}^{(0)} },{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}})$ to be stationary with respect to variations in the correction multipliers $$\begin{aligned}
\label{generalampeq}
\frac{\partial L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{ \mathbf{\bar{t}}^{(0)} },{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}})}{\partial \delta {\bar{t}}_{\mu_i}} = 0
\qquad
(i=1,2,3)\end{aligned}$$ which reproduces the CCSDT amplitude equations in \[ampeq\]. It follows that the equations for the correction amplitudes are independent of the choice of zeroth-order multipliers, and the correction amplitudes for the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series are therefore identical to all orders. Equations for the CCSDT multipliers are obtained by requiring $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{ \mathbf{\bar{t}}^{(0)} },{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}})$ to be stationary with respect to variations in the amplitudes $$\begin{aligned}
\label{generalmulteq}
\frac{\partial L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{ \mathbf{\bar{t}}^{(0)} },{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}})}{\partial \delta t_{\mu_i}} = 0
\qquad
(i=1,2,3) \ .\end{aligned}$$ Unlike for the correction amplitudes in \[ampeq\], the precise form of the multiplier equations will depend upon the choice of zeroth-order multipliers, and the correction multipliers for the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series will therefore be different. To keep this distinction clear, we will refer to the correction multipliers associated with the choices ${\bar{\textbf{t}}}^{(0)} = {\mathbf{0}}$ and ${\bar{\textbf{t}}}^{(0)} = {{^{*}}\mathbf{\bar{t}}}$ as ${\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^E}$ and ${\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^L}$, respectively, while the generic notation ${\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}}$ may refer to either of the series. We note that at infinite order, the multipliers—as defined within either the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ or ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series—are identical (assuming that both expansions converge), i.e. $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \delta\bar{\textbf{t}}^{E(n)} =
{^{*}}\bar{\textbf{t}} + \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\delta\bar{\textbf{t}}^{L(n)} =
\bar{\textbf{t}}\end{aligned}$$ where $\bar{\textbf{t}}$ is the final set of converged CCSDT multipliers ($\Lambda$-state parameters).\
To simplify the comparison of the two series, it proves convenient to expand the Lagrangian in \[LT1\] in a form that emphasizes the dependence on the CCSD multiplier equation in \[CCSDmult\] $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber
L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{ \mathbf{\bar{t}}^{(0)} },{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}}) &=
E^{{\text{CCSD}}}
\\
\nonumber
&+ \sum_{i=1}^2 \sum_{\mu_i} \delta t_{\mu_i}
\bigg( \bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} },\hat{\tau}_{\mu_i} ] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} +
\sum_{j=1}^2 \sum_{\nu_j} {\bar{t}}_{\nu_j}^{(0)}
\bra{\nu_j} [{ \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} },\hat{\tau}_{\mu_i}] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \bigg)
\\
\nonumber
&+ \tfrac{1}{2} \bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} [ [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_1], \delta\hat{T}_1] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \\
\nonumber
&+ \sum_{j=1}^2 \sum_{\nu_j} {\bar{t}}_{\nu_j}^{(0)}
\bigg( \bra{\nu_j} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_3] + \tfrac{1}{2}[ [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}], \delta\hat{T}] + \ldots \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \bigg) \\
\nonumber
&+ \sum_{j=1}^2 \sum_{\nu_j} \delta {\bar{t}}_{\nu_j}
\bigg( \bra{\nu_j} [{ \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}] + \tfrac{1}{2}[ [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}], \delta\hat{T}] + \ldots \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \bigg) \\
&+ \sum_{\nu_3} \delta {\bar{t}}_{\nu_3}
\bigg( \bra{\nu_3} { \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }+ [{ \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}] + \tfrac{1}{2}[ [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}], \delta\hat{T}] + \ldots \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \bigg)
\label{LT2}\end{aligned}$$ where we have set ${\mathbf{t}^{(0)}}={{^{*}}\mathbf{t}}$ and used the CCSD amplitude equations in \[CCSDamp\].\
By choosing ${ \mathbf{\bar{t}}^{(0)} }= {\mathbf{0}}$ in \[LT2\], we arrive at the Lagrangian $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{\mathbf{0}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^E})$, which reads $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber
L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{\mathbf{0}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^E}) &=
E^{{\text{CCSD}}}
\\
\nonumber
&+ \bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} [ { \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_1 + \delta\hat{T}_2] + \tfrac{1}{2}[[{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_1], \delta\hat{T}_1] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \\
\nonumber
&+ \sum_{j=1}^2 \sum_{\nu_j} {\delta \bar{t}^E}_{\nu_j}
\bigg( \bra{\nu_j} [{ \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}] + \tfrac{1}{2}[ [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}], \delta\hat{T}] + \ldots \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \bigg) \\
&+ \sum_{\nu_3} {\delta \bar{t}^E}_{\nu_3}
\bigg( \bra{\nu_3} { \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }+ [{ \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}] + \tfrac{1}{2}[ [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}], \delta\hat{T}] + \ldots \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \bigg) \ .
\label{LT3}\end{aligned}$$ Since the ${\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^E}$ multipliers multiply the CCSDT amplitude equations in \[ampeq\], they may be eliminated from \[LT3\], and it follows that $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{\mathbf{0}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^E})$ equals the CCSDT energy in \[ETf3\] $$\begin{aligned}
L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{\mathbf{0}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^E}) = E^{{\text{CCSDT}}} \ .
\label{LT4}\end{aligned}$$ By evaluating $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{\mathbf{0}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^E})$ to different orders in the fluctuation potential, we thus arrive at the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series in \[ECCSDTn\], for which the energy corrections may be expressed exclusively in terms of correction amplitudes. The evaluation of the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ energy corrections using \[ECCSDTn\] corresponds to using the $n+1$ rule, where amplitudes to order $n$ determine the energy to order $n+1$. Alternatively, by exploiting that $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{\mathbf{0}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^E})$ is variational in the amplitudes as well as the multipliers, it may be evaluated to different orders in the fluctuation potential by using the $2n +1$ and $2n+2$ rules [@helgaker_jorgensen_1988; @helgaker_jorgensen_1989; @kasper_wigner_rules] for the amplitudes and multipliers (i.e., the amplitudes/multipliers to order $n$ determine the Lagrangian to order $2n+1$/$2n+2$). These two approaches are of course equivalent, but the use of the $2n +1$ and $2n+2$ rules allows for an easy comparison of the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series to the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series (cf. \[appendix\_comparison\]).\
By setting ${ \mathbf{\bar{t}}^{(0)} }= {{^{*}}\mathbf{\bar{t}}}$ in \[LT2\], the resulting Lagrangian $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{{^{*}}\mathbf{\bar{t}}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^L})$ becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber
L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{{^{*}}\mathbf{\bar{t}}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^L}) &=
E^{{\text{CCSD}}}
\\
\nonumber
&+ \tfrac{1}{2} \bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} [ [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_1], \delta\hat{T}_1] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \\
\nonumber
&+ \sum_{j=1}^2 \sum_{\nu_j} { {^{*}}\bar{t}}_{\nu_j}
\bigg( \bra{\nu_j} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} },\delta\hat{T}_3] + \tfrac{1}{2} [ [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}], \delta\hat{T}] + \ldots \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \bigg) \\
\nonumber
&+ \sum_{j=1}^2 \sum_{\nu_j} {\delta \bar{t}^L}_{\nu_j}
\bigg( \bra{\nu_j} [{ \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}] + \tfrac{1}{2} [ [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}], \delta\hat{T}] + \ldots \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \bigg) \\
&+ \sum_{\nu_3} {\delta \bar{t}^L}_{\nu_3}
\bigg( \bra{\nu_3} { \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }+ [{ \hat{H}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}] + \tfrac{1}{2} [ [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}], \delta\hat{T}] + \ldots \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \bigg)
\label{LT5}\end{aligned}$$ where we have used the CCSD multiplier equations in \[CCSDmult\]. An expansion of $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{{^{*}}\mathbf{\bar{t}}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^L})$ in orders of the fluctuation potential defines the recently proposed ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series [@eriksen2014lagrangian]. The ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series begins at third order (see \[ECCSDTn\]), while the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series starts already at second order. The series are evidently different, and in \[sec:comparison\] we perform an explicit comparison of them.
Comparison of the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series {#sec:comparison}
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this section, we compare the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series—first, we discuss the origin of the difference between the series from a formal point of view, and next, we compare the two lowest-order multipliers and energy corrections for the two series.
As shown in \[sec:general\], both series can be derived from \[LT2\] with different choices of parent multipliers, resulting in the Lagrangians, $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{\mathbf{0}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^E})$ and $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{{^{*}}\mathbf{\bar{t}}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^L})$, for the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, respectively. The $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{\mathbf{0}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^E})$ Lagrangian reduces to the standard CCSDT energy expression, because no zeroth-order multipliers enter the Lagrangian and because the correction multipliers, $\delta {\bar{t}}$, are multiplied by the CCSDT amplitude equations (cf. \[LT3\] and \[LT4\]). However, the $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{{^{*}}\mathbf{\bar{t}}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^L})$ Lagrangian cannot be subject to a similar reduction, since certain terms in the CCSDT amplitude equations were cancelled when the CCSD multiplier equations were used to manipulate \[LT2\] to arrive at \[LT5\]. Consequently, the CCSD multipliers cannot be removed from \[LT5\], and $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{{^{*}}\mathbf{\bar{t}}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^L})$ can therefore not be reduced to the standard CCSDT energy expression.
In the same way as the CCSD amplitudes formally depend on the fluctuation potential to infinite order in the space of all single and double excitations, so do the CCSD multipliers (or CCSD $\Lambda$-state parameters). Thus, since the CCSD multipliers are not counted as zeroth-order parameters in the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series (unlike in the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series), orders are necessarily counted differently in the perturbative expansions of $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{{^{*}}\mathbf{\bar{t}}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^L})$ and $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{\mathbf{0}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^E})$; however, we may compare the two series by comparing their leading-order, next-to-leading-order, etc., corrections to one another, which we will do numerically in \[sec:results\].
On that note, we have theoretically compared the lowest- and next-to-lowest-order corrections of the two series in \[appendix\_comparison\]. In summary, we find that for the $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{{^{*}}\mathbf{\bar{t}}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^L})$ Lagrangian, a good zeroth-order description of the CCSDT $\Lambda$-state in the space of all single and double excitations is used (the CCSD $\Lambda$-state), and the lowest-order multiplier correction therefore occurs in the triples space (cf. \[CCSDmult\_order\_exp\_3\_1\]). For the $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{\mathbf{0}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^E})$ Lagrangian, on the other hand, there is no representation of the CCSDT $\Lambda$-state at zeroth order, and the leading-order contributions to this state (in the form of the first-order multipliers, ${\delta \bar{t}^{E(1)}}_{\mu_i}$) hence occur within the singles and doubles space, while triples multipliers first enter the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series at the following (second) order (cf. \[CCSDmult\_order\_exp\_2\]). In fact, we find that the first- and second-order singles and doubles multipliers, $\{ {\delta \bar{t}^{E(1)}}_{\mu_i}, {\delta \bar{t}^{E(2)}}_{\mu_i} \}$ for $i=1,2$, are nothing but the two lowest-order contributions to the CCSD $\Lambda$-state parameters, if the CCSD multiplier equations in \[CCSDmult\] are solved perturbatively (cf. \[tbs\_pert\_expansion\]). Furthermore, the lowest-order ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ energy corrections are found to have the same structural form, however, they are expressed in terms of different sets of multipliers (cf. \[E3alt\_plus\_E4alt\_app\] and \[L2alt\_plus\_L3alt\_app\]). Thus, the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series may be viewed as attempting to compensate for the poor (non-existing) guess at the CCSDT $\Lambda$-state by mimicking the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series as closely as possible within a perturbational framework. For both series, a perturbative solution of the CCSDT $\Lambda$-state is embedded into the energy corrections, and the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series is thus trailing behind the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series from the onset of the perturbation expansion. Again, this motivates the claim that it is advantageous to consider the CC energy as the stationary point of an energy functional in both the CC and $\Lambda$-state parameters, and hence that perturbative expansions are optimally carried out whenever the two states are treated on an equal footing [@arponen_ann_phys_1983; @arponen_pra_1987; @kvaal_jcp_2012; @kvaal_mol_phys_2013]. For higher orders in the perturbation, a direct comparison of the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series is more intricate, but we note that they will differ to all orders. Only in the infinite-order limit are the two bound to agree ($L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{\mathbf{0}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^E})$ and $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{{^{*}}\mathbf{\bar{t}}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^L})$ both equal the CCSDT energy), but this is a natural consequence of the fact that the CC energy may be described in terms of fully converged CC amplitudes alone.\
In conclusion, the $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{\mathbf{0}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^E})$ and $L^{{\text{CCSDT}}}({{^{*}}\mathbf{t}},{{^{*}}\mathbf{\bar{t}}},{\delta\mathbf{t}},{\delta\mathbf{\bar{t}}^L})$ Lagrangians have the same parent energy (CCSD) and the same target energy (CCSDT), and all contributions of both series will be trivially term-wise size extensive to all orders, as they are all expressed in terms of (linked) commutator expressions. However, the paths between these two CC energies, as defined by a perturbation expansion, are obviously very different for the two series. Conceptually, the expansion point for the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series is formally the [*CCSD energy*]{} (only the CCSD amplitude equations are satisfied), while the expansion point for the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series is the [*CCSD Lagrangian*]{} (the CCSD amplitude [*and*]{} CCSD multiplier equations are satisfied). For the energy-based ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, the Lagrangian is thus merely a mathematical tool that allows for correction energies to be obtained using amplitude and multiplier corrections that satisfy the $2n+1$ and $2n+2$ rules. On the contrary, the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series is deeply rooted within a bivariational Lagrangian formulation and has no energy-based analogue.
Numerical results {#sec:results}
=================
The performance of the models of the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series has recently been theoretically as well as numerically compared to a variety of alternative triples models for two sets of closed-shell [@eriksen2015convergence] and open-shell species [@open_shell_triples_eriksen_2015; @open_shell_quadruples_eriksen_2016], and the formal convergence of the series (through sixth order in the perturbation) has been confirmed. Furthermore, the performance of the higher-order ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ models with respect to the target CCSDT model was found to be essentially independent of the HF reference used, and thus, independent of the spin of the ground state. In this section, we assess the numerical performance of the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ models (once again measured against results obtained with the target CCSDT model) in order to compare the rate of convergence throughout the series to that of the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series.
We here use the two test sets previously used in Refs. , , , and : $\textbf{(i)}$ 17 closed-shell molecules, all optimized at the all-electron CCSD(T)/cc-pCVQZ level of theory, and $\textbf{(ii)}$ 18 open-shell atoms and radicals, all optimized at the all-electron CCSD(T)/cc-pVQZ level of theory. For a specification of the members of the closed- and open-shell test sets as well as tabularized molecular geometries, cf. Refs. and the papers describing the HEAT thermochemical model [@tajti2004heat; @bomble2006high; @harding2008high], respectively. All of the closed-shell calculations are based on a restricted HF (RHF) reference, while unrestricted HF (UHF) as well as restricted open-shell HF (ROHF) trial functions have been used for the open-shell calculations. The correlation-consistent cc-pVTZ basis set [@dunning_1] is used throughout for all of the reported valence-electron (frozen-core) results, and the Aquarius program [@aquarius] has been used for all of the calculations.
In \[e\_t\_n\_figure\], we consider the performance of the five lowest-order models of the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ hierarchies. Mean recoveries (in $\%$) of the triples correlation energy, $E^{\text{T}} = E^{{\text{CCSDT}}} - E^{{\text{CCSD}}}$, are presented in \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_rhf\_figure\], \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_uhf\_figure\], and \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_rohf\_figure\], while mean deviations from $E^{\text{T}}$ (in kcal/mol) are presented in \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_rhf\_figure\], \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_uhf\_figure\], and \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_rohf\_figure\]. In all cases, we report statistical error measures generated from the individual results, cf. the supplementary material . As noted in \[sec:comparison\], the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series start at third and second order, respectively, but we may group these together like ${\text{E-CCSD(T--3)}}$/${\text{CCSD(T--2)}}$, ${\text{E-CCSD(T--4)}}$/${\text{CCSD(T--3)}}$, etc.
The results in \[e\_t\_n\_figure\] show that the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ models in general yield smaller mean and standard errors than their ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ counterparts, and the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series furthermore exhibits a more stable convergence than the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series. In other words, the rate of convergence is improved in the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series over the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series. For most of the considered molecules, the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ corrections are negative/positive for uneven/even orders, which leads to the oscillatory convergence behavior observed for the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series in \[e\_t\_n\_figure\]. Some oscillatory behavior is also observed for the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, but this is much less prominent, and primarily observed beyond fourth order. The superior stability of the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series compared to the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series is also manifested in the smaller standard deviations for the former (in \[e\_t\_n\_figure\] represented in terms of standard errors of the mean). Some of the molecules, however, differ considerably from the mean trends in \[e\_t\_n\_figure\]. For example, methylene (CH$_2$) and ozone (O$_3$) are notoriously difficult cases due to significant multireference character[@mest; @eriksen2015convergence], and, for both, we observe a rather slow convergence throughout either of the series. While for O$_3$, the convergence towards the CCSDT limit is oscillatory, for CH$_2$, the convergence is stabile, yet slow, cf. Table S4 of the supplementary material for the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ results. Similar, but significantly less pronounced problems, are observed for the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series [@open_shell_triples_eriksen_2015]. Finally, we note how the results obtained using the two open-shell references (UHF and ROHF) are similar, and also that the general behavior for the mean deviations are similar to the RHF results.
[0.47]{} ![Mean recoveries of (in $\%$, \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_rhf\_figure\], \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_uhf\_figure\], and \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_rohf\_figure\]) and mean deviations from (in kcal/mol, \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_rhf\_figure\], \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_uhf\_figure\], and \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_rohf\_figure\]) the triples energy $E^{\text{T}}$ for the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series using RHF, UHF, and ROHF references. The error bars show the standard error of the mean. []{data-label="e_t_n_figure"}](figure1a.pdf "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
[0.47]{} ![Mean recoveries of (in $\%$, \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_rhf\_figure\], \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_uhf\_figure\], and \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_rohf\_figure\]) and mean deviations from (in kcal/mol, \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_rhf\_figure\], \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_uhf\_figure\], and \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_rohf\_figure\]) the triples energy $E^{\text{T}}$ for the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series using RHF, UHF, and ROHF references. The error bars show the standard error of the mean. []{data-label="e_t_n_figure"}](figure1b.pdf "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
[0.47]{} ![Mean recoveries of (in $\%$, \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_rhf\_figure\], \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_uhf\_figure\], and \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_rohf\_figure\]) and mean deviations from (in kcal/mol, \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_rhf\_figure\], \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_uhf\_figure\], and \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_rohf\_figure\]) the triples energy $E^{\text{T}}$ for the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series using RHF, UHF, and ROHF references. The error bars show the standard error of the mean. []{data-label="e_t_n_figure"}](figure1c.pdf "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
[0.47]{} ![Mean recoveries of (in $\%$, \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_rhf\_figure\], \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_uhf\_figure\], and \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_rohf\_figure\]) and mean deviations from (in kcal/mol, \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_rhf\_figure\], \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_uhf\_figure\], and \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_rohf\_figure\]) the triples energy $E^{\text{T}}$ for the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series using RHF, UHF, and ROHF references. The error bars show the standard error of the mean. []{data-label="e_t_n_figure"}](figure1d.pdf "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
[0.47]{} ![Mean recoveries of (in $\%$, \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_rhf\_figure\], \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_uhf\_figure\], and \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_rohf\_figure\]) and mean deviations from (in kcal/mol, \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_rhf\_figure\], \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_uhf\_figure\], and \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_rohf\_figure\]) the triples energy $E^{\text{T}}$ for the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series using RHF, UHF, and ROHF references. The error bars show the standard error of the mean. []{data-label="e_t_n_figure"}](figure1e.pdf "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
[0.47]{} ![Mean recoveries of (in $\%$, \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_rhf\_figure\], \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_uhf\_figure\], and \[e\_t\_n\_recoveries\_rohf\_figure\]) and mean deviations from (in kcal/mol, \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_rhf\_figure\], \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_uhf\_figure\], and \[e\_t\_n\_abs\_diff\_rohf\_figure\]) the triples energy $E^{\text{T}}$ for the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series using RHF, UHF, and ROHF references. The error bars show the standard error of the mean. []{data-label="e_t_n_figure"}](figure1f.pdf "fig:"){width="\textwidth"}
From an application point of view, the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series is practically converged onto the CCSDT limit at the ${\text{CCSD(T--4)}}$ model (robust for closed- and open-shell systems), while two additional corrections (two additional orders in the perturbation) are needed in the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series in order to match these results (the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--7)}}$ model). However, even for the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--7)}}$ model, the standard deviations (for both recoveries and deviations) are larger than for the ${\text{CCSD(T--4)}}$ model. If results more accurate than those provided by the ${\text{CCSD(T--4)}}$/${\text{E-CCSD(T--7)}}$ models are desired, it is in general necessary to also account for the effects of quadruple excitations, as the quadruples energy contribution may easily exceed the difference between the CCSDT and ${\text{CCSD(T--4)}}$ energies. In such cases, the recently proposed CCSDT(Q–$n$) models [@eriksen2014lagrangian; @quadruples_pert_theory_jcp_2015] may offer attractive alternatives to the iterative CCSDTQ model. These models are theoretically on par with the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ models, but expand the CCSDTQ–CCSDT energy difference, rather than the CCSDT–CCSD difference, in orders of the MP fluctuation potential.
In conclusion, a number of similarities exist between the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, but both the magnitude of the (individual) errors as well as the oscillatory convergence pattern are significantly reduced in the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, as compared to the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series. This improvement is in line with the theoretical analysis in \[sec:comparison\]. More information about the expansion point is used in the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, where the CCSD amplitudes and CCSD multipliers are both built into the perturbative corrections, to yield a faster and more balanced rate of convergence than that observed for the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, in which only the CCSD amplitudes are used to construct the energy corrections. Based on the results for the five lowest-order models in \[e\_t\_n\_figure\], the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series both appear to converge for all of the considered molecules, although slowly for some of the notoriously difficult cases. However, a formal convergence analysis is required to firmly establish whether the series indeed converge (i.e., establish the radius of convergence for the series). This will be the subject of a forthcoming paper.
Conclusion and perspectives {#sec:conclusion}
===========================
We have developed the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ perturbation series and compared it to the recently proposed ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series in order to gain new insights into the importance of treating amplitudes and multipliers (parameters of the $\Lambda$-state) on an equal footing whenever perturbation expansions are developed within CC theory. Both series represent a perturbation expansion of the difference between the CCSD and CCSDT energies, and they share the same common set of correction amplitudes. The ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series formally describes an expansion around the CCSD energy point (CCSD amplitude equations are satisfied), while the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series may be viewed as an expansion around the CCSD Lagrangian point (CCSD amplitude equations [*and*]{} CCSD multiplier equations are satisfied). The two series are therefore different, and the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series is found to converge more rapidly towards the CCSDT target energy, since all available information at the CCSD expansion point is utilized.
The presented analysis may be generalized to any perturbation expansion representing the difference between a parent CC model and a higher-level target CC model. For developments of CC perturbation expansions, we thus generally advocate the use a bivariational Lagrangian CC formulation to ensure an optimal rate of convergence in terms of term-wise size extensive corrections towards the target energy. For example, two perturbation series formulated around the CCSDT energy (E-CCSDT(Q–$n$)) and CCSDT Lagrangian (CCSDT(Q–$n$)) expansion points, respectively, to describe an expansion towards the CCSDTQ target energy in order the M[ø]{}ller-Plesset fluctuation potential, are also bound to exhibit different rates of convergence, following a similar line of arguments.\
In quantum chemistry, a Lagrangian energy functional has traditionally been viewed merely as a convenient mathematical tool for deriving perturbative expansions, however, one that would give rise to expansions that are identical to those based on the standard energy. The present work highlights how this equivalence between energy- and Lagrangian-based perturbation theory only holds whenever the zeroth-order parameters do not depend on the perturbing operator, as is, for example, the case for standard MP perturbation theory where the zeroth-order parameters vanish. Thus, when the zeroth-order parameters are independent of the perturbing operator, a Lagrangian formulation is merely of mathematical convenience, but, for perturbation-dependent zeroth-order parameters (e.g., like those of the right- (CC) and left-hand ($\Lambda$) eigenstates of a non-Hermitian CC similarity-transformed Hamiltonian), a bivariational Lagrangian formulation is in general expected to lead to a faster and more stable convergence than a corresponding energy formulation. This is an important point to keep in mind for future developments and applications involving perturbation expansions.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
K. K., J. J. E., and P. J. acknowledge support from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007-2013)/ERC Grant Agreement No. 291371. J. O. acknowledges support from the Danish Council for Independent Research, DFF-4181-00537, and D. A. M. acknowledges support from the US National Science Foundation (NSF) under grant number ACI-1148125/1340293.
Explicit lowest-order ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ correction energies {#appendix_comparison}
===============================================================================================
In the present appendix, we compare the lowest- and next-to-lowest-order corrections of the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ and ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series. For this, we need a closed-form expression for the CCSDT multipliers (i.e., the CCSDT $\Lambda$-state parameters), which, from \[generalmulteq\], reads $$\begin{aligned}
\label{CCSDT_mult_explicit}
\bar{t}_{\mu_i} = -\epsilon^{-1}_{\mu_i}\big(\bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} [ \Phi^{\hat{T}}, \hat{\tau}_{\mu_i} ] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} + \sum_{j=1}^3 \sum_{\nu_j} \bar{t}_{\nu_j}\bra{\nu_j} [ \Phi^{\hat{T}}, \hat{\tau}_{\mu_i} ] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }}\big)\end{aligned}$$ where we will again partition the CCSDT cluster operator, $\hat{T}$, as $\hat{T} = {^{\ast}}\hat{T} + \delta\hat{T}$. \[CCSDT\_mult\_explicit\] may now be expanded in orders of the fluctuation potential (cf. \[multpara\]) $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{\textbf{t}} = \bar{\textbf{t}}^{(0)} + \delta\bar{\textbf{t}}^{(1)} + \delta\bar{\textbf{t}}^{(2)} + \ldots \label{CCSDT_mult_order_exp_1}\end{aligned}$$ If $\bar{\textbf{t}}^{(0)} = \bm{0}$, the multiplier corrections in \[CCSDT\_mult\_order\_exp\_1\] will be those belonging to the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series, and the two lowest-order corrections are given by
\[CCSDmult\_order\_exp\_2\] $$\begin{aligned}
{\delta \bar{t}^{E(1)}}_{\mu_i} &= -\epsilon^{-1}_{\mu_i}\bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} [ { \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \hat{\tau}_{\mu_i} ] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \label{CCSDmult_order_exp_2_1} \\
{\delta \bar{t}^{E(2)}}_{\mu_i} &= -\epsilon^{-1}_{\mu_i}\sum_{j=1}^2 \sum_{\nu_j} {\delta \bar{t}^{E(1)}}_{\nu_j}\bra{\nu_j} [ { \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \hat{\tau}_{\mu_i} ] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \ . \label{CCSDmult_order_exp_2_2}\end{aligned}$$
It follows that the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series has non-vanishing first-order multipliers only in the singles and doubles space (${\delta \bar{t}^{E(1)}}_{\mu_3}=0$), and second-order multipliers for all excitation levels ($i=1,2,3$).
Using \[ECCSDTn\], the two leading-order corrections of the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series may be evaluated using the $n+1$ rule for the amplitudes
\[E3alt\_E4alt\_app\_n\_1\] $$\begin{aligned}
E^{(3)} &= \sum^2_{j=1} \bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_j^{(2)}] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \label{E3alt_app_n_1} \\
E^{(4)} &= \sum^2_{j=1} \bra{{ \mathrm{HF} }} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_j^{(3)}] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \ .
\label{E4alt_app_n_1}
$$
Alternatively, using the Lagrangian in \[LT3\] and the $2n+1$/$2n+2$ rules[@helgaker_jorgensen_1988; @helgaker_jorgensen_1989; @kasper_wigner_rules] for the amplitudes/multipliers, $E^{(3)}$ and $E^{(4)}$ may be written as
\[E3alt\_E4alt\_app\_2n\_1\] $$\begin{aligned}
E^{(3)} &= \sum_{i=1}^2 \sum_{\mu_i} {\delta \bar{t}^{E(1)}}_{\mu_i}\bra{\mu_i} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_3^{(1)}] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \label{E3alt_app_2n_1} \\
E^{(4)} &= \sum^3_{k=1} \big\{\sum_{i=1}^2 \sum_{\mu_i} {\delta \bar{t}^{E(1)}}_{\mu_i}\bra{\mu_i} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_k^{(2)}] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \big\} \ . \label{E4alt_app_2n_1}
$$
The expressions in \[E3alt\_E4alt\_app\_n\_1\] and \[E3alt\_E4alt\_app\_2n\_1\] are of course equivalent as may be verified by explicit comparison. Finally, the $E^{(4)}$ energy in \[E4alt\_app\_2n\_1\] may be further recast by expanding the second-order correction amplitudes, $\delta\textbf{t}^{(2)}$, given in \[amp\_pert\_expand\] $$\begin{aligned}
E^{(4)} &= -\sum^3_{k=1}\sum_{\nu_k}\big\{\epsilon^{-1}_{\nu_k}\sum_{i=1}^2 \sum_{\mu_i} {\delta \bar{t}^{E(1)}}_{\mu_i}\bra{\mu_i} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \hat{\tau}_{\nu_k}] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \bra{\nu_k} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} },\delta\hat{T}^{(1)}_{3}] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \big\} \nonumber \\
&= \sum_{k=1}^3 \sum_{\nu_k} {\delta \bar{t}^{E(2)}}_{\nu_k}\bra{\nu_k} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_3^{(1)}] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \ . \label{E4alt_app_final}\end{aligned}$$ By taking the sum of the third- and fourth-order ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ energies in \[E3alt\_app\_n\_1\] and \[E4alt\_app\_final\], respectively, we can write $$\begin{aligned}
E^{(3)} + E^{(4)} &= \sum_{i=1}^2 \sum_{\mu_i} \big({\delta \bar{t}^{E(1)}}_{\mu_i} + {\delta \bar{t}^{E(2)}}_{\mu_i} \big)\bra{\mu_i} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_3^{(1)}] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \nonumber \\
&\phantom{=} \ + \sum_{\mu_3}{\delta \bar{t}^{E(2)}}_{\mu_3} \bra{\mu_3} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_3^{(1)}] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \ .\label{E3alt_plus_E4alt_app}\end{aligned}$$ To evaluate the two lowest-order energy corrections of the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series ($\bar{\textbf{t}}^{(0)} = {{^{*}}\mathbf{\bar{t}}}$), we only need to consider the first-order multipliers, which read[@eriksen2014lagrangian]
\[CCSDmult\_order\_exp\_3\_1\] $$\begin{aligned}
{\delta \bar{t}^{L(1)}}_{\mu_1} &= {\delta \bar{t}^{L(1)}}_{\mu_2} = 0 \\
{\delta \bar{t}^{L(1)}}_{\mu_3} &= -\epsilon^{-1}_{\mu_3}\sum^2_{j=1}{^{\ast}}\bar{t}_{\nu_j}\bra{\nu_j} [ { \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \hat{\tau}_{\mu_3} ] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \ . \label{CCSDmult_order_exp_3_1trip}\end{aligned}$$
By applying the $2n+1$/$2n+2$ rules to \[LT5\], the two leading corrections of the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series are given as $$\begin{aligned}
L^{(2)} = \sum_{i=1}^2 \sum_{\mu_i} { {^{*}}\bar{t}}_{\mu_i} \bra{\mu_i} [ { \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_3^{(1)} ] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \label{L2alt_app}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
L^{(3)} = \sum_{\mu_3} {\delta \bar{t}^{L(1)}}_{\mu_3}\bra{\mu_3} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_3^{(1)}] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \label{L3alt_app}\end{aligned}$$ the sum of which becomes $$\begin{aligned}
L^{(2)} + L^{(3)} &= \sum_{i=1}^2 \sum_{\mu_i} { {^{*}}\bar{t}}_{\mu_i} \bra{\mu_i} [ { \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_3^{(1)} ] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \nonumber \\
&\phantom{=} \ + \sum_{\mu_3} {\delta \bar{t}^{L(1)}}_{\mu_3}\bra{\mu_3} [{ \hat{\Phi}^{{ {^{*}}\hat{T}}} }, \delta\hat{T}_3^{(1)}] \ket{{ \mathrm{HF} }} \ . \label{L2alt_plus_L3alt_app}\end{aligned}$$ We may now compare the energy sums in \[E3alt\_plus\_E4alt\_app\] and \[L2alt\_plus\_L3alt\_app\]. Since the two leading-order multiplier corrections of the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series are independent of the triple excitations in the CCSDT ansatz, these will equal the two lowest-order contributions to the CCSD $\Lambda$-state parameters, i.e. $$\label{tbs_pert_expansion}
{ {^{*}}\bar{t}}_{\mu_i} = {\delta \bar{t}^{E(1)}}_{\mu_i} + {\delta \bar{t}^{E(2)}}_{\mu_i} + \mathcal{O}(3)
\qquad (i=1,2)$$ where $\mathcal{O}(3)$ denotes terms of third and higher orders in the fluctuation potential. For this reason, the first term on the right-hand side of \[E3alt\_plus\_E4alt\_app\] may be viewed as mimicking the first term on the right-hand side of \[L2alt\_plus\_L3alt\_app\], and the same applies for the second term on the right-hand side of the two equations, by noticing that the $\bar{\textbf{t}}^{E(2)}_3$ multipliers of \[CCSDmult\_order\_exp\_2\_2\] are similar to the $\bar{\textbf{t}}^{L(1)}_3$ multipliers of \[CCSDmult\_order\_exp\_3\_1trip\], with the notable exception that $\bar{\textbf{t}}^{E(1)} \rightarrow {^{\ast}}\bar{\textbf{t}}$ in moving from the ${\text{E-CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ to the ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ series.
@ifundefined
[38]{}
ek, J. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **1966**, *45*, 4256ek, J. *[A]{}dv.. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **1969**, *14*, 15 Paldus, J.; [Č]{}[í]{}[č]{}ek, J.; Shavitt, I. *[P]{}hys. [R]{}ev. [A]{}* **1972**, *5*, 50 Shavitt, I.; Bartlett, R. J. *[M]{}any–[B]{}ody [M]{}ethods in [C]{}hemistry and [P]{}hysics: [M]{}any–[B]{}ody [P]{}erturbation [T]{}heory and [C]{}oupled–[C]{}luster [T]{}heory*; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2009 Purvis, G. D.; Bartlett, R. J. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **1982**, *76*, 1910 Helgaker, T.; J[ø]{}rgensen, P.; Olsen, J. *[M]{}olecular [E]{}lectronic–[S]{}tructure [T]{}heory*, 1st ed.; Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: West Sussex, England, 2000 Noga, J.; Bartlett, R. J. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **1987**, *86*, 7041 Scuseria, G. E.; Schaefer, H. F. *[C]{}hem. [P]{}hys. [L]{}ett.* **1988**, *152*, 382 Oliphant, N.; Adamowicz, L. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **1991**, *95*, 6645 Kucharski, S. A.; Bartlett, R. J. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **1992**, *97*, 4282 Eriksen, J. J.; Kristensen, K.; Kj[æ]{}rgaard, T.; J[ø]{}rgensen, P.; Gauss, J. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **2014**, *140*, 064108 Eriksen, J. J.; J[ø]{}rgensen, P.; Gauss, J. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **2015**, *142*, 014102 Eriksen, J. J.; Matthews, D. A.; J[ø]{}rgensen, P.; Gauss, J. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **2015**, *143*, 041101 Møller, C.; Plesset, M. S. *Phys. Rev.* **1934**, *46*, 618–622 Handy, N. C.; Schaefer, H. F. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **1984**, *81*, 5031 Scheiner, A. C.; Scuseria, G. E.; Rice, J. E.; Lee, T. J.; Schaefer, H. F. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **1987**, *87*, 5361 Arponen, J. *[A]{}nn. [P]{}hys.* **1983**, *151*, 311 Arponen, J.; Bishop, R.; Pajanne, E. *[P]{}hys. [R]{}ev. [A]{}* **1987**, *36*, 2519 Helgaker, T.; J[ø]{}rgensen, P. *[A]{}dv. [Q]{}uantum [C]{}hem.* **1988**, *19*, 183 Kvaal, S. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **2012**, *136*, 194109 Kvaal, S. *[M]{}ol. [P]{}hys.* **2013**, *111*, 1100 Gwaltney, S. R.; Head-Gordon, M. *[C]{}hem. [P]{}hys. [L]{}ett.* **2000**, *323*, 21 Gwaltney, S. R.; Head-Gordon, M. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **2001**, *115*, 2014 Hirata, S.; Nooijen, M.; Grabowski, I.; Bartlett, R. J. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **2001**, *114*, 3919 Hirata, S.; Fan, P.-D.; Auer, A. A.; Nooijen, M.; Piecuch, P. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **2004**, *121*, 12197 Shiozaki, T.; Hirao, K.; Hirata, S. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **2007**, *126*, 244106 Eriksen, J. J.; J[ø]{}rgensen, P.; Olsen, J.; Gauss, J. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **2014**, *140*, 174114,; [T. Helgaker]{}, *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **1988**, *89*, 1560 Helgaker, T.; J[ø]{}rgensen, P. *[T]{}heor. [C]{}him. [A]{}cta* **1989**, *75*, 111 Kristensen, K.; J[ø]{}rgensen, P.; Thorvaldsen, A. J.; Helgaker, T. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **2008**, *129*, 214103 Eriksen, J. J.; Matthews, D. A.; J[ø]{}rgensen, P.; Gauss, J. *arXiv:1512.02846* **2015** Eriksen, J. J.; Matthews, D. A.; J[ø]{}rgensen, P.; Gauss, J. *arXiv:1601.06379* **2016** Tajti, A.; Szalay, P. G.; Cs[á]{}sz[á]{}r, A. G.; K[á]{}llay, M.; Gauss, J.; Valeev, E. F.; Flowers, B. A.; V[á]{}zquez, J.; Stanton, J. F. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **2004**, *121*, 11599 Bomble, Y. J.; V[á]{}zquez, J.; K[á]{}llay, M.; Michauk, C.; Szalay, P. G.; Cs[á]{}sz[á]{}r, A. G.; Gauss, J.; Stanton, J. F. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **2006**, *125*, 064108 Harding, M. E.; V[á]{}zquez, J.; Ruscic, B.; Wilson, A. K.; Gauss, J.; Stanton, J. F. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **2008**, *128*, 114111 Dunning Jr., T. H. *[J]{}. [C]{}hem. [P]{}hys.* **1989**, *90*, 1007 Solomonik, E.; Matthews, D.; Hammond, J. R.; Stanton, J. F.; Demmel, J. J. *[J]{}. [J]{}. [P]{}arallel [D]{}istrib.* **2014**, *74*, 3176 See supplementary material at \[AIP URL\] for individual recoveries and deviations. Individual ${\text{CCSD(T--$n$)}}$ results are given in Ref. .
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In this paper we extend the notion of Melham sum to the Pell and Pell-Lucas sequences. While the proofs of general statements rely on the binomial theorem, we prove some spacial cases by the known Pell identities. We also give extensions of obtained expressions to the other recursive sequences.'
---
**On Polynomial Identities for Recursive Sequences**
Ivica Martinjak and Iva Vrsaljko\
Faculty of Science\
University of Zagreb\
Bijenička cesta 32, HR-10000 Zagreb\
Croatia\
[**Keywords:**]{} recursive sequence, Pell equation, polynomial identity, Melham sum\
[**AMS Mathematical Subject Classifications:**]{} 11B39, 11B37
Introduction
============
The Pell sequence $(P_n )_{n \ge 0}$ and the Pell-Lucas sequence $(Q_n )_{n \ge 0}$ are defined as the second order recurrences, $$\begin{aligned}
&P_{n+2}=2P_{n+1}+P_{n},& P_0=0, \enspace P_1=1\\
&Q_{n+2}=2Q_{n+1}+Q_{n},& Q_0=2, \enspace Q_1=2.\end{aligned}$$ Equivalently, these sequences can be defined as the solutions of Diophantine equations $$x^2-dy^2= \pm 1$$ for $d=2$. More precisely, the pairs $(Q_n/2, P_n)$ are all solutions of these equations. The $n$-th term of the Pell sequence can also be expressed by the closed form equation. The Pell-Lucas sequence is sometimes called [*companion Pell sequence*]{} and there is also similar closed form for this sequence. We let $\gamma$ denote the silver ratio, $\gamma:=1+\sqrt{2}$ and we set $\delta:=1-\sqrt{2}$. Then the closed formula for Pell sequence can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{BinetForPell}
P_n&=& \frac{\gamma^n - \delta^n}{\gamma-\delta} \end{aligned}$$ while for the companion Pell numbers we have $Q_n= {\gamma^n - \delta^n} $. There are many known properties and identities for these sequences [@Bravo; @Duje; @Wloch]. This includes several identities encountering both of the sequences, $$\begin{aligned}
Q_n=P_{n-1}+ P_{n+1}\end{aligned}$$ being the basic one. Recall that the Cassini identity [@WeZe] for Pell numbers has form $$\begin{aligned}
\label{CassiniId}
P_{n-1}P_{n+1}- P_n^2 = (-1)^n.\end{aligned}$$ An elegant proof include the fact that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Pellmatriceprop}
\begin{pmatrix}
0 &1\\
1 &2
\end{pmatrix}^ n =
\begin{pmatrix}
P_{n-1} & P_n\\
P_n & P_{n+1}
\end{pmatrix},
\end{aligned}$$ which can be proved by induction. When applying the Cauchy-Binet theorem for determinants, the statement follows immediately. We will also use relation $$\begin{aligned}
\label{MplusNid}
P_{m+n} = P_{m-1}P_n + P_mP_{n+1},\end{aligned}$$ for the purpose to prove some polynomial identities for Pell numbers. Identity (\[MplusNid\]) can be proved by induction.
In what follows, firstly we prove that $(2m+1)n$-th Pell number is represented as a polynomial in $P_n$. Then we extend the notion of Melham sum [@Ulat] to the Pell and Pell-Lucas sequences and find related expansions into the power series of $P_n$, where exponents are odd. Finally, we give extensions of the obtained identities for a certain, more general, class of recursive sequences.
The ${(2m+1)n}$-th Pell number as a polynomial in $P_n$
=======================================================
For the Pell sequence $( P_n )_{n \ge 0}$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{idPoli3n}
i) & P_{3n} =& 8P_n^3 + 3 (-1)^n P_n\\
ii) & P_{5n} =& 64P_n^5 + 40(-1)^nP_n^3 +5P_n. \label{idPoli5n}\end{aligned}$$
According to relations (\[CassiniId\]) and (\[MplusNid\]) we get $$\begin{aligned}
P_{3n} &=& P_{2n+n} = P_{2n-1}P_n+P_{2n}P_{n+1}\\
&=& P_{n-1}^2P_n+P_n^3 + (P_n-1P_n + P_nP_{n+1})(2P_n + P_{n-1})\\
&=& P_n(P_{n-1}^2 + 2P_nP_{n-1} + P_n^2 + 2P_nP_{n+1} + P_{n-1}^2 + P_n^2 + (-1)^n )\\
&=& P_n(3P_n^2 + 2(-1)^2 + 2 P_nP_{n+1} + P_{n-1}^2)\\
&=& P_n(3P_n^2 + 2(-1)^2 + 4P_n^2 + P_{n-1}(2P_n+P_{n-1}) )\\
&=& P_n(8P_n^2 + 3(-1)^n).\end{aligned}$$ Application of the same relations also proves identities for $P_{5n}$.
Furthermore, for the next instance when $n$ is odd we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{idPoli7n}
P_{7n}= 512{P_n}^7-448{P_n}^5+112{P_n}^3-7P_n\end{aligned}$$ while all coefficients are positive when $n$ is even.
\[Jennings\] For the Pell sequence $( P_n )_{n \ge 0}$ $$\begin{aligned}
\label{JenningsRelation}
P_{(2m+1)n} = \sum_{i=0}^m (-1)^{n(m+i)} 2^{3i} \frac{2m+1}{2i+1} \binom{m+i}{2i} P_{n}^{2i+1}.\end{aligned}$$
We use equalities (\[JenningsLemma1\]) and (\[JenningsLemma2\]), which are results of D. Jennings available in [@Jenn] and which can be proved by induction.
$$\begin{aligned}
\begin{aligned} \label{JenningsLemma1}
\bigg(x^{2m} + \frac{1}{x^{2m}} \bigg) + \bigg(x^{2m-2} + \frac{1}{x^{2m-2}} \bigg)+ \cdots + \bigg(x^{2} + \frac{1}{x^{2}}\bigg) + 1\\
=\sum_{i=0}^m \frac{2m+1}{m+i+1} \binom{m+i+1}{2i+1} \bigg ( x - \frac{1}{x} \bigg)^{2i}
\end{aligned}\end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
\begin{aligned} \label{JenningsLemma2}
\bigg(x^{2m} + \frac{1}{x^{2m}} \bigg) - \bigg(x^{2m-2} + \frac{1}{x^{2m-2}} \bigg)+ \cdots + (-1)^{m+1} \bigg(x^{2} + \frac{1}{x^{2}}\bigg) + (-1)^m\\
=\sum_{i=0}^m (-1)^{m+i} \frac{2m+1}{m+i+1} \binom{m+i+1}{2i+1} \bigg ( x + \frac{1}{x} \bigg)^{2i}
\end{aligned}\end{aligned}$$
Having in mind Binet formula for the Pell numbers (\[BinetForPell\]) and the fact that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{gammaTimesDelta}
\gamma \cdot \delta &=& -1\\
\gamma - \delta&=& 2\sqrt{2} \label{gammaPlusDelta}\end{aligned}$$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ratioPpnPn}
\frac{P_{pn} }{P_n} = \frac{\gamma^{pn} - \delta^{pn} }{\gamma^{n}-\delta^n} = x^{p-1}+x^{p-2}y+ \cdots + xy^{p-2} + y^{p-1},\end{aligned}$$ where $x=\gamma^n$ and $y=\delta^{n}=\frac{(-1)^n}{x}$. When $p$ is odd, the r.h.s. of (\[ratioPpnPn\]) reduces to $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg(x^{p-1} + \frac{1}{x^{p-1}} \bigg) + (-1)^n \bigg(x^{p-1} + \frac{1}{x^{p-1}} \bigg) + \cdots + \bigg(x^{p-1} + \frac{1}{x^{p-1}} \bigg) + (-1)^n \label{caseA}\end{aligned}$$ when $p \equiv 3 \pmod {4}$ or to $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg(x^{p-1} + \frac{1}{x^{p-1}} \bigg) + (-1)^n \bigg(x^{p-1} + \frac{1}{x^{p-1}} \bigg) + \cdots + (-1)^n \bigg(x^{p-1} + \frac{1}{x^{p-1}} \bigg) + 1 \label{caseB}\end{aligned}$$ when $p \equiv 1 \pmod {4}$. Now, we have $$x + \frac{1}{x} = \gamma^n + \frac{1}{\gamma^n} = \gamma^n + (-1)^n \delta^n$$ which gives $$\begin{aligned}
x+ \frac{1}{x} &=& (\gamma - \delta) P_n, \enspace n \equiv 1 \pmod {2}\\
x- \frac{1}{x} &= &(\gamma - \delta) P_n, \enspace n \equiv 0 \pmod {2}\end{aligned}$$ and furthermore $$\begin{aligned}
\bigg( x+ \frac{1}{x} \bigg )^2 &=& 8 P_n^2, \enspace n \equiv 1 \pmod {2}\\
\bigg( x- \frac{1}{x} \bigg)^2 &= & 8 P_n^2, \enspace n \equiv 0 \pmod {2}\end{aligned}$$ Since we get expression (\[caseA\]) assuming that $p$ is odd we now substitute $p=2m+1$. Now, when $n$ is even we obtain all positive terms in (\[caseA\]) and then r.h.s. of (\[ratioPpnPn\]) is equal to the l.h.s. of equality (\[JenningsLemma1\]), $$\begin{aligned}
\label{JenningsRelationFinal}
P_{(2m+1)n} = \sum_{i=0}^m (-1)^{n(m+i)} 2^{3i} \frac{2m+1}{m+ i+1} \binom{m+i +1}{2i+1} P_{n}^{2i+1}.\end{aligned}$$ Analogue reasoning when $n$ is odd gives the same relation, thus (\[JenningsRelationFinal\]) holds true for any natural number $n$. Finally, a simple manipulation with (\[JenningsRelationFinal\]) leads to the final form of the theorem.
One can easily see that relations (\[idPoli3n\]), (\[idPoli5n\]) and (\[idPoli7n\]) appear from Theorem \[Jennings\] for $m=$1,2 and 3, respectively. When $m=4$ Theorem \[Jennings\] gives $$\begin{aligned}
\label{idPoli9n}
P_{9n}= 2^{12}{P_n}^9 -9 \cdot 2^9{P_n}^7 + 1728{P_n}^5 -240{P_n}^3 + 9P_n\end{aligned}$$ when $n$ is odd while all coefficients are positive otherwise. Note that the leading coefficient in (\[JenningsRelation\]) is always a power of 2, $2^{3m}$, while the absolute value of the coefficient in the term of the smallest degree is $2m+1$.
Melham sum for the Pell and Pell-Lucas sequence
===============================================
Twice the sum of the Pell numbers having even indexes from 2 to n is equal to the (2n+1)-st Pell number diminished by 1, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{MelhamTrivial}
1+ 2 \sum_{k=1}^n P_{2k}=P_{2n+1}.\end{aligned}$$
The statement follows immediately from defining properties of Pell sequence, $$\begin{aligned}
P_{2n+1}&=& 2P_{2n}+P_{2n-1}\\
&=&2P_{2n}+2P_{2n-2}+P_{2n-3}\\
&=&2P_{2n}+2P_{2n-2}+ \cdots + 2P_2+P_1.\end{aligned}$$
Note that relation (\[MelhamTrivial\]) can be seen as the expansion of the expression $Q_1 \sum_{k=1}^nP_{2k}$ into polynomial in $P_{2n+1}$, $$\begin{aligned}
Q_1 \sum_{k=1}^n P_{2k}=P_{2n+1} -1.\end{aligned}$$ In what follows we extend this idea to full generality. The expression $$Q_1Q_2 \cdots Q_{2m+1} \sum_{k=1}^n P_{2k}^{2m+1},$$ we shall call the [*Melham sum for Pell and Pell-Lucas sequences*]{}, because there is analogy with established term for Fibonacci and Lucas sequences. More on the Fibonacci sequence one can find in [@Vajda]. Introduction to Fibonacci polynomials one can find in [@GKP], and some recent development in [@ACMS].
\[MSlema1\] For the sequences $ (P_n)_{n \geq 0}$, $(Q_n)_{n \geq 0}$ and $m \in \mathbb{N}$ $$\begin{aligned}
Q_m\sum_{k=1}^nP_{2mk}=P_{m(2n+1)}-P_m. \end{aligned}$$
By relation (\[MplusNid\]) we have $$\begin{aligned}
P_{m+n}&=&(P_{m-n}-P_nP_{n-1}{(-1)}^n){(-1)}^{n+1}+P_mP_{n-1}\\
&=&P_{m-1}{(-1)}^{n+1}+P_mP_{n-1}+P_mP_{n+1}\\
&=&P_{m-1}{(-1)}^{n+1}+P_m(P_{n-1}+P_{n+1})\\
&=&P_mQ_n - (-1)^nP_{m-n}.\end{aligned}$$ Now we prove the statement of lemma by induction where this result is used in a step of induction. Thus, from the fact that the statement holds true for $n=1$ we have to derive equality $Q_n\sum_{k=1}^{n+1}P_{2mk}=P_{m(2n+3)}-P_m$. We have $$\begin{aligned}
Q_n\sum_{k=1}^{n+1}P_{2mk}&=&Q_n \Big (\sum_{k=1}^{n}P_{2mk}+P_{2m(n+1)} \Big) \\
&=&P_{m(2n+1)}-P_m+Q_nP_{2m(n+1)}\\
&=&P_{m(2n+1)}+QP_{2m(n+1)}-P_m\\
&=&P_{2m(n+1)+m}-P_m\\
&=&P_{m(2n+3)}-P_m,\end{aligned}$$ which completes the statement of lemma.
\[MSlema2\] For the sequences $ (P_n)_{n \geq 0}$, $(Q_n)_{n \geq 0}$ and $m \in \mathbb{N}$ $$\begin{aligned}
{P_n}^{2m+1}=\frac{1}{2^{3m}}\sum_{j=0}^m{(-1)}^{j(n+1)}\binom{2m+1}{j}P_{(2m+1-2j)n}.\end{aligned}$$
By means of binomial theorem and using (\[gammaTimesDelta\]) as well as (\[gammaPlusDelta\]) we have $$\begin{aligned}
{P_n}^{2m+1}&=&{\Big(\frac{\gamma^n-\delta^n}{\gamma-\delta}\Big)}^{2m+1}\\
&=&\frac{1}{{(\gamma-\delta)}^{2m+1}}\sum_{j=0}^{2m+1}{(-1)^{j+1}}\binom{2m+1}{j}\gamma^{jn}\delta^{(2m+1-j)n}\\
&=&\frac{1}{8^m(\gamma-\delta)}\sum_{j=0}^m{(-1)}^j\binom{2m+1}{j}(\gamma^{(2m+1-j)n}\delta^{jn}-\gamma^{jn}\delta^{(2m+1-j)n})\\
&=&\frac{1}{2^{3m}}\sum_{j=0}^m{(-1)}^j\binom{2m+1}{j}\gamma^{jn}\delta^{jn}(\frac{\gamma^{(2m+1-2j)n}-\delta^{(2m+1-2j)n}}{\gamma-\delta})\\
&=&\frac{1}{2^{3m}}\sum_{j=0}^m{(-1)}^{j(n+m)}P_{(2m+1-2j)n}\end{aligned}$$ which completes the statement of lemma.
\[MS1\] For $m \in \mathbb{N}$ and the sequences $(P_n)_{n \geq 0}$, $(Q_n)_{n \geq 0}$ $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{k=1}^n{P_{2k}}^{2m+1}=\frac{1}{2^{3m}}\sum_{j=0}^{m} \frac{ (-1)^j }{Q_{2m+1-2j}} \binom{2m+1}{j}(P_{(2m+1-2j)(2n+1)}-P_{2m+1-2j}). \label{MSum1}\end{aligned}$$
In Lemma \[MSlema2\] we substitute $n=2k$ and then sum both sides of equality from $k=1$ through $n$. It follows $$\begin{aligned}
{P_{2k}}^{2m+1}=\frac{1}{2^{3m}}\sum_{j=0}^m{(-1)}^{j}\binom{2m+1}{j}\sum_{k=1}^nP_{(2m+1-2j)2k}.\end{aligned}$$ When we substitute $\sum_{k=1}^nP_{(2m+1-2j)2k}$ by the expression in Lemma \[MSlema1\], the proof is completed.
\[Melham\] For $m \in \mathbb{N}$ and sequences $(P_n)_{n \geq 0}$, $(Q_n)_{n \geq 0}$ $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
\sum_{k=1}^n P_{2k}^{2m+1} = \sum_{i=0}^m P_{2n+1}^{2i+1} \sum_{j=0}^{m-i} \frac{ (-1)^{m+i} 2^{3(i-m)} (2m-2j+1) }{Q_{2m+1-2j} (2i+1) } \binom{2m+1}{j} \binom{m-j+i}{2i}\\ + \sum_{j=0}^m \frac{ (-1)^{j+1} P_{2m+1-2j} }{ 2^{3m} Q_{2m+1-2j} } \binom{2m+1}{j}. \label{MelhamId}
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$
When substitute $m$ with $m-j$ and $n$ with $2n+1$ in Theorem \[Jennings\] one get $$\begin{aligned}
P_{(2m+1-2j)(2n+1)}=\sum_{i=0}^{m-j} (-1)^{(2n+1)(m-j+i)} 2^{3i} \frac{2m-2j+1}{2i+1} \binom{m-j+i}{2i} P_{2n+1}^{2i+1}.\end{aligned}$$ We substitute this expression in Theorem \[MS1\] and the statement follows immediately.
Now we consider some particular cases of Theorem \[Melham\]. When $m=1$ we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{k=1}^n P_{2k}^3 = \frac{1}{14} \big ( P_{2n+1} ^3 - 3 P_{2n+1} +2 \big ).\end{aligned}$$ When multiply this relation with $Q_1Q_3$ we get polynomial identity for the Melham sum in case $m=1$ $$\begin{aligned}
Q_1Q_3 \sum_{k=1}^n P_{2k}^3 =2 P_{2n+1} ^3 - 6 P_{2n+1} +4.\end{aligned}$$ The next case, when $m=2$ gives $$\begin{aligned}
Q_1Q_3 Q_5 \sum_{k=1}^n P_{2k}^5 = 28 P_{2n+1} ^5 - 120 P_{2n+1}^ 3 + 220 P_{2n+1} -128.\end{aligned}$$
Further extensions
==================
Given $s,t \in \mathbb{N}$ and $n \in \mathbb{N}_0$ we define the second order recurrence with the relation $$\begin{aligned}
\label{secondOrderRec}
a_{n+2} = s a_{n-1} + t a_{n}\end{aligned}$$ and initial values $a_0$ and $a_1$. We say that a sequence $(a_n)_{n \ge 0}$ is a solution of (\[secondOrderRec\]) if its terms satisfies this recurrence. Here we consider a class of (\[secondOrderRec\]) defined by $t=1$ and initial terms $a_0 =0$, $a_1=1$. We let $(A_n)_{n \ge 0}$ denote the sequence defined by this class. It is worth mentioning that two notable representatives of this class are Fibonacci and Pell numbers.
\[2nplus1A\] For the sequence of numbers $(A_n)_{n \ge 0}$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
i) & A_{3n} =& (s^2 + 4) A_n^{3} + 3(-1)^{n} A_n\\
ii) & A_{5n} =& (s^2 + 4)^2 A_n^{5} + 5(s^2+4) (-1)^{n} A_n^{3} + 5A_n.\end{aligned}$$
By induction we prove that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{CassiniA}
A_{n-1} A_{n+1} - A^2 = (-1)^2\end{aligned}$$ and also $$\begin{aligned}
\label{MplusNA}
A_{m+n} = A_{m-1}A_n + A_{m}A_{n+1}.\end{aligned}$$
Now we employ (\[MplusNA\]) to get $$\begin{aligned}
A_{3n}&=& A_{2n+n} = A_{2n-1} A_n + A_{2n} A_{n+1}\\
&=& A_{n-1}^2 A_n + A_n^3 + (A_{n-1}A_n + A_nA_{n+1}) (A_2A_n + A_{n-1} ) \\
&=& A_n(A_{n-1}^2 + A_n^2 + s A_{n-1}A_n + s A_n A_{n+1} + A_{n-1}^2 + A_{n-1}A_{n+1} ).\end{aligned}$$ Having in mind that $$\begin{aligned}
A_{n-1}^2 + sA_{n-1}A_n = A_n^2 + (-1)^n\end{aligned}$$ by (\[CassiniA\]), we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
A_{3n} = A_n( 2A_n^2 + 2(-1) ^n + A_n^2 + s A_n A_{n+1} + A_{n-1}^2 ).\end{aligned}$$ When applying again (\[CassiniA\]) to the terms $s A_n A_{n+1}$ and $A_{n-1}^2$ we finally have $$\begin{aligned}
A_{3n} &=& A_n[ 4A_n^2 + s^2 A_n^2 + 3(-1)^n ] \\
&=& A_n \big [(s^2 + 4)A_n^2 + 3 (-1)^n \big ].\end{aligned}$$ The second relation can be proved by analogue calculation.
Clearly, further identities can be proved in the same fashion as Proposition \[2nplus1A\] is proved. Instead, we give a more elegant family of identities (\[JenningsA\]) that generalize Proposition \[2nplus1A\]. It follows as a corollary of the Theorem \[Jennings\].
\[corJennings\] For $m \in \mathbb{N}$ and the sequence of numbers $(A_n)_{n \ge 0}$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{JenningsA}
A_{(2m+1)n} = \sum_{i=0}^m (-1)^{n(m+i)} (s^2 + 4)^{i} \frac{2m+1}{2i+1} \binom{m+i}{2i} A_{n}^{2i+1}.\end{aligned}$$
In order to prove Corollary \[corJennings\] we use the fact that the closed form relation for the terms of sequence $(A_n)_{n \ge 0}$ is $$\begin{aligned}
A_n= \frac{\alpha^n - \beta^n}{ \alpha - \beta},\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\alpha &=& \frac{1}{2} (s + \sqrt{s^2 + 4})\\
\beta &=& \frac{1}{2} (s - \sqrt{s^2 + 4}).\end{aligned}$$ Furthermore, it holds $$\begin{aligned}
\alpha \cdot \beta &=&-1\\
\alpha - \beta &=& \sqrt{s^2 + 4},\end{aligned}$$ what generalize relations (\[gammaTimesDelta\]) and (\[gammaPlusDelta\]) in the proof of Theorem \[Jennings\]. This completes the statement of the Corollary \[corJennings\].
Further generalizations and extensions of expressions presented in this work are also possible.
[6]{}
T. Amdeberhan, X. Chen, V. H. Moll, B. E. Sagan, Generalized Fibonacci polynomials and Fibonomial coefficients, Annals of Combinatorics, 18 (2014) 541-562.
Jhon J. Bravo et al, Powers in products of terms of Pell’s and Pell-Lucas Sequences, International Journal of Number Theory, 11 (2015), 1259-1274.
Andrej Dujella, A problem of Diophantus and Pell numbers, Application of Fibonacci Numbers, Vol. 7 (G. E. Bergum, A. N. Philippou, A. F. Horadam, eds.), Kluwer, Dordrecht, (1998), 61-68.
R. L. Graham, D. E. Knuth, O. Patashnik, Concrete Mathematics, Addison-Wesley, 1994.
Derek Jennings, Some polynomial identities for the Fibonacci and Lucas numbers, Fibonacci Quart. 31(2) (1993), 134-137.
E. Kilic, N. Omur, Y.T. Ulutas, Alternating sums of the powers of Fibonacci and Lucas numbers, Miskolc Mathematical Notes, 12 (1) (2011), 87-103.
Steven Vajda, Fibonacci and Lucas Numbers, and the Golden Section: Theory and Applications, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1989.
M. Werman, D. Zeilberger, A bijective proof of Cassini’s Fibonacci identity, Discrete Mathematics, 58 (1986), 109.
A. Wloch, M. Wolowiec-Musial, Generalized Pell numbers and some relations with Fibonacci numbers, Ars Combinatoria, 109 (2013), 391-403.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- |
C. Zălinescu\
Faculty of Mathematics, University Al. I. Cuza Iasi, Iasi, Romania
title: On quadratic optimization problems and canonical duality theory
---
Canonical duality theory (CDT) is advertised by its author DY Gao as a breakthrough methodological theory that can be used not only for modeling complex systems within a unified framework, but also for solving a large class of challenging problems in multidisciplinary fields of engineering, mathematics, and sciences."
DY Gao solely or together with some of his collaborators applied CDT for solving some quadratic optimization problems with quadratic constraints. Unfortunately, in almost all papers we read on CDT there are unclear definitions, non convincing arguments in the proofs, and even false results.
The aim of this paper is to treat rigorously quadratic optimization problems by the method suggested by CDT and to compare what we get with the results obtained by DY Gao and his collaborators on this topic in several papers.
Notations and preliminary results\[sec1\]
=========================================
Let us consider the quadratic functions $q_{k}:\mathbb{R}^{n}\rightarrow
\mathbb{R}$ for $k\in\overline{0,m}$, that is $q_{k}(x):=\tfrac{1}{2}\left\langle x,A_{k}x\right\rangle -\left\langle b_{k},x\right\rangle
+c_{k}$ for $x\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$ with given $A_{k}\in\mathfrak{S}_{n}$, $b_{k}\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$ (seen as column vector) and $c_{k}\in\mathbb{R}$ for $k\in\overline{0,m}$, where $\mathfrak{S}_{n}$ denotes the class of symmetric matrices from $\mathfrak{M}_{n}:=\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$, and $\left\langle
\cdot,\cdot\right\rangle $ denotes the usual inner product on $\mathbb{R}^{n}$. For $k\in\mathbb{N}^{\ast}$ We set$$\mathbb{R}_{+}^{k}:=\{\eta\in\mathbb{R}^{k}\mid\eta_{i}\geq0~\forall
i\in\overline{1,k}\},\quad\mathbb{R}_{-}^{k}:=-\mathbb{R}_{+}^{k},\quad\mathbb{R}_{++}^{k}:=\operatorname*{int}\mathbb{R}_{+}^{k},\quad\mathbb{R}_{--}^{k}:=-\mathbb{R}_{++}^{k}.$$
The fact that $A\in\mathfrak{S}_{n}$ is positive (semi) definite is denoted by $A\succ0$ $(A\succeq0)$ and we set $\mathfrak{S}_{n}^{+}:=\{A\in
\mathfrak{S}_{n}\mid A\succeq0\}$, $\mathfrak{S}_{n}^{++}:=\{A\in
\mathfrak{S}_{n}\mid A\succ0\}$ ; it is well known that $\mathfrak{S}_{n}^{++}=\operatorname*{int}\mathfrak{S}_{n}^{+}$. In this paper we consider quadratic minimization problems with (quadratic) equality and inequality constraints. With this aim, we fix a set $J\subset\overline{1,m}$ corresponding to the equality constraints; the set $J^{c}:=\overline
{1,m}\setminus J$ will correspond to the inequality constraints. So, the general problem is
$(P_{J})$ $~~\min$ $q_{0}(x)$ s.t. $x\in X_{J}$,
where $$X_{J}:=\{x\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\mid\left[ \forall j\in J:q_{j}(x)=0\right]
~\wedge~\left[ \forall j\in J^{c}:q_{j}(x)\leq0\right] \}.$$ For later use we introduce also the set $$\Gamma_{J}:=\{(\lambda_{1},...,\lambda_{m})\in\mathbb{R}^{m}\mid\lambda
_{j}\geq0~\forall j\in J^{c}\}. \label{r-gamma}$$ Clearly, for $J=\overline{1,m}$ $(P_{J})$ becomes the quadratic minimization problem with (quadratic) equality constraints denoted $(P_{e})$ with $X_{e}:=X_{\overline{1,m}}$ its feasible set, while for $J=\emptyset$ $(P_{J})$ becomes the quadratic minimization problem with inequality constraints denoted $(P_{i})$ with $X_{i}:=X_{\emptyset}$ its feasible set. Clearly $X_{e}\subset X_{J}\subset X_{i}$, the inclusions being strict in general when $\emptyset\neq J\neq\overline{1,m}$. Observe that any optimization problem with equality constraints can be seen as a problem with inequality constraints because the equality constraint $h(x)=0$ can be replaced by the inequality constraints $g_{1}(x):=h(x)\leq0$ and $g_{2}(x):=-h(x)\leq0$. Excepting linear programming, such a procedure is not used in general because the constraints qualification conditions are very different for problems with equality constraints and those with inequality constraints.
To the family $(q_{k})_{k\in\overline{0,m}}$ we associate the Lagrangian $L:\mathbb{R}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ defined by $$L(x,\lambda):=q_{0}(x)+\sum\nolimits_{j=1}^{m}\lambda_{j}q_{j}(x)=\tfrac{1}{2}\left\langle x,A(\lambda)x\right\rangle -\left\langle x,b(\lambda
)\right\rangle +c(\lambda), \label{r-L}$$ where $A(\lambda)x:=[A(\lambda)]\cdot x$ and$$A(\lambda):=\sum\nolimits_{k=0}^{m}\lambda_{k}A_{k},\quad b(\lambda
):=\sum\nolimits_{k=0}^{m}\lambda_{k}b_{k},\quad c(\lambda):=\sum
\nolimits_{k=0}^{m}\lambda_{k}c_{k},$$ with $\lambda_{0}:=1$ and $\lambda:=(\lambda_{1},...,\lambda_{m})^{T}\in\mathbb{R}^{m}$. Clearly, $A:\mathbb{R}^{m}\rightarrow\mathfrak{S}_{n}$, $b:\mathbb{R}^{m}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^{n}$, $c:\mathbb{R}^{m}\rightarrow
\mathbb{R}$ defined by the above formulas are affine mappings.
Moreover, one considers the sets $$\begin{gathered}
Y_{0}:=\{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}^{m}\mid\det A(\lambda)\neq0\},\label{r-s0}\\
Y^{+}:=\{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}^{m}\mid A(\lambda)\succ0\},\quad Y^{-}:=\{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}^{m}\mid A(\lambda)\prec0\}.\label{r-s0pm}$$ Observe that $Y_{0}$ is a (possible empty) open set, while $Y^{+}$ and $Y^{-}$ are (possibly empty) open and convex sets. Sometimes one uses also the sets $$\begin{gathered}
Y_{\operatorname{col}}:=\{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}^{m}\mid b(\lambda
)\in\operatorname{Im}A(\lambda)\},\label{r-yext}\\
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}:=\{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}\mid
A(\lambda)\succeq0\},\quad Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}:=\{\lambda\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}\mid A(\lambda)\preceq0\},\label{r-yextp}$$ where for $F\in\mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ we set $\operatorname{Im}F:=\{Fx\mid
x\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\}$ and $\ker F:=\{x\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\mid Fx=0\}$. Clearly, $Y_{0}\subset Y_{\operatorname{col}}$, $Y^{+}\subset Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$, $Y^{-}\subset Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$, and $Y_{\operatorname{col}}$ is neither open, nor closed (in general). Unlike for $Y^{+}$, the convexity of $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$ is less obvious. In fact the next (probably known) result holds.
\[lem-im\]*(i)* Let $A,B\in\mathfrak{S}_{n}^{+}$. Then $\operatorname{Im}(A+B)=\operatorname{Im}A+\operatorname{Im}B$.
*(ii)* Let $A\in\mathfrak{S}_{n}$ and $a\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$, and set $q(x):=\tfrac{1}{2}\left\langle x,Ax\right\rangle -\left\langle
a,x\right\rangle $. Then $q(x_{1})=q(x_{2})$ for all $x_{1},x_{2}\in
\mathbb{R}^{n}$ such that $Ax_{1}=Ax_{2}=a$.
Proof. (i) It is known that $\operatorname{Im}F=(\ker F)^{\perp}$, and so $\mathbb{R}^{n}=\operatorname{Im}F+\ker F$, provided $F\in\mathfrak{S}_{n}$. Moreover, using Schwarz’ inequality for positive semi-definite matrices (operators) we have that $\ker F=\{x\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\mid\left\langle
x,Fx\right\rangle =0\}$ whenever $F\in\mathfrak{S}_{n}^{+}$. Since $A+B\in\mathfrak{S}_{n}^{+}$ we get $$\begin{aligned}
\left( \operatorname{Im}(A+B)\right) ^{\perp} & =\ker(A+B)=\{x\in
\mathbb{R}^{n}\mid\left\langle x,(A+B)x\right\rangle =0\}\\
& =\ker A\cap\ker B=\left( \operatorname{Im}A\right) ^{\perp}\cap\left(
\operatorname{Im}B\right) ^{\perp}=\left( \operatorname{Im}A+\operatorname{Im}B)\right) ^{\perp},\end{aligned}$$ whence the conclusion.
\(ii) Take $x_{1},x_{2}\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$ such that $Ax_{1}=Ax_{2}=a;$ setting $x:=x_{1}$ and $u:=x_{2}-x_{1}$, we have that $x_{2}=x+u$ and $Au=0$. It follows that $\left\langle a,u\right\rangle =\left\langle Ax,u\right\rangle
=\left\langle x,Au\right\rangle =0$, and so$$q(x+u)=\tfrac{1}{2}\left\langle x+u,A(x+u)\right\rangle -\left\langle
a,x+u\right\rangle =\tfrac{1}{2}\left\langle x,Ax\right\rangle -\left\langle
a,x\right\rangle =q(x),$$ whence $q(x_{2})=q(x_{1})$. $\square$
\[c-yqi-ycoli\]With the previous notations and assumptions, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$ and $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$ are convex. Moreover, if $Y^{+}$ (resp. $Y^{-}$) is nonempty, then $Y^{+}=\operatorname*{int}Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$ (resp. $Y^{-}=\operatorname*{int}Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$).
Proof. Take $\lambda,\lambda^{\prime}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$ and $\alpha\in(0,1)$. From the definition of $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$ and Lemma \[lem-im\] (i), taking into account that $A$ and $b$ are affine, we get $$\begin{aligned}
b(\alpha\lambda+(1-\alpha)\lambda^{\prime}) & =\alpha b(\lambda
)+(1-\alpha)b(\lambda^{\prime})\in\alpha\operatorname{Im}A(\lambda
)+(1-\alpha)\operatorname{Im}A(\lambda^{\prime})\\
& =\operatorname{Im}[\alpha A(\lambda)]+\operatorname{Im}[(1-\alpha
)A(\lambda^{\prime})]=\operatorname{Im}[\alpha A(\lambda)+(1-\alpha
)A(\lambda^{\prime})]\\
& =\operatorname{Im}A(\alpha\lambda+(1-\alpha)\lambda^{\prime}),\end{aligned}$$ and so $\alpha\lambda+(1-\alpha)\lambda^{\prime}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$. The proof of the convexity of $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$ is similar.
Assume now that $Y^{+}\neq\emptyset$ and take $\lambda_{0}\in Y^{+}$, $\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$ and $\alpha\in(0,1)$. Then $A(\alpha\lambda_{0}+(1-\alpha)\lambda)=\alpha A(\lambda_{0})+(1-\alpha
)A(\lambda)\succ0$, and so $\alpha\lambda_{0}+(1-\alpha)\lambda\in Y^{+}$. Taking the limit for $\alpha\rightarrow0$ we obtain that $\lambda
\in\operatorname*{cl}Y^{+}$. Hence $Y^{+}\subset Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}\subset\operatorname*{cl}Y^{+}$, and so $$Y^{+}=\operatorname*{int}Y^{+}\subset\operatorname*{int}Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}\subset\operatorname*{int}(\operatorname*{cl}Y^{+})=Y^{+}.$$ The proof is complete. $\square$
Of course, for every $(x,\lambda)\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}$ we have that $$\nabla_{x}L(x,\lambda)=A(\lambda)\cdot x-b(\lambda),\quad\nabla_{xx}^{2}L(x,\lambda)=A(\lambda),\quad\nabla_{\lambda}L(x,\lambda)=\left(
q_{j}(x)\right) _{j\in\overline{1,m}}. \label{r-nxL}$$
Hence $L(\cdot,\lambda)$ is (strictly) convex for $\lambda\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$ $(\lambda\in Y^{+})$ and (strictly) concave for $\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$ $(\lambda\in Y^{-})$. Moreover, for $\lambda\in Y_{0}$ we have that $\nabla_{x}L(x,\lambda)=0$ iff $x=[A(\lambda
)]^{-1}\cdot b(\lambda)$, written $A(\lambda)^{-1}b(\lambda)$ in the sequel.
Let us consider now the (dual objective) function $$D:Y_{\operatorname{col}}\rightarrow\mathbb{R},\quad D(\lambda):=L(x,\lambda
)\text{ with }A(\lambda)x=b(\lambda);\label{r-pd0}$$ $D$ is well defined because for $x_{1},x_{2}\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$ with $A(\lambda)x_{1}=A(\lambda)x_{2}=b(\lambda)$, by Lemma \[lem-im\] (ii), we have that $L(x_{2},\lambda)=L(x_{1},\lambda)$. In particular,$$\big[\lambda\in Y_{0}~\text{~}\wedge~~x=\left( A(\lambda)\right) ^{-1}\cdot
b(\lambda)\big]\Longrightarrow L(x,\lambda)=D(\lambda).\label{r-lpd}$$
Of course $$D(\lambda)=L\big(A(\lambda)^{-1}b(\lambda),\lambda\big)=-\tfrac{1}{2}\big\langle b(\lambda),A(\lambda)^{-1}b(\lambda)\big\rangle+c(\lambda
)\quad\forall\lambda\in Y_{0}.\label{r-pd}$$
\[lem-qperfdual\]Let $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}$ be such that $\nabla_{x}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0$ and $\left\langle \overline{\lambda},\nabla_{\lambda
}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\right\rangle =0$. Then $\overline{\lambda
}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}$ and $$q_{0}(\overline{x})=L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=D(\overline{\lambda}).
\label{r-qlpd}$$ In particular, $\overline{x}\in X_{e}$ and (\[r-qlpd\]) hold if $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a critical point of $L$, that is $\nabla L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0$.
Proof. Because $0=\nabla_{x}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=A(\overline
{\lambda})\overline{x}-b(\overline{\lambda})$, it is clear that $\overline
{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}$ and $L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda
})=D(\overline{\lambda})$ by the definition of $D$. On the other hand, $$L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=q_{0}(\overline{x})+\sum\nolimits_{j=1}^{m}\overline{\lambda}_{j}q_{j}(\overline{x})=q_{0}(\overline{x})+\left\langle
\overline{\lambda},\nabla_{\lambda}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda
})\right\rangle =q_{0}(\overline{x}).$$ The last assertion follows from the expression of $\nabla_{\lambda}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ in (\[r-nxL\]). $\square$
Formula (\[r-qlpd\]) is related to the so-called complimentary-dual principle (see [GaoRuaLat:16]{}, [@GaoRuaLat:17 p. 13]) and sometimes is called the perfect duality formula".
\[lem-pd\]*(i)* The following representation of $D$ holds: $$D(\lambda)=\left\{
\begin{array}
[c]{ll}\min_{x\in\mathbb{R}^{n}}L(x,\lambda) & \text{if }\lambda\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+},\\
\max_{x\in\mathbb{R}^{n}}L(x,\lambda) & \text{if }\lambda\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-},
\end{array}
\right. \label{r-1}$$ the value of $D(\lambda)$ being attained at any $x\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$ such that $A(\lambda)x=b(\lambda)$ whenever $\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}\cup
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-};$ in particular, $D(\lambda)$ is attained uniquely at $x:=A(\lambda)^{-1}b(\lambda)$ for $\lambda\in Y^{+}\cup Y^{-}$.
*(ii)* $D$ is concave and upper semicontinuous on $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$, and convex and lower semicontinuous on $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$.
*(iii)* Let $J\subset\overline{1,m}$ and $(\overline{x},\overline
{\lambda})\in X_{J}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}$ be such that $\nabla_{x}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0$ and $\left\langle \overline{\lambda
},\nabla_{\lambda}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\right\rangle =0$. Then $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}};$ moreover$$\begin{gathered}
\overline{\lambda}\in\Gamma_{J}\cap Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}\Longrightarrow
D(\overline{\lambda})=\max\left\{ D(\lambda)\mid\lambda\in\Gamma_{J}\cap
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}\right\} ,\label{r-2a}\\
\overline{\lambda}\in(-\Gamma_{J})\cap Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}\Longrightarrow D(\overline{\lambda})=\min\left\{ D(\lambda)\mid\lambda
\in(-\Gamma_{J})\cap Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}\right\} . \label{r-2b}$$
*(iv)* Assume that $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}$ is such that $\nabla L(\overline{x},\overline
{\lambda})=0$. Then $$D(\overline{\lambda})=\left\{
\begin{array}
[c]{ll}\max_{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}}D(\lambda) & \text{if }\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+},\\
\min_{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}}D(\lambda) & \text{if }\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}.
\end{array}
\right. \label{r-2c}$$ In particular, (\[r-2c\]) holds if $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{+}\cup Y^{-}$ is a critical point of $D$ and $\overline{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$.
Proof. (i) Consider $\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+};$ then there exists $u\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$ such that $A(\lambda)u=b(\lambda)$, and so $\nabla
_{x}L(u,\lambda)=A(\lambda)u-b(\lambda)=0$. Because $L(\cdot,\lambda)$ is convex we obtain that $L(u,\lambda)\leq L(u^{\prime},\lambda)$ for every $u^{\prime}\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$, whence $D(\lambda)=L(u,\lambda)=\min
_{u^{\prime}\in\mathbb{R}^{n}}L(u^{\prime},\lambda)$. Of course, if $\lambda\in Y^{+}$ then $L(\cdot,\lambda)$ is strictly convex and $u=A(\lambda)^{-1}b(\lambda)$, and so $A(\lambda)^{-1}b(\lambda)$ is the unique minimizer of $L(\cdot,\lambda)$ on $\mathbb{R}^{n}$. The case $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{-}$ is solved similarly.
\(ii) Because $L(x,\cdot)$ is linear (hence concave and convex) for every $x\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$, from (\[r-1\]) we obtain that $D$ is concave and u.s.c. on $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$ as an infimum of concave continuous functions. The argument is similar for the other situation.
\(iii) Assume that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$ (hence $\overline{\lambda}\in\Gamma_{J}\cap Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$), and take $\lambda\in\Gamma_{J}\cap Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$. Using (\[r-1\]) and the fact that $\overline{x}\in X_{J}$, we have that $$D(\lambda)\leq L(\overline{x},\lambda)=q_{0}(\overline{x})+\sum_{j\in J^{c}}\lambda_{j}q_{j}(\overline{x})\leq q_{0}(\overline{x})=q_{0}(\overline
{x})+\left\langle \overline{\lambda},\nabla_{\lambda}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\right\rangle =L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda
})=D(\overline{\lambda}),$$ and so $D(\overline{\lambda})=\sup_{\lambda\in\Gamma_{J}\cap
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}}D(\lambda)$. The proof for $\overline{\lambda}\in(-\Gamma_{J})\cap Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$ is similar.
\(iv) One applies (iii) for $J:=\overline{1,m}$. $\square$
Observe that $D$ is a $C^{\infty}$ function on the open set $Y$ (assumed to be nonempty). Indeed, the operator $\varphi:\{U\in\mathfrak{M}_{n}\mid U$ invertible$\}\rightarrow\mathfrak{M}_{n}$ defined by $\varphi(U)=U^{-1}$ is Fréchet differentiable and $d\varphi(U)(S)=-U^{-1}SU^{-1}$ for $U,S\in\mathfrak{M}_{n}$ with $U$ invertible. It follows that $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial D(\lambda)}{\partial\lambda_{j}} & =\tfrac{1}{2}\left\langle
b(\lambda),A(\lambda)^{-1}A_{j}A(\lambda)^{-1}b(\lambda)\right\rangle
-\left\langle b_{j},A(\lambda)^{-1}b(\lambda)\right\rangle +c_{j}\nonumber\\
& =\tfrac{1}{2}\left\langle x(\lambda),A_{j}x(\lambda)\right\rangle
-\left\langle b_{j},x(\lambda)\right\rangle +c_{j}=q_{j}\left( x(\lambda
)\right) \quad\forall j\in\overline{1,m}\label{r-d1pdq}$$ for $\lambda\in Y_{0}$, where$$x(\lambda):=A(\lambda)^{-1}b(\lambda)\quad\left( \lambda\in Y_{0}\right)
;\label{r-xl}$$ hence $$\nabla D(\lambda^{\prime})=\nabla_{\lambda}L(x(\lambda^{\prime}),\lambda
^{\prime})\quad\forall\lambda^{\prime}\in Y_{0}.\label{r-grpdl}$$ Consequently,$$\forall\lambda^{\prime}\in Y_{0}:\left[ \nabla D(\lambda^{\prime})=0\iff\nabla_{\lambda}L\left( x(\lambda^{\prime}),\lambda^{\prime}\right)
=0\iff\nabla L\left( x(\lambda^{\prime}),\lambda^{\prime}\right) =0\right]
.\label{r-cppdL}$$
A similar computation gives$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial^{2}D(\lambda)}{\partial\lambda_{j}\partial\lambda_{k}}= &
-\left\langle A_{j}A(\lambda)^{-1}b(\lambda),A(\lambda)^{-1}A_{k}A(\lambda)^{-1}b(\lambda)\right\rangle \\
& +\left\langle A_{j}A(\lambda)^{-1}b_{k}+A_{k}A(\lambda)^{-1}b_{j},A(\lambda)^{-1}b(\lambda)\right\rangle -\left\langle b_{j},A(\lambda
)^{-1}b_{k}\right\rangle \\
& =-\left\langle A_{j}x(\lambda)-b_{j},A(\lambda)^{-1}\left( A_{k}x(\lambda)-b_{k}\right) \right\rangle \quad\forall j,k\in\overline{1,m}$$ for $\lambda\in Y_{0}$. Omitting $\lambda$ $(\in Y_{0})$, for $v\in
\mathbb{R}^{m}$ and $A_{v}:=\sum_{j=1}^{m}v_{j}A_{j}$, $b_{v}:=\sum_{j=1}^{m}v_{j}b_{j}$, we get $$\big\langle v,\nabla^{2}Dv\big\rangle=\sum\nolimits_{j,k=1}^{m}\frac
{\partial^{2}D}{\partial\lambda_{j}\partial\lambda_{k}}v_{j}v_{k}=-\left\langle A_{v}A^{-1}b-b_{v},A^{-1}\left( A_{v}A^{-1}b-b_{v}\right)
\right\rangle .$$ Therefore, $\nabla^{2}D(\lambda)\preceq0$ if $\lambda\in Y^{+}$ and $\nabla^{2}D(\lambda)\succeq0$ if $\lambda\in Y^{-}$, confirming that $D$ is concave on $Y^{+}$ and convex on $Y^{-}$.
Quadratic minimization problems with equality constraints
=========================================================
As mentioned above, for $J:=\overline{1,m}$, $(P_{J})$ becomes the quadratic minimization problem
$(P_{e})$ $~~\min$ $q_{0}(x)$ s.t. $x\in X_{e}:=X_{\overline{1,m}}$.
Using the previous facts we are in a position to state and prove the following result.
\[p1\]Let $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}$.
*(i)* Assume that $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a critical point of $L$. Then $\overline{x}\in X_{e}$, $\overline{\lambda}\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}$, and (\[r-qlpd\]) holds; moreover, for $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$ we have that $$q_{0}(\overline{x})=\inf_{x\in X_{e}}q_{0}(x)=L(\overline{x},\overline
{\lambda})=\sup_{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}}D(\lambda
)=D(\overline{\lambda}), \label{r-minmaxqe}$$ while for $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$ we have that $$q_{0}(\overline{x})=\sup_{x\in X_{e}}q_{0}(x)=L(\overline{x},\overline
{\lambda})=\inf_{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}}D(\lambda
)=D(\overline{\lambda}). \label{r-maxminqe}$$
*(ii)* Assume that $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a critical point of $L$ with $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$. Then $\nabla D(\overline
{\lambda})=0$ and $\overline{x}=A(\overline{\lambda})^{-1}b(\overline{\lambda
})$; moreover, $\overline{x}$ is the unique global minimizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{e}$ when $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{+}$, and $\overline{x}$ is the unique global maximizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{e}$ when $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{-}$.
Conversely, assume that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ is a critical point of $D$. Then $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a critical point of $L$, where $\overline{x}=A(\overline{\lambda})^{-1}b(\overline{\lambda})$; consequently *(i)* and *(ii)* apply.
Proof. (i) Assume that $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a critical point of $L$; hence $\nabla_{x}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0$ and $\nabla_{\lambda}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0$. Using Lemma \[lem-qperfdual\] we obtain that $\overline{\lambda}\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}$, $\overline{x}\in X_{e}$, and (\[r-qlpd\]) holds.
Assume moreover that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$. Because $L(\cdot,\overline{\lambda})$ is convex, its infimum is attained at $\overline{x}$. Therefore, for $x\in X_{e}$ we have that $q_{0}(\overline
{x})=L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\leq L(x,\overline{\lambda})=q_{0}(x)$, and so $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\inf_{x\in X_{e}}q_{0}(x)$. Using Proposition \[lem-pd\] (iii) for $J:=\overline{1,m}$ (hence $\Gamma_{J}=\mathbb{R}^{m}$), we get the last equality in (\[r-minmaxqe\]). Hence (\[r-minmaxqe\]) holds.
The proof of (\[r-maxminqe\]) in the case $\overline{\lambda}\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$ is similar; an alternative proof is to apply the previous case for $q_{j}$ replaced by $-q_{j}$ and $\overline{\lambda}_{j}$ by $-\overline{\lambda}_{j}$ for $j\in\overline{1,m}.$
\(ii) Assume that $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a critical point of $L$ with $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$. Since $A(\overline{\lambda})\overline{x}-b(\overline{\lambda})=\nabla_{x}L(\overline{x},\overline
{\lambda})=0$, clearly $\overline{x}=x(\overline{\lambda})=A(\overline
{\lambda})^{-1}b(\overline{\lambda})$. Using (\[r-grpdl\]) we obtain that $\nabla D(\overline{\lambda})=\nabla_{\lambda}L(\overline{x},\overline
{\lambda})=0$.
Moreover, suppose that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{+}$. Then $L(\cdot
,\overline{\lambda})$ is strictly convex, and so $q_{0}(\overline
{x})=L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})<L(x,\overline{\lambda})=q_{0}(x)$ for $x\in X_{e}\setminus\{\overline{x}\}$. Hence $\overline{x}$ is the unique global minimizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{e}$. The proof in the case $\overline
{\lambda}\in Y^{-}$ is similar.
Conversely, let $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ be a critical point of $D$ and take $\overline{x}:=A(\overline{\lambda})^{-1}b(\overline{\lambda});$ then $\nabla_{x}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0$ by (\[r-nxL\]). Using (\[r-d1pdq\]) we obtain that $\overline{x}\in X_{e}$, and so $\nabla
_{\lambda}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0$. Therefore, $(\overline
{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a critical point of $L$. $\square$
The next example shows that $(P_{e})$ might have several solutions when $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$.
\[ex-qe\]Take $q_{0}(x,y):=xy$, $q_{1}(x,y):=\tfrac{1}{2}(x^{2}+y^{2}-1)$ for $x,y\in\mathbb{R}$. Then $L(x,y,\lambda)=xy+\tfrac{\lambda}{2}\left(
x^{2}+y^{2}-1\right) $. It follows that $A(\lambda)=\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{ll}\lambda & 1\\
1 & \lambda
\end{array}
\right) $, $b(\lambda)=\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{l}0\\
0
\end{array}
\right) $, $c(\lambda)=-\tfrac{1}{2}\lambda$, $Y_{0}=\mathbb{R}\setminus\{-1,1\}$, $Y^{+}=-Y^{-}=(1,\infty)$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}=\mathbb{R}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}=-Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}=[1,\infty)$, $D(\lambda)=-\tfrac{1}{2}\lambda$. Clearly, $D$ has not critical points, and the only critical points of $L$ are $(\pm2^{-1/2},\mp2^{-1/2},1)$ and $(\pm2^{-1/2},\pm2^{-1/2},-1)$. For $(\pm2^{-1/2},\mp2^{-1/2},1)$ we can apply Proposition \[p1\] (i) with $\overline
{\lambda}:=1\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$, and so both $\pm2^{-1/2}(1,-1)$ are solutions for problem $(P_{e})$, while for $(\pm2^{-1/2},\pm2^{-1/2},-1)$ we can apply Proposition \[p1\] (i) with $\overline{\lambda}:=-1\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$, and so $\pm2^{-1/2}(1,1)$ are global maximizers of $q_{0}$ on $X_{e}$.
Quadratic minimization problems with equality and inequality constraints
========================================================================
Let us consider now the general quadratic minimization problem $(P_{J})$ considered at the beginning of Section \[sec1\]. To $(P_{J})$ we associate the sets $$\begin{gathered}
Y^{J}:=\Gamma_{J}\cap Y_{0},\quad Y^{J+}:=\Gamma_{J}\cap Y^{+},\quad
Y^{J-}:=(-\Gamma_{J})\cap Y^{-},\\
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J}:=\Gamma_{J}\cap Y_{\operatorname{col}},\quad
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}:=\Gamma_{J}\cap Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+},\quad
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J-}:=(-\Gamma_{J})\cap Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-},\end{gathered}$$ where $Y_{0}$, $Y^{+}$ and $Y^{-}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$ and $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$, are defined in (\[r-s0\]), (\[r-s0pm\]), (\[r-yext\]) and (\[r-yextp\]), respectively. Unlike $Y_{0}$, $Y^{+}$, $Y^{-}$, the sets $Y^{J}$, $Y^{J+}$ and $Y^{J-}$ are (generally) not open. Because $Y^{+}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$ and $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$ are convex, so are $Y^{J+}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}$ and $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J-}$, and so $L(\cdot,\lambda)$ is (strictly) convex on $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}$ $(Y^{J+})$ and (strictly) concave on $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J-}$ $(Y^{J-});$ moreover, $\operatorname*{int}Y^{J+}=\operatorname*{int}Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}$ ($\operatorname*{int}Y^{J-}=\operatorname*{int}Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J-}$) provided $Y^{J+}\neq\emptyset$ ($\operatorname*{int}Y^{J-}\neq\emptyset$).
As observed already, for $J=\overline{1,m}$ we have that $\Gamma
_{J}=\mathbb{R}^{m}$, and so $Y^{J}$, $Y^{J+}$, $Y^{J-}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}$ and $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J-}$ reduce to $Y_{0}$, $Y^{+}$, $Y^{-}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$ and $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$, respectively.
Suggested by the well known necessary optimality conditions for minimization problems with equality and inequality constraints, we say that $(\overline
{x},\overline{\lambda})\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $L$ (that is a Lagrange–Karush–Kuhn–Tucker[^1] point of $L$ with respect to $J$) if $\nabla
_{x}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0$ and $$\textstyle\left[ \forall j\in J^{c}:\overline{\lambda}_{j}\geq0~~\wedge
~~\frac{\partial L}{\partial\lambda_{j}}(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\leq0~~\wedge~~\overline{\lambda}_{j}\cdot\frac{\partial L}{\partial
\lambda_{j}}(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0\right] ~\wedge~\left[
\forall j\in J:\frac{\partial L}{\partial\lambda_{j}}(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0\right] ,\label{r-kkt-lqm}$$ or, equivalently, $$\overline{x}\in X_{J}~~\wedge~~\overline{\lambda}\in\Gamma_{J}~~\wedge
~~\left[ \forall j\in J^{c}:\overline{\lambda}_{j}q_{j}(\overline
{x})=0\right] ;\label{r-kkt-pqei}$$ we say that $\overline{x}\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$ is a $J$-LKKT point for $(P_{J})$ if there exists $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathbb{R}^{m}$ such that $(\overline
{x},\overline{\lambda})$ verifies (\[r-kkt-pqei\]); moreover, for $D$ defined in (\[r-pd0\]), we say that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ is a $J$-LKKT point for $D$ if$$\textstyle\left[ \forall j\in J^{c}:\overline{\lambda}_{j}\geq0~~\wedge
~~\frac{\partial D}{\partial\lambda_{j}}(\overline{\lambda})\leq
0~~\wedge~~\overline{\lambda}_{j}\cdot\frac{\partial D}{\partial\lambda_{j}}(\overline{\lambda})=0\right] ~\wedge~\left[ \forall j\in J:\frac{\partial
D}{\partial\lambda_{j}}(\overline{\lambda})=0\right] .\label{r-kkt-dqm}$$
Of course, when $J=\overline{1,m}$, $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $L$ iff $\nabla
L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0$, while $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ is a $J$-LKKT point for $D$ iff $\nabla D(\overline{\lambda})=0$.
\[rem-kktLkktpd\]Notice that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $D$ if and only if $(x(\overline{\lambda}),\overline{\lambda})$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $L$; for this just take into account (\[r-d1pdq\]). Moreover, taking into account (\[r-cppdL\]), if $\overline{\lambda}\in
Y_{0}$ is a critical point of $D$ then $\overline{\lambda}$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $D$ and $(x(\overline{\lambda}),\overline{\lambda})$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $L$ (being a critical point of $L$).
In general, for distinct $J$ and $J^{\prime}$, the sets of $J$-LKKT and $J^{\prime}$-LKKT points of $L$ (resp. $D$) are not comparable. For comparable $J$ and $J^{\prime}$ we have the following result whose simple proof is omitted; its second part follows from the first one and the previous remark.
\[fact1\]Let $J\subset J^{\prime}\subset\overline{1,m}$ and $(\overline
{x},\overline{\lambda})\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}$
*(i)* If $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a $J^{\prime}$-LKKT point of $L$ and $\overline{\lambda}_{j}\geq0$ for all $j\in J^{\prime}\setminus J$, then $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $L$. Conversely, if $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $L$ and $\overline{\lambda}_{j}>0$ for all $j\in J^{\prime}\setminus J$, then $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a $J^{\prime}$-LKKT point of $L$.
*(ii)* If $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ is a $J^{\prime}$-LKKT point of $D$ and $\overline{\lambda}_{j}\geq0$ for all $j\in J^{\prime}\setminus J$, then $\overline{\lambda}$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $D$. Conversely, if $\overline{\lambda}$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $D$ and and $\overline{\lambda
}_{j}>0$ for all $j\in J^{\prime}\setminus J$, then $\overline{\lambda}$ is a $J^{\prime}$-LKKT point of $D$.
The result below corresponds to Proposition \[p1\].
\[p1ei\]Let $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}$.
*(i)* Assume that $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $L$. Then $\overline{x}$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $(P_{J})$, $\overline{x}\in
X_{J}$, $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J}$, and (\[r-qlpd\]) holds; moreover, if $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}$ then $$q_{0}(\overline{x})=\inf_{x\in X_{J}}q_{0}(x)=L(\overline{x},\overline
{\lambda})=\sup_{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}}D(\lambda
)=D(\overline{\lambda}). \label{r-minmaxqei}$$
*(ii)* Assume that $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $L$ with $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ (or, equivalently, $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{J}$). Then $\overline{x}=A(\overline{\lambda})^{-1}b(\overline{\lambda})$, and $\overline{\lambda}$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $D$; moreover, $\overline{x}$ is the unique global minimizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{J}$ if $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{J+}$.
Conversely, assume that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $D$. Then $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $L$, where $\overline{x}:=A(\overline{\lambda})^{-1}b(\overline{\lambda})$. Consequently, *(i)* and *(ii)* apply.
*(iii)* Assume that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{J+}$. Then$$D(\overline{\lambda})=\sup_{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}}D(\lambda)\Longleftrightarrow D(\overline{\lambda})=\sup_{\lambda\in Y^{J+}}D(\lambda)\Longleftrightarrow\overline{\lambda}\text{ is a $J$-LKKT point of
$D$.}$$
Proof. (i) By hypothesis, (\[r-kkt-pqei\]) holds. The fact that $\overline{x}$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $(P_{J})$ is obvious from its very definition; hence $\overline{x}\in X_{J}$. On the other hand, because $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $L$ we have that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J}$ and (\[r-qlpd\]) holds by Lemma \[lem-qperfdual\].
Assume that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}$ $(=\Gamma
_{J}\cap Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+})$. The last equality in (\[r-minmaxqei\]) follows from Proposition \[lem-pd\] (iii). Because $L(\cdot,\overline
{\lambda})$ is convex, its infimum is attained at $\overline{x}$. Therefore, for $x\in X_{J}$ we have that $$q_{0}(\overline{x})=L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\leq L(x,\overline
{\lambda})=q_{0}(x)+\sum\nolimits_{j=1}^{m}\overline{\lambda}_{j}q_{j}(x)\leq
q_{0}(x), \label{r-siqei}$$ whence $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\inf_{x\in X_{i}}q_{0}(x)$. Hence (\[r-minmaxqei\]) holds.
\(ii) Because $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $L$ with $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$, we have that $A(\overline{\lambda
})\overline{x}-b(\overline{\lambda})=\nabla_{x}L(\overline{x},\overline
{\lambda})=0$, and so $\overline{x}=x(\overline{\lambda})$. As observed in Remark \[rem-kktLkktpd\], (\[r-kkt-dqm\]) is verified.
Suppose now that moreover that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{+}$ (and so Then $L(\cdot,\overline{\lambda})$ is strictly convex, and so $q_{0}(\overline
{x})=L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})<L(x,\overline{\lambda})\leq q_{0}(x)$ for $x\in X_{J}\setminus\{\overline{x}\}$. Hence $\overline{x}$ is the unique global minimizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{J}$.
Conversely, let $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ be a $J$-LKKT point of $D$, and take $\overline{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda});$ then $(\overline{x},\overline
{\lambda})$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $L$ by Remark \[rem-kktLkktpd\].
\(iii) If $\overline{\lambda}$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $D$, we have that $D(\overline{\lambda})=\sup_{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}}D(\lambda)$ by Remark \[rem-kktLkktpd\] and (i), while $D(\overline{\lambda
})=\sup_{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}}D(\lambda)$ implies $D(\overline{\lambda})=\sup_{\lambda\in Y^{J+}}D(\lambda)$ because $Y^{J+}\subset Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}$. Assume that $D(\overline{\lambda
})=\sup_{\lambda\in Y^{J+}}D(\lambda)$. Setting $Q:=-D$, we have that $Q$ is convex and $\overline{\lambda}$ is a global minimizer of $Q$ on (the convex set) $Y^{J+}$. Using [@Zal:89 Prop. 4] we have that $$0\leq Q^{\prime}(\overline{\lambda},\lambda-\overline{\lambda}):=\lim
_{t\rightarrow0+}\frac{Q(\overline{\lambda}+t(\lambda-\overline{\lambda
}))-Q(\overline{\lambda})}{t}=\left\langle \lambda-\overline{\lambda},\nabla
Q(\overline{\lambda})\right\rangle \quad\forall\lambda\in Y^{J+}.$$ It follows that $\left\langle y,v\right\rangle \leq0$ for all $y\in
\mathbb{R}_{+}(Y^{J+}-\overline{\lambda})$, where $v:=\nabla D(\overline
{\lambda})$. Because $\Gamma_{J}$ and $Y^{+}$ are convex sets, $Y^{J+}=\Gamma_{J}\cap Y^{+}$, and $\overline{\lambda}\in\operatorname*{int}Y^{+}=Y^{+}$, we have that $$\begin{aligned}
\mathbb{R}_{+}(Y^{J+}-\overline{\lambda}) & =\mathbb{R}_{+}\left[
(\Gamma_{J}-\overline{\lambda})\cap(Y^{+}-\overline{\lambda})\right]
=\mathbb{R}_{+}(\Gamma_{J}-\overline{\lambda})\\
& =\left\{ \mu\in\mathbb{R}^{m}\mid\forall j\in J^{c}:\overline{\lambda}_{j}=0\Rightarrow\mu_{j}\geq0\right\} .\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, $\frac{\partial D}{\partial\lambda_{j}}(\overline{\lambda})=v_{j}=0$ for $j\in J\cup\{j\in J^{c}\mid\overline{\lambda}_{j}>0\}$ and $\frac{\partial D}{\partial\lambda_{j}}(\overline{\lambda})=v_{j}\leq0$ for $j\in\{j^{\prime}\in J\mid\overline{\lambda}_{j^{\prime}}=0\}$. This shows that condition (\[r-kkt-dqm\]) is verified. $\square$
\[fact2\]Let $\emptyset\neq J\subset\overline{1,m}$ and let $(\overline
{x},\overline{\lambda})\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}$ be a $J$-LKKT point of $L$ such that $A(\overline{\lambda})\succeq0;$ hence $\overline{x}$ $\in X_{J}$, $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}$ and (\[r-minmaxqei\]) holds. If $J_{\geq}:=\{j\in J\mid\overline{\lambda}_{j}\geq0\}$ is nonempty, then $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a $(J\setminus J_{\geq})$-LKKT point of $L$, and so $\overline{x}$ is a global minimizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{J\setminus J_{\geq}}\supset X_{J}$.
Proof. The first assertion holds by Proposition \[p1ei\] (i) because $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}$. In what concerns the second assertion, it is sufficient to observe that for $j\in J^{c}\cup
J_{\geq}=(J\setminus J_{\geq})^{c}$ we have that $\overline{\lambda}_{j}\geq
0$, and $\overline{\lambda}_{j}\cdot\frac{\partial L}{\partial\lambda_{j}}(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0$ by the definition of a $J$-LKKT point of $L$, then to apply Proposition \[p1ei\] (i) for $J$ replaced by $J\setminus
J_{\geq}$. $\square$
\[fact3\]If $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}$ is a critical point of $L$ (in particular if $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ is a critical point of $D$ and $\overline
{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$), then $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a $J^{c}$-LKKT point of $L$, where $J:=\{j\in\overline{1,m}\mid\overline
{\lambda}_{j}\geq0\}$. Consequently, if moreover $A(\overline{\lambda})\geq0$, then $\overline{x}$ $(\in X_{e})$ is a global minimizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{J^{c}}\supset X_{e}$.
Proof. Apply Corollary \[fact2\] for $J:=\overline{1,m}$. $\square$
The next result is the variant of Proposition \[p1ei\] for maximizing $q_{0}$ on $X_{J}$.
\[p1eimax\]Let $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}$.
*(i)* Assume that $\nabla_{x}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0$ and the condition$$\textstyle \left[ \forall j\in J^{c}:\overline{\lambda}_{j}\leq
0~~\wedge~~\frac{\partial L}{\partial\lambda_{j}}(\overline{x},\overline
{\lambda})\leq0~~\wedge~~\overline{\lambda}_{j}\cdot\frac{\partial L}{\partial\lambda_{j}}(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0\right]
~\wedge~\left[ \forall j\in J:\frac{\partial L}{\partial\lambda_{j}}(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0\right] \label{r-lkktmax}$$ is verified. Then $\overline{x}$ $\in X_{J}$, $\overline{\lambda}\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}$, and $$\textstyle \left[ \forall j\in J^{c}:\overline{\lambda}_{j}\leq
0~~\wedge~~\frac{\partial D}{\partial\lambda_{j}}(\overline{\lambda})\leq0~~\wedge~~\overline{\lambda}_{j}\cdot\frac{\partial D}{\partial
\lambda_{j}}(\overline{\lambda})=0\right] ~\wedge~\left[ \forall j\in
J:\frac{\partial D}{\partial\lambda_{j}}(\overline{\lambda})=0\right] ;
\label{r-qlpdmax}$$ moreover, if $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$ (or equivalently $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J-}$), then $$q_{0}(\overline{x})=\sup_{x\in X_{J}}q_{0}(x)=L(\overline{x},\overline
{\lambda})=\inf_{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J-}}D (\lambda
)=D(\overline{\lambda}).$$
*(ii)* Assume that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$, $\nabla_{x}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0$ and $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ verifies (\[r-lkktmax\]). Then $\overline{x}=x(\overline{\lambda})$, and $\overline{\lambda}$ verifies condition (\[r-qlpdmax\]); moreover, $\overline{x}$ is the unique global maximizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{J}$ if $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{J-}$.
*(iii)* Assume that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{J-}$. Then$$D(\overline{\lambda})=\inf_{\lambda\in Y^{J-}}D(\lambda)\Longleftrightarrow
D(\overline{\lambda})=\inf_{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J-}}D(\lambda)\Longleftrightarrow\overline{\lambda}\text{ verifies condition
(\ref{r-qlpdmax}).}$$
The proof of the above result is an easy adaptation of the proof of Proposition \[p1ei\], so we omit it.
Quadratic minimization problems with inequality constraints
===========================================================
We consider now the particular case of $(P_{J})$ in which $J=\emptyset;$ the problem is denoted by $(P_{i})$ and the set of its feasible solutions by $X_{i}$. In this case $\Gamma_{J}=\mathbb{R}_{+}^{m}$, and the sets $Y^{J}$, $Y^{J+}$, $Y^{J-}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J+}$ and $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J-}$ are denoted by $Y^{i}$, $Y^{i+}$, $Y^{i-}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+}$ and $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i-}$, respectively. Moreover, in this situation we shall use KKT instead of $J$-LKKT. So, we say that $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}$ is a Karush–Kuhn–Tucker point of $L$ if $\nabla_{x}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=0$ and $$\overline{\lambda}\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{m}~~\wedge~~\nabla_{\lambda}L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\in\mathbb{R}_{-}^{m}~~\wedge
~~\big \langle\overline{\lambda},\nabla_{\lambda}L(\overline{x},\overline
{\lambda})\big\rangle=0,\label{r-kkt-lq}$$ or, equivalently,$$\overline{x}\in X_{i}~~\wedge~~\overline{\lambda}\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{m}~~\wedge~~\left[ \forall j\in\overline{1,m}:\overline{\lambda}_{j}q_{j}(\overline{x})=0\right] ;\label{r-kkt-pqi}$$ we say that $\overline{x}$ is a KKT point for $(P_{i})$ if there exists $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathbb{R}^{m}$ such that (\[r-kkt-pqi\]) holds; we say that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ is a KKT point for $D$ if$$\overline{\lambda}\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{m}~~\wedge~~\nabla D(\overline{\lambda
})\in\mathbb{R}_{-}^{m}~~\wedge~~\big \langle\overline{\lambda},\nabla
D(\overline{\lambda})\big\rangle=0.\label{r-kkt-dqi}$$
Proposition \[p1ei\] becomes the next result when $J=\emptyset$.
\[p1i\]Let $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m}$.
*(i)* Assume that $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a KKT point of $L$. Then $\overline{x}$ is a KKT point of $(P_{i})$, and so $\overline{x}\in
X_{i}$, $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i}$, and (\[r-qlpd\]) holds; moreover, for $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+}$ we have that $$q_{0}(\overline{x})=\inf_{x\in X_{i}}q_{0}(x)=L(\overline{x},\overline
{\lambda})=\sup_{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+}}D(\lambda
)=D(\overline{\lambda}). \label{r-minmaxqi}$$
*(ii)* Assume that $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a KKT point of $L$ with $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$. Then $\overline{x}=x(\overline
{\lambda})$ and $\overline{\lambda}$ is a KKT point of $D$; moreover, $\overline{x}$ is the unique global minimizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{i}$ provided $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{i+}$.
Conversely, assume that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ is a KKT point of $D$. Then $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a KKT point of $L$, where $\overline{x}:=A(\overline{\lambda})^{-1}b(\overline{\lambda})$.
*(iii)* Assume that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{i+}$. Then $$D(\overline{\lambda})=\sup_{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+}}D(\lambda)\Longleftrightarrow D(\overline{\lambda})=\sup_{\lambda\in Y^{i+}}D(\lambda)\Longleftrightarrow\overline{\lambda}\text{ is a KKT point of $D$.}$$
\[r-jrw\]Jeyakumar, Rubinov and Wu (see [@JeyRubWu:07 Prop. 3.2]) proved that $\overline{x}$ is a (global) solution of $(P_{i})$ when there exists $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i}$ is a KKT point of $L$; this result was established previously by Hiriart-Urruty in [@Hir:98 Th. 4.6] when $m=2$.
\[rem-adv\]Having in view Propositions \[p1\], \[p1ei\], \[p1i\], it is more advantageous to use their versions (i) than the second part of (ii) with $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ because in versions (i) one must know only the Lagrangian (hence only the data of the problems), and this provides both $\overline{x}$ and $\overline{\lambda}$, without needing to calculate effectively $D$, then to determine $\overline{\lambda}$ (and after that, $\overline{x}$). Using $D$ could be useful, maybe, if the number of constraints is much smaller than $n$. As seen in the proofs, the consideration of the dual function is not essential in finding the optimal solutions of the primal problem(s).
Comparisons with results on quadratic optimization problems obtained by using CDT\[sec4\]
=========================================================================================
In this section we analyze results obtained by DY Gao and his collaborators in papers dedicated to quadratic optimization problems, or as particular cases of more general results. The main tool to identify the papers where quadratic problems are considered was to look in the survey papers like [@Gao:03a], [@Gao:09] (which is almost the same as [@Gao:08], both of them being cited in Gao’s papers), [@GaoShe:09] (which is very similar to [@Gao:09b]), as well as in the recent book [@GaoLatRua:17].
We present the results in chronological order using our notations (when possible) and with equivalent formulations; however, sometimes we quote the original formulations to feel also the flavor of those papers. When we have not notations for some sets we introduce them, often as in the respective papers; similarly for some notions. Because $c_{0}$ in the definition of $q_{0}$ may be taken always to be $0$, we shall not mention it in the sequel.
Before beginning our analysis we consider it is worth having in view the following remark from the very recent paper [@RuaGao:17b] and to observe that there is not an assumption that some multiplier $\overline{\lambda}_{j}$ be non null in Propositions \[p1\], \[p1ei\] and \[p1i\].
> “*Remark 1*. As we have demonstrated that by the generalized canonical duality (32), all KKT conditions can be recovered for both equality and inequality constraints. Generally speaking, the nonzero Lagrange multiplier condition for the linear equality constraint is usually ignored in optimization textbooks. But it can not be ignored for nonlinear constraints. It is proved recently \[26\] that the popular augmented Lagrange multiplier method can be used mainly for linear constrained problems. Since the inequality constraint $\mu\not =0$ produces a nonconvex feasible set $\mathcal{E}_{a}^{\ast}$, this constraint can be replaced by either $\mu<0$ or $\mu>0$. But the condition $\mu<0$ is corresponding to $y\circ(y-e_{K})\geq0$, this leads to a nonconvex open feasible set for the primal problem. By the fact that the integer constraints $y_{i}(y_{i}-1)=0$ are actually a special case (boundary) of the boxed constraints $0\leq y_{i}\leq1$, which is corresponding to $y\circ(y-e_{K})\geq0$, we should have $\mu>0$ (see \[8\] and \[12, 16\]). In this case, the KKT condition (43) should be replaced by
>
> $\mu>0,~~y\circ(y-e_{K})\leq0,~~\mu^{T}[y\circ(y-e_{K})]=0.\quad$ (47)
>
> Therefore, as long as $\mu\neq0$ is satisfied, the complementarity condition in (47) leads to the integer condition $y\circ(y-e_{K})=0$. Similarly, the inequality $\tau\neq0$ can be replaced by $\tau>0$."
Notice that many papers (co-) authored by DY Gao, mostly in those made public in the last five years, the multipliers corresponding to nonlinear constraints (but not only) are assumed to be positive. So, in most cases Eq. (\[r-2c\]) is true. Moreover, it is worth observing that $\overline{x}\in X_{J}$ is a local minimizer as well as a local maximizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{J}$ whenever $X_{J}$ is a finite set; this is the case in many optimization problems mentioned in this section.
The quadratic problem considered by Gao in [@Gao:03a Sect. 5.1] is of type $(P_{i})$ in which $A_{1}:=I_{n}:=\operatorname*{diag}e$ with $e:=(1,...,1)^{T}\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$, $b_{1}=0$, $c_{1}<0$, $A_{j}=0$ for $j\in\overline{2,m}$. Below, $X_{i1}:=\{x\in X_{i}\mid q_{1}(x)=0\}$ and $Y_{1}^{i+}:=\{\lambda\in Y^{i+}\mid\lambda_{1}>0\}$.
Theorem 4 in [@Gao:03a] (attributed to [@Gao:03b]) asserts: *Let $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{i}$ be a KKT point of $D$ and $\overline{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$. Then $\overline{x}$ is a KKT point of $(P_{i})$ and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
Theorem 6 in [@Gao:03a] asserts: *Assume that $A_{0}$ has at least one negative eigenvalue and $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ is a KKT point of $L$. If $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{1}^{i+}$, then $\overline{x}\in
X_{q1}^{i}$ and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in X_{i1}}q_{0}(x)=\max
_{\lambda\in Y_{1}^{i+}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda})$. If $\overline
{\lambda}\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{m}\cap Y^{-}$ then $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\max_{x\in
X_{i}}q_{0}(x)=\max_{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{m}\cap Y^{-}}D(\lambda
)=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
Clearly, the conclusion of [@Gao:03a Th. 4] follows from Proposition \[p1i\] (ii) and (i).
Let us look at [@Gao:03a Th. 6]. Because $(\overline{x},\overline
{\lambda})$ is a KKT point of $L$ with $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{q1}^{i+}\subset Y^{i+}$, (\[r-minmaxqi\]) holds. Moreover, because $\overline{\lambda}_{1}>0$, it follows that $q_{1}(\overline{x})=0$, and so $\overline{x}\in X_{q1}^{i}$ $(\subset X_{i})$, and so the first assertion of [@Gao:03a Th. 6] holds, but (\[r-minmaxqi\]) is stronger.
Consider now the particular case in which $b_{j}=0$ and $c_{j}=0$ for $j\in\overline{2,m}$ (or, equivalently, $m=1$); in this case the preceding problem becomes a quadratic programming problem over a sphere, considered in [@Gao:03a Sect. 6]. Assume that $Y^{-}\ni\overline{\lambda}=\overline{\lambda}_{1}>0$. Then $\nabla
D(\overline{\lambda})=0$, and so $\overline{x}\in X_{e}$. Using Proposition \[p1\] we get $$\max_{x\in X_{i}}q_{0}(x)\geq q_{0}(\overline{x})=\max_{x\in X_{e}}q_{0}(x)=\min_{\lambda\in Y^{-}}D(\lambda)=\min_{\lambda\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda}),$$ which does not agree with the second assertion of [@Gao:03a Th. 6] because $\mathbb{R}_{+}\cap Y^{-}\subset Y^{-}\subset Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$.
\[ex-gao03\]Let $n=1$, $q_{0}(x)=-\tfrac{1}{2}(x^{2}+x)$ and $q_{1}(x)=\tfrac{1}{2}(x^{2}-1)$. It follows that $X_{e}=\{-1,1\}$, $X_{i}=[-1,1]$, $Y^{+}=(1,\infty)=Y^{i+}$ and $Y^{-}=(-\infty,1)\supset
\lbrack0,1)=\mathbb{R}_{+}\cap Y^{-}$. In this case we have that $A(\lambda)=\lambda-1$, $b(\lambda)=\tfrac{1}{2}$, $c(\lambda)=-\frac{\lambda
}{2}$, $L(x,\lambda)=\frac{\lambda-1}{2}x^{2}-\tfrac{1}{2}x-\frac{\lambda}{2}$, $\nabla L(x,\lambda)=\left( (\lambda-1)x-\tfrac{1}{2},\tfrac{1}{2}x^{2}-\tfrac{1}{2}\right) $, $\nabla L(x,\lambda)=0$ $\Leftrightarrow$ $(x,\lambda)\in\left\{ (-1,\tfrac{1}{2}),(1,\tfrac{3}{2})\right\} $, $D(\lambda)=\frac{1}{8(1-\lambda)}-\frac{\lambda}{2}$. For $(\overline
{x},\overline{\lambda})=(1,\tfrac{3}{2})$ we have that $$q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in X_{i}}q_{0}(x)=\max_{\lambda\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda}),$$ which confirms the second assertion of [@Gao:03a Th. 6], while for $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})=(-1,\tfrac{1}{2})$ we have that $$\tfrac{1}{8}=\max_{x\in\lbrack-1,1]}q_{0}(x)>0=q_{0}(-1)=\max_{x\in
\{-1,1\}}q_{0}(x)=\min_{\lambda\in\lbrack0,1)}D(\lambda)=D(\tfrac{1}{2})<\sup_{\lambda\in\lbrack0,1)}D(\lambda)=\infty.$$ This shows that the third assertion of [@Gao:03a Th. 6] is false.
Of course, in [@Gao:03a Th. 6] there is no need to assume $A$ (i.e. our $A_{0}$) has at least one negative eigenvalue; probably this hypothesis was added in order problem $(\mathcal{P}_{\lambda})$ be not a convex one.
The problems considered by DY Gao in his survey papers [@Gao:08 Sect. 4] and [@Gao:09 Sect. 4] (which are almost the same) refer to box constrained problem ([@Gao:07], [@GaoRua:10]), integer programming ([@FanGaoSheWu:08], [@Gao:07], [@GaoRua:10], [@WanFanGaoXin:08]), mixed integer programming with fixed charge ([@GaoRuaShe:10]) and quadratic constraints ([@GaoRuaShe:09]). In these survey papers the results are stated without proofs and their statements are generally different from the corresponding ones in the papers mentioned above; even more, for some results, the statements are different in the two survey papers, even if the wording (text) is almost the same. We shall mention those results from [@Gao:08 Sect. 4] and/or [@Gao:09 Sect. 4] which have not equivalent statements in other papers.
It seems that the first paper dedicated completely to quadratic problems with quadratic equality constraints using CDT is [@FanGaoSheWu:08], even if [@Gao:07] was published earlier; note that [@FanGaoSheWu:08] is cited in [@Gao:07] as Ref. 6 with a slightly different title (see also Ref. Fang SC, Gao DY, Sheu RL, Wu SY (2007a) in [@GaoRua:08]).
The problems considered by Fang, Gao, Sheu and Wu in [@FanGaoSheWu:08] are of type $(P_{e})$ with $m=n$. Setting $e_{j}:=(\delta_{jk})_{k\in
\overline{1,n}}\in\mathbb{R}^{n}$, one has $A_{j}:=2\operatorname*{diag}e_{j}$, $b_{j}:=e_{j}$, $c_{j}:=0$ for $j\in\overline{1,n}$. Of course, $X_{e}=\{0,1\}^{n}$.
Theorem 1 in [@FanGaoSheWu:08 Th. 1] asserts: *Let $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}\cap\mathbb{R}_{++}^{n}$ be a critical point of $D$ and $\overline{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$. Then $\overline{x}$ is a KKT point for problem $(P_{e})$ and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
Theorem 2 in [@FanGaoSheWu:08 Th. 1] asserts: *Let $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}\cap\mathbb{R}_{--}^{n}$ be a critical point of $D$ and $\overline{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$. Then $\overline{x}$ is a KKT point for the problem $(\mathcal{P}_{\max})$ of maximizing $q_{0}$ on $X_{e}$ and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
Theorem 3 in [@FanGaoSheWu:08 Th. 1] asserts: *Let $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ be a critical point of $D$ and $\overline
{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$.*
*(a) If $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{\natural}^{+}:=Y^{+}\cap\mathbb{R}_{++}^{n}$, then $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in X_{e}}q_{0}(x)=\max_{\lambda\in\mathcal{S}_{\natural}^{+}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline
{\lambda})$.*
*(b) If $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{\natural}^{-}:=Y^{-}\cap\mathbb{R}_{++}^{n}$, then in a neighborhood $\mathcal{X}_{0}\times\mathcal{S}_{0}\subset X_{e}\times\mathcal{S}_{\natural}^{-}$ of $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$, $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in
\mathcal{X}_{0}}q_{0}(x)=\min_{\lambda\in\mathcal{S}_{0}}D(\lambda
)=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
*(c) If $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{\flat}^{-}:=Y^{-}\cap\mathbb{R}_{--}^{n}$, then $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\max_{x\in X_{e}}q_{0}(x)=\min_{\lambda\in\mathcal{S}_{\flat}^{-}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline
{\lambda})$.*
*(d) If $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{\flat}^{+}:=Y^{+}\cap\mathbb{R}_{--}^{n}$, then in a neighborhood $\mathcal{X}_{0}\times\mathcal{S}_{0}\subset X_{e}\times\mathcal{S}_{\flat}^{+}$ of $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$, $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\max_{x\in
\mathcal{X}_{0}}q_{0}(x)=\max_{\lambda\in\mathcal{S}_{0}}D(\lambda
)=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
Using Proposition 4 for $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ with $\nabla
D(\overline{\lambda})=0$ we have: (i) $q_{0}(\overline{x})=D(\overline
{\lambda})$ without supplementary conditions on $\overline{\lambda};$ (ii) because $\mathcal{S}_{\natural}^{+}\subset Y^{+}$, Eq. (\[r-minmaxqe\]) is stronger than the minmax relation in (a); (iii) because $\mathcal{S}_{\flat
}^{-}\subset Y^{-}$, Eq. (\[r-maxminqe\]) is stronger than the maxmin relation in (c); (iii) because $q_{0}$ is locally constant on $X_{e}$, (b) and (d) are true but their conclusions are much weaker then those provided by Eq. (\[r-maxminqe\]) and Eq. (\[r-minmaxqe\]), respectively.
The quadratic problems $(\mathcal{P}_{b})$ considered by Gao in [Gao:07]{} is of type $(P_{e})$ in which $m\geq n$, $q_{0}(x):=-\tfrac{1}{2}\left\Vert Ax-c\right\Vert ^{2}$ for some $A\in\mathbb{R}^{p\times n}$ and $c\in\mathbb{R}^{p}$, $A_{j}:=\operatorname*{diag}e_{j}$, $b_{j}:=0$, $c_{j}:=-\tfrac{1}{2}$ for $j\in\overline{1,n}$, $A_{j}=0$ for $j\in
\overline{n+1,m}$; hence $X_{e}\subset\{-1,1\}^{n};$ problem $(\mathcal{P}_{bo})$ is $(\mathcal{P}_{b})$ in the case $m=n$. The problem of maximizing $D$ on $\mathcal{S}_{b}:=Y_{0}\cap(\mathbb{R}_{++}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m-n})$ is denoted by $(\mathcal{P}_{b}^{d})$ in the general case, and by $(\mathcal{P}_{bo}^{d})$ for $m=n$ (when $\mathcal{S}_{b}:=Y_{0}\cap
\mathbb{R}_{++}^{n}$).
Theorem 4 in [@Gao:07] asserts: *Let $\overline{\lambda
}\in\mathcal{S}_{b}$ be a critical point of $(\mathcal{P}_{b}^{d})$ and $\overline{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$. Then $\overline{x}$ is a critical point of $(\mathcal{P}_{b})$" and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=D(\overline{\lambda})$. Moreover, if $\overline
{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{b}^{+}:=Y^{+}\cap(\mathbb{R}_{++}^{n}\times
\mathbb{R}^{m-n})$, then $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in X_{e}}q_{0}(x)=\max_{\lambda\in\mathcal{S}_{b}^{+}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
Corollary 2 in [@Gao:07] asserts: *Let $\overline{\lambda
}\in\mathcal{S}_{b}$ be a KKT point the canonical dual problem $(\mathcal{P}_{bo}^{d})$ and $\overline
{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$. Then $\overline{x}$ is a KKT point of the Boolean least squares problem $(\mathcal{P}_{bo})$". If $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{b}^{+}$, then $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in X_{e}}q_{0}(x)=\max_{\lambda\in\mathcal{S}_{b}^{+}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
Unfortunately, it is not defined what is meant by critical points of problems $(\mathcal{P}_{b}^{d})$ and $(\mathcal{P}_{b})$, respectively. However, because $\mathcal{S}_{b}$ and $\mathcal{S}_{b}^{+}$ are open sets, by critical point of $(\mathcal{P}_{b}^{d})$ one must mean critical point of $D$; in this situation the conclusions of [@Gao:07 Th. 4], less $\overline{x}$ is a critical point of $(\mathcal{P}_{b})$", are true, but are much weaker than those provided by Proposition \[p1\]. Similarly, in [@Gao:07 Cor. 2], $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{b}$ is a KKT point the canonical dual problem $(\mathcal{P}_{bo}^{d})$ is equivalent to $\overline{\lambda}$ is a critical point of $D$.
The difference between problems $(\mathcal{P}_{b})$ considered by Wang, Fang, Gao and Xing in [@WanFanGaoXin:08 p. 215] and [@Gao:07 Th. 4] is that in the former $q_{0}$ is a general quadratic function (hence $X_{e}\subset\{-1,1\}^{n}$).
Theorem 2.2 in [@WanFanGaoXin:08] asserts: *Let $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{b}:=Y_{0}\cap(\mathbb{R}_{+}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m-n})$ be a critical point of $D$ and $\overline
{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$. Then $\overline{x}$ is a KKT point of $(P_{e})$ and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
Theorem 2.3 in [@WanFanGaoXin:08] asserts: *Let $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{b}^{+}:=Y^{+}\cap(\mathbb{R}_{+}^{n}\times\mathbb{R}^{m-n})$ be a critical point of $D$ and $\overline
{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$. Then $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in X_{e}}q_{0}(x)=\max_{\lambda\in\mathcal{S}_{b}^{+}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
Theorems 3.2 and 3.3 from [@WanFanGaoXin:08] are the versions of Theorems 2.2 and 2.3 for $n=m$, respectively. Of course, the conclusions of Theorems 2.2 and 2.3 are valid replacing $\mathcal{S}_{b}$ and $\mathcal{S}_{b}^{+}$ by $Y_{0}$ and $Y^{+}$, respectively.
The general quadratic problem with inequality constraints $(P_{i})$ is considered by Gao in [@Gao:08] and [@Gao:09]. In the sequel, the Moore–Penrose generalized inverse of $F\in\mathfrak{M}_{n}$ is denoted by $F^{\dag}$ or $F^{+}$, as in the corresponding cited papers authored by Gao and his collaborators.
Theorem 7 in [@Gao:08] and Theorem 10 in [@Gao:09] assert: *Let $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+}$ be a a solution of problem $(\mathcal{P}_{q}^{d})$ of maximizing $D$ on $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i}$ and $\overline{x}:=\left[ A(\overline{\lambda})\right] ^{\dag
}(\overline{\lambda})$. Then $\overline{x}$ is a KKT point of $(P_{i})$ and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=D(\overline{\lambda})$. If $A(\overline{\lambda})\succeq0$ then $\overline{\lambda}$ is a global maximizer of the problem $(\mathcal{P}_{q}^{d})$ and $\overline{x}$ is a global minimizer of $(P_{i})$. If $A(\overline{\lambda})\prec0$, then $\overline{x}$ is a local minimizer (or maximizer) of $(P_{i})$ if and only if $\overline{\lambda}$ is a local minimizer (or maximizer) of $D$ on $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+}$.*
The box constrained problem" $(\mathcal{P}_{b})$ considered by Gao in [@Gao:08 Th. 3] and [@Gao:09] is of type $(P_{i})$ in which $m=n$, $A_{j}:=2\operatorname*{diag}e_{j}$, $b_{j}:=0$, $c_{j}:=-1$ for $j\in\overline{1,n}$; hence $X_{i}=[-1,1]^{n}$.
Theorem 3 in [@Gao:08] asserts: *Let $\overline{\lambda
}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+}$ be a critical point of $D$ and $\overline{x}:=\left[ A(\overline{\lambda})\right] ^{\dag}b(\overline
{\lambda})$. Then $\overline{x}$ is a KKT point of $(P_{i})$ and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=D(\overline{\lambda})$. Moreover, if $A(\overline
{\lambda})\succeq0$ then $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in X_{i}}q_{0}(x)=\max_{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline
{\lambda})$. If $A(\overline{\lambda})\prec0$, then on a neighborhood $\mathcal{X}_{o}\times\mathcal{S}_{o}$ of $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$ we have either $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in\mathcal{X}_{0}}q_{0}(x)=\min_{\lambda\in\mathcal{S}_{0}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda})$, or $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\max_{x\in\mathcal{X}_{0}}q_{0}(x)=\max_{\lambda
\in\mathcal{S}_{0}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
The only difference between [@Gao:08 Th. 3] and [Gao:09]{} is that in the latter the case $A(\overline{\lambda})\prec0$ is missing.
Probably, the intention was to take $\overline{\lambda}\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i}$ instead of $\overline{\lambda}\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+}$ in the first assertions of [@Gao:08 Ths. 3, 7] and [@Gao:09 Ths. 5, 10]; in fact, there is not $\overline
{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+}$ such that $A(\overline{\lambda
})\prec0!$
It is not clear how the criticality of $D$ at $\lambda\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}\setminus Y_{0}$ is defined in [@Gao:08 Th. 3] and [@Gao:09 Th. 5].
Let us assume that $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ is a critical point of $D$ in the mentioned results from [@Gao:08] and [@Gao:09]; in this situation [@Gao:08 Th. 3] is a particular case of [@Gao:08 Th. 7]. Then $\overline{x}$ is a KKT point of $(P_{i})$ iff $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{n};$ assuming moreover that $A(\overline{\lambda})\succeq
0$, the conclusion of the second assertion of [@Gao:08 Th. 7] is true. However, in the case $A(\overline{\lambda})\prec0$ the conclusions of [@Gao:08 Ths. 3, 7] are false, as the next example shows.
\[ex-gao08\] Consider $n:=m:=2$, $A_{0}:=\left[
\begin{array}
[c]{cc}-1 & 1\\
1 & -3
\end{array}
\right] $, $A_{1}:=\operatorname*{diag}e_{1}$, $A_{2}:=\operatorname*{diag}e_{2}$, $b_{0}:=(0,-1)^{T},b_{1}:=b_{2}:=0$, $c_{1}:=c_{2}:=-\frac{1}{2}$. Then $A(\lambda)=A_{0}+\lambda_{1}A_{1}+\lambda_{2}A_{2}$, $b(\lambda)=b_{0}$, $c(\lambda)=-\tfrac{1}{2}(\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2})$. We have that $Y_{\operatorname{col}}=Y_{0}=\{(\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2})\in\mathbb{R}^{2}\mid(\lambda_{1}-1)(\lambda_{2}-3)\neq1\}$. The critical points $(\overline
{x},\overline{\lambda})$ of $L$ are: $\left( (-1,-1)^{T},(0,3)^{T}\right) $, $\left( (-1,1)^{T},(2,3)^{T}\right) $, $\left( (1,-1)^{T},(2,5)^{T}\right)
$, $\left( (1,1)^{T},(0,1)^{T}\right) $. Applying Proposition \[p1i\] we obtain that $\overline{x}:=(1,-1)^{T}$ is the global minimizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{i}=[0,1]^{2}$ and $\overline{\lambda}:=(2,5)^{T}$ is the global maximizer of $D$ on $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i}=Y^{i}=\{(\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2})\in\mathbb{R}^{2}\mid\lambda_{1}>2$, $(\lambda_{1}-2)(\lambda_{2}-3)>1\}$.
Take now $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda}):=\left( (1,1)^{T},(0,1)^{T}\right) ;$ we have that $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{2}$ and $A(\overline{\lambda})\prec0$. From Proposition \[lem-pd\] (iv), we have that $\overline{\lambda}$ is a global minimizer of $D$ on $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}=Y^{-}=\{(\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2})\in\mathbb{R}^{2}\mid\lambda_{1}<2$, $(\lambda_{1}-2)(\lambda_{2}-3)>1\}$. Assuming that $\overline{\lambda}$ is a local maximizer of $D$, because $D$ is convex on $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}=Y^{-}$, $D$ is constant on an open neighborhood $U\subset Y^{-}$ of $\overline{\lambda}$, and so $\nabla D(\lambda)=0$ for $\lambda\in U;$ taking into account (\[r-cppdL\]), this is a contradiction. Observe that $\overline{x}=(1,1)$ is not a local minimizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{i}$. Indeed, take $x:=(1-u,1)\in X_{i}$ for $u\in(0,2);$ then $q_{0}(x)=-\tfrac{1}{2}u^{2}<0=q_{0}(\overline{x})$, proving that $\overline{x}$ is not a local minimum of $q_{0}$ on $X_{i}$.
Gao and Sherali in [@GaoShe:09 Th. 8.16] (attributed to [@Gao:05]) assert: *Suppose that $m=1$, $A_{1}>0$, $b_{1}=0$, $c_{1}<0$. Let $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{i}$ be a critical point of $D$ and $\overline
{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$. If $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{i+}$, then $\overline{x}$ is a global minimizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{i}$. If $\overline
{\lambda}\in\mathbb{R}_{+}\cap Y^{-}$ then $\overline{\lambda}$ is a local minimizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{i}$.*
As in the case of [@Gao:03a Th. 6] above, the first assertion of [@GaoShe:09 Th. 8.16] follows from Proposition \[p1i\]. However, the second assertion of [@GaoShe:09 Th. 8.16] is false as the next example shows.
*(see [@VoiZal:10 Ex. 1])*\[ex-th16-gs\] Consider $n:=2$, $m:=1$, $A_{0}:=\left[
\begin{array}
[c]{cc}-2 & -1\\
-1 & -3
\end{array}
\right] $, $A_{1}:=I_{2}$, $b_{0}:=(-1,-1)^{T}$, $b_{1}:=0$, $c_{1}:=-\frac{1}{2}$. Then $D(\lambda)=-\frac{1}{2}\lambda-\frac{1}{2}\frac{2\lambda-3}{\lambda^{2}-5\lambda+5}$ and $D^{\prime}(\lambda)=-\frac
{1}{2}\frac{\left( \lambda-2\right) ^{2}}{\left( \lambda^{2}-5\lambda
+5\right) ^{2}}\left( \lambda-1)(\lambda-5\right) $. Hence the set of critical points of $D$ is $\{1,2,5\}\subset\mathbb{R}_{+}$. For $\overline
{\lambda}=1$ we have that $A(\overline{\lambda})=\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{cc}-1 & -1\\
-1 & -2
\end{array}
\right) \prec0$ and $\overline{x}=x(\overline{\lambda})=(1,0)^{T}$. Since $X_{i}=\{(\cos t,\sin t)^{T}\mid t\in(-\pi,\pi]\}$ and $$q_{0}((\cos t,\sin t)^{T})=-(3+\cos t-2\sin t)\sin^{2}\tfrac{1}{2}t\leq
(\sqrt{5}-3)\sin^{2}\tfrac{1}{2}t<0=q_{0}(\overline{x})$$ for all $t\in(-\pi,\pi]\setminus\{0\}$, we have that $\overline{x}$ is the unique global maximizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{i}$, in contradiction with the second assertion of [@GaoShe:09 Th. 8.16].
The problem considered by Zhang, Zhu and Gao in [@ZhaZhuGao:09] is of type $(P_{i})$ in which $m\geq n$, $A_{j}:=\operatorname*{diag}e_{j}$, $b_{j}:=0$, $c_{j}\leq0$ for $j\in\overline{1,n}$, $A_{j}=0$ for $j\in\overline{n+1,m}$.
Theorem 1 in [@ZhaZhuGao:09] asserts: *Let $\overline
{\lambda}\in Y^{i}$ be a KKT point of $D$ and $\overline{x}:=x(\overline
{\lambda})$. Then $\overline{x}$ is a KKT point of $(P_{i})$ and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
Theorem 2 in [@ZhaZhuGao:09] asserts: *Let $\overline
{\lambda}\in Y^{i}$ be a KKT point of $D$ and $\overline{x}:=x(\overline
{\lambda})$. If $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{i+}$, then $\overline{\lambda}$ is a global maximizer of $D$ on $Y^{i+}$ if and only if the vector" $\overline{x}$ is a global minimizer of $(P_{i})$ on $X_{i}$, and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in X_{i}}q_{0}(x)=\max{}_{\lambda\in Y^{i+}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda})$. If $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{m}\cap Y^{-}$, then in a neighborhood $\mathcal{X}_{0}\times S_{0}\subset$$X_{i}\times(\mathbb{R}_{+}^{m}\cap
Y^{-})$ of $(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda})$, we have that either $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in\mathcal{X}_{0}}q_{0}(x)=\min_{\lambda\in S_{0}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda})$, or $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\max_{x\in\mathcal{X}_{0}}q_{0}(x)=\max{}_{\lambda\in
S_{0}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
Clearly, [@ZhaZhuGao:09 Th. 1] and the conclusion of [ZhaZhuGao:09]{} in the case $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{i+}$ follow from Proposition \[p1i\]. As shown in [@Zal:11 Ex. 2] and Example \[ex-gao08\], each of the alternative conclusions of [ZhaZhuGao:09]{} in the case $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{m}\cap Y^{-}$ is false. Observe that [@GaoRuaShe:09] is cited in [@ZhaZhuGao:09] as a paper to appear, but not in connection with the previous result.
The problem $(P_{i})$ is considered also by Gao, Ruan and Sherali in [@GaoRuaShe:09 p. 486]; the problem of maximizing $D$ on $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i}$ is denoted by $(\mathcal{P}_{q}^{d})$.
Theorem 4 in [@GaoRuaShe:09] asserts: *Let $\overline
{\lambda}\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i}$ be a critical point of $(\mathcal{P}_{q}^{d})$ and $\overline{x}:=\left[ A(\overline{\lambda})\right]
^{+}b(\overline{\lambda})$. Then $\overline{x}$ is a KKT point of $(P_{i})$ and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=D(\overline{\lambda})$. If $\overline{\lambda}\in
Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+}$, then $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in X_{i}}q_{0}(x)=\max_{\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline
{\lambda})$. If $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{i+}$ then $\overline{\lambda}$ is a unique global maximizer of $(\mathcal{P}_{q}^{d})$ and the vector $\overline{x}$ is a unique global minimizer of $(P_{i})$. If $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{m}\cap Y^{-}$, then $\overline{\lambda}$ is a local minimizer of $D$ on the neighborhood $S_{o}\subset
$$\mathbb{R}_{+}^{m}\cap Y^{-}$ if and only if $\overline{x}$ is a local minimizer of $q_{0}$ on the neighborhood $X_{o}\subset$$X_{i}$, i.e., $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in\mathcal{X}_{o}}q_{0}(x)=\min_{\lambda
\in\mathcal{S}_{o}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
As noticed before Lemma \[lem-im\], $Y_{\operatorname{col}}$ is not open in general, so it is not possible to speak about the differentiability of $D$ at $\lambda\in Y_{\operatorname{col}}\setminus Y_{0}$. As in [@Gao:07 Th. 4], it is not explained what is meant by critical point of $(\mathcal{P}_{q}^{d})$; we interpret it as being a critical point of $D$. With the above interpretation for critical point of $(\mathcal{P}_{q}^{d})$, we agree with the first two assertions of [@GaoRuaShe:09 Th. 4]. However, the third assertion of [@GaoRuaShe:09 Th. 4] that $\overline{\lambda}$ is the unique global maximizer of $(\mathcal{P}_{q}^{d})$ provided that $\overline{\lambda}\in
Y^{i+}$ is false, as seen in Example \[ex-qi-grs\] below. The same example shows that the fourth assertion of [@GaoRuaShe:09 Th. 4] is false, too; another counterexample is provided by Example \[ex-gao08\].
\[ex-qi-grs\]Let us take $n=m=2$, $q_{0}(x,y):=xy-x$, and $q_{1}(x,y):=-q_{2}(x,y):=\tfrac{1}{2}\left( x^{2}+y^{2}-1\right) $ for $(x,y)\in\mathbb{R}^{2}$. Clearly, the problems $(P_{e})$ for $(q_{0},q_{1})$ and $(P_{i})$ for $(q_{0},q_{1},q_{2})$ are equivalent in the sense that they have the same objective functions and the same feasible sets (hence the same solutions). Denoting by $L^{e}$, $A^{e}$, $b^{e}$, $c^{e}$, $D^{e}$ and $L^{i}$, $A^{i}$, $b^{i}$, $c^{i}$, $D^{i}$ the functions associated to problems $(P_{e})$ and $(P_{i})$ mentioned above, we get: $L^{e}(x,y,\lambda)=xy-x+\tfrac{\lambda}{2}\left( x^{2}+y^{2}-1\right) $, $A^{e}(\lambda)=\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{ll}\lambda & 1\\
1 & \lambda
\end{array}
\right) $, $b^{e}(\lambda)=(1,0)^{T}$, $c^{e}(\lambda)=-\tfrac{1}{2}\lambda$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}=Y_{0}=\mathbb{R}\setminus\{-1,1\}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}=-Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}=Y^{+}=-Y^{-}=(1,\infty)$, $D^{e}(\lambda)=\frac{-\lambda}{\lambda^{2}-1}-\tfrac{1}{2}\lambda$ \[for the problem $(P_{e})$\] and $L^{i}(x,y,\lambda_{1},\lambda
_{2})=L^{e}(x,y,\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{2})$, $A^{i}(\lambda_{1},\lambda
_{2})=A^{e}(\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{2})$, $b^{i}(\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2})=b^{e}(\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{2})$, $c^{i}(\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2})=c^{e}(\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{2})$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i}=Y^{i}=\{(\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2})\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{2}\mid\lambda_{1}-\lambda
_{2}\neq\pm1\}$, $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+}=Y^{i+}=\{(\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2})\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{2}\mid\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{2}>1\}$, $\mathbb{R}_{+}^{2}\cap Y^{-}=\{(\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2})\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{2}\mid\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{2}<-1\}$, $D^{i}(\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2})=D^{e}(\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{2})$.
The critical points of $L^{e}$ are $(0,1,0)$ and $\left( \pm\sqrt
{3}/2,-1/2,\pm\sqrt{3}\right) $. Using Proposition \[p1\], it follows that $(\sqrt{3}/2,-1/2)$ is the unique global minimizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{e}$ and $\sqrt{3}$ is a global maximizer of $D^{e}$ on $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{+}$ $(=Y^{+})$, while $(-\sqrt{3}/2,-1/2)$ is the unique global maximizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{e}$ and $-\sqrt{3}$ is a global minimizer of $D^{e}$ on $Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{-}$ $(=Y^{-})$.
Note that $(\overline{x},\overline{y},\overline{\lambda}_{1},\overline
{\lambda}_{2})$ is a KKT point of $L^{i}$ iff $(\overline{x},\overline
{y},\overline{\lambda}_{1},\overline{\lambda}_{2})$ is a critical point of $L^{i}$ with $(\overline{\lambda}_{1},\overline{\lambda}_{2})\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{2}$, iff $(\overline{x},\overline{y},\overline{\lambda}_{1}-\overline{\lambda}_{2})$ is a critical point of $L^{e}$ with $(\overline
{\lambda}_{1},\overline{\lambda}_{2})\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{2}$. Using Proposition \[p1i\] (ii) we obtain that $(\sqrt{3}/2,-1/2)$ is the unique global minimizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{i}$ and any $(\overline{\lambda}_{1},\overline{\lambda}_{2})\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{2}$ with $\overline{\lambda}_{1}-\overline{\lambda}_{2}=\sqrt{3}$ is a global maximizer of $D^{i}$ on $Y^{i+}$ $(=Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i+})$, the latter assertion contradicting the third assertion of [@GaoRuaShe:09 Th. 4]. On the other hand, as seen above, $(-\sqrt{3}/2,-1/2)$ is the unique global maximizer of $q_{0}$ on $X_{e}=X_{i}$ and $(\sqrt{3},2\sqrt{3})\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{2}\cap Y^{-}$ is a global minimizer of $(\mathcal{P}_{q}^{d})$, contradicting the fourth assertion of [@GaoRuaShe:09 Th. 4].
The problem considered by Lu, Wang, Xin and Fang in [@LuWanXinFan:10] is of type $(P_{e})$ with $m=n$. More precisely, $A_{j}=2\operatorname*{diag}e_{j}$, $b_{j}:=e_{j}$, $c_{j}:=0$ for $j\in\overline{1,n};$ hence $X_{e}=\{0,1\}^{n}$. One must emphasize the fact that the authors use the usual Lagrangian, even if CDT is invoked.
Theorem 2.2 (resp. Theorem 2.3) of [@LuWanXinFan:10] asserts: *If $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ (resp. $\overline{\lambda}\in Y^{+}$) is such that $\nabla D(\overline{\lambda})=0$ and $\overline{x}:=x(\overline
{\lambda})$, then $q_{0}(\overline{x})=D(\overline{\lambda})$ (resp. $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in X_{e}}q_{0}(x)$).*
Gao and Ruan [@GaoRua:10] considered problems $(P_{e})$ and $(P_{i})$ when $m=n$ and $A_{j}:=\operatorname*{diag}e_{j}$, $b_{j}:=0$, $c_{j}:=-\tfrac
{1}{2}$ for $j\in\overline{1,n}$. Of course, $X_{e}=\{-1,1\}^{n}$ and $X_{i}=[-1,1]^{n}$. The problem of maximizing $D$ on $Y^{i+}$ is denoted by $(\mathcal{P}^{d})$.
Theorem 1 in [@GaoRua:10] (attributed to [@Gao:07]) asserts: *If $\overline{\sigma}$ is a critical point of $D$, the vector $\overline{x}$“$:=x(\overline{\sigma})$ is a KKT point of” $(P_{i})$ and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=D(\overline{\sigma})$. If the critical point $\overline{\sigma}>0$, then the vector $\overline{x}$“$\in X_{e}$ is a local optimal solution of the integer programming problem” $(P_{e})$. If $\overline{\sigma}\in Y^{i+}$, then $q_{0}(\overline
{x})=\min_{x\in X_{i}}q_{0}(x)=\max_{\sigma\in Y^{i+}}D(\sigma)=D(\overline
{\sigma})$. If the critical point $\overline{\sigma}\in
$“$Y^{i+}$ and $\overline{\sigma}>0$, then the vector $\overline{x}$”$\in X_{e}$ is a global minimizer to the integer programming problem“ $(P_{e})$. If $\overline{\sigma}\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^{n}\cap Y^{-}$, then $\overline{\sigma}$ is a local minimizer of $(\mathcal{P}^{d})$, the vector $\overline{x}$ is a local minimizer of” $(P_{i})$, and on the neighborhood $\mathcal{X}_{o}\times\mathcal{S}_{o}$ of $(\overline{x},\overline{\sigma})$, $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in\mathcal{X}_{o}}q_{0}(x)=\min_{\sigma
\in\mathcal{S}_{o}}D(\sigma)=D(\overline{\sigma})$.*
Concerning [@GaoRua:10 Th. 1] we observe the following: In the first assertion it is not clear if $\overline{\sigma}$ belongs to $\mathbb{R}_{+}^{n}$ or not; of course, $\overline{x}$ is not a KKT point of $(P_{i})$ if $\overline{\sigma}\notin\mathbb{R}_{+}^{n}$. The second assertion is true because $X_{e}$ is finite (without any condition on $\overline{\sigma}$). The third assertion is false without assuming that $\overline{\sigma}$ is at least a KKT point of $D$. The fourth assertion is true without assuming $\overline{\sigma}>0$. The fifth assertion is false if $\overline{\sigma}>0$ and $\nabla D(\overline{\sigma})\neq0$.
The main difference between [@GaoRua:10 Th. 1] and the conjunction of [@GaoRua:10 Th. 2 & Th. 3] is that in the latter $Y_{0}$ is replaced by $Y_{\operatorname{col}}$, but their statements are not more clear. This is the reason for not analyzing them here.
The problem considered by Gao, Ruan and Sherali in [@GaoRuaShe:10] is of type $(P_{J})$ with $n=m=2k$ $(k\in\mathbb{N}^{\ast})$ and $J:=\overline
{k+1,n}$. In [@GaoRuaShe:10] $A_{0}$ is such that $(A_{0})_{ij}=0$ if $\max\{i,j\}>k$, $A_{j}:=2\operatorname*{diag}e_{j}$ and $c_{j}:=0$ for $j\in\overline{1,m}$, $b_{j}:=e_{j+k}$ for $j\in J^{c}$ $(=\overline{1,k})$ and $b_{j}:=e_{j}$ for $j\in J;$ moreover, $\mathcal{S}_{\natural
}:=Y_{\operatorname{col}}\cap(\mathbb{R}_{+}^{k}\times\mathbb{R}_{++}^{k})$ $(\subset Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{i}\subset Y_{\operatorname{col}}^{J})$, $\mathcal{S}_{\natural}^{+}:=Y^{+}\cap\mathcal{S}_{\natural}$ $(\subset
Y^{i+}\subset Y^{J+})$, $\mathcal{S}_{\flat}:=Y_{\operatorname{col}}\cap(\mathbb{R}_{-}^{k}\times\mathbb{R}_{--}^{k})$, $\mathcal{S}_{\flat}^{-}:=Y^{-}\cap\mathcal{S}_{\flat}$ $(\subset Y^{i-}\subset Y^{J-})$.
Theorem 1 of [@GaoRuaShe:10] asserts: *Let $\overline
{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{\natural}$ be a KKT point of $D$ and $\overline
{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$. Then $\overline{x}$ is feasible to the primal problem $(P_{J})$ and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=L(\overline{x},\overline{\lambda
})=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
Theorem 2 in [@GaoRuaShe:10] asserts: *Let $\overline
{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{\natural}^{+}\cup\mathcal{S}_{\flat}^{-}$ be a critical point of $D$ and $\overline{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$. If $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{\natural}^{+}$ then $q_{0}(\overline
{x})=\min_{x\in X_{J}}q_{0}(x)=\max_{\lambda\in\mathcal{S}_{\natural}^{+}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda})$. If $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{\flat}^{-}$ then $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\max_{x\in X_{J}}q_{0}(x)=\min
_{\lambda\in\mathcal{S}_{\flat}^{-}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
In [@GaoRuaShe:10 Th. 1] it is not clear what is meant by KKT point of $D$ because $D$ is not differentiable for $\overline{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{\natural}\setminus Y_{0}$. Propositions \[p1ei\] and \[p1eimax\] confirm [@GaoRuaShe:10 Th. 2], but the conclusions of the latter are much weaker than those of the former.
The quadratic problems $(\mathcal{P}_{b})$ and $(\mathcal{P}_{bo})$ considered by Ruan and Gao in [@RuaGao:17] (and [@RuaGao:16]) are those from [@Gao:07]. The statement of [@RuaGao:17 Th. 5] is that of [@Gao:07 Cor. 2] in which $\mathcal{S}_{b}$ is now $Y_{0}\cap\{\lambda
\in\mathbb{R}^{m}\mid\lambda_{j}\neq0$ $\forall j\in\overline{1,n}\}$, $\mathcal{S}_{b}^{+}$ being the same, that is $Y^{+}\cap\mathbb{R}_{++}^{m}$. The statement of [@RuaGao:17 Th. 6] is that of [@Gao:07 Th. 4] in which a critical point of $(\mathcal{P}_{b}^{d})$ is replaced by a KKT point of $(\mathcal{P}_{b}^{d})$.
The quadratic problem considered by Ruan and Gao in [@RuaGao:17b] is of type $(P_{J})$ in which $m>n$, and $\overline{1,n+1}\subset J$. In [@RuaGao:17b] $A_{j}:=2\operatorname*{diag}e_{j}$, $b_{j}:=e_{j}$, $c_{j}:=0$ for $j\in\overline{1,n}$, $A_{j}:=0$ for $j\in\overline{n+1,m};$ hence $X_{J}\subset\{0,1\}^{n}$. One considers $\mathcal{S}_{a}:=\{\lambda\in
Y^{J}\mid\lambda_{j}\neq0$ $\forall j\in J\}$ and $\mathcal{S}_{a}^{+}:=\{\lambda\in Y^{J+}\mid\lambda_{j}>0$ $\forall j\in J\}$.
Theorem 3 of [@RuaGao:17b] asserts: *Let $\overline
{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{a}$ be a $J$-LKKT point of $D$ and $\overline
{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$. Then $\overline{x}$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $(P_{J})$ and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
Theorem 4 in [@RuaGao:17b] asserts: *Let $\overline
{\lambda}\in\mathcal{S}_{a}^{+}$ be a $J$-LKKT point of $D$ and $\overline
{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})$. Then $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in X_{J}}q_{0}(x)=\max_{\lambda\in\mathcal{S}_{a}^{+}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
Clearly, [@RuaGao:17b Th. 3] is an immediate consequence of Lemma \[lem-qperfdual\], while [@RuaGao:17b Th. 4] is a very particular case of Proposition \[p1ei\].
The quadratic problem considered by Gao in [@Gao:17], [@Gao:18] and [@GaoAli:18] is of type $(P_{J})$ in which $m=n+1$ and $J:=\overline{1,n}$. In these papers $A_{0}:=0$, $A_{j}:=2\operatorname*{diag}e_{j}$, $b_{j}:=e_{j}$, $c_{j}:=0$ for $j\in J$, and $A_{n+1}:=0$; hence $X_{J}\subset\{0,1\}^{n}$.
Theorem 2 of [@Gao:17] asserts: *Let $\overline{\lambda
}\in Y^{J+}$ be a global maximizer of $D$ on $Y^{J+}$. Then $\overline
{x}:=x(\overline{\lambda})\in X_{J}$ and $q_{0}(\overline{x})=\min_{x\in
X_{J}}q_{0}(x)=\max_{\lambda\in Y^{J+}}D(\lambda)=D(\overline{\lambda})$.*
The differences between [@Gao:17 Th. 2] and [Gao:18]{} are: in the latter $b_{n+1}:=-c(u)\in\mathbb{R}_{-}^{n}$, $c_{n+1}:=-V_{c}<0$, and $Y^{J+}$ is replaced by $\{\lambda\in Y^{J+}\mid\lambda_{n+1}>0\}$. The differences between [@Gao:17 Th. 2] and [@GaoAli:18 Th. 1] are: in the latter $c_{n+1}:=-V_{c}<0$, and $\min_{\rho\in\mathcal{Z}_{a}}P_{u}(\rho)$ is replaced by $\min_{\rho
\in\mathbb{R}^{n}}P_{u}(\rho);$ of course, $\min_{\rho\in\mathbb{R}^{n}}P_{u}(\rho)=-\infty$ if $c_{u}\neq0$. In all 3 papers there are provided proofs of the mentioned results.
Using Proposition \[p1ei\] (iii) in then context of [@Gao:17 Th. 2] we have that $\overline{\lambda}$ is a $J$-LKKT point of $D;$ using Proposition \[p1ei\] (ii) and (i) we get the conclusion of [@Gao:17 Th. 2].
Yuan [@Yua:17] (the same as [@Yua:16]) considers problem $(P_{i})$ in its general form.
In [@Yua:17 p. 340] one asserts: *One hard restriction is given“ by $b_{0}\neq0$. The restriction is very important to guarantee the uniqueness of a globally optimal solution of” $(P_{i})$.*
Theorem 1 of [@Yua:17] asserts: *Let $\mathcal{Y}:=\{\sigma\in Y^{i}\mid x(\sigma)\in X_{i}\}\neq\emptyset$, and let $(\mathcal{P}^{d})$ be the problem of maximizing $D$ on $\mathcal{Y}$. If $\overline{\sigma}$ is a solution of $(\mathcal{P}^{d})$, then $\overline
{x}:=x(\overline{\sigma})$ is a solution of $(P_{i})$ and $q_{0}(\overline
{x})=D(\overline{\sigma})$.*
Theorem 2 of [@Yua:17] asserts: *Assume that ($C_{1}$) $\sum_{k=0}^{m}A_{k}\succ0$, and ($C_{2}$) there exists $k\in\overline{1,m}$ such that $A_{k}\succ0$, $A_{0}+A_{k}\succ0$, and $\left\Vert D_{k}A_{0}^{-1}b_{0}\right\Vert >\left\Vert b_{k}^{T}D_{k}^{-1}\right\Vert
+\sqrt{\left\Vert b_{k}^{T}D_{k}^{-1}\right\Vert ^{2}+2|c_{k}|}$, where $A_{k}=D_{k}^{T}D_{k}$ and $\left\Vert ^{\ast}\right\Vert $ is some vector norm. Then problem $(\mathcal{P}^{d})$ has a unique non-zero solution $\overline{\sigma}$ in the space $Y^{i+}$.*
Counterexamples to both theorems of [@Yua:17] as well as for the assertion on the hard restriction" $b_{0}\neq0$ from [@Yua:17 p. 340] are provided in [@Zal:18].
Conclusions
===========
– We made a complete study of quadratic minimization problems with quadratic equality and/or inequality constraints using the method suggested by the canonical duality theory (CDT) introduced by DY Gao. This method is based on the introduction of a dual function. Our study uses only the usual Lagrangian associated to minimization problems with equality and/or inequality constraints, without any reference to CDT; CDT is presented (or, at least, referred) in all the papers cited in Section \[sec4\].
– As observed in Remark \[rem-adv\], it is more advantageous to use the assertions (i) of Propositions \[p1\], \[p1ei\], \[p1i\], than the second part of (ii) with $\overline{\lambda}\in Y_{0}$ because in versions (i) one must know only the Lagrangian (hence only the data of the problems), and this provides both $\overline{x}$ and $\overline{\lambda}$. Using $D$ could be useful, possibly, if the number of constraints is much smaller than $n$.
– As seen in Section \[sec4\], many results obtained by DY Gao and his collaborators on quadratic optimization problems are not stated clearly, and some of them are even false; some statements were made more clear in subsequent papers, but we didn’t observe some warning about the false assertions. For the great majority of the correct assertions the use of the usual direct method provides stronger versions.
– Asking the strict positivity of the multipliers corresponding to nonlinear constraints (but not only, as in [@RuaGao:17b]), is very demanding, even for inequality constraints. Just observe that for $k$ equality constraints one has $2^{k}$ distinct possibilities to get the feasible set, but at most one could produce strictly positive multipliers.
**Acknowledgement** We thank prof. Marius Durea for reading a previous version of the paper and for his useful remarks.
[99]{}
SC Fang, DY Gao, RL Sheu, SY Wu, *Canonical dual approach to programming problems*, J. Ind. Manag. Optim. 4 (2008), 125–142.
DY Gao, *Nonconvex semi-linear problems and canonical dual solutions*, in: DY Gao, RW Ogden (eds) Advances in Mechanics and Mathematics, vol. II, pp. 261–312. Springer (2003).
DY Gao, *Perfect duality theory and complete solutions to a class of global optimization problems*, Optimization 52 (2003), 467–493.
DY Gao, *Sufficient conditions and perfect duality in nonconvex minimization with inequality constraints*, J. Ind. Manag. Optim. 1 (2005), 59–69.
DY Gao, *Solutions and optimality to box constrained nonconvex minimization problems*, J. Ind. Manag. Optim. 3 (2007), 293–304
DY Gao, *Advances in canonical duality theory with applications to global optimization*, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Foundations of Computer-Aided Process Operations, pp. 73–82. Omni Press, Cambridge, MA (2008) (almost the same as [@Gao:09]).
DY Gao, *Canonical duality theory: Unified understanding and generalized solution for global optimization problems*, Comput. Chem. Eng. 13 (2009), 1964–1972 (almost the same as [@Gao:08]).
DY Gao, *Introduction to canonical duality theory* (2009) (found with Google Scholar).
DY Gao, *Canonical duality theory for topology optimization*, in: DY Gao, V Latorre, N Ruan (eds) Canonical Duality Theory. Advances in Mechanics and Mathematics, vol. 37, pp. 263–276. Springer, Cham (2017).
DY Gao, *On topology optimization and canonical duality method*, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 341 (2018), 249–277 (see also arXiv:1712.02919).
DY Gao, EJ Ali, *A novel canonical duality theory for solving 3-D topology optimization problems*, arXiv:1803.02615 (3 versions).
DY Gao, V Latorre, N Ruan (eds), *Canonical Duality Theory. Unified Methodology for Multidisciplinary Study*, Advances in Mechanics and Mathematics 37. Cham: Springer (2017).
DY Gao, N Ruan, *Solutions and optimality criteria for nonconvex quadratic-exponential minimization problem*, Math. Meth. Oper. Res. 67 (2008), 479–491.
DY Gao, N Ruan, *Solutions to quadratic minimization problems with box and integer constraints*, J. Glob. Optim. 47 (2010), 463–484.
DY Gao, N Ruan, V. Latorre, RETRACTED: *Canonical duality-triality theory: bridge between nonconvex analysis/mechanics and global optimization in complex system*, Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids, 21(3) (2016), NP5–NP36 (see also arXiv:1410.2665).
DY Gao, N Ruan, V Latorre, *Canonical duality-triality theory: bridge between nonconvex analysis/mechanics and global optimization in complex system*, in: DY Gao, V Latorre, N Ruan (eds) Canonical Duality Theory. Advances in Mechanics and Mathematics, vol. 37, pp. 1–47. Springer, Cham (2017).
DY Gao, N Ruan, H Sherali, *Solutions and optimality criteria for nonconvex constrained global optimization problems with connections between canonical and Lagrangian duality*. J. Glob. Optim. 45 (2009), 473–497.
DY Gao, N Ruan, H Sherali, *Canonical dual solutions for fixed cost quadratic program*, in A Chinchuluun et al. (eds) Optimization and Optimal Control, Springer Optimization and its Applications vol. 39, pp. 139–156. Springer, New York, NY (2010).
DY Gao, H Sherali, *Canonical duality theory: Connections between nonconvex mechanics and global optimization*, in: DY Gao, H Sherali (eds) Advances in Applied Mathematics and Global Optimization, pp. 257–326. Springer, USA (2009).
JB Hiriart-Urruty, *Conditions for global optimality 2*, J. Global Optim. 13 (1998), 349–367.
V Jeyakumar, AM Rubinov, ZY Wu, *Non-convex quadratic minimization problems with quadratic constraints: Global optimality conditions*, Math. Program. 110 (2007), 521–541.
C Lu, Z Wang, W Xing, SC Fang, *Extended canonical duality and conic programming for solving 0-1 quadratic programming problems,* J. Ind. Manag. Optim. 6 (2010), 779–793.
J-P Penot, *On the existence of Lagrange multipliers in nonlinear programming in Banach spaces,* in: S Auslender, W Oettli, J Stoer (eds) Optimization and Optimal Control. Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences, vol. 30, pp 89–104. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (1981).
N Ruan, DY Gao, *RETRACTED: Canonical duality theory for solving nonconvex/discrete constrained global optimization problems*, Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids, 21(3) (2016), NP194–NP205.
N Ruan, DY Gao, *Canonical duality theory for solving nonconvex/discrete constrained global optimization problems*, in: DY Gao, V Latorre, N Ruan (eds) Canonical Duality Theory. Advances in Mechanics and Mathematics, vol. 37, pp. 187–201. Springer, Cham (2017).
N Ruan, DY Gao, *Global optimal solution to quadratic discrete programming problem with inequality constraints*, in: DY Gao, V Latorre, N Ruan (eds) Canonical Duality Theory. Advances in Mechanics and Mathematics, vol. 37, pp. 315–338. Springer, Cham (2017).
MD Voisei, C Zalinescu: *On three duality results*, http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.4329.
ZB Wang, SC Fang, DY Gao, WX Xing, *Global extremal conditions for multi-integer quadratic programming*, J. Ind. Manag. Optim. 4 (2008), 213–225.
Y Yuan: RETRACTED: *Global optimization solutions to a class of non-convex quadratic minimization problems with quadratic constraints,* Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids, 21(3) (2016), NP208–NP222.
Y Yuan: *Global optimization solutions to a class of non-convex quadratic minimization problems with quadratic constraints,* in: DY Gao, V Latorre, N Ruan (eds) Canonical Duality Theory. Advances in Mechanics and Mathematics, vol. 37, pp. 339–358. Springer, Cham (2017).
C Zalinescu, *On Gwinner’s paper Results of Farkas type*, Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 10 (1989), 199–210.
C. Zalinescu, *On two triality results*, Optim. Eng. 12 (2011), 477–487.
C. Zalinescu, *On “two important theorems" in canonical duality theory*, arXiv:1808.05074v1
X Zhang, J Zhu, DY Gao, *Solution to nonconvex quadratic programming with both inequality and box constraints*, Optim. Eng. 10 (2009), 183–191.
[^1]: It seems that the term Lagrange–Karush–Kuhn–Tucker multiplier was introduced by J.-P. Penot in [@Pen:81].
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Model of angular bremsstrahlung of photons emitted during $\alpha$-decay is presented. A special emphasis is given on development of unified formalism of matrix elements in the dipole and multipolar approaches. A probability of the emission of photons calculated on the basis of the multipole model without any normalization on experimental data (i. e. in absolute scale) is found at $90^{\circ}$ of the angle $\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}$ between directions of motion of the $\alpha$-particle (with its tunneling under barrier) and emission of photons to be in a good agreement with the newest experimental data for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$, $^{214}{\rm Po}$, and $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ nuclei. The spectrum for $^{244}{\rm Cm}$ is found at $\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma} = 25^{\circ}$ to be in satisfactory agreement with high limit of errors of experimental data of Japanese group. A comparative analysis for the spectra calculated for $^{210}{\rm Po}$ by the multipole and dipole approaches in the absolute scale and with normalization on experimental data is performed. The emission of photons from the internal well in the dipole approach is found to be not small while the multipolar approach does not show such a strong dependence. Distribution of the bremsstrahlung probability on the numbers of protons and nucleons of the $\alpha$-decaying nucleus in selected region close to $^{210}{\rm Po}$ is obtained. An unified formula of the bremsstrahlung probability during the $\alpha$-decay of arbitrary nucleus expressed directly through the $Q_{\alpha}$-value and numbers $A_{p}$, $Z_{p}$ of nucleons and protons of this nucleus is proposed.'
author:
- 'Sergei P. Maydanyuk[^1]'
title: 'Angular bremsstrahlung during $\alpha$-decay, emission from the internal region and unified formula of the bremsstrahlung probability'
---
Introduction \[introduction\]
=============================
Last two decades many experimental and theoretical efforts have been made in investigation of nature of bremsstrahlung emission which accompanies $\alpha$-decay of heavy nuclei (see references in [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA; @Maydanyuk.2009.NPA]). A key idea of such research consists in search of new information about dynamics of the $\alpha$-decay (and dynamics of tunneling) which is supposed to be extracted from analysis of the measured bremsstrahlung spectra. Tunneling times in nuclear collisions and decays are extremely small, close to nuclear time. This fact results in impossibility to test non-stationary methods of tunneling experimentally. However, researchers open new ways how to obtain new information about the dynamics of nuclear processes. An increasing interest in study of the bremsstrahlung processes accompanying the $\alpha$-decay could be explained by this idea mainly: to find a new approach how through analysis of the bremsstrahlung spectra to “measure” dynamics of the $\alpha$-decay (perhaps, in its first stage), to estimate duration of tunneling of the $\alpha$-particle through barrier.
Many approaches for description of the bremsstrahlung emission during the $\alpha$-decay have already been developed where models with semiclassical spherically symmetric description of the $\alpha$-decay are prevailing (see [@Dyakonov.1996.PRLTA; @Dyakonov.1999.PHRVA; @Bertulani.1999.PHRVA; @Takigawa.1999.PHRVA], also calculations of the spectra see in [@Kasagi.1997.JPHGB]). In comparison with fully quantum approach, the semiclassical one allows to work with characteristics and parameters, physical sense of which is natural that simplifies this task, allowing to understand studied questions easier. Enough well description of experimental data has already been achieved in such approach, where one can note a resent success in agreement between theory and experiment for the controversial nucleus $^{210}{\rm Po}$ [@Boie.2007.PRL; @Jentschura.2008.PRC]. Perspectives are certain in study of dynamics of the $\alpha$-decay with some analysis of the bremsstrahlung [@Bertulani.1999.PHRVA; @Misicu.2001.JPHGB; @Dijk.2003.FBSSE], in study of dynamics of tunneling in the $\alpha$-decay [@Serot.1994.NUPHA; @Dijk.1999.PRLTA; @Dijk.2002.PHRVA; @Ivlev.2004.PHRVA], in research of peculiarities of the polarized bremsstrahlung during $\alpha$-decay and influence of electron shells on it [@Amusia.2007.JETP], in effect [@Flambaum.1999.PRLTA] called as *Münchhausen effect* which increases penetrability of the barrier due to charged-particle emission during its tunneling and which could be interesting for further study of the photon bremsstrahlung during tunneling in the $\alpha$-decay. However, the fully quantum approach (starting from [@Batkin.1986.SJNCA] and then [@Papenbrock.1998.PRLTA; @Tkalya.1999.JETP]) seems to be the most accurate and motivated from the physical point of view in description of emission of photons, to be the richest in study of quantum properties and new effects. Among the fully quantum approaches a model proposed for the first time by Papenbrock and Bertsch in [@Papenbrock.1998.PRLTA] has been developing the most intensively, where wave function of photons is used in the dipole approximation. In such dipole approach the matrix element is calculated with higher convergence and without visible decrease of accuracy, that makes this problem to be studied for many researchers in the fully quantum consideration.
If intensity of bremsstrahlung was varied enough visibly at change of the angle, then the emission of photons would take influence on dynamics of the $\alpha$-decay essentially and, therefore, change some its characteristic. From such point of view discussions [@Eremin.2000.PRLTA; @Kasagi.2000.PRLTA] show a way for obtaining the new information about the $\alpha$-decay: through *angular analysis of the bremsstrahlung during the $\alpha$-decay*. But for such researches a model of description of the bremsstrahlung in the $\alpha$-decay which takes a value of the angle between the directions of the $\alpha$-particle propagation (or tunneling) and the photon emission into account, should be constructed. In such direction two independent groups have developed the angular formalism in the semiclassical dipole approach including quadrupole term [@Boie.2007.PRL; @Jentschura.2008.PRC] and in the fully quantum approach [@Maydanyuk.nucl-th.0404013; @Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA; @Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA; @Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA; @Maydanyuk.2009.NPA] where wave function of photons was mainly expanded by spherical waves. In particular, the good agreement for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus between experimental data and the calculated spectra in the approach [@Boie.2007.PRL; @Jentschura.2008.PRC] was obtained, neglecting by emission of photons from the internal nuclear region before the barrier. From such results it could follow that such internal emission of photons is extremely small and does not influence on the spectra. In such a case, it looks to be impossible to extract any useful information about processes of $\alpha$-decay inside the nuclear region before the barrier from experimental data of the bremsstrahlung. But, in order to clarify this the emission of photons from internal region should be estimated on the basis of fully quantum calculations based on the realistic potential between $\alpha$-particle and daughter nucleus. A question of influence of emission from the internal region of the total bremsstrahlung spectra on the basis of realistic $\alpha$-nucleus potential has not been studied yet.
Taking into account *expansion in spherical waves* for description of angular correction of the wave function of photons [@Maydanyuk.nucl-th.0404013] and realistic form of interaction between the $\alpha$-particle and the daughter nucleus [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA], we achieved a little better agreement between such fully quantum approach and later obtained experimental data [@Boie.2007.PRL] for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus (for explanation see Fig. 3 in [@Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA] and discussions here). Results in descriptions of the newest experimental data [@Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA; @Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA; @Maydanyuk.2009.NPA] for the $^{214}{\rm Po}$ and $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ nuclei seem to be enough good also, where we have been achieving agreement between theory and experiment up to 765 keV. But, a *multipole approach* (started from [@Tkalya.1999.JETP], then in [@Maydanyuk.2003.PTP]) seems to be the most accurate and corrected in spatial description of the emission of photons during the $\alpha$-decay. Such approach turns out to calculate probability without any normalization relatively experimental data (i. e. in co-called *absolute scale*), and achieves enough good agreement with them. This peculiarity adds power of prediction to the multipolar approach: it allows to study the bremsstrahlung during the $\alpha$-decays of arbitrary nucleus, to estimate the emission from the internal region, to predict new spectra.
In [@So_Kim.2000.JKPS] dependence of the bremsstrahlung probability on the electrical charge of the daughter nucleus was analyzed. But, it is unclear how much energy of the $\alpha$-particle takes influence on the photons emission. Calculating the bremsstrahlung probabilities for the different isotopes with different mass numbers, I have seen that this probability is determined by combination between numbers of protons and neutrons in the nucleus under decay, rather than by the electric charge of this nucleus, and one come to conclusion about direct dependence of the bremsstrahlung probability on the effective charge $Z_{\rm eff}$. It could be interesting to clarify whether any other parameter or characteristic exists, influence of which on the probability is essential. More intriguing task has been appeared: *to construct an unified formula of the bremsstrahlung probability during the $\alpha$-decay of the arbitrary nucleus which is directly expressed through all these parameters and characteristics*. *But, whether is it possible to describe the bremsstrahlung spectra for all different nuclei by only one formula in general? Whether is it possible to describe the bremsstrahlung spectrum for only one arbitrary nucleus with very high accuracy inside the energy region of the photon emitted used in experiments?* To answer on such questions, it should be desirable to use the model which is the most accurate and corrected in description of this reaction.
This paper answers on these questions and it is organized so. In Sec. II the model of the bremsstrahlung accompanying the $\alpha$-decay is presented, where emphasis is made on the angular formalism in framework of the dipole and multipolar approaches of the matrix elements and calculation of the bremsstrahlung probability. In Sec. \[sec.3.3\] the model is tested on experimental data [@Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA; @Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA] for the $^{214}{\rm Po}$ and $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ nuclei. The spectrum for $^{244}{\rm Cm}$ is added to such a picture, compared with high limit of errors of experimental data [@Kasagi.1997.JPHGB; @Kasagi.1997.PRLTA]. In Sec. \[sec.3.4\] distribution of the bremsstrahlung probability on the numbers of protons and nucleons of the $\alpha$-decaying nucleus in selected region close to $^{210}{\rm Po}$ is presented. In Sec. \[sec.3.5\] the angular spectra for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus by the multipolar model are presented. In Sec. \[sec.3.6\] the formula of the bremsstrahlung probability during the $\alpha$-decay, based only on the $Q_{\alpha}$-value and numbers of protons and neutrons of the decaying nucleus, has been constructed. Inside region of the $\alpha$-active nuclei from $^{106}{\rm Te}$ up to the nucleus with numbers of nucleons and protons $A_{p}=266$ and $Z_{p}=109$ with energy of the photons emitted from 50 keV up to 900 keV good agreement has been achieved between the spectra, obtained on the basis of the multipole model, and the bremsstrahlung spectra obtained on the basis of the proposed formula. At finishing, results are summarized.
Model \[sec.2\]
===============
Matrix element of emission \[sec.2.1\]
--------------------------------------
We define probability of the bremsstrahlung emission during $\alpha$-decay of nucleus in terms of transition matrix element of the composite system ($\alpha$-particle and daughter nucleus) from its state before emission of photon (called as *initial $i$-state*) into its state after such emission (called as *final $f$-state*). In this paper, I shall use the definition of the matrix element like (2.11) in [@Maydanyuk.2003.PTP] (in the first correction of the non-stationary perturbation theory with stationary limits $t_{0}=-\infty$ and $t_{1}=+\infty$, and with normalization $|C| \to 1$): $$a_{fi} = F_{fi} \cdot 2\pi \,\delta(w_{f}-w_{i}+w),
\label{eq.2.1.1}$$ where $$\begin{array}{lcl}
F_{fi} & = &
Z_{eff}\, \displaystyle\frac{e}{m} \,
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{2\pi\hbar}{w}} \cdot p\,(k_{i},k_{f}), \\
p\,(k_{i}, k_{f}) & = &
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\alpha=1,2} \mathbf{e}^{(\alpha),*}\, \mathbf{p}\,(k_{i}, k_{f}), \\
\mathbf{p}\,(k_{i}, k_{f}) & = &
\biggl< k_{f} \biggl| \, e^{-i\mathbf{kr}} \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \,
\biggr| \,k_{i} \biggr> =
\int
\psi^{*}_{f}(\mathbf{r}) \:
e^{-i\mathbf{kr}} \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\:
\psi_{i}(\mathbf{r}) \;
\mathbf{dr}
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.1.2}$$ and $\psi_{i}(\mathbf{r}) = |k_{i}\bigr>$ and $\psi_{f}(\mathbf{r}) = |k_{f}\bigr>$ are stationary wave functions of the decaying system in the initial $i$-state and final $f$-state which do not contain number of photons emitted, $Z_{\rm eff}$ and $m$ are effective charge and reduced mass of this system. $\mathbf{e}^{(\alpha)}$ are unit vectors of polarization of the photon emitted, $\mathbf{k}$ is wave vector of the photon and $w = k = \bigl| \mathbf{k}\bigr|$. Vectors $\mathbf{e}^{(\alpha)}$ are perpendicular to $\mathbf{k}$ in Coulomb calibration. We have two independent polarizations $\mathbf{e}^{(1)}$ and $\mathbf{e}^{(2)}$ for the photon with impulse $\mathbf{k}$ ($\alpha=1,2$). One can develop formalism simpler in the system of units where $\hbar = 1$ and $c = 1$, but we shall write constants $\hbar$ and $c$ explicitly. Let’s find also square of the matrix element $a_{fi}$ used in definition of *probability of transition*. Using the *formula of power reduction of $\delta$-function* (see [@Bogoliubov.1980], § 21, p. 169): $$[\delta(w)]^{2} = \delta(w)\: \delta(0) = \delta(w) \: (2\pi)^{-1} \int dt =
\delta(w)\: (2\pi)^{-1}\, T,
\label{eq.2.1.3}$$ we find ($T\to +\infty$ is higher time limit): $$|a_{fi}|^{2} = 2\pi\: T\: |F_{fi}|^{2} \cdot \delta(w_{f}-w_{i}+w),
\label{eq.2.1.4}$$ that looks like (4.21) in [@Bogoliubov.1980] (with accuracy up to factor $(2\pi)^{2}$) and like (42.5) in [@Landau.v3.1989] (exactly, see § 42, p. 189).
Linear and circular polarizations of the photon emitted \[sec.2.2\]
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Rewrite vectors of *linear* polarization $\mathbf{e}^{(\alpha)}$ through *vectors of circular polarization* $\mathbf{\xi}_{\mu}$ with opposite directions of rotation (see ref. [@Eisenberg.1973], (2.39), p. 42): $$\begin{array}{ccc}
\mathbf{\xi}_{-1} = \displaystyle\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\,
\bigl(\mathbf{e}^{(1)} - i\mathbf{e}^{(2)}\bigr), &
\mathbf{\xi}_{+1} = -\displaystyle\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\,
\bigl(\mathbf{e}^{(1)} + i\mathbf{e}^{(2)}\bigr), &
\mathbf{\xi}_{0} = \mathbf{e}^{(3)} = 0.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.2.1}$$ Then $p\,(k_{i},k_{f})$ can be rewritten so: $$p\,(k_{i}, k_{f}) =
\sum\limits_{\mu = -1, 1} h_{\mu}\,\mathbf{\xi}^{*}_{\mu}
\int
\psi^{*}_{f}(\mathbf{r})\:
e^{-i\mathbf{kr}} \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \:
\psi_{i}(\mathbf{r}) \;
\mathbf{dr},
\label{eq.2.2.2}$$ $$\begin{array}{ccc}
h_{\pm} = \mp \displaystyle\frac{1 \pm i}{\sqrt{2}}, &
h_{-1} + h_{+1} = -i\sqrt{2}, &
\sum\limits_{\alpha = 1,2} \mathbf{e}^{(\alpha),*} =
h_{-1} \mathbf{\xi}_{-1}^{*} + h_{+1} \mathbf{\xi}_{+1}^{*}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.2.3}$$
Different expansions of the vector potential $\mathbf{A}$ \[sec.2.3\]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to simplify calculations of the matrix element $p\,(k_{i}, k_{f})$ with taking into account angular correlation between vectors $\mathbf{k}$ and $\mathbf{r}$, function $e^{-i\mathbf{kr}}$ connected with the vector potential $\mathbf{A}$ of the electro-magnetic field of the daughter nucleus should be expanded into basis of functions. At present, only three different types of expansion have been used in this problem:
- The expansion in the dipole approximation: $$e^{i \mathbf{kr}} = 1 + i\,\mathbf{kr} + \ldots
\label{eq.2.3.1}$$ where the first item is found to be mainly used correctly in further calculations of the matrix element;
- The expansion by the spherical waves (in direction of papers [@Maydanyuk.nucl-th.0404013; @Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA; @Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA; @Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA; @Maydanyuk.2009.NPA]): $$e^{i \mathbf{kr}} =
\displaystyle\sum_{l=0}^{+\infty}\,
i^{l} (2l+1)\, P_{l}(\cos \theta_{\alpha\gamma}) \, j_{l}(kr),
\label{eq.2.3.2}$$ where $\theta_{\alpha\gamma}$ is angle between vectors $\mathbf{k}$ and $\mathbf{r}$ ($\mathbf{kr} = kr\,\cos{\theta_{\alpha\gamma}}$);
- The expansion by electric and magnetic multiples (see ref.[@Eisenberg.1973], (2.106) in p. 58): $$\mathbf{\xi}_{\mu}\, e^{i \mathbf{kr}} =
\mu\, \sqrt{2\pi}\, \sum_{l, \nu}\,
(2l+1)^{1/2}\, i^{l}\, D_{\nu\mu}^{l} (\varphi,\theta,0) \cdot
\Bigl[ \mathbf{A}_{l\nu} (\mathbf{r}, M) +
i\mu\, \mathbf{A}_{l\nu} (\mathbf{r}, E) \Bigr],
\label{eq.2.3.3}$$ where (see ref.[@Eisenberg.1973], (2.73) in p. 49, (2.80) in p. 51) $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\mathbf{A}_{l\nu}(\mathbf{r}, M) & = &
j_{l}(kr) \: \mathbf{T}_{ll,\nu} ({\mathbf n}_{ph}), \\
\mathbf{A}_{l\nu}(\mathbf{r}, E) & = &
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{l+1}{2l+1}}\,
j_{l-1}(kr) \: \mathbf{T}_{ll-1,\nu}({\mathbf n}_{ph}) -
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{l}{2l+1}}\,
j_{l+1}(kr) \: \mathbf{T}_{ll+1,\nu}({\mathbf n}_{ph}).
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.3.4}$$
Here, $\mathbf{A}_{l\nu}(\textbf{r}, M)$ and $\mathbf{A}_{l\nu}(\textbf{r}, E)$ are *magnetic* and *electric multipoles*, $j_{l}(kr)$ are *spherical Bessel functions of order $l$*, $\mathbf{T}_{ll',\nu}(\mathbf{n})$ are *vector spherical harmonics*, $\theta_{1}$, $\theta_{2}$, $\theta_{3}$ are angles defining direction of vector $\mathbf{k}$ relatively axis $z$ in selected frame system.
In this paper, I shall use the multipole expansion assuming that it gives us the most reliable approach to describe the angular emission of photon during the $\alpha$-decay. Matrix-function $D_{\nu\mu}^{l,*}(\varphi,\theta,0)$ defines direction of vector $\mathbf{k}$ relatively axis $z$ in the frame system for $\mathbf{r}$: angles $\varphi$ and $ \theta$ point to direction of vector $\mathbf{k}$, but not the vector $\mathbf{r}$. The functions $\mathbf{T}_{ll',\nu}(\mathbf{n})$ have the following form (${\mathbf \xi}_{0} = 0$, see ref.[@Eisenberg.1973], p. 45): $$\mathbf{T}_{jl,m} (\mathbf{n}) =
\sum\limits_{\mu = \pm 1} (l, 1, j \,\big| \,m-\mu, \mu, m) \; Y_{l,m-\mu}(\mathbf{n}) \; \mathbf{\xi}_{\mu},
\label{eq.2.3.5}$$ where $(l, 1, j \,\bigl| \, m-\mu, \mu, m)$ are *Clebsh-Gordon coefficients* and $Y_{lm}(\theta, \varphi)$ are *spherical functions* defined, according to [@Landau.v3.1989] (see p. 119, (28,7)–(28,8)).
Approximation of the spherically symmetric $\alpha$-decay \[sec.2.4\]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Now we shall study the $\alpha$-decay in the spherically symmetric approximation. We orientate the frame system so that axis $z$ will be parallel to the vector $\mathbf{k}$ and $$D_{\nu\mu}^{l}(\varphi,\theta,0) = \delta_{\mu\nu}.
\label{eq.2.4.1}$$ In the spherically symmetric approximation, wave functions of the decaying system in the initial and final states are separated into the radial and angular components, and these states are characterized by quantum numbers $l$ and $m$. We shall be interesting in such photon emission when the system transits to superposition of all possible final states with different values of the magnetic numbers $m_{f}$ at the same orbital number $l_{f}$. Let’s assume that in the initial state we have $l_{i}=m_{i}=0$ and the radial component of wave function $\varphi_{f} (r)$ does not depend on $m_{f}$ for selected $l_{f}$. We write wave functions so: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\psi_{i} (\mathbf{r}) & = & \varphi_{i} (r) \: Y_{00}({\mathbf n}_{r}^{i}), \\
\psi_{f} (\mathbf{r}) & = & \varphi_{f} (r) \: \displaystyle\sum\limits_{m} Y_{l_{f}m}({\mathbf n}_{r}^{f})
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.4.2}$$ and obtain: $$p\,(k_{i}, k_{f}) = \sqrt{2\pi}\: \sum\limits_{l} \: (-i)^{l}\, \sqrt{2l+1} \: \Bigl[ p_{l}^{M} -ip_{l}^{E} \Bigr],
\label{eq.2.4.3}$$ where $$\begin{array}{ll}
p_{l}^{M} = \sum\limits_{\mu = -1, 1} \mu\, h_{\mu}\: p_{l\mu}^{M}, &
p_{l}^{E} = \sum\limits_{\mu = -1, 1} \mu^{2} h_{\mu}\: p_{l\mu}^{E}
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.4.4}$$ and $$\begin{array}{lcl}
p_{l\mu}^{M} & = &
\displaystyle\int\limits^{+\infty}_{0} dr
\displaystyle\int d\Omega \: r^{2} \,
\psi^{*}_{f}(\mathbf{r}) \,
\biggl( \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\, \psi_{i}(\mathbf{r}) \biggr) \,
\mathbf{A}_{l\mu}^{*} (\mathbf{r}, M), \\
p_{l\mu}^{E} & = &
\displaystyle\int\limits^{+\infty}_{0} dr
\displaystyle\int d\Omega \: r^{2} \,
\psi^{*}_{f}(\mathbf{r}) \,
\biggl( \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\, \psi_{i}(\mathbf{r}) \biggr)\,
\mathbf{A}_{l\mu}^{*} (\mathbf{r}, E).
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.4.5}$$
Using *gradient formula* (see (2.56), p. 46 in [@Eisenberg.1973]): $$\displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\:
f(r)\, Y_{lm}({\mathbf n}_{r}) =
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{l}{2l+1}}\:
\biggl( \displaystyle\frac{df}{dr} + \displaystyle\frac{l+1}{r} f \biggr)\,
\mathbf{T}_{l l-1, m}({\mathbf n}_{r}) -
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{l+1}{2l+1}}\:
\biggl( \displaystyle\frac{df}{dr} - \displaystyle\frac{l}{r} f \biggr)\,
\mathbf{T}_{l l+1, m}({\mathbf n}_{r}),
\label{eq.2.4.6}$$ we obtain: $$\displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\: \psi_{i}(\mathbf{r}) =
-\,\displaystyle\frac{d\,\varphi_{i}(r)}{dr}\: \mathbf{T}_{01,0}(\mathbf{n}^{i}_{r}),
\label{eq.2.4.7}$$ and then we calculate the matrix components: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
p_{l_{ph}}^{M} & = & -\; I_{M}(l_{f},l_{ph}, l_{ph}) \cdot J(l,l), \\
p_{l_{ph}}^{E} & = &
-\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{l_{ph}+1}{2l_{ph}+1}}\; I_{E}(l_{f},l_{ph},l_{ph}-1) \cdot J(l_{f},l_{ph}-1)\; +
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{l_{ph}}{2l_{ph}+1}}\; I_{E}(l_{f},l_{ph},l_{ph}+1) \cdot J(l_{f},l_{ph}+1),
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.4.8}$$ where $$\begin{array}{lcl}
J(l_{f},n) & = &
\displaystyle\int\limits^{+\infty}_{0}
\varphi^{*}_{f}(l,r)\, \displaystyle\frac{d\varphi_{i}(r)}{dr}\:
j_{n}(kr)\; r^{2} dr, \\
I_{M}(l_{f}, l_{ph}, n) & = &
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu = \pm 1}
\mu\, h_{\mu}
\displaystyle\int
Y_{l_{f}m}^{*}({\mathbf n}_{r}^{f}) \:
\mathbf{T}_{01,0}(\mathbf{n}^{i}_{r})
\: \mathbf{T}_{l_{ph} n,\mu}^{*}({\mathbf n}_{ph}) \: d\Omega, \\
I_{E}(l_{f}, l_{ph}, n) & = &
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu = \pm 1}
h_{\mu}
\displaystyle\int
Y_{l_{f}m}^{*}({\mathbf n}_{r}^{f}) \:
\mathbf{T}_{01,0}(\mathbf{n}^{i}_{r})
\: \mathbf{T}_{l_{ph} n,\mu}^{*}({\mathbf n}_{ph}) \: d\Omega.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.4.9}$$
Using the following value of the Clebsh-Gordon coefficient (see Appendix A): $$(110\,|1, -1, 0) = (110\,|-1, 1, 0) = \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{3}},
\label{eq.2.4.10}$$ from (\[eq.2.3.5\]) and (\[eq.2.4.7\]) we obtain: $$\begin{array}{c}
\mathbf{T}_{01,0}(\mathbf{n}^{i}_{r}) =
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu = \pm 1} (110\,|-\mu\mu 0) \:
Y_{1,-\mu}(\mathbf{n}^{i}_{r}) \: \mathbf{\xi}_{\mu} =
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{3}}
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu = \pm 1}
Y_{1,-\mu}(\mathbf{n}^{i}_{r}) \: \mathbf{\xi}_{\mu}, \\
\displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}
\psi_{i}(\mathbf{r}) =
-\,\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{3}}\:
\displaystyle\frac{d\varphi_{i}(r)}{dr}
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu = -1, 1}
Y_{1,-\mu}(\mathbf{n}^{i}_{r}) \: \mathbf{\xi}_{\mu}
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.4.11}$$ and for the angular integrals for transition into the superposition of all possible final $f$-states with different $m_{f}$ at the same $l_{f}$ from eq. (\[eq.2.4.9\]) we obtain: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
I_{M}(l_{f},l_{ph},n) & = &
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{3}}
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu = \pm 1} \mu\, h_{\mu}
\sum\limits_{\mu^{\prime} = \pm 1} (n, 1, l_{ph} \big|\, \mu-\mu^{\prime}, \mu^{\prime}, \mu) \;
\displaystyle\int \:
Y_{l_{f}m}^{*}({\mathbf n}_{r}^{f}) \,
Y_{1,-\mu^{\prime}}(\mathbf{n}_{r}^{i}) \,
Y_{n, \mu-\mu^{\prime}}^{*}(\mathbf{n}_{ph}) \;
d\Omega, \\
I_{E}(l_{f},l_{ph},n) & = &
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{3}}
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu = \pm 1} h_{\mu}
\sum\limits_{\mu^{\prime} = \pm 1} (n, 1, l_{ph} \big|\, \mu-\mu^{\prime}, \mu^{\prime}, \mu) \;
\displaystyle\int \:
Y_{l_{f}m}^{*}({\mathbf n}_{r}^{f}) \,
Y_{1,-\mu^{\prime}}(\mathbf{n}_{r}^{i}) \,
Y_{n, \mu-\mu^{\prime}}^{*}(\mathbf{n}_{ph}) \;
d\Omega.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.4.12}$$
Calculations of the angular integrals \[sec.2.5\]
-------------------------------------------------
Let us analyze a physical sense of vectors $\mathbf{n}^{i}_{r}$, $\mathbf{n}^{f}_{r}$ and $\mathbf{n}_{ph}$. According to definition of wave functions $\psi_{i} (\mathbf{r})$ and $\psi_{f} (\mathbf{r})$, the vectors $\mathbf{n}^{i}_{r}$ and $\mathbf{n}^{f}_{r}$ determine orientation of radius-vector $\mathbf{r}$ from the center of frame system to point where this wave functions describes the particle before and after the emission of photon. Such description of the particle has a probabilistic sense and is fulfilled over whole space. Change of direction of motion (or tunneling) of the particle in result of the photon emission can be characterized by change of quantum numbers $l$ and $m$ in the angular wave function: $Y_{00}(\mathbf{n}^{i}_{r}) \to Y_{lm}(\mathbf{n}^{f}_{r})$ (which changes the probability of appearance of this particle along different directions, and angular asymmetry is appeared). The vector $\mathbf{n}_{ph}$ determines orientation of radius-vector $\mathbf{r}$ from the center of the frame system to point where wave function of photon describes its “appearance”. Using such a logic, we have: $$\mathbf{n}_{ph} = \mathbf{n}^{i}_{r} = \mathbf{n}^{f}_{r} = \mathbf{n}_{r}.
\label{eq.2.5.1}$$ As we use the frame system where axis $z$ is parallel to vector $\mathbf{k}$ of the photon emission, then dependent on $\mathbf{r}$ integrant function in the matrix element represents amplitude (its square is probability) of appearance of the particle at point $\mathbf{r}$ after emission of photon, if this photon has emitted along axis $z$. Then angle $\theta$ (of vector $\mathbf{n}_{\mathbf{r}}$) is the angle between direction of the particle motion (with possible tunneling) and direction of the photon emission.
Let us consider the angular integral in (\[eq.2.4.12\]) over $d\,\Omega$. Using (\[eq.2.5.1\]), we find: $$\begin{array}{l}
\displaystyle\int \:
Y_{lm}^{*}({\mathbf n}_{r}) \,
Y_{1,-\mu^{\prime}}(\mathbf{n}_{r}) \,
Y_{n, \mu-\mu^{\prime}}^{*}(\mathbf{n_{r}}) \;
d\Omega = \\
= (-1)^{l+n-\mu^{\prime}+1 + \frac{|m+\mu^{\prime}|}{2}} \; i^{l+n+1} \;
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{3\,(2l+1)\,(2n+1)}{32\pi}\;
\displaystyle\frac{(l-1)!}{(l+1)!} \;
\displaystyle\frac{(n-|m+\mu^{\prime}|)!}{(n+|m+\mu^{\prime}|)!}} \;
\times \\
\;\times
\displaystyle\int\:
P_{l}^{1}(\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1}(\cos{\theta}) \; P_{n}^{|m+\mu^{\prime}|} (\cos{\theta}) \cdot
\sin{\theta} \, d\theta \,d\varphi,
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.5.2}$$ where $P_{l}^{m}(\cos{\theta})$ are *associated Legandre’s polynomial* (see [@Landau.v3.1989], p. 752–754, (c,1)–(c,4); also see [@Eisenberg.1973] (2.6), p. 34) and the following restrictions on possible values of $m$ and $l_{f}$ have been obtained: $$\begin{array}{ccc}
m = -\mu = \pm 1, & l_{f} \ge 1, &
n \ge |\mu - \mu^{\prime}| = |m + \mu^{\prime}|.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.5.3}$$
Let’s introduce the following differential matrix elements $dp_{l}^{M}$ and $dp_{l}^{E}$ dependent on the angle $\theta$ : $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\displaystyle\frac{d \,p_{l}^{M}}{\sin{\theta}\,d\theta} & = &
i^{l_{f}+l_{ph}+1} \;
J(l_{f},l_{ph})
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{m = \pm 1}
m \,h_{-m} \;
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu^{\prime} = \pm 1}
C_{l_{f}l_{ph}l_{ph}}^{m \mu^{\prime}} f_{l_{f}l_{ph}}^{m \mu^{\prime}}(\theta), \\
\displaystyle\frac{d \,p_{l}^{E}}{\sin{\theta}\,d\theta} & = &
-i^{l_{f}+l_{ph}} \;
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{l_{ph}+1}{2l_{ph}+1}} \, J(l_{f},l_{ph}-1)
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{m = \pm 1}
h_{-m} \;
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu^{\prime} = \pm 1}
C_{l_{f},l_{ph},l_{ph}-1}^{m \mu^{\prime}} \: f_{l_{f},l_{ph}-1}^{m \mu^{\prime}}(\theta) \: - \\
& - &
i^{l_{f}+l_{ph}} \;
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{l_{ph}}{2l_{ph}+1}} \, J(l_{f},l_{ph}+1)
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{m = \pm 1}
h_{-m} \;
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu^{\prime} = \pm 1}
C_{l_{f},l_{ph},l_{ph}+1}^{m \mu^{\prime}} \: f_{l_{f},l_{ph}+1}^{m \mu^{\prime}}(\theta),
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.5.4}$$ where $$\begin{array}{lcl}
C_{l_{f} l_{ph} n}^{m \mu^{\prime}} & = &
(-1)^{l_{f}+n+1 - \mu^{\prime} + \frac{|m+\mu^{\prime}|}{2}} \;
(n, 1, l_{ph} \big| -m-\mu^{\prime}, \mu^{\prime}, -m) \; \times \\
& \times &
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{(2l_{f}+1)\,(2n+1)}{32\pi}\;
\displaystyle\frac{(l_{f}-1)!}{(l_{f}+1)!} \;
\displaystyle\frac{(n-|m+\mu^{\prime}|)!}{(n+|m+\mu^{\prime}|)!}}, \\
f_{l_{f} n}^{m \mu^{\prime}}(\theta) & = &
P_{l_{f}}^{1}(\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1}(\cos{\theta}) \; P_{n}^{|m+\mu^{\prime}|} (\cos{\theta}).
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.5.5}$$ One can see that integration of functions (\[eq.2.5.4\]) by angle $\theta$ with limits from 0 to $\pi$ gives the total matrix elements $p_{l}^{M}$ and $p_{l}^{E}$ exactly for transition into superposition of all possible final states with different $m_{f}$ at the same $l_{f}$.
We shall find the matrix element at the first values of $l_{f}$ and $l_{ph}$. We have $l_{f} = 1$, $l_{ph} = 1$. Calculating coefficients $C_{11 n}^{m \mu^{\prime}}$ and functions $f_{1 n}^{m \mu^{\prime}}(\theta)$ (see Appendix \[app.4\] and \[app.5\]), from eq. (\[eq.2.5.4\]) we obtain: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\displaystyle\frac{d \,\tilde{p}_{1}^{M}}{\sin{\theta}\,d\theta} & = &
- \displaystyle\frac{3}{8} \: \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{\pi}} \cdot
J(1,1) \cdot
\sin^{2}{\theta} \cos{\theta}, \\
\displaystyle\frac{d \,\tilde{p}_{1}^{E}}{\sin{\theta}\,d\theta} & = &
i \: \displaystyle\frac{1}{8} \: \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{2}{\pi}} \cdot J(1,0) \cdot \sin^{2}{\theta} \: + \:
i \: \displaystyle\frac{1}{8} \: \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{\pi}} \cdot J(1,2) \cdot
\sin^{2}{\theta} \: \Bigl( 1 - 3 \sin^{2}{\theta} \Bigr).
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.6.1}$$ Integrating these expressions over angle $\theta$, we find the integral matrix elements: $$\begin{array}{lcllcl}
\tilde{p}_{1}^{M} & = & 0, &
\tilde{p}_{1}^{E} & = &
i \: \displaystyle\frac{1}{6} \, \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{2}{\pi}} \cdot
\Bigl\{ J(1,0) - \displaystyle\frac{7}{10} \, \sqrt{2} \cdot J(1,2) \Bigr\}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.6.2}$$
Dipole approximation and Fermi’s Golden rule \[sec.2.7\]
--------------------------------------------------------
### Vector potential $\mathbf{A}$ and integrated matrix element \[sec.2.7.1\]
The matrix element $p\,(k_{i},k_{f})$ in the dipole approximation of the vector potential $\mathbf{A}$ has a form: $$p\,(k_{i}, k_{f}) =
\sum\limits_{\mu = -1, 1} h_{\mu}\,\mathbf{\xi}^{*}_{\mu}
\int
\psi^{*}_{f}(\mathbf{r})\:
\displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\: \psi_{i}(\mathbf{r})\; \mathbf{dr}.
\label{eq.2.7.1.1}$$ Applying the following transformation at $l_{i}=0$ introduced in [@Papenbrock.1998.PRLTA] (see new analog in a general case in Appendix \[app.7\]): $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\Bigl\langle f \Bigl|\, \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\, \Bigl|\, i \Bigl\rangle =
\displaystyle\frac{1}{w_{fi}}\;
\biggl\langle f\,
\biggl|\,
\displaystyle\frac{\partial\, V(\mathbf{r})}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\,
\biggr|\, i \biggr\rangle,
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.7.1.2}$$ we obtain: $$p\,(k_{i}, k_{f}) =
\displaystyle\frac{1}{w_{fi}}
\sum\limits_{\mu = -1, 1} h_{\mu}\,\mathbf{\xi}^{*}_{\mu}
\int
\psi^{*}_{f}(\mathbf{r})\:\psi_{i}(\mathbf{r})\;
\displaystyle\frac{\partial\, V(\mathbf{r})}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\; \mathbf{dr}.
\label{eq.2.7.1.3}$$ In the spherically symmetric approximation of the $\alpha$-decay we use the wave functions in form (\[eq.2.4.2\]) and then the matrix element transforms into $$p\,(k_{i}, k_{f}) =
\displaystyle\frac{1}{w_{fi}}
\sum\limits_{\mu = -1, 1}
\sum\limits_{m_{f}}\:
h_{\mu}\,\mathbf{\xi}^{*}_{\mu}
\displaystyle\int\limits^{+\infty}_{0} r^{2} dr
\displaystyle\int d\Omega \cdot
\varphi_{f}^{*} (r) \: Y_{l_{f}m_{f}}^{*} ({\mathbf n}_{r}^{f}) \cdot
\varphi_{i} (r) \cdot
\displaystyle\frac{\partial\, V(r)}{\partial \mathbf{r}}.
\label{eq.2.7.1.4}$$ After use of the gradient formula (\[eq.2.4.7\]) at $l_{i}=0$ and taking into account form (\[eq.2.4.11\]) for the spherical function $\mathbf{T}_{01,0}(\mathbf{n}_{r})$, this matrix element is separated into radial and angular integrals: $$\begin{array}{ccl}
p\,(k_{i}, k_{f}) & = &
-\,\displaystyle\frac{1}{w_{fi}}\,
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{3}}
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu = -1, 1} h_{\mu}
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu^{\prime} = \pm 1}
\mathbf{\xi}^{*}_{\mu}\,\mathbf{\xi}_{\mu^{\prime}}
\displaystyle\int\limits^{+\infty}_{0}
\varphi_{f}^{*}(r)\;
\varphi_{i} (r)\: \displaystyle\frac{d\, V(r)}{dr}\;
r^{2} dr\; \cdot
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{m_{f}}\:
\displaystyle\int
Y_{l_{f}m_{f}}^{*} ({\mathbf n}_{r}^{f})\;
Y_{1,-\mu^{\prime}}(\mathbf{n}_{r})\; d\Omega
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.7.1.5}$$ or ($\mathbf{\xi}_{\pm 1}$ and $\mathbf{\xi}_{\pm 1}^{*}$ are orthogonal vectors) $$\begin{array}{lcl}
p\,(k_{i}, k_{f}) =
-\,\displaystyle\frac{1}{w_{fi}}\,
J_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f}) \cdot
I_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f}),
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.7.1.6}$$ where $$\begin{array}{lcl}
J_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f}) & = &
\displaystyle\int\limits^{+\infty}_{0}
\varphi_{f}^{*}(l_{f}, r)\;
\varphi_{i} (r)\;
\displaystyle\frac{d\, V(r)}{dr}\;
r^{2} dr, \\
I_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f}) & = &
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{3}}\;
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu = \pm 1}
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{m}
h_{\mu}
\displaystyle\int
Y_{l_{f}m_{f}}^{*} ({\mathbf n}_{r}^{f})\;
Y_{1,-\mu}(\mathbf{n}_{r})\; d\Omega.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.7.1.7}$$ After use of formula (\[eq.2.5.1\]) for vectors $\mathbf{n}^{f}_{r}$ and $\mathbf{n}_{r}$ the angular integral $I_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f})$ is non-zero only at $$\begin{array}{lcl}
m_{f} = -\mu = \pm 1, &
l_{f} = 1
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.7.1.8}$$ and equals to $$\begin{array}{lcl}
I_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f}=1) & = &
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{3}}\; \displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu = \pm 1} h_{\mu} =
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{3}}\; \Bigl(h_{-1} + h_{+1}\Bigr) =
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{3}}\; \Bigl(-i\,\sqrt{2}\Bigr) =
-i\; \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{2}{3}}\; .
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.7.1.9}$$ Now the matrix element (\[eq.2.7.1.6\]) obtains a form: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
p\,(k_{i}, k_{f}) =
i\; \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{2}{3}}\; \displaystyle\frac{J_{\rm dip}\, (1)}{w_{fi}}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.7.1.10}$$ Comparing selection rules (\[eq.2.7.1.8\]) in the dipole approximation with the selection rules (\[eq.2.5.3\]) in the multipole approach, one can see that they do not impose any restrictions on the emission of photons. *From eq. (\[eq.2.7.1.1\]) one can see that the wave function of photon in the dipole approximation has no any information about orientation of the vector $\mathbf{k}$ concerning vector $\mathbf{r}$ in any selected frame system. On the basis of such a fact it is logically to consider the emission of photons in the dipole approximation as isotropic.*
### Differential matrix element \[sec.2.7.2\]
Let us define the following differential components of the angular integral $I_{\rm dip}$ by solid angle $\Omega$ and by angle $\theta$: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\displaystyle\frac{d\, I_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f})}{d\Omega} & = &
\displaystyle\frac{d\, I_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f})}{\sin{\theta}\,d\theta\, d\varphi} =
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{3}}\;
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu = \pm 1}
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{m}
h_{\mu} \cdot
Y_{l_{f}m_{f}}^{*} ({\mathbf n}_{r})\;
Y_{1,-\mu}(\mathbf{n}_{r}), \\
\displaystyle\frac{d\, I_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f})}{\sin{\theta}\,d\theta} & = &
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{3}}\;
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu = \pm 1}
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{m}
h_{\mu} \cdot
\displaystyle\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}
Y_{l_{f}m_{f}}^{*} ({\mathbf n}_{r})\;
Y_{1,-\mu}(\mathbf{n}_{r})\; d\varphi.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.7.2.1}$$ But, in their calculations we shall assume that the selection rules (\[eq.2.7.1.8\]) are fulfilled. We find: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\displaystyle\frac{d\, I_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f})}{d\Omega} & = &
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{3}}\;
\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\mu = \pm 1} h_{\mu} \cdot
\displaystyle\frac{3}{8\pi} \cdot
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \cdot P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) =
-i\; \displaystyle\frac{\sqrt{6}}{8\pi}\; \sin^{2}{\theta}, \\
\displaystyle\frac{d\, I_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f})}{\sin{\theta}\,d\theta} & = &
\displaystyle\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}
\displaystyle\frac{d\, I_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f})}{d\Omega}\; d\varphi =
-i\; \displaystyle\frac{\sqrt{6}}{4}\; \sin^{2}{\theta}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.7.2.2}$$ On their basis we shall define the following differential components of the matrix element: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\displaystyle\frac{d\, p_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f}=1)}{d\Omega} & = &
-\,\displaystyle\frac{J_{\rm dip}\,(1)}{w_{fi}} \cdot \displaystyle\frac{d\, I_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f})}{d\Omega} =
i\;\displaystyle\frac{\sqrt{6}}{8\pi}\;
\displaystyle\frac{J_{\rm dip}\, (1)}{w_{fi}} \cdot \sin^{2}{\theta}, \\
\displaystyle\frac{d\, p_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f}=1)}{\sin{\theta}\,d\theta} & = &
-\,\displaystyle\frac{J_{\rm dip}\, (1)}{w_{fi}} \cdot
\displaystyle\frac{d\, I_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f})}{\sin{\theta}\,d\theta} =
i\;\displaystyle\frac{\sqrt{6}}{4}\; \displaystyle\frac{J_{\rm dip}\, (1)}{w_{fi}} \cdot \sin^{2}{\theta}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.7.2.3}$$ One can see that integration of such functions over the solid angle $\Omega$ or over the angle $\theta$ (with needed limits) gives the integrated matrix element $p_{\rm dip}$ exactly. Comparing eqs. (\[eq.2.7.2.3\]) and (\[eq.2.7.1.10\]), we obtain connection between the differential and integral components of the matrix element in the dipole approximation: $$\begin{array}{lclcl}
\displaystyle\frac{d\, p_{\rm dip}}{d\Omega} & = &
2\pi \cdot \displaystyle\frac{d\, p_{\rm dip}}{\sin{\theta}\,d\theta} & = &
p_{\rm dip} \cdot
\displaystyle\frac{3}{8\pi}\;
\sin^{2}{\theta}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.7.2.4}$$ The differential matrix element characterizes the angular distribution of emitted $\alpha$-particles, which becomes anisotropic in result of emission of photons.
Angular probability of emission of photon with impulse $\mathbf{k}$ and polarization $\mathbf{e}^{(\alpha)}$ \[sec.2.8\]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I define the probability of transition of the system for time unit from the initial $i$-state into the final $f$-states, being in the given interval $d \nu_{f}$, with emission of photon with possible impulses inside the given interval $d \nu_{ph}$, so (see ref.[@Landau.v3.1989], (42,5) § 42, p. 189; ref.[@Berestetsky.1989], § 44, p. 191): $$\begin{array}{lll}
d W = \displaystyle\frac{|a_{fi}|^{2}}{T} \cdot d\nu =
2\pi \:|F_{fi}|^{2} \: \delta (w_{f} - w_{i} + w) \cdot d\nu, &
d \nu = d\nu_{f} \cdot d\nu_{ph}, &
d \nu_{ph} = \displaystyle\frac{d^{3} k}{(2\pi)^{3}} =
\displaystyle\frac{w^{2} \, dw \,d\Omega_{ph}}{(2\pi c)^{3}},
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.8.1}$$ where $d\nu_{ph}$ and $d\nu_{f}$ are intervals defined for photon and particle in the final $f$-state, $d\Omega_{ph} = d\,\cos{\theta_{ph}} = \sin{\theta_{ph}} \,d\theta_{ph} \,d\varphi_{ph}$, $k_{ph}=w/c$. $F_{fi}$ is integral over space with possible summation by some quantum numbers of the system in the final $f$-state. Such procedure is averaging by these characteristics and $F_{fi}$ is independent on them. Then, interval $d\,\nu_{f}$ has only new characteristics and quantum numbers, by which integration and summation in $F_{fi}$ was not fulfilled. Integrating eq. (\[eq.2.8.1\]) over $dw$ and substituting eq. (\[eq.2.1.2\]) for $F_{fi}$, we find: $$\begin{array}{cc}
d W = \displaystyle\frac{Z_{eff}^{2} \,e^{2}}{m^{2}}\:
\displaystyle\frac{\hbar\, w_{fi}}{2\pi \,c^{3}} \; \Bigl|p(k_{i}, k_{f})\Bigr|^{2} \;
d \Omega_{ph} \, d\nu_{f}, &
w_{fi} = w_{i} - w_{f} = \displaystyle\frac{E_{i} - E_{f}}{\hbar}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.8.2}$$ This is the probability of the photon emission with impulse $\mathbf{k}$ (and with averaging by polarization $\mathbf{e}^{(\alpha)}$) where the integration over angles of the particle motion after the photon emission has already fulfilled. To take direction $\mathbf{n}_{\mathbf{r}}^{f}$ of motion (or tunneling) of the particle after emission into account, I define the probability so: *the concerning angle $\theta$ is such a function, definite integral of which by the angle $\theta$ with limits from 0 to $\pi$ corresponds exactly to the total probability of photon emission (\[eq.2.8.2\])*: $$\begin{array}{ccl}
\displaystyle\frac{d W(\theta_{f})} {d\,\Omega_{ph} \: d\cos{\theta_{f}}} & = &
\displaystyle\frac{Z_{eff}^{2}\, \hbar\, e^{2}}{2\pi\, c^{3}}\: \displaystyle\frac{w_{fi}}{m^{2}} \;
\biggl\{p\,(k_{i},k_{f}) \displaystyle\frac{d\, p^{*}(k_{i},k_{f}, \theta_{f})}{d\cos{\theta_{f}}} + {\rm h. e.} \biggr\}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.8.3}$$ This probability is inversely proportional to normalized volume $V$. With a purpose to have the probability independent on $V$, I divide eq. (\[eq.2.8.3\]) on flux $j$ of outgoing $\alpha$-particles, which is inversely proportional to this volume $V$ also. Using quantum field theory approach (where $v(\mathbf{p}) = |\mathbf{p}| / p_{0}$ at $c=1$, see [@Bogoliubov.1980], § 21.4, p. 174): $$\begin{array}{cc}
j = n_{i}\, v(\mathbf{p}_{i}), &
v_{i} = |\mathbf{v}_{i}| = \displaystyle\frac{c^{2}\,|\mathbf{p}_{i}|} {E_{i}} =
\displaystyle\frac{\hbar\,c^{2}\,k_{i}} {E_{i}},
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.8.4}$$ where $n_{i}$ is average number of particles in time unit before photon emission (we have $n_{i}=1$ for the normalized wave function in the initial $i$-state), $v(\mathbf{p}_{i})$ is module of velocity of outgoing particle in the frame system where colliding center is not moved, I obtain the *differential absolute probability* (while let’s name $dW$ as the *relative probability*): $$\begin{array}{ccl}
\displaystyle\frac{d\,P (\varphi_{f}, \theta_{f})}{d\Omega_{ph}\, d\cos{\theta_{f}}} & = &
\displaystyle\frac{d\,W (\varphi_{f}, \theta_{f})}{d\Omega_{ph}\, d\cos{\theta_{f}}} \cdot
\displaystyle\frac{E_{i}} {\hbar\, c^{2}\, k_{i}} =
\displaystyle\frac{Z_{eff}^{2} \,e^{2}}{2\pi\,c^{5}}\:
\displaystyle\frac{w_{ph}\,E_{i}}{m^{2}\,k_{i}} \;
\biggl\{p\,(k_{i},k_{f}) \displaystyle\frac{d\, p^{*}(k_{i},k_{f}, \Omega_{f})}{d\,\cos{\theta_{f}}} + {\rm h. e.} \biggr\}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.8.5}$$
Multipolar approach \[sec.2.9\]
-------------------------------
Let us find the bremsstrahlung probability in the multiple approach at the first values $l_{f}=1$ and $l_{ph}=1$. Starting from eqs. (\[eq.2.4.3\]) and (\[eq.2.4.4\]), and using the found differential and integral electrical and magnetic components (\[eq.2.6.1\]) and (\[eq.2.6.2\]), I calculate: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\vspace{2mm}
\tilde{p}_{1}\, (k_{i},k_{f}) & = &
- i \, \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{3}} \cdot
\Bigl\{ J(1,0) - \displaystyle\frac{7}{10} \, \sqrt{2} \cdot J(1,2) \Bigr\}, \\
\displaystyle\frac{d \, \tilde{p}_{1}\, (k_{i},k_{f})}{\sin{\theta}\,d\theta} & = &
i\; \displaystyle\frac{\sqrt{6}}{8} \: \cdot
\biggl\{
3\,J(1,1) \cdot \cos{\theta} - \sqrt{2}\, J(1,0) - J(1,2) \cdot \Bigl( 1 - 3 \sin^{2}{\theta} \Bigr)
\biggr\} \cdot \sin^{2}{\theta}
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.9.1}$$ and from eq. (\[eq.2.8.5\]) I obtain the *absolute* angular probability ($\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma} \equiv \theta_{f}$): $$\begin{array}{ccl}
\vspace{3mm}
\displaystyle\frac{d P^{E1+M1}_{1}(\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma})}
{d\,\Omega_{ph} \: d\cos{\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}}} & = &
\displaystyle\frac{Z_{eff}^{2}\, e^{2}}{8\,\pi\, c^{5}}\:
\displaystyle\frac{w_{fi}}{m^{2}}\,
\displaystyle\frac{E_{i}}{k_{i}}\;
\biggl\{ \Bigl[ J(1,0) - \displaystyle\frac{7}{10} \, \sqrt{2} \cdot J(1,2) \Bigr] \times \\
& \times &
\Bigl[
J^{*}(1,0) +
\displaystyle\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} J^{*}(1,2) \cdot \Bigl( 1 - 3 \sin^{2}{\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}} \Bigr)
- \displaystyle\frac{3}{\sqrt{2}} \,J^{*}(1,1) \cdot \cos{\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}}
\Bigr]
+ {\rm h. e.} \biggr\} \cdot \sin^{2}{\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.9.2}$$
Dipole approach \[sec.2.10\]
----------------------------
Let us find the differential absolute probability (\[eq.2.8.5\]) in dependence on angle $\theta$ and the integrated absolute probability in the dipole approximation. Taking into account: $$\begin{array}{cclccl}
p_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f}=1)& = &
i\;\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{2}{3}}\; \displaystyle\frac{J_{\rm dip}\, (1)}{w_{fi}}, &
\hspace{10mm}
\displaystyle\frac{d\, p_{\rm dip}\, (l_{f}=1)}{\sin{\theta}\,d\theta} & = &
i\;\displaystyle\frac{\sqrt{6}}{4}\; \displaystyle\frac{J_{\rm dip}\, (1)}{w_{fi}} \cdot \sin^{2}{\theta},
\end{array}$$ I obtain: $$\begin{array}{ccl}
\vspace{3mm}
\displaystyle\frac{d P_{\rm dip}(\theta_{f})} {d\,\Omega_{ph} \: d\cos{\theta_{f}}} & = &
\displaystyle\frac{Z_{\rm eff}^{2}\, e^{2}}{c^{5}}\:
\displaystyle\frac{E_{i}}{m^{2}\,k_{i}\,w_{fi}} \cdot
\Bigl| J_{\rm dip}\, (1) \Bigr|^{2} \cdot \sin^{2}{\theta}, \\
P_{\rm dip}(\theta_{f}) & = &
\displaystyle\frac{Z_{\rm eff}^{2}\, e^{2}}{3\pi\,c^{5}}\: \displaystyle\frac{E_{i}}{m^{2}\,k_{i}\,w_{fi}} \cdot
\Bigl| J_{\rm dip}\, (1) \Bigr|^{2}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.10.1}$$ One can write: $$\begin{array}{ccl}
\vspace{3mm}
\displaystyle\frac{d P_{\rm dip}(\theta_{f})} {d\,\Omega_{ph} \: d\cos{\theta_{f}}} & = &
3\pi \cdot P_{\rm dip}(\theta_{f}) \cdot \sin^{2}{\theta}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.10.2}$$ Comparing angular dependence in such a result with the angular correlation obtained in the dipole approximation in [@Jentschura.2008.PRC] (see eq. (9) in the cited paper) one can find that they coincide.
Spectroscopic factor \[sec.2.11\]
---------------------------------
In order to take into account a non-unit possibility of formation of the $\alpha$-particle in the state, from which it is further emitted outside, let us come to other problems of nuclear decays where this question has already been resolved. For example, in a problem of decay of nucleus through emission of proton we should take into account that the state which is occupied by the proton before its emission, is empty for the daughter nucleus. In order to obtain proper value for half-life we should divide it, calculated before by semiclassical approach (or others) directly, on the spectroscopic factor $S_{p}^{\rm (th)}$ (see [@Aberg.1997.PRC]). The spectroscopic factor can easily be calculated in the independent quasiparticle approximation (BCS), in which one assume that the ground state of odd-Z nucleus is one-quasiparticle state, while that of odd-odd system is two-quasiparticle configuration. In the BSC theory, the spectroscopic factor is given by $S^{\rm (th)}_{p} = u^{2}$, where $u^{2}$ is the probability that the spherical orbital corresponding to proton emitted is empty in the daughter nucleus [@Aberg.1997.PRC; @Heyde.1990]. For different proton emitters inclusion of the spectroscopic factors into formulas of half-lives improves agreement between calculated half-lives and their experimental values. Similar approach seems to be in the problem of $\alpha$-decay, where the spectroscopic factor $S_{\alpha}^{\rm (th)}$ is successfully applied.
On such a basis, let us modify the formulas for probability. For the multipole and dipole approaches from eqs. (\[eq.2.9.2\]) and (\[eq.2.10.1\]) we obtain the following *modified absolute angular probabilities*: $$\begin{array}{ccl}
\vspace{3mm}
\displaystyle\frac{d \tilde{P}^{E1+M1}_{{\rm mult},\,1}(\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma})}
{d\,\Omega_{ph} \: d\cos{\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}}} & = &
\displaystyle\frac{Z_{eff}^{2}\, e^{2}}{8\,\pi\, c^{5}\: S_{\alpha}^{\rm (th)}}\:
\displaystyle\frac{w_{fi}}{m^{2}}\,
\displaystyle\frac{E_{i}}{k_{i}}\;
\biggl\{ \Bigl[ J(1,0) - \displaystyle\frac{7}{10} \, \sqrt{2} \cdot J(1,2) \Bigr] \times \\
& \times &
\Bigl[
J^{*}(1,0) +
\displaystyle\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} J^{*}(1,2) \cdot \Bigl( 1 - 3 \sin^{2}{\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}} \Bigr)
- \displaystyle\frac{3}{\sqrt{2}} \,J^{*}(1,1) \cdot \cos{\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}}
\Bigr]
+ {\rm h. e.} \biggr\} \cdot \sin^{2}{\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}},
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.11.1}$$ $$\begin{array}{ccl}
\vspace{3mm}
\displaystyle\frac{d \tilde{P}_{\rm dip}(\theta_{f})} {d\,\Omega_{ph} \: d\cos{\theta_{f}}} & = &
\displaystyle\frac{Z_{\rm eff}^{2}\, e^{2}}{c^{5}\: S_{\alpha}^{\rm (th)}}\:
\displaystyle\frac{E_{i}}{m^{2}\,k_{i}\,w_{fi}} \cdot
\Bigl| J_{\rm dip}\, (1) \Bigr|^{2} \cdot \sin^{2}{\theta}, \\
\tilde{P}_{\rm dip}(\theta_{f}) & = &
\displaystyle\frac{Z_{\rm eff}^{2}\, e^{2}}{3\pi\,c^{5}\: S_{\alpha}^{\rm (th)}}\: \displaystyle\frac{E_{i}}{m^{2}\,k_{i}\,w_{fi}} \cdot
\Bigl| J_{\rm dip}\, (1) \Bigr|^{2}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.2.11.2}$$ One can see that inclusion of the spectroscopic factor $S_{\alpha}^{\rm (th)}$ into formulas of the bremsstrahlung probability raises the spectra obtained before without it by eqs. (\[eq.2.9.2\]) and (\[eq.2.10.1\]). However, in this paper we shall restrict ourselves only by the first preliminary calculations of the bremsstrahlung spectra for the deformed $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ nucleus.
Calculations and analysis \[sec.3\]
===================================
In order to estimate efficiency of the model and accuracy, which it gives in determination of the angular absolute probability of the photon emission, I have calculated the spectra for the $^{210}\mbox{\rm Po}$, $^{214}\mbox{\rm Po}$, $^{226}\mbox{\rm Ra}$ and $^{244}{\rm Cm}$ nuclei. Here, the bremsstrahlung probability is calculated by eq. (\[eq.2.9.2\]). The nucleus–$\alpha$-particle potential is defined by eqs. (11)–(15) with parameters — by eqs. (16)–(22) in [@Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA]. $Q_{\alpha}$-value is 5.439 MeV for $^{210}\mbox{\rm Po}$, 7.865 MeV for $^{214}\mbox{\rm Po}$, 4.904 MeV for $^{226}\mbox{\rm Ra}$, 5.940 MeV for $^{244}{\rm Cm}$, according to ref. [@Buck.1993.ADNDT] (see p. 63). The angle $\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}$ between the directions of the $\alpha$-particle motion (with possible tunneling) and the photon emission for $^{214}\mbox{\rm Po}$ and $^{226}\mbox{\rm Ra}$ is $90^{\circ}$, that is explained by configuration in experiments [@D'Arrigo.1994.PHLTA; @Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA; @Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA]. For $^{210}{\rm Po}$ I use the same angle but results could be easily generalized for other its values. For $^{244}{\rm Cm}$ I study two cases at $90^{\circ}$ and $25^{\circ}$ in order to include experiments [@Kasagi.1997.PRLTA] into the total picture. The first step is calculations of wave functions which should be obtained with high accuracy in order to obtain the convergent spectra. The wave functions of the $\alpha$-decaying system in the states before and after emission of photon are presented in Fig. \[fig.1\] (presentation is for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus, energy of photon is 500 keV).
![Wave functions of the $\alpha$-decaying system for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus: (a) Imaginary part of the wave function in the initial $i$-state; (b) Real part of the wave function in the initial $i$-state; (c) The real wave function in the final $f$-state (after emission of photon); (d) Errors of the wave function in the final $f$-state appeared in current calculations of the spectra (for presentation, module of such a wave function is shown). \[fig.1\]](figure_1a.eps "fig:"){width="44mm"} ![Wave functions of the $\alpha$-decaying system for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus: (a) Imaginary part of the wave function in the initial $i$-state; (b) Real part of the wave function in the initial $i$-state; (c) The real wave function in the final $f$-state (after emission of photon); (d) Errors of the wave function in the final $f$-state appeared in current calculations of the spectra (for presentation, module of such a wave function is shown). \[fig.1\]](figure_1b.eps "fig:"){width="44mm"} ![Wave functions of the $\alpha$-decaying system for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus: (a) Imaginary part of the wave function in the initial $i$-state; (b) Real part of the wave function in the initial $i$-state; (c) The real wave function in the final $f$-state (after emission of photon); (d) Errors of the wave function in the final $f$-state appeared in current calculations of the spectra (for presentation, module of such a wave function is shown). \[fig.1\]](figure_1c.eps "fig:"){width="44mm"} ![Wave functions of the $\alpha$-decaying system for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus: (a) Imaginary part of the wave function in the initial $i$-state; (b) Real part of the wave function in the initial $i$-state; (c) The real wave function in the final $f$-state (after emission of photon); (d) Errors of the wave function in the final $f$-state appeared in current calculations of the spectra (for presentation, module of such a wave function is shown). \[fig.1\]](figure_1d.eps "fig:"){width="44mm"}
One can see that in the initial state the wave function is complex. This provides flux to be constant (in the internal region, in the region of tunneling and in the external region) and be directed outside. In current calculations of the spectra the wave function in the final state is real that allows to miss discontinuity at $r=0$. In particular, in these figures (a, b, c) one can see behavior of these wave functions at boundary between tunneling and external regions. The last figure (d) shows errors which calculations give us, and one hope this allows us to obtain convergent pictures of the bremsstrahlung probability for all studied nuclei.
According to analysis, the multipolar approach provides more accurate calculations of the bremsstrahlung spectra both in absolute scale (i. e. without any normalization on existed experimental data) and in a case when such normalization is used, in comparison with the dipole approach (see Appendix \[app.6\], for details). For example, let us look on Fig. \[fig.2\] \[left panel\], where the spectra for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus obtained by the multipole and dipole approaches in absolute scale are presented.
![Bremsstrahlung probabilities in the $\alpha$-decay of the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus calculated in the absolute scale (solid line, red, is for the spectrum calculated by the multipole model; short-dash line, brown, for the spectrum calculated by the multipole model without emission from the internal region up to the internal turning point; dash line, green, for the full spectrum calculated by the dipole model; dash-dot-dot line, violet, for the spectrum calculated by the dipole model without taking the internal region up to the internal turning point into account; dash-dot line, blue, for the normalized spectrum calculated by the approach in [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA] with normalization used in that paper): \[left panel\] difference between two spectra calculated in the dipole approach with inclusion of emission from the internal well and without such emission is not small, in contrast to the multipole approach; \[right panel\] a role of the nuclear strength $\tilde{V}_{0}$ is clearly shown in calculations of the spectra in the dipole approach: one can see that the strength is larger, the spectrum is higher (for each spectrum the corresponding strength is defined as $\tilde{V}_{0} = V_{0} \cdot V$ where $V_{0}$ is defined by eq. (14) in [@Denisov.2005.PHRVA] and additional new factor $V$ has values 0,1,2,3,4,5 as shown in the figure). \[fig.2\]](figure_2a.eps "fig:"){width="95mm"} ![Bremsstrahlung probabilities in the $\alpha$-decay of the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus calculated in the absolute scale (solid line, red, is for the spectrum calculated by the multipole model; short-dash line, brown, for the spectrum calculated by the multipole model without emission from the internal region up to the internal turning point; dash line, green, for the full spectrum calculated by the dipole model; dash-dot-dot line, violet, for the spectrum calculated by the dipole model without taking the internal region up to the internal turning point into account; dash-dot line, blue, for the normalized spectrum calculated by the approach in [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA] with normalization used in that paper): \[left panel\] difference between two spectra calculated in the dipole approach with inclusion of emission from the internal well and without such emission is not small, in contrast to the multipole approach; \[right panel\] a role of the nuclear strength $\tilde{V}_{0}$ is clearly shown in calculations of the spectra in the dipole approach: one can see that the strength is larger, the spectrum is higher (for each spectrum the corresponding strength is defined as $\tilde{V}_{0} = V_{0} \cdot V$ where $V_{0}$ is defined by eq. (14) in [@Denisov.2005.PHRVA] and additional new factor $V$ has values 0,1,2,3,4,5 as shown in the figure). \[fig.2\]](figure_2b.eps "fig:"){width="95mm"}
In order to feel sensitivity of the spectra on change of the internal well of the $\alpha$-nucleus potential (i. e. its shape in the internal region from $r \to 0$ up to internal turning point), the following calculations are included into this figure: (1) the spectra without emission from such internal well (for the dipole approach this corresponds to a case of rectangular well in the internal region), and (2) the complete spectra obtained concerning full $\alpha$-nucleus potential with realistic nuclear component. It is clearly seen that for the dipole approach the influence of the shape of the potential in the internal region on the spectrum is stronger essentially while the multipole approach seems to be less sensitive to it. Such a peculiarity could be explained by more accurate use of far asymptotic region by the multipole approach, while the dipole approach reduces such a region. This leads to higher convergence of numerical integration over $r$ in calculations of the spectra in the dipole approach. However, *more accurate use of the far asymptotic region by the multipole approach provides essentially better agreement between obtained spectra and experimental data, while the dipole approach seems to do not calculate correctly here (at its present development)*. This important point adds the power of predictions in absolute scale to the multipolar model, in contrast to the dipole one. So, we shall use the multipolar approach for further estimation of the spectra for interesting nuclei and for analysis. In order to complete such a picture, I add calculations of the spectra for $^{210}{\rm Po}$ in the dipole approach for different values of the nuclear strength, presented in next Fig. \[fig.2\] \[right panel\]. From here it is clearly seen that the spectrum is higher, if the nuclear strength is larger (i.e. the internal well of the $\alpha$-nucleus potential is deeper). One can suppose that for multipole approach such dependence should be essentially smaller.
Bremsstrahlung spectra for $^{214}\mbox{\rm Po}$, $^{226}\mbox{\rm Ra}$ and $^{244}\mbox{\rm Cm}$: comparison theory and experiments \[sec.3.3\]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The best result in agreement between theory and experiment I have obtained for the $^{214}\mbox{\rm Po}$ nucleus (see the left panel in Fig. \[fig.3\]; here there is no any normalization of the calculated curve relatively experimental data). From figure one can see that for this nucleus the calculated spectrum by the proposed approach is in enough good agreement with the experimental data [@Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA] inside the region from 100 keV up to 750 keV. The calculated absolute probabilities of the bremsstrahlung in $\alpha$-decay of the $^{226}\mbox{\rm Ra}$ nucleus and experimental data in [@Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA] for this nucleus are presented in the central panel in Fig. \[fig.3\]. For this nucleus at low energies of the photons emitted the calculated spectra are located below experimental data, but for energies from 350 keV and higher I have obtained good agreement between theory and experiment.
![The bremsstrahlung probability in the $\alpha$-decay of the $^{214}{\rm Po}$, $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ and $^{244}{\rm Cm}$ nuclei: red solid line is for the absolute probability calculated by the multipole model, dash-dot blue line for the normalized spectrum calculated by approach [@Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA], dash green line for the absolute probability calculated by formula (\[eq.2.11.1\]) of the multipole model with taking the spectroscopic factor $S_{\alpha}^{\rm (th)}$ into account for the deformed nucleus $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ (we use approximated value $S_{\alpha}^{\rm (th)}=0.2$ from table I in [@Peltonen.2008.PRC]), scatter line for experimental data (data [@Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA] for $^{214}{\rm Po}$, data [@Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA] for $^{226}{\rm Ra}$), data [@Kasagi.1997.JPHGB; @Kasagi.1997.PRLTA] for $^{244}{\rm Cm}$)). \[fig.3\]](figure_3a.eps "fig:"){width="62mm"} ![The bremsstrahlung probability in the $\alpha$-decay of the $^{214}{\rm Po}$, $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ and $^{244}{\rm Cm}$ nuclei: red solid line is for the absolute probability calculated by the multipole model, dash-dot blue line for the normalized spectrum calculated by approach [@Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA], dash green line for the absolute probability calculated by formula (\[eq.2.11.1\]) of the multipole model with taking the spectroscopic factor $S_{\alpha}^{\rm (th)}$ into account for the deformed nucleus $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ (we use approximated value $S_{\alpha}^{\rm (th)}=0.2$ from table I in [@Peltonen.2008.PRC]), scatter line for experimental data (data [@Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA] for $^{214}{\rm Po}$, data [@Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA] for $^{226}{\rm Ra}$), data [@Kasagi.1997.JPHGB; @Kasagi.1997.PRLTA] for $^{244}{\rm Cm}$)). \[fig.3\]](figure_3b.eps "fig:"){width="62mm"} ![The bremsstrahlung probability in the $\alpha$-decay of the $^{214}{\rm Po}$, $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ and $^{244}{\rm Cm}$ nuclei: red solid line is for the absolute probability calculated by the multipole model, dash-dot blue line for the normalized spectrum calculated by approach [@Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA], dash green line for the absolute probability calculated by formula (\[eq.2.11.1\]) of the multipole model with taking the spectroscopic factor $S_{\alpha}^{\rm (th)}$ into account for the deformed nucleus $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ (we use approximated value $S_{\alpha}^{\rm (th)}=0.2$ from table I in [@Peltonen.2008.PRC]), scatter line for experimental data (data [@Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA] for $^{214}{\rm Po}$, data [@Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA] for $^{226}{\rm Ra}$), data [@Kasagi.1997.JPHGB; @Kasagi.1997.PRLTA] for $^{244}{\rm Cm}$)). \[fig.3\]](figure_3c.eps "fig:"){width="62mm"}
I add the calculated absolute probabilities for the $^{244}{\rm Cm}$ nucleus, comparing them with the high limit of errors of experimental data [@Kasagi.1997.JPHGB; @Kasagi.1997.PRLTA] (see the right panel in Fig. \[fig.3\]). I calculate the bremsstrahlung spectrum for $\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}=25^{\circ}$ of the angle $\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}$ between direction of motion of the $\alpha$-particle and photon emission which correspond to experiment [@Kasagi.1997.PRLTA], and I add another spectrum obtained for $\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}=90^{\circ}$. From this figure I see that both calculated curves are located enough close to the high limit of error of experimental data, and perhaps one can conclude that the agreement between theory and experiment is not so bad. This figure clearly demonstrates that the difference between higher and lower spectra could be explained by different values of this angle! Such explanation of two different spectra on the basis of one model is given for the first time, and one can suppose that by such a way a question discussed in [@Eremin.2000.PRLTA; @Kasagi.2000.PRLTA] concerning to the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus is explained also.
Bremsstrahlung dependence on $Q_{\alpha}$ and predictions of the bremsstrahlung probability during $\alpha$-decay of isotopes of ${\rm Th}$ \[sec.3.4\]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Ref. [@Ohtsuki.2006.CzJP] it was reported about current investigations of bremsstrahlung accompanying the $\alpha$-decay of the $^{228}{\rm Th}$ nucleus. Let us estimate the absolute bremsstrahlung probability for this nucleus on the basis of the proposed model. Results of such calculations are presented in Fig. \[fig.4\]. In calculations I use [@Buck.1993.ADNDT]: the angle $\vartheta$ between the directions of the $\alpha$-particle motion (with possible tunneling) and the photon emission is $90^{\circ}$, $Q_{\alpha}$-value is 5.555 MeV.
![The predicted absolute bremsstrahlung probabilities in $\alpha$-decay of the $^{228}{\rm Th}$ nucleus and its isotopes \[fig.4\]](figure_4.eps){width="88mm"}
In Ref. [@Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA] we explained the difference between the photon emission probabilities (both experimental and theoretical results) in the $\alpha$-decay of $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ and $^{214}{\rm Po}$ (at first, dependence of the bremsstrahlung probability on the $\alpha$-particle energy was analyzed in Ref. [@So_Kim.2000.JKPS]): *“The difference between the two sets of data can be attributed to the different structure of the two nuclei, which affects the motion of the $\alpha$-particle inside the barrier. The ratio between the two sets of data of the photon emission probability $dP / dE_{\gamma}$ is strongly characterized by the different $\alpha$-decay energy for $^{214}{\rm Po}$ (E$_{\alpha}$=7.7 MeV) and $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ (E$_{\alpha}$=4.8 MeV) concerning the shapes of the alpha-nucleus barriers for these nuclei.”* The difference between the $\alpha$-particle energies for the decaying $^{214}{\rm Po}$ and $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ nuclei is directly connected with different tunneling regions for these nuclei, which is directly connected with different contributions of the photons emission from tunneling and external regions, interference terms into the total spectra. And we obtained the property: *The tunneling region is larger, the bremsstrahlung spectrum is smaller.* The smaller values of the calculated total emission probability for $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ than the one for $^{214}{\rm Po}$ can be explained by a consequence of the fact that outside the barrier the Coulomb field (and its derivative respect to $r$) that acts on the $\alpha$-particle in the case of $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ is smaller than in the case of $^{214}{\rm Po}$ because the external wide region results for the $^{214}{\rm Po}$ nucleus larger than for $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ and therefore the $\gamma$-emission probability for the $^{214}{\rm Po}$ nucleus is bigger. In Fig. \[fig.4\] one can see the demonstration of this property for isotopes of ${\rm Th}$. In Table \[table.1\] it is shown how the bremsstrahlung probability depends on $Q_{\alpha}$-value of the nucleus for different energies of the photons emitted.
--------- ------------------- --------------------------- ------------------------------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
$A_{p}$ $Q_{\alpha}$, MeV $b_{\alpha}^{\rm abs}$, % $T_{1/2,\, \alpha}^{\rm exp}$, sec 100 keV 200 keV 300 keV 400 keV 500 keV
212 7.987 100.0 3.0E-2 3.0E-9 8.1E-10 2.7E-10 9.5E-11 3.5E-11
218 9.881 100.0 1.1E-7 7.5E-9 2.5E-9 1.0E-9 4.7E-10 2.2E-10
222 8.164 100.0 2.8E-3 5.2E-9 1.3E-9 4.6E-10 1.7E-10 7.0E-11
226 6.487 75.5 2.5E+3 2.9E-9 5.6E-10 1.3E-10 3.5E-11 9.4E-12
228 5.555 72.7 8.3E+7 1.8E-9 2.8E-10 4.9E-11 1.0E-11 1.9E-12
--------- ------------------- --------------------------- ------------------------------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
: Estimated values of the bremsstrahlung probability during $\alpha$-decay of the $^{228}{\rm Th}$ nucleus and its isotopes \[table.1\]
How much is the bremsstrahlung probability changed in dependence on numbers of protons and neutrons of the $\alpha$-decaying nucleus? \[sec.3.5\]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let us analyze how much the probability of photons emitted could change if to change number of protons or neutrons of the nucleus which decays.
![Distribution of the absolute bremsstrahlung probability in the $\alpha$-decay on numbers of protons and nucleons of the decaying nucleus (used data: $Q_{\alpha}=5.439$ MeV for $^{210}{\rm Po}$): left panel is for the probability of the photons emitted with energy $E_{\gamma}=100$ keV, right panel for the probability of the photons emitted with energy $E_{\gamma}=300$ keV \[fig.5\]](figure_5a.eps "fig:"){width="95mm"} ![Distribution of the absolute bremsstrahlung probability in the $\alpha$-decay on numbers of protons and nucleons of the decaying nucleus (used data: $Q_{\alpha}=5.439$ MeV for $^{210}{\rm Po}$): left panel is for the probability of the photons emitted with energy $E_{\gamma}=100$ keV, right panel for the probability of the photons emitted with energy $E_{\gamma}=300$ keV \[fig.5\]](figure_5b.eps "fig:"){width="95mm"}
In order to made such analysis clearer, I have fixed Q-value and have calculated the probabilities in some region of numbers of protons and nucleons (it is convenient to use angle between directions of the emission of photon and motion of the $\alpha$-particle equal to $90^{\circ}$, as results are supposed to be similar for any other angles). In the next Fig. \[fig.5\] a distribution of the absolute probability in dependence on the numbers of protons and neutrons of the $\alpha$-decaying nucleus is presented for 100 keV, 300 keV and 500 keV of the emitted photons. One can see that at increasing of the number of neutrons the probability is changed a little and monotonously while at increasing of the number of protons the probability decreases stronger essentially and monotonously (such proton dependence could be a quantitative demonstration of results of [@So_Kim.2000.JKPS]).
Angular emission of photons \[sec.3.6\]
---------------------------------------
Now let us analyze how much the bremsstrahlung probability is changed in dependence on the angle between directions of the motion of the particle and emission of photon. For analysis we consider the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus. In Fig. \[fig.6\] the bremsstrahlung probabilities calculated by the multipole model at different values of this angle are presented.
![The absolute bremsstrahlung probability in the $\alpha$-decay of $^{210}{\rm Po}$ in dependence on the angle $\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}$ between directions of the motion of the $\alpha$-particle and the emission of photon calculated by the multipole model \[fig.6\]](figure_6a.eps "fig:"){width="85mm"} ![The absolute bremsstrahlung probability in the $\alpha$-decay of $^{210}{\rm Po}$ in dependence on the angle $\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}$ between directions of the motion of the $\alpha$-particle and the emission of photon calculated by the multipole model \[fig.6\]](figure_6b.eps "fig:"){width="85mm"}
In particular, one can see that spectrum for the angle $25^{\circ}$ is located enough far below then the spectrum for the $90^{\circ}$. Now these calculations confirm (at first time) arguments proposed for explanation of difference between experimental data [@Kasagi.1997.PRLTA] and [@D'Arrigo.1994.PHLTA] obtained for these angles, correspondingly, and they have resolved discussions in [@Eremin.2000.PRLTA; @Kasagi.2000.PRLTA]. In the next Fig. \[fig.7\] distribution of the bremsstrahlung probability on the angle $\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}$ between directions of the motion of the particle and emission of photon for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus is presented.
![Distribution of the bremsstrahlung probability on the angle between directions of the motion of the particle and emission of photon for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus: (a) angular probability at 300 keV, 350 keV, 400 keV, 500 keV; (b) angular probability at 300 keV in large scale: here one can see difference between two spectra. \[fig.7\]](figure_7a.eps "fig:"){width="85mm"} ![Distribution of the bremsstrahlung probability on the angle between directions of the motion of the particle and emission of photon for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus: (a) angular probability at 300 keV, 350 keV, 400 keV, 500 keV; (b) angular probability at 300 keV in large scale: here one can see difference between two spectra. \[fig.7\]](figure_7b.eps "fig:"){width="85mm"}
In particular, one can see that the angular distribution of the probability is formed mainly by the first integral $J(1,0)$ while next two integrals $J(1,1)$ and $J(1,2)$ give very small contribution to the total angular spectrum.
Formula of the bremsstrahlung probability in the $\alpha$-decay \[sec.3.7\]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let us restrict ourselves by only one nucleus and try to write such formula for it. After preliminary estimations of the spectra for different nuclei, I propose the following form (further, let’s use only $\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}=90^{\circ}$): $$\begin{array}{ccl}
\ln \;
\biggl\{
\displaystyle\frac
{d P_{\rm param}(w;\, a_{0}\ldots a_{4},\, n_{1}\ldots n_{4})}
{d\,\Omega_{ph} \: d\cos{\theta_{f}}}
\biggr\} & = &
\ln \;
\biggl\{
\displaystyle\frac{e^{2}}{8\,\pi\, c^{5}}\:
\displaystyle\frac{Z_{eff}^{2}\, E_{i}}{m^{2}\, k_{i}}
\biggr\} +
a_{0} -
a_{1}\,w^{n_{1}} +
\displaystyle\frac{a_{2}}{w^{n_{2}}} +
\displaystyle\frac{a_{3}}{w^{n_{3}}} +
\displaystyle\frac{a_{4}}{w^{n_{4}}},
\end{array}
\label{eq.3.3.1}$$ where $a_{0}\ldots a_{4}$ and $n_{1}\ldots n_{4}$ are unknown constants which do not depend on energy of the photon emitted and are changed for the different nuclei. These constants reflect “structure” of the $\alpha$-decay for the studied nucleus. Therefore, they should depend on $Q_{\alpha}$, $Z_{\rm eff}$, $Z_{d}$, $A_{d}$ of this nucleus.
With a purpose to find parameters $a_{0}\ldots a_{4}$ $n_{1}\ldots n_{4}$ for the selected nucleus, I shall introduce the following characteristic: $$\begin{array}{ccl}
\vspace{2mm}
\sigma\, (a_{i},\, n_{i}) & = &
\sqrt{
\displaystyle\frac{1}{w_{\rm max} - w_{\rm min}}\;
\displaystyle\int\limits_{w_{\rm min}}^{w_{\rm max}}
\Bigl[\Delta P\;(w;\; a_{i},\, n_{i})\Bigr]^{2} \; dw}, \\
\Delta P\; (w;\; a_{i},\, n_{i}) & = &
\ln\;\biggl\{ \displaystyle\frac{d P_{\rm model}(w)} {d\,\Omega_{ph} \: d\cos{\theta_{f}}} \biggr\}\; - \;
\ln\;\biggl\{ \displaystyle\frac{d P_{\rm param} (w;\, a_{0}\ldots a_{4},\, n_{1}\ldots n_{4})}
{d\,\Omega_{ph} \: d\cos{\theta_{f}}} \biggr\},
\end{array}
\label{eq.3.3.2}$$ where $d P_{\rm model}$ and $d P_{\rm param}$ are the bremsstrahlung probabilities calculated by the multipole model and by the formula (\[eq.3.3.1\]), correspondingly. The $\sigma$ at selected set of parameters is smaller, the curve $d P_{\rm param}$ obtained by formula (\[eq.3.3.1\]) is closer to the spectrum $d P_{\rm model}$ calculated by the multipole model. I. e. the best description of the bremsstrahlung spectrum for the studied nucleus by formula (\[eq.3.3.1\]) should be obtained at such choice of the parameters $a_{0}\ldots a_{4}$ and $n_{1}\ldots n_{4}$ where $\sigma$ is minimal. For convenience, I call this approach for determination of parameters for the selected nucleus as *method of minimization*. So, using the method of minimization, for the $^{218}{\rm Th}$ nucleus I obtain the following values ($w_{\rm min}=50$ keV and $w_{\rm max}=900$ keV are used): $$\begin{array}{ccccc}
n_{1} = 1, &
n_{2} = 0.5, &
n_{3} = 1, &
n_{4} = 2, & \\
a_{0} = 10.8, &
a_{1} = 0.007, &
a_{2} = 10, &
a_{3} = 10, &
a_{4} = 1.
\end{array}
\label{eq.3.3.3}$$ The curve calculated by formula (\[eq.3.3.1\]) at choice (\[eq.3.3.3\]) of parameters turns out to be located extremely close to the bremsstrahlung spectrum for $^{218}{\rm Th}$! From here I conclude that *the bremsstrahlung probability for arbitrary one nucleus can be approximated by formula (\[eq.3.3.1\]) with very high accuracy inside the energy region up to 1 MeV.* Estimations of parameters for other nuclei show that it is possible to describe the bremsstrahlung spectra with enough high accuracy for different nuclei using different values of the $a_{0}$ and $a_{1}$ parameters only, while the $n_{1} \ldots n_{4}$ parameters and even the $a_{2}$, $a_{3}$, $a_{4}$ parameters are fixed. In this paper, I shall define the $n_{1}\ldots n_{4}$, $a_{2}$, $a_{3}$ and $a_{4}$ parameters for the different nuclei by (\[eq.3.3.3\]) and try to find out how $a_{0}$ and $a_{1}$ can be described. Assuming dependence of $a_{0}$ and $a_{1}$ on $Q$, $A_{d}$ and $Z_{d}$ to be linear, I propose the following formula: $$\begin{array}{ccl}
a_{0}\, (Q, A_{d}, Z_{d}) & = & b_{00} + b_{01}\,Q + b_{02}\,A_{d} + b_{03}\,Z_{d}, \\
a_{1}\, (Q, A_{d}, Z_{d}) & = & b_{10} + b_{11}\,Q + b_{12}\,A_{d} + b_{13}\,Z_{d},
\end{array}
\label{eq.3.3.4}$$ where new unknown parameters $b_{0i}$ and $b_{1i}$ ($i=0,1,2,3$) have been introduced which do not already depend on $Q$, $Z_{d}$ and $A_{d}$. The simplest way is to find $b_{01}$ and $b_{11}$. For such calculations we needs in two nuclei with equal $Z_{d}$ and $A_{d}$ values and different $Q$-values. Let’s consider the $^{228}{\rm Th}$ nucleus. For it I calculate the bremsstrahlung spectrum on the basis of the multipole model at two different $Q$-values (I use: $Q_{1}=5.555$ MeV and $Q_{2}=10$ MeV), and then I obtain the $a_{0}$ and $a_{1}$ parameters using the method of minimization above. Results are presented in Table \[table.2\] in the first two strings with numbers 1 and 2.
----- --------- --------------- --------- --------------- ------------------- --------------------- ----------------------- --------------------- -----------------------
No. $A_{d}$ $A_{d}^{1/3}$ $Z_{d}$ $Z_{\rm eff}$ $Q_{\alpha}$, MeV $a_{0}^{\rm (min)}$ $a_{0}^{\rm (param)}$ $a_{1}^{\rm (min)}$ $a_{1}^{\rm (param)}$
1 224 6.073177 88 0.42105 5.555 10.2 10.20083 0.0154 0.01531749
2 224 6.073177 88 0.42105 10.0 11.2 11.20020 0.0069 0.00681732
3 102 4.672328 50 0.03774 10.0 6.3 6.30084 0.00475 0.00440210
4 262 6.398827 107 0.36090 10.0 10.9 10.90000 0.008 0.00799993
----- --------- --------------- --------- --------------- ------------------- --------------------- ----------------------- --------------------- -----------------------
: Parameters $a_{0}$ and $a_{1}$ for $^{228}{\rm Th}$, $^{106}{\rm Te}$ and nucleus with $A_{p}=266$ and $Z_{p}=109$ ($a_{0}^{\rm (min)}$ and $a_{1}^{\rm (min)}$ are parameters calculated by the method of minimization, $a_{0}^{\rm(param)}$ and $a_{1}^{\rm(param)}$ are parameters calculated by formula (\[eq.3.3.9\])) \[table.2\]
In order to find next unknown parameters $b_{ij}$ ($i=1,2$, $j= 0,2,3$), it needs to consider nuclei with the different $A_{d}$, $Z_{d}$ numbers at the same $Q$-value. To achieve accuracy as high as possible, we shall use the previous nucleus and two other nuclei with the largest difference between $A_{d}$ (and between $Z_{d}$). Let’s use Table in [@Buck.1993.ADNDT], from here we select: $^{106}{\rm Te}$ and nucleus with $A_{p}=266$, $Z_{p}=109$. I calculate the bremsstrahlung spectra at $Q_{\alpha}$-value equals to 10 MeV using the multipole model and then I find $a_{0}$ and $a_{1}$ for them using the minimization method. Results are presented in Table \[table.2\] in the next two strings with numbers 3 and 4. Using data of the table \[table.2\], I calculate unknown $b_{0i}$ and $b_{1i}$, then I find the final form of $a_{0}$ and $a_{1}$ on $Q$, $A_{d}$ and $Z_{d}$ ($Q$ is used in MeV): $$\begin{array}{ccl}
a_{0}\,(Q, A_{d}, Z_{d}) & = &
4.60202 + 0.22497 \cdot Q + 0.11956 \cdot A_{\rm d} - 0.25492 \cdot Z_{\rm d}, \\
a_{1}\,(Q, A_{d}, Z_{d}) & = &
0.0204108 - 0.0019123 \cdot Q + 1.086956\cdot 10^{-6} \cdot A_{\rm d} + 6.0068649\cdot 10^{-5} \cdot Z_{\rm d}
\end{array}
\label{eq.3.3.9}$$ and the bremsstrahlung formula (\[eq.3.3.1\]) has transformed into such: $$\begin{array}{ccl}
\ln \;
\biggl\{
\displaystyle\frac{d P^{E1+M1}_{1}(w,\, \theta_{f}=90^{\circ})} {d\,\Omega_{ph} \: d\cos{\theta_{f}}}
\biggr\} & = &
\ln \;
\biggl\{
\displaystyle\frac{e^{2}}{8\,\pi\, c^{5}}\:
\displaystyle\frac{Z_{eff}^{2}\, E_{i}}{m^{2}\, k_{i}}
\biggr\} +
a_{0} -
a_{1}\,w +
\displaystyle\frac{10}{\sqrt{w}} +
\displaystyle\frac{10}{w} +
\displaystyle\frac{1}{w^{2}}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.3.3.10}$$ For four studied nuclei I have obtained very small difference between the probability calculated by the model above and the curve calculated by formula (\[eq.3.3.10\]) with parameters (\[eq.3.3.9\]) for the energy of photons emitted up to 1 MeV (less then 1 percent). *I. e. we have described the bremsstrahlung spectra inside the energy region up to 1 MeV for four different nuclei (with such long maximal distance between their numbers $A_{d}$) with very good accuracy by only one this formula with parameters calculated only on the basis of values $A_{d}$, $Z_{d}$, $Q_{\alpha}$!* It turns out that description of the bremsstrahlung spectra for all nuclei inside region $A_{d}= 107..262$ at different $Z_{d}$ by the formula (\[eq.3.3.10\]) with parameters (\[eq.3.3.9\]) is not such accurate but enough good also (see curves in Fig. \[fig.8\] obtained by formula). However, one can improve further such approximation essentially for the “problem” nuclei, if to pass from the linear dependence (\[eq.3.3.4\]) of the bremsstrahlung probability on the $A_{d}$ and $Z_{d}$ values to harmonic one.
![The bremsstrahlung probability in the $\alpha$-decay of the $^{210}{\rm Po}$, $^{214}{\rm Po}$ and $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ nuclei ($\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}=90^{\circ}$): the absolute probability calculated by the multipole model (red solid line), experimental data (scatter line, data [@Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA] for $^{214}{\rm Po}$, data [@Boie.2007.PRL] for $^{210}{\rm Po}$ and data [@Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA] for $^{226}{\rm Ra}$) and curve calculated by formula (\[eq.3.3.1\]) with (\[eq.3.3.9\]) (dash blue line). \[fig.8\]](figure_8a.eps "fig:"){width="60mm"} ![The bremsstrahlung probability in the $\alpha$-decay of the $^{210}{\rm Po}$, $^{214}{\rm Po}$ and $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ nuclei ($\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}=90^{\circ}$): the absolute probability calculated by the multipole model (red solid line), experimental data (scatter line, data [@Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA] for $^{214}{\rm Po}$, data [@Boie.2007.PRL] for $^{210}{\rm Po}$ and data [@Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA] for $^{226}{\rm Ra}$) and curve calculated by formula (\[eq.3.3.1\]) with (\[eq.3.3.9\]) (dash blue line). \[fig.8\]](figure_8b.eps "fig:"){width="60mm"} ![The bremsstrahlung probability in the $\alpha$-decay of the $^{210}{\rm Po}$, $^{214}{\rm Po}$ and $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ nuclei ($\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}=90^{\circ}$): the absolute probability calculated by the multipole model (red solid line), experimental data (scatter line, data [@Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA] for $^{214}{\rm Po}$, data [@Boie.2007.PRL] for $^{210}{\rm Po}$ and data [@Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA] for $^{226}{\rm Ra}$) and curve calculated by formula (\[eq.3.3.1\]) with (\[eq.3.3.9\]) (dash blue line). \[fig.8\]](figure_8c.eps "fig:"){width="60mm"}
Conclusions
===========
In the paper the model of the bremsstrahlung accompanying the $\alpha$-decay is presented where emphasis is given on development of unified angular formalism of the dipole and multipole approaches. Effectiveness of the model and accuracy of calculations of the bremsstrahlung spectra are analyzed in their comparison with experimental data for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$, $^{214}{\rm Po}$, $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ and $^{244}{\rm Cm}$ nuclei. Note the following.
- The multipolar model is the most motivated from the physical point of view, it is the richest in obtaining useful information about angular emission of photons during $\alpha$-decay, their results obtained for the $^{210}\mbox{\rm Po}$, $^{214}\mbox{\rm Po}$ and $^{226}\mbox{\rm Ra}$ nuclei both in the absolute scale and with normalization on experimental data [@Boie.2007.PRL; @Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA; @Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA] are in the best agreement with these experimental data in comparison with any other known models and approaches.
- The best result has been obtained in agreement between the calculated absolute probability of the bremsstrahlung emission for the $^{214}\mbox{\rm Po}$ nucleus and the experimental data[@Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA] for this nucleus inside the region of photons energies from 100 keV up to 750 keV (see Fig. \[fig.3\] (a), $Q_{\alpha} = 7.865$ MeV, the angle $\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}$ between the directions of the $\alpha$-particle motion and the photon emission is $90^{\circ}$).
- The calculated absolute probabilities of the bremsstrahlung emission in $\alpha$-decay of the $^{210}\mbox{\rm Po}$ and $^{226}\mbox{\rm Ra}$ nuclei for low energies of the photons emitted are located below experimental data [@Boie.2007.PRL] and [@Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA], but for energies from 350 keV and higher I have obtained good agreement between the model and experiment (see Fig. \[fig.3\] (b) and (c), $Q_{\alpha} = 5.439$ MeV for $^{210}\mbox{\rm Po}$ and $Q_{\alpha} = 4.904$ MeV for $^{226}\mbox{\rm Ra}$, $\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}=90^{\circ}$).
- The spectrum for the $^{244}{\rm Cm}$ nucleus obtained at $\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}=25^{\circ}$ is found to be in satisfactory agreement with high limit of errors of experimental data [@Kasagi.1997.PRLTA].
- In frameworks of the dipole approach, the emission of photons from the internal region before the barrier is not small and gives visible contribution into the total spectrum. However, the multipolar approach seems to be less sensitive to such emission. Such a peculiarity could be explained by more accurate use of the far asymptotic region by the multipole approach, while the dipole approach reduces this region and, so, has higher convergence in numerical integration of the spectra over $r$. However, more accurate use of the far asymptotic region by the multipole approach provides essentially better agreement between obtained spectra and experimental data, while the dipole approach seems to be fail here (at its present development). This important point adds the power of predictions in absolute scale to the multipolar model, in contrast to the dipole one. This demolishes published progress in agreement between experimental data and the spectra calculated in the dipole approach (where such emission from the internal region was neglected) if it was affirmed as obtained in the absolute scale.
- A hypothesis about explanation of difference between two experiments [@D'Arrigo.1994.PHLTA] and [@Kasagi.1997.JPHGB] on the basis of different values $25^{\circ}$ and $90^{\circ}$ of the angle $\vartheta_{\alpha\gamma}$ between direction of motion of the $\alpha$-particle and emission of photons proposed in discussions [@Eremin.2000.PRLTA; @Kasagi.2000.PRLTA], has been confirmed (at the first time).
- The unified formula of the bremsstrahlung probability (in the absolute scale) during the $\alpha$-decay of the arbitrary nucleus, which is directly expressed through the $Q_{\alpha}$-value and numbers $A_{d}$, $Z_{d}$ of protons and neutrons of this nucleus, has been constructed. Inside region of the $\alpha$-active nuclei from $^{106}{\rm Te}$ up to the nucleus with numbers of nucleons and protons $A_{p}=266$ and $Z_{p}=109$ (this region is taken from [@Buck.1993.ADNDT]) with energy of the photons emitted from 50 keV up to 900 keV satisfactory agreement has been achieved between the spectra, obtained on the basis of the multipole model (where duration of calculations for one selected nucleus is up to 1 day), and the bremsstrahlung spectra obtained on the basis of the proposed formula (where duration of calculations is about some seconds using the same computer). However, analyzing results for the $^{210}\mbox{\rm Po}$, $^{210}\mbox{\rm Po}$ and $^{226}\mbox{\rm Ra}$ nuclei, this formula is found to give more accurate spectra relatively experimental data (up to 500 keV), then spectra obtained in the dipole approach without taking the emission from the internal region before the barrier into account.
Acknowledgements \[sec.acknowledgements\] {#acknowledgements-sec.acknowledgements .unnumbered}
=========================================
The author is appreciated to Dr. Alexander K. Zaichenko for his assistance in computer realization of numerical methods in calculations of wave functions, Prof. Vladislav S. Olkhovsky for useful discussions concerning realizations of multiple internal reflections in the problem of $\alpha$-decay and comments of definition of phase times, Prof. Giorgio Giardina for useful discussions concerning main formalism of the model, dependence of the bremsstrahlung spectra on $Q_{\alpha}$-value of $\alpha$-decay, aspects to investigate deformed nuclei in this problem, Prof. Volodimir M. Kolomietz for useful discussions and critical comments concerning the general formalism of the presented model, Dr. Sergei N. Fedotkin for useful comments concerning definitions of absolute and normalized probabilities of the photons emitted during the $\alpha$-decay, Dr. Alexander G. Magner for useful comments concerning determination of wave function of the $\alpha$-decaying system, Dr. Vladislav Kobychev for interesting discussions with some analysis concerning behavior of the bremsstrahlung spectra for photon energies close to zero, Dr. Volodymyr Kyrytsya for useful comments how to improve the computer integration of matrix elements at large radius $r$ (in asymptotic region) with increasing of convergence and keeping of accuracy in calculations.
Clebsch-Gordan coefficients \[app.3\]
=====================================
I define Clebsch-Gordan coefficients, according to Table I in ref.[@Eisenberg.1973] (see p.317) and find: $$\begin{array}{lll}
(0 1 1 \big| \,2, -1, \,1) = 0, &
(1 1 1 \big| \,2, -1, \,1) = 0, &
(2 1 1 \big| \,2, -1, \,1) = \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{3}{5}}, \\
(0 1 1 \big| \,0, \,1, \,1) = \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}}, &
(1 1 1 \big| \,0, \,1, \,1) = -\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}}, &
(2 1 1 \big| \,0, \,1, \,1) = \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{10}}, \\
(0 1 1 \big| \,0, -1, -1) = \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}}, &
(1 1 1 \big| \,0, -1, -1) = \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{2}}, &
(2 1 1 \big| \,0, -1, -1) = \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{10}}, \\
(0 1 1 \big| -2, \,1, -1) = 0, &
(1 1 1 \big| -2, \,1, -1) = 0, &
(2 1 1 \big| -2, \,1, -1) = \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{3}{5}}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.3.1}$$
Coefficients $C_{l_{f} l_{ph} n}^{m \mu^{\prime}}$ \[app.4\]
============================================================
We define the coefficient $C_{l_{f} l_{ph} n}^{m \mu^{\prime}}$ so: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
C_{l_{f} l_{ph} n}^{m \mu^{\prime}} & = &
(-1)^{l_{f}+n+1 - \mu^{\prime} + \frac{|m+\mu^{\prime}|}{2}} \;
(n, 1, l_{ph} \big| -m-\mu^{\prime}, \mu^{\prime}, -m)\; \times \\
& & \times\;
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{(2l_{f}+1)\,(2n+1)}{32\pi}\;
\displaystyle\frac{(l_{f}-1)!}{(l_{f}+1)!} \;
\displaystyle\frac{(n-|m+\mu^{\prime}|)!}{(n+|m+\mu^{\prime}|)!}}
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.4.1}$$ At $l_{f}=1$, $l_{ph}=1$ and $n=0$ we have: $$m = - \mu^{\prime} = \pm 1
\label{eq.app.4.2}$$ and the coefficient $C_{l_{f} l_{ph} n}^{m \mu^{\prime}}$ is: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
C_{110}^{m \mu^{\prime}} & = &
- \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{3}{64\pi}} \cdot (0 1 1 \big| \; 0, \mu^{\prime}, -m).
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.4.3}$$ At $l_{f}=1$, $l_{ph}=1$ and $n=1$ the property (\[eq.app.4.2\]) is fulfilled and we obtain: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
C_{111}^{m \mu^{\prime}} & = &
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{9}{64\pi}} \cdot (1 1 1 \big| \; 0, \mu^{\prime}, -m).
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.4.4}$$ At $l_{f}=1$, $l_{ph}=1$ and $n=2$ the property (\[eq.app.4.2\]) is not fulfilled and $$\begin{array}{lcl}
C_{112}^{m \mu^{\prime}} & = &
(-1)^{- \mu^{\prime} + \frac{|m+\mu^{\prime}|}{2}} \;
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{15}{64\,\pi}\;
\displaystyle\frac{(2-|m+\mu^{\prime}|)!}{(2+|m+\mu^{\prime}|)!}} \cdot
(2 1 1 \big| -m-\mu^{\prime}, \mu^{\prime}, -m).
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.4.5}$$ Rewrite these coefficients at different $m = \pm 1$ and $\mu^{\prime} = \pm 1$: $$\begin{array}{lcllcl}
C_{112}^{-1 -1} & = &
\displaystyle\frac{1}{16} \: \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{5}{2\,\pi}} \cdot (2 1 1 \big| \;2, -1, 1), &
C_{112}^{-1 1} & = &
- \displaystyle\frac{1}{8} \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{15}{\pi}} \cdot (2 1 1 \big| \;0 1 1), \\
C_{112}^{1 -1} & = &
- \displaystyle\frac{1}{8} \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{15}{\pi}} \cdot (2 1 1 \big| \;0, -1, -1), &
C_{112}^{11} & = &
\displaystyle\frac{1}{16} \: \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{5}{2\,\pi}} \cdot (2 1 1 \big| \:-2, 1, -1).
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.4.6}$$ Substituting here values (\[eq.app.3.1\]) for the Clebsh-Gordan coefficients, we find: $$\begin{array}{llll}
\vspace{2mm}
C_{110}^{-1 -1} = 0, &
C_{110}^{-1 1} = -\displaystyle\frac{1}{8} \cdot \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{3}{2\,\pi}}, &
C_{110}^{1 -1} = -\displaystyle\frac{1}{8} \cdot \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{3}{2\,\pi}}, &
C_{110}^{11} = 0; \\
\vspace{2mm}
C_{111}^{-1 -1} = 0, &
C_{111}^{-1 1} = -\displaystyle\frac{3}{8} \cdot \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{2\,\pi}}, &
C_{111}^{1 -1} = \displaystyle\frac{3}{8} \cdot \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{1}{2\,\pi}}, &
C_{111}^{11} = 0; \\
\vspace{2mm}
C_{112}^{-1 -1} = \displaystyle\frac{1}{16} \: \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{3}{2\,\pi}}, &
C_{112}^{-1 1} = - \displaystyle\frac{1}{8} \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{3}{2\,\pi}}, &
C_{112}^{1 -1} = - \displaystyle\frac{1}{8} \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{3}{2\,\pi}}, &
C_{112}^{11} = \displaystyle\frac{1}{16} \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{3}{2\,\pi}}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.4.7}$$
Functions $f_{l_{f}n}^{m \mu^{\prime}}(\theta)$ \[app.5\]
=========================================================
Let us consider the function $f_{l_{f}n}^{m \mu^{\prime}}(\theta)$: $$f_{l_{f} n}^{m \mu^{\prime}}(\theta) =
P_{l_{f}}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{n}^{|m+\mu^{\prime}|}(\cos{\theta}).
\label{eq.app.5.1}$$ At $l_{f}=1$ and $n=0,1,2$ we obtain: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
f_{10}^{m \mu^{\prime}}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{0}^{|m+\mu^{\prime}|} (\cos{\theta}), \\
f_{11}^{m \mu^{\prime}}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{|m+\mu^{\prime}|} (\cos{\theta}), \\
f_{12}^{m \mu^{\prime}}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{2}^{|m+\mu^{\prime}|} (\cos{\theta}).
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.5.2}$$ At different $m = \pm 1$ and $\mu^{\prime} = \pm 1$ we find: $$\begin{array}{lclcl}
f_{10}^{-1, -1}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{0}^{2} (\cos{\theta}) & = & 0, \\
f_{10}^{-1 1}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{0}^{0} (\cos{\theta}) & = &
\sin^{2}{\theta}, \\
f_{10}^{1 -1}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{0}^{0} (\cos{\theta}) & = &
\sin^{2}{\theta}, \\
\vspace{3mm}
f_{10}^{11}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{0}^{2} (\cos{\theta}) & = & 0; \\
f_{11}^{-1, -1}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{2} (\cos{\theta}) & = & 0, \\
f_{11}^{-1 1}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{0} (\cos{\theta}) & = &
\sin^{2}{\theta} \cos{\theta}, \\
f_{11}^{1 -1}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{0} (\cos{\theta}) & = &
\sin^{2}{\theta} \cos{\theta}, \\
\vspace{3mm}
f_{11}^{1 1}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{2} (\cos{\theta}) & = & 0; \\
f_{12}^{-1, -1}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{2}^{2} (\cos{\theta}) & = &
3 \sin^{4}{\theta}, \\
f_{12}^{-1 1}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{2}^{0} (\cos{\theta}) & = &
\frac{1}{2} \sin^{2}{\theta} \: (3\cos^{2}{\theta} - 1), \\
f_{12}^{1 -1}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{2}^{0} (\cos{\theta}) & = &
\frac{1}{2} \sin^{2}{\theta} \: (3\cos^{2}{\theta} - 1), \\
f_{12}^{11}(\theta) & = &
P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{1}^{1} (\cos{\theta}) \; P_{2}^{2} (\cos{\theta}) & = &
3 \sin^{4}{\theta}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.5.3}$$
Dipole approach versus multipole one: comparative analysis and a role of the internal well of the potential \[app.6\]
=====================================================================================================================
After appearance of the fully quantum approach proposed by Papenbrock and Bertsch in [@Papenbrock.1998.PRLTA] where wave function of photons was used in the dipole approximation, further fully quantum approaches have been developed mainly on its basis. In particular, formula $\langle f|\mathbf{p}|i \rangle = i\hbar\, \langle f|\partial_{r} V|i \rangle /E_{\gamma}$ proposed in this paper for transformation of the matrix element of the photon emission and increasing essentially its convergence in calculations without visible decreasing of accuracy, becomes very popular. This is essential point which attracts many researchers to study this problem in fully quantum approach. Published results with agreement between spectra calculated by such dipole approach and experimental data look to be well. In particular, consequence “The present high precision data clearly demonstrate the failure of a classical Coulomb acceleration calculation (see, e.g., \[9,14\]) to describe the bremsstrahlung emission in $\alpha$ decay, and rules out theoretical suggestions put forward by authors of Refs. \[6,7,9\]” in [@Boie.2007.PRL] (see p. 4, reference in cited paper) has been considered further as a fact that the dipole approach is the most accurate in description of experimental data and perspective from all fully quantum approaches in further study of bremsstrahlung emission during $\alpha$-decay. However, let us clarify how much such approach is accurate in description of experimental data in comparison with the multipole one.
Spectra in absolute scale \[app.6.1\]
-------------------------------------
Usually, authors do not mention whether they calculate normalized or absolute probability in the dipole approach. However, the spectra calculated in the absolute scale are sometimes noted to have a main progress of such a way. But if to suppose that these results were obtained without any normalization on experimental data, then I meet the following problem. Up today, all published calculations in the dipole approach have been based on the $\alpha$-nucleus potential where rectangular well inside the internal region before the barrier was used. According to (\[eq.2.7.1.2\]), we obtain directly null contribution of the emission from this internal region into the total spectrum. But such results would be reliable if the real emission from the internal region is very small. Only in such a case more accurate realistic shape of the well could be neglected. But I find that this is not so. Let us look on the left panel of Fig. \[fig.9\] where the spectra for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus calculated by the dipole and multipole approaches without any normalization on experimental data are presented.
![Bremsstrahlung probability in the $\alpha$-decay of the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus (solid line, red, is for the spectrum calculated by the multipole model; dash line, green, for the full spectrum calculated by the dipole model; dash-dot-dot line, brown, for the spectrum calculated by the dipole model without taking the internal region up to the internal turning point into account; dash-dot line, blue, for the normalized spectrum calculated by the approach in [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA] with normalization used in this paper): (left panel, a) Absolute probabilities: here one can see that difference between two spectra calculated in the dipole approach with inclusion of the internal region and without it is not small that confirms a real non-small influence of this nuclear region on the total spectrum; (right panel, b) Normalized probabilities: here one can see that normalized spectra in multipole approach and in approach [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA] are found in better agreement with experimental data [@Boie.2007.PRL] in comparison with normalized results obtained in the dipole approach (in contrast with conclusions of [@Boie.2007.PRL]). \[fig.9\]](figure_9a.eps "fig:"){width="93mm"} ![Bremsstrahlung probability in the $\alpha$-decay of the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus (solid line, red, is for the spectrum calculated by the multipole model; dash line, green, for the full spectrum calculated by the dipole model; dash-dot-dot line, brown, for the spectrum calculated by the dipole model without taking the internal region up to the internal turning point into account; dash-dot line, blue, for the normalized spectrum calculated by the approach in [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA] with normalization used in this paper): (left panel, a) Absolute probabilities: here one can see that difference between two spectra calculated in the dipole approach with inclusion of the internal region and without it is not small that confirms a real non-small influence of this nuclear region on the total spectrum; (right panel, b) Normalized probabilities: here one can see that normalized spectra in multipole approach and in approach [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA] are found in better agreement with experimental data [@Boie.2007.PRL] in comparison with normalized results obtained in the dipole approach (in contrast with conclusions of [@Boie.2007.PRL]). \[fig.9\]](figure_9b.eps "fig:"){width="93mm"}
Here, one can see that difference between the full spectrum obtained by the dipole approach (see dash line, green, in this figure) and the spectrum obtained by the dipole approach formed in the spatial region starting from the internal turning point (see dash-dot-dot line, brown, in this figure) is not small (in calculations for $^{210}{\rm Po}$ such data are used: $Q_{\alpha} = 5.439$ MeV, internal turning point is $r_{\rm tp,\, int} = 8.829$ fm, external turning point is $r_{\rm tp,\, ext} = 44.007$ fm, tunneling length is $\Delta r_{\rm tun} = 35.177$ fm)! One can find that complete neglect of the emission from the internal region improves visibly agreement between the dipole calculations and experimental data. However, these two spectra are essentially farther to experimental data in comparison with the spectrum obtained by the multipole model without any normalization (see solid line, red, in this figure). Now this confirms a real importance of inclusion of the realistic shape of the well before the barrier into calculations of the spectra in the absolute scale. But if the spectra obtained previously in the dipole approach were in good or the best agreement with experimental data (authors are assumed to have catched a successful normalization in theory), then after taking the emission from the internal realistic well into account such spectra should be displaced below (to the distance similar to distance between two curves in the dipole approach in Fig. \[fig.9\]). As a result, this demolishes all published progress in agreement between experimental data and calculations in the dipole approach. Now physical motivations of such progress in agreement between theory and experiment have became unclear if they were affirmed to be obtained in the absolute scale. It has became clear which difficulty authors of [@Batkin.1986.SJNCA] had, who gave the first predictions for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus before the first experiments [@D'Arrigo.1994.PHLTA].
Spectra normalized on experimental data \[app.6.2\]
---------------------------------------------------
If to suppose that the spectra have obtained with normalization on experimental data, then we must compare them with results obtained in the multipolar approach with normalization also. If in eq. (\[eq.2.9.2\]) for the absolute probability in the multipolar approach to restrict ourselves by the first most important integral $J(1,0)$ only in comparison with other two integrals $J(1,1)$ and $J(1,2)$, then we obtain (with possible normalization) the spectrum calculated by the model [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA] exactly. Now exact coincidence has been established between the spectra obtained in the approach [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA] and the spectra obtained by the multipolar model, where a difference is explained by taking non-zero magnetic component at $J(1,1)$ into account in the total matrix element in eqs. (\[eq.2.9.1\]) ($J(1,2)$ is smaller then $J(1,0)$ by 1-2 orders from 50 keV up to 1 MeV of the photons). The matrix element beyond the dipole approximation through expansion of the wave function of photons in *spherical waves* (at first, proposed in [@Maydanyuk.nucl-th.0404013]) and realistic form of the $\alpha$-nucleus potential realized in the model [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA] give us a small difference between the spectrum calculated for the $^{210}{\rm Po}$ nucleus by such a way and the spectrum obtained for this nucleus in the dipole approach with formula $\langle f|\mathbf{p}|i \rangle = i\hbar\, \langle f|\partial_{r} V|i \rangle /E_{\gamma}$ (see lines 6 and 7 in Fig. 1 in [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA] and comments here). As latter experiment [@Boie.2007.PRL] for $^{210}{\rm Po}$ showed, this predicted peculiarity increases a little coincidence with experimental data of such paper in comparison with our calculations in the dipole approach above and with presented results (at lower energies of photons) in the fully quantum dipole approach in this paper also. While authors of [@Boie.2007.PRL] did not comment such comparison, did not present any grounds of their affirmation about groundlessness (ruling out) and accuracy of the approach [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA], the complete comparative consideration of these experimental data and all these spectra breaks down such affirmation (see Fig. 3 in [@Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA] and discussions). The same logics is applicable again for the multipole model directly. Let us look to the right panel in Fig. \[fig.9\]. Here, one can see that the spectrum calculated by the multipole model (see solid line, red, in this figure) looks to be a little more successful in description of the experimental data [@Boie.2007.PRL] in comparison with the spectrum calculated by the dipole approach (see dash line, green, in this figure). Here, our discussed result by the approach [@Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA] is included also (see dash-dot line, blue, in this figure). Results in descriptions of the newest experimental data [@Maydanyuk.2008.EPJA; @Maydanyuk.2008.MPLA; @Maydanyuk.2009.NPA] for the $^{214}{\rm Po}$ and $^{226}{\rm Ra}$ nuclei in direction of the approach [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA] look enough good also, where we have been achieving agreement between theory and experiment up to 765 keV (in [@Boie.2007.PRL] energy region of photons emitted is up to 500 keV).
Irrespective of accuracy which the approach could give to researcher, more important point consists in physics which such approach has. While calculations of spectra in all other published approaches up today [@Takigawa.1999.PHRVA; @Boie.2007.PRL; @Jentschura.2008.PRC; @Papenbrock.1998.PRLTA; @Tkalya.1999.JETP; @So_Kim.2000.JKPS] are based on the potential of interaction between the $\alpha$-particle and the daughter nucleus, which in the region of nuclear forces has a form of rectangular well and its depth is determined for each selected nucleus separately and absolutely does not take the real nuclear shape into account, our model and calculations starting from [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA] have been based on the unified global realistic nucleus–$\alpha$-particle potential which parameters are defined by $Q_{\alpha}$-value of the $\alpha$-decay, protons and neutrons numbers only for the studied nucleus. Such potential is constructed on the basis of analysis of 344 $\alpha$-decaying nuclei in frameworks of one unified model *UMADAC* of the $\alpha$-decay and $\alpha$-capture [@Khudenko.2009.PRC.C79; @Khudenko.2009.PRC.C80] (see also [@Denisov.2005.PHRVA]) where errors with experimental data turn out to be the smallest in comparison with other known models this year. This unification of the potential combines naturally with our formalism for calculations of the absolute angular (and integral) probabilities of bremsstrahlung during the $\alpha$-decay. This allows to calculate the absolute bremsstrahlung probability for arbitrary nucleus using $Q_{\alpha}$-value, proton and neutron numbers only as input data. After angular realization of the multipolar approach in calculation of the matrix elements, such a way allows to take a deformation of the $\alpha$-decaying nucleus into account [@Maydanyuk.2009.NPA], which turns out to be (that confirms a real importance of accurate determination of the $\alpha$-nucleus potential in the region of the nuclear forces) and it could be extracted from the bremsstrahlung spectra (what other published approaches in the dipole approach are not able to study in current their stage). This fact underlines perspective of further investigations of the multipole approach. One can hope it should allow to open new independent experimental ways to obtain new information about $\alpha$-decay. Argument presented above contradict to the affirmation of authors in [@Boie.2007.PRL] about groundlessness of the approach [@Maydanyuk.2006.EPJA] and results obtained by such approach. So, among all variety of existed models and approaches the multipolar model is the most motivated from the physical point of view, it is the richest in obtaining useful information about emission of photons during $\alpha$-decay, their results are in the best agreement with experimental data existed.
Transformations of the matrix element in a general case \[app.7\]
=================================================================
The matrix element of emission (\[eq.2.7.1.1\]) in the dipole approximation can be transformed as [@Papenbrock.1998.PRLTA]: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\langle f\, |\, \mathbf{p}\, | i \rangle =
-\,\displaystyle\frac
{i\,\hbar\,
\Bigl\langle f\, \Bigl|\,
\displaystyle\frac{\partial\, U(\mathbf{r})}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\, \Bigr|\, i\, \Bigr\rangle }
{E_{i} - E_{f}}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.7.1}$$ In the resulting expression the integrant function obtains additional factor $1/r$ at enough far $r$ (in result of Coulomb type of the $\alpha$-nucleus potential here), that in the asymptotic region increases convergence of numerical integration of the total matrix element over $r$. So, it could be useful to generalize such a transformation for the multipole approach. However, in a general case the calculation of the matrix element looks to be more complicated and the following theorem can be applied.
Let us consider transition of the $\alpha$-decaying system from the initial $i$-state into the final $f$-state in result of emission of photon. If the vector potential of photons was used in such a form $\mathbf{A}\, (\mathbf{r}) =
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{2\pi \hbar c^{2}}{w}}\; \mathbf{e}^{(\alpha)}\, e^{i\,(\mathbf{kr}-wt)}$, then the matrix element of such transition $i \to f$ would be written as $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\langle f\, |\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, \mathbf{p}\, | i \rangle =
-\,\displaystyle\frac
{i\,\hbar\,
\Bigl\langle f\, \Bigl|\,
\mathbf{A}^{*}\,
\displaystyle\frac{\partial\, U(\mathbf{r})}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\, \Bigr|\, i\, \Bigr\rangle +
\displaystyle\frac{\hbar^{2}}{m}\:
\Bigl\langle\, f\, \Bigl|\,
\biggl(\mathbf{A}^{*}\, \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \biggr)\,
\biggl(\mathbf{k} \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \biggr) \Bigr|\, i\,
\Bigr \rangle}
{E_{i} - E_{f} + \displaystyle\frac{\hbar\, k^{2}}{2m}},
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.7.2}$$ where $U\,(\mathbf{r})$ is the $\alpha$-nucleus potential, $m$ is reduced mass, $E_{i}$ and $E_{f}$ are energies of the $\alpha$-decaying system in the initial $i$-state and in the final $f$-state, $\mathbf{k}$ is wave vector of photon emitted, $k = |\mathbf{k}|$ is its wave number.
Let us consider the following commutator: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\vspace{2mm}
[\hat{H},\, \mathbf{A}^{*}]\: \varphi(\mathbf{r}) & = &
\hat{H} \mathbf{A}^{*}\, \varphi(\mathbf{r}) - \mathbf{A}^{*} \hat{H}\, \varphi(\mathbf{r}) =
\Bigl( \displaystyle\frac{\mathbf{\hat{p}}^{2}}{2m} + U(\mathbf{r}) \Bigr) \cdot \mathbf{A}^{*}
\varphi(\mathbf{r}) -
\mathbf{A}^{*} \cdot
\Bigl( \displaystyle\frac{\mathbf{\hat{p}}^{2}}{2m} + U(\mathbf{r}) \Bigr) \cdot \varphi(\mathbf{r}) = \\
\vspace{2mm}
& = &
\Bigl( - \displaystyle\frac{\hbar}{2m} \displaystyle\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial \mathbf{r}^{2}} \Bigr)
\cdot \mathbf{A}^{*}(\mathbf{r})\, \varphi(\mathbf{r}) -
\mathbf{A}^{*}(\mathbf{r}) \cdot
\Bigl( - \displaystyle\frac{\hbar}{2m} \displaystyle\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial \mathbf{r}^{2}} \Bigr)
\cdot \varphi(\mathbf{r}) = \\
\vspace{2mm}
& = &
- \displaystyle\frac{\hbar}{2m}
\biggl( \displaystyle\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial \mathbf{r}^{2}}\: \mathbf{A}^{*}(\mathbf{r}) \biggr)\,
\varphi(\mathbf{r}) -
2\, \displaystyle\frac{\hbar}{2m}
\biggl( \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\: \mathbf{A}^{*}(\mathbf{r}) \biggr)
\biggl( \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\: \varphi(\mathbf{r}) \biggr).
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.7.3}$$ Taking explicit form of $\mathbf{A}\,(\mathbf{r})$ into account, we find $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\vspace{2mm}
\biggl( \displaystyle\frac{\partial^{2}}{\partial \mathbf{r}^{2}}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}(\mathbf{r}) \biggr)\,
\varphi(\mathbf{r}) & = &
\biggl(
\displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{2\pi \hbar c^{2}}{w}}\, \mathbf{e}^{(\alpha),*} e^{-i\,(\mathbf{kr}-wt)}
\biggr)
\varphi(\mathbf{r}) =
\biggl(
(-i \mathbf{k})
\displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{2\pi \hbar c^{2}}{w}}\: \mathbf{e}^{(\alpha),*} e^{-i\,(\mathbf{kr}-wt)}
\biggr)
\varphi(\mathbf{r}) = \\
\vspace{2mm}
& = &
\biggl(
(- \mathbf{k}^{2}) \sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{2\pi \hbar c^{2}}{w}}\: \mathbf{e}^{(\alpha),*} e^{-i\,(\mathbf{kr}-wt)}
\biggr)
\varphi(\mathbf{r}) =
- k^{2}\, \mathbf{A}^{*} \, \varphi(\mathbf{r}), \\
\vspace{2mm}
\biggl( \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}(\mathbf{r}) \biggr)
\biggl( \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\, \varphi(\mathbf{r}) \biggr) & = &
\biggl( \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{2\pi \hbar c^{2}}{w}}\, \mathbf{e}^{(\alpha),*} e^{-i\,(\mathbf{kr}-wt)}
\biggr)
\biggl( \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\, \varphi(\mathbf{r}) \biggr) = \\
& = &
\biggl( -i \mathbf{k}
\sqrt{\displaystyle\frac{2\pi \hbar c^{2}}{w}}\, \mathbf{e}^{(\alpha),*} e^{-i\,(\mathbf{kr}-wt)}
\biggr)
\biggl( \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\, \varphi(\mathbf{r}) \biggr) =
-i\,\mathbf{A}^{*}
\biggl(\mathbf{k} \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \biggr)\varphi(\mathbf{r})
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.7.4}$$ and from (\[eq.app.7.3\]) we obtain $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\hat{H} \mathbf{A}^{*}\, \varphi(\mathbf{r}) - \mathbf{A}^{*} \hat{H}\, \varphi(\mathbf{r}) & = &
\displaystyle\frac{\hbar\, k^{2}}{2m}\: \mathbf{A}^{*}(\mathbf{r})\, \varphi(\mathbf{r}) +
\displaystyle\frac{i\,\hbar}{m}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\,
\biggl(\mathbf{k} \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\biggr)\, \varphi(\mathbf{r})
\end{array}$$ or $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\hat{H} \mathbf{A}^{*}\, \varphi(\mathbf{r}) =
\biggl\{
\mathbf{A}^{*} \hat{H} +
\displaystyle\frac{\hbar\, k^{2}}{2m}\: \mathbf{A}^{*}(\mathbf{r}) +
\displaystyle\frac{i\,\hbar}{m}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\,
\biggl(\mathbf{k} \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}}\biggr)
\biggr\}\,
\varphi(\mathbf{r}).
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.7.5}$$ Now we write ($\mathbf{p}\, \mathbf{A}^{*} = \mathbf{A}^{*} \mathbf{p} \ne 0$ in Coulomb gauge) $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\vspace{2mm}
\langle f\, |\, \mathbf{p}\, \hat{H}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, | i \rangle & = &
\langle f\, |\, \mathbf{p}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, \hat{H}\, | i \rangle +
\displaystyle\frac{\hbar\, k^{2}}{2m}\: \langle f\, |\, \mathbf{p}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, | i \rangle +
\displaystyle\frac{i\,\hbar}{m}\,
\langle f\, |\, \Bigl(\mathbf{p}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\Bigr)\,
\biggl(\mathbf{k} \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \biggr) \, | i \rangle = \\
\vspace{2mm}
& = &
\langle f\, |\, \mathbf{p}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, E_{i}\, | i \rangle +
\displaystyle\frac{\hbar\, k^{2}}{2m}\: \langle f\, |\, \mathbf{p}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, | i \rangle +
\displaystyle\frac{i\,\hbar}{m}\,
\langle f\, |\, \Bigl(\mathbf{p}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\Bigr)\,
\biggl(\mathbf{k} \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \biggr) \, | i \rangle = \\
& = &
\biggl(E_{i} + \displaystyle\frac{\hbar\, k^{2}}{2m} \biggr) \cdot
\langle f\, |\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, \mathbf{p}\, | i \rangle +
\displaystyle\frac{\hbar^{2}}{m} \cdot
\Bigl\langle\, f\, \Bigl|\,
\biggl(\mathbf{A}^{*}\, \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \biggr)\,
\biggl(\mathbf{k} \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \biggr) \Bigr|\, i\,
\Bigr\rangle
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.7.6}$$ and we have also $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\vspace{2mm}
\langle f\, |\, \hat{H}\, \mathbf{p}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, | i \rangle =
\langle f\, |\, E_{f}\, \mathbf{p}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, | i \rangle =
E_{f} \cdot \langle f |\, \mathbf{p}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, | i \rangle.
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.7.7}$$ From (\[eq.app.7.6\]) and (\[eq.app.7.7\]) we obtain: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\vspace{2mm}
\langle f\, |\, [\hat{H},\, \mathbf{p}]\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, | i \rangle =
\langle f\, |\, \hat{H}\, \mathbf{p}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, | i \rangle -
\langle f\, |\, \mathbf{p}\, \hat{H}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, | i \rangle = \\
= E_{f} \cdot \langle f |\, \mathbf{p}\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, | i \rangle -
\biggl(E_{i} + \displaystyle\frac{\hbar\, k^{2}}{2m} \biggr) \cdot
\langle f\, |\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, \mathbf{p}\, | i \rangle -
\displaystyle\frac{\hbar^{2}}{m} \cdot
\Bigl\langle\, f\, \Bigl|\,
\biggl(\mathbf{A}^{*}\, \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \biggr)\,
\biggl(\mathbf{k} \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \biggr) \Bigr|\, i\,
\Bigr\rangle = \\
= - \biggl(E_{i} - E_{f} + \displaystyle\frac{\hbar\, k^{2}}{2m} \biggr) \cdot
\langle f\, |\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, \mathbf{p}\, | i \rangle -
\displaystyle\frac{\hbar^{2}}{m} \cdot
\Bigl\langle\, f\, \Bigl|\,
\biggl(\mathbf{A}^{*}\, \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \biggr)\,
\biggl(\mathbf{k} \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \biggr) \Bigr|\, i\,
\Bigr\rangle
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.7.8}$$ and from here we find: $$\begin{array}{lcl}
\langle f\, |\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, \mathbf{p}\, | i \rangle =
-\,\displaystyle\frac
{\langle f\, |\, [\hat{H},\, \mathbf{p}]\, \mathbf{A}^{*}\, | i \rangle +
\displaystyle\frac{\hbar^{2}}{m} \cdot
\Bigl\langle\, f\, \Bigl|\,
\biggl(\mathbf{A}^{*}\, \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \biggr)\,
\biggl(\mathbf{k} \displaystyle\frac{\partial}{\partial \mathbf{r}} \biggr) \Bigr|\, i\,
\Bigr \rangle}
{E_{i} - E_{f} + \displaystyle\frac{\hbar\, k^{2}}{2m}}.
\end{array}
\label{eq.app.7.9}$$ Now taking into account $$%\begin{array}{ll}
[\hat{H},\, \mathbf{p}] = i\,\hbar\, \displaystyle\frac{\partial\, U(\mathbf{r})}{\partial \mathbf{r}},
% E_{i} - E_{f} = \displaystyle\frac{\hbar\, k^{2}}{2m},
%\end{array}
\label{eq.app.7.10}$$ we obtain (\[eq.app.7.2\]).
Physical sense of the formula (\[eq.app.7.2\]) could be explained by the following. The first item in this formula seems to have higher convergence in the asymptotic region at numerical integration over $r$. It is supposed to give major contribution into the total matrix element while the second item allows us to analyze corrections after taking more accurate estimation of the emission of photons in the far asymptotic region into account (which is smaller usually).
[99]{} S. P. Maydanyuk, V. S. Olkhovsky, Europ. Phys. Journ. **A28** (3), 283–294 (2006), nucl-th/0408022. S. P. Maydanyuk, V. S. Olkhovsky, G. Giardina, G. Fazio, G. Mandaglio, M. Manganaro, Nucl. Phys. **A823** (1–4), 38–46 (2009).
M. I. Dyakonov, I. V. Gornyi, Phys. Rev. Lett. **76** (19), 3542–3545 (1996). M. I. Dyakonov, Phys. Rev. **C60**, 037602 (1999), nucl-th/9903016. C. A. Bertulani, D. T. de Paula and V. G. Zelevinsky, Phys. Rev. **C60** (3), 031602 (1999) (4 pages), nucl-ex/9812009. N. Takigawa, Y. Nozawa, K. Hagino, A. Ono and D. M. Brink, Phys. Rev. **C59** (2), R593–R597 (1999), nucl-th/9809001. J. Kasagi, H. Yamazaki, N. Kasajima, T. Ohtsuki and H. Yuki, , Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics [**23**]{}, 1451–1457 (1997). H. Boie, H. Scheit, U. D. Jentschura, F. Köck, M. Lauer, A. I. Milstein, I. S. Terekhov, and D. Schwalm, Phys. Rev. Lett. **99**, 022505 (2007), arXiv:0706.2109. U. D. Jentschura, A. I. Milstein, I. S. Terekhov, H. Boie, H. Scheit, and D. Schwalm, Phys. Rev. **C77**, 014611 (2008).
S. Misicu, M. Rizea and W. Greiner, Journ. Phys. G **27**, 993–1003 (2001). W. van Dijk and Y. Nogami, Few-body systems Supplement **14**, 229–232 (2003). O. Serot, N. Carjan and D. Strottman, Nucl. Phys. **A569**, 562–574 (1994). W. van Dijk and Y. Nogami, Phys. Rev. Lett. **83**, 2867–2871 (1999). W. van Dijk and Y. Nogami, Phys. Rev. **C65**, 024608 (2002) (14 pages). B. Ivlev and V. Gudkov, Phys. Rev. **C69**, 037602 (2004) (4 pages), nucl-th/0307012. M. Ya. Amusia, B. A. Zon, and I. Yu. Kretinin, JETP **105** (2), 343–346 (2007).
V. V. Flambaum and V. G. Zelevinsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. **83**, 3108–3111 (1999), nucl-th/9812076.
I. S. Batkin, I. V. Kopytin and T. A. Churakova *Internal bremsstrahlung accompanying $\alpha$ decay*, Yad. Phys. (Sov. Journal of nuclear physics) **44**, Iss. 6 (12), 1454–1458 (1986).
T. Papenbrock, G. F. Bertsch, Phys. Rev. Lett. **80** (19), 4141–4144 (1998), nucl-th/9801044. E. V. Tkalya, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. **116**, 390 (1999) \[Translation: Sov. Phys. JETP **89** (1999) 208\]; E. V. Tkalya, Phys. Rev. **C60**, 054612 (1999).
N. V. Eremin, G. Fazio and G. Giardina, Phys. Rev. Lett. **85** (14), 3061 (2000). J. Kasagi, H. Yamazaki, N. Kasajima, T. Ohtsuki and H. Yuki, *Replay on Comment on “Bremsstrahlung in $\alpha$-decay of $^{210}\mbox{Po}$: do $\alpha$-particles emit photons in tunneling?”* Phys. Rev. Lett. **85** (14), 3062 (2000). S. P. Maydanyuk, S. V. Belchikov, Prob. At. Sci. Tech.. Ser.: Nucl. Phys. Inv. (44) **5**, 19–21 (2004), nucl-th/0404013. G. Giardina, G. Fazio, G. Mandaglio, M. Manganaro, C. Saccá, N. V. Eremin, A. A. Paskhalov, D. A. Smirnov, S. P. Maydanyuk, and V. S. Olkhovsky, Europ. Phys. Journ. **A36** (1), 31–36 (2008). G. Giardina, G. Fazio, G. Mandaglio, M. Manganaro, S. P. Maydanyuk, V. S. Olkhovsky, N. V. Eremin, A. A. Paskhalov, D. A. Smirnov and C. Saccá, Mod. Phys. Lett. **A23** (31), 2651–2663 (2008), arXiv:0804.2640. S. P. Maydanyuk, V. S. Olkhovsky, Prog. Theor. Phys. **109** (2), 203–211 (2003), nucl-th/0404090. W. So and Y. Kim, Journ. Korean Phys. Soc. **37** (3), 202–208 (2000). J. Kasagi, H. Yamazaki, N. Kasajima, T. Ohtsuki and H. Yuki, Phys. Rev. Lett. **79** (3), 371–374 (1997). N. N. Bogoliubov and D. V. Shirkov, *Kvantovie polya* (Quantum fields theory) ([Nauka]{}, [Mockva]{}, 1980), p. 320 — \[in Russian\]. L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, *Kvantovaya Mehanika, kurs Teoreticheskoi Fiziki* (Quantum mechanics, course of Theoretical Physics), Vol. 3 ([Nauka]{}, [Mockva]{}, 1989) p. 768 — \[in Russian; eng. variant: Oxford, Uk, Pergamon, 1982\].
J. M. Eisenberg and W. Greiner, *Mehanizmi vozbuzhdenia yadra. Electromagnitnoie i slaboie vzaimodeistviya* (Excitation Mechanisms of Nucleus), Vol. 2 ([Atomizdat]{}, [Moskva]{}, 1973) p. 348 — \[in Russian; Engl.: *Excitation mechanisms of the nucleus. Electromagnetic and weak interactions* (North-Holland publishing company, Amsterdam-London, 1970)\]. V. B. Berestetsky, E. M. Lifshitz and L. P. Pitaevsky, *Kvantovaya Elektrodinamika, kurs Teoreticheskoi Fiziki* (Quantum electrodynamics, course of Theoretical Physics), Vol. 4 ([Nauka]{}, [Mockva]{}, 1989) p. 704 — \[in Russian; eng. variant: Oxford, Uk, Pergamon, 1982, 652 p.\].
S. [Å]{}berg, P. B. Semmes, and W. Nazarewicz, *Spherical proton emitters*, Phys. Rev. **C56**, 1762–1773 (1997).
K. Heyde, *The Nuclear Shell Model*, (Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1990).
B. Buck, A. C. Merchant and S. M. Perez, *Half-lives of favored alpha decays from nuclear ground states*, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables **54** (1), 53–74 (May, 1993).
A. D’Arrigo, N. V. Eremin, G. Fazio, G. Giardina, M. G. Glotova, T. V. Klochko, M. Sacchi and A. Taccone, , Physics Letters **B332** (1–2), 25–30 (July, 1994). V. Yu. Denisov and H. Ikezoe, *Alpha-nucleus potential for alpha-decay and sub-barrier fusion*, Phys. Rev. **C72**, 064613, p. 9 (2005), nucl-th/0510082. S. Peltonen, D. S. Delion, and J. Suhonen, *$\alpha$-decay spectroscopy of deformed nuclei reexamined*, Phys. Rev. **C78**, 034608 (2008).
T. Ohtsuki, H. Yuki, K. Hirose, T. Mitsugashira, *Status of the electron accelerator for radioanalytical studies at Tohoku University*, Czech. Journ. Phys. **56**, D391–D398 (2006).
V. Yu. Denisov and A. A. Khudenko, *Alpha-decay half-lives, alpha-capture and alpha-nucleus potential*, Phys. Rev. **C79**, 054614 (2009) \[23 pages\], arXiv:0902.0677. V. Yu. Denisov and A. A. Khudenko, *Alpha decays to ground and excited states of heavy deformed nuclei*, Phys. Rev. **C80**, 034603 (2009) \[10 pages\].
[^1]: E-mail: [email protected]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In this paper, we give a Fraïssé theoretic proof of the result of X. Jiang and H. Su that the Jiang–Su algebra is the unique monotracial simple C\*-algebra among all inductive limits of prime dimension drop algebras. The proof presented here is self-contained and quite elementary, and does not depend on any K-theoretic technology. We also partially recover the fact that every unital endomorphism of the Jiang–Su algebra is approximately inner.'
address: 'Graduate School of Mathematical=Sciences, the University of Tokyo'
author:
- Shuhei MASUMOTO
title: 'A Fraïssé theoretic approach to the Jiang–Su algebra'
---
Introduction
============
The Jiang–Su algebra was originally introduced by Jiang and Su in [@jiang99:_simple_unital] as a C\*-algebraic analog of the hyperfinite type $\mathrm{II}_1$-factor. This algebra is characterized as the unique simple monotracial C\*-algebra among all inductive limits of prime dimension drop algebras (i.e. certain algebras of matrix-valued continuous functions on the closed interval $[0, 1]$). In addition to being simple and having unique tracial state, it is separable, nuclear and infinite-dimensional, and have the same K-theory as the complex numbers $\mathbb{C}$. Furthermore, every unital endomorphism of this algebra is approximately inner, and it tensorially absorbs itself, i.e. $\mathcal{Z} \otimes \mathcal{Z} \simeq \mathcal{Z}$. Because of these properties, it plays a central role in the Elliott’s classification program of separable nuclear C\*-algebras via K-theoretic invariants [@elliott08:_regularity_properties].
The degree of difficulty in proving the properties of the Jiang–Su algebra varies from one to another. It is immediate from the construction that the Jiang–Su algebra is a unital simple separable nuclear infinite-dimensional C\*-algebra with a unique tracial state and has the same K-theory as $\mathbb{C}$. Compared with that, the proofs of the other properties that were presented in [@jiang99:_simple_unital] are relatively difficult. For example, the uniqueness result of the Jiang–Su algebra among the inductive limits of prime dimension drop algebras is implied as a corollary of the complete classification of the unital infinite-dimensional simple inductive limits of direct sums of dimension drop algebras via K-groups and trace spaces [@jiang99:_simple_unital Theorem 6.2]. The construction of isomorphisms in the classification result is carried over by the standard approximate intertwining argument, and for this, one has to find an appropriate sequence of morphisms between direct sums of dimension drop algebras which is convergent to the isomorphism between the limits. This sequence of morphisms are obtained by studying the KK-theory of dimension drop algebras and observing how to lift a morphism from a KK-element. Such an observation is also used to prove that every unital endomorphism of the Jiang–Su algebra is approximately inner.
It is true that, since KK-theory is a powerful tool, calculating KK-groups of dimension drop algebras is significant, and that the classification theorem is fairly interesting on its own right. On the other hand, it would be natural to ask whether there are more elementary proofs of these properties of the Jiang–Su algebra, taking the fundamental importance of the algebra into account.
In this paper, we give an alternative proof that a simple monotracial inductive limit of prime dimension drop algebras is unique up to isomorphism and every unital endomorphism of this inductive limit is approximately inner. The proof does not rely on KK-theory, but instead it uses Fraïssé theory.
Fraïssé theory is a topic in model theory where a bijective correspondence between certain classes consisting of finitely generated structures and countable structures with a certain homogeneity property is established. By definition, a countable structure is said to be *ultra-homogeneous* if every isomorphism between its two finitely generated substructures extends to an automorphism. The class corresponding to an ultra-homogeneous structure $\mathcal{M}$ in the context of Fraïssé theory is $\operatorname{Age} M$, the class of all finitely generated structures which are embeddable into $\mathcal{M}$. Fraïssé’s theorem characterizes the classes obtained in this way, and produces a method to recover the original ultra-homogeneous structures. Namely, if $\{\iota_{n, m} \colon \mathcal{A}_m \to \mathcal{A}_n\}$ and $\{\eta_{n, m} \colon \mathcal{B}_m \to \mathcal{B}_n\}$ are *generic* inductive systems of members of such a class, then, passing to subsystems if necessary, one can find sequences $\{\varphi_n \colon \mathcal{A}_n \to \mathcal{B}_n\}$ and $\{\psi_n \colon \mathcal{B}_n \to \mathcal{A}_{n+1}\}$ of embeddings such that the triangles in the following diagram commute. $$\begin{original}
\begin{tikzcd}
\mathcal{A}_1 \arrow[r, "\iota_{2,1}"] \arrow[d, "\varphi_1"] &
\mathcal{A}_2 \arrow[r, "\iota_{3,2}"] \arrow[d, "\varphi_2"] &
\mathcal{A}_3 \arrow[r, "\iota_{4,3}"] \arrow[d, "\varphi_3"] &
\mathcal{A}_4 \arrow[r, "\iota_{5,4}"] \arrow[d, "\varphi_4"] & \dots \\
\mathcal{B}_1 \arrow[r, "\eta_{2,1}"'] \arrow[ru, "\psi_1"'] &
\mathcal{B}_2 \arrow[r, "\eta_{3,2}"'] \arrow[ru, "\psi_2"'] &
\mathcal{B}_3 \arrow[r, "\eta_{4,3}"'] \arrow[ru, "\psi_3"'] &
\mathcal{B}_4 \arrow[r, "\eta_{5,4}"'] \arrow[ru, "\psi_4"'] & \dots
\end{tikzcd}
\end{original}
\begin{arxiv}
\xymatrix{
\mathcal{A}_1 \ar[r]^{\iota_{2,1}} \ar[d]^{\varphi_1} &
\mathcal{A}_2 \ar[r]^{\iota_{3,2}} \ar[d]^{\varphi_2} &
\mathcal{A}_3 \ar[r]^{\iota_{4,3}} \ar[d]^{\varphi_3} &
\mathcal{A}_4 \ar[r]^{\iota_{5,4}} \ar[d]^{\varphi_4} & \dots \\
\mathcal{B}_1 \ar[r]_{\eta_{2,1}} \ar[ru]_{\psi_1} &
\mathcal{B}_2 \ar[r]_{\eta_{3,2}} \ar[ru]_{\psi_2} &
\mathcal{B}_3 \ar[r]_{\eta_{4,3}} \ar[ru]_{\psi_3} &
\mathcal{B}_4 \ar[r]_{\eta_{5,4}} \ar[ru]_{\psi_4} & \dots
}
\end{arxiv}$$ Consequently, the sequences $\{\varphi_n\}$ and $\{\psi_n\}$ provide embeddings between the inductive limits which are inverses of each other and so are isomorphisms. In fact, the resulting inductive limits are isomorphic to the original ultra-homogeneous structure. The class and the ultra-homogeneous structure in this context are called a Fraïssé class and its Fraïssé limit respectively.
Like other topics in model theory, this theory has been a target of generalization to the setting of metric structures ([@schoretsanitis07:_fraisse_theory], [@yaacov15:_fraisse_limits]). In [@eagle16:_fraisse_limits], a variant of the theory presented in [@yaacov15:_fraisse_limits] was used to recognize a part of AF algebras including the UHF algebras, the hyperfinite type $\mathrm{II}_1$ factor, and the Jiang–Su algebra as generic limits of suitable Fraïssé classes. The author also gave an alternative proof of the same result on the Jiang–Su algebra as [@eagle16:_fraisse_limits], and realized the UHF algebras as Fraïssé limit in a different way [@masumoto16:_jiang_su].
The idea in [@eagle16:_fraisse_limits] and [@masumoto16:_jiang_su] of realizing the Jiang–Su algebra as a Fraïssé limit is essentially coming from the observation that the approximate intertwining argument, which is used to construct an isomorphism in the classification result for inductive limits of direct sums of dimension drop algebras, is a variant of the back-and-forth argument. That is, in order to construct suitable sequences of embeddings between direct sums of dimension drop algebras, it would be suffice to verify that a suitable class of direct sums of dimension drop algebras forms a Fraïssé class, which does not necessarily mean that one needs KK-theory.
Thus, in short, the result on the Jiang–Su algebra in [@eagle16:_fraisse_limits] and [@masumoto16:_jiang_su] seems to be a Fraïssé theoretic expression of the fact that the algebra is the unique simple monotracial inductive limits of prime dimension drop algebras. Therefore, this fact should be recovered from the Fraïssé limit construction, and that is our strategy in this paper.
This paper consists of three sections. In the next section we briefly give a description of Fraïssé theory for metric structures. The Fraïssé limit construction of the Jiang–Su algebra is analyzed in the last section.
Approximate isomorphisms and Fraïssé limits
===========================================
In this section, we briefly sketch the theory of Fraïssé limits used in [@eagle16:_fraisse_limits] and [@masumoto16:_jiang_su]. It is a slight modified version of the theory presented in [@yaacov15:_fraisse_limits], and detailed proofs can be found in [@masumoto16:_generalized_fraisse].
By definition, a *language* is a set $L$ such that each element is exactly one of the following symbols:
- constant symbols;
- $n$-ary function symbols ($n = 1, 2, 3, \dots$);
- $n$-ary predicate symbols ($n = 1, 2, 3, \dots$).
A *metric $L$-structure* $\mathcal{A}$ consists of a complete metric space $A$, which is called the *domain* of $\mathcal{A}$ and denoted by $|\mathcal{A}|$, together with an interpretation $S \mapsto S^\mathcal{A}$ of the symbols in $L$.
- If $c$ is a constant symbol, then $c^\mathcal{A}$ is an element in $A$.
- If $f$ is an $n$-ary function symbol, then $f^\mathcal{A}$ is a continuous function from $|\mathcal{A}|^n$ into $|\mathcal{A}|$.
- If $R$ is an $n$-ary predicate symbol, then $R^\mathcal{A}$ is a continuous $\mathbb{R}$-valued function on $|\mathcal{A}|^n$.
An isometry $\iota$ from a metric $L$-structure $\mathcal{A}$ into another $L$-structure $\mathcal{B}$ is called an *($L$-)embedding* if $$f^\mathcal{B}\bigl(\iota(a_1), \dots, \iota(a_n)\bigr)
= \iota\bigl(f^\mathcal{A}(a_1, \dots, a_n)\bigr)
\quad (a_1, \dots, a_n \in |\mathcal{A}|)$$ for any $n$-ary function symbol $f$ in $L$, and $$P^\mathcal{B}\bigl(\iota(a_1), \dots, \iota(a_n)\bigr)
= P^\mathcal{A}(a_1, \dots, a_n)
\quad (a_1, \dots, a_n \in |\mathcal{A}|)$$ for any $n$-ary predicate symbol $P$ in $L$.
In this paper, we are interested in the language $L_{\mathrm{TC}^*}$ of unital tracial C\*-algebras, which consists of the following:
- two constant symbols $0$ and $1$;
- an unary function symbol $\lambda$ for each $\lambda \in \mathbb{C}$, which are to be interpreted as multiplication by $\lambda$;
- an unary function symbol $*$ for involution;
- a binary function symbol $+$ and ${}\cdot{}$;
- an unary predicate symbol $\operatorname{tr}$.
Then every unital C\*-algebra with a distinguished trace can be considered as a metric $L_{\mathrm{TC}^*}$-structure. Note that the distance we adopt is the norm distance, and that a map between unital C\*-algebras with fixed traces are $L$-embeddings if and only if it is a trace-preserving injective $*$-homomorphism.
\[dfn:\_jep\_and\_nap\] Let $\mathscr{K}$ be a category of finitely generated separable metric $L$-structures and $L$-embeddings.
1. For $\mathcal{A}, \mathcal{B} \in \mathscr{K}$, we set $$\operatorname{JE}_\mathscr{K}(\mathcal{A}, \mathcal{B})
:= \bigl\{(\iota,\eta) \bigm|
\exists \mathcal{C} \in \operatorname{Obj}(\mathscr{K}), \
\iota \in \operatorname{Mor}_\mathscr{K}(\mathcal{A}, \mathcal{C}) \ \& \
\eta \in \operatorname{Mor}_\mathscr{K}(\mathcal{B}, \mathcal{C}) \bigr\}$$ and call each member of $\operatorname{JE}_\mathscr{K}(\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B})$ a *joint $\mathscr{K}$-embedding* of $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{B}$. The category $\mathscr{K}$ is said to satisfy the *joint embedding property (JEP)* if $\operatorname{JE}_\mathscr{K}(\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B})$ is nonempty for any objects $\mathcal{A}, \mathcal{B}$ of $\mathscr{K}$.
2. The category $\mathscr{K}$ is said to satisfy the *near amalgamation property* if for any objects $\mathcal{A}, \mathcal{B}_1, \mathcal{B}_2$ of $\mathscr{K}$, any morphisms $\iota_i \colon \mathcal{A} \to \mathcal{B}_i$, any finite subset $G \subseteq \mathcal{A}$ and any $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists a joint $\mathscr{K}$-embedding $(\eta_1, \eta_2) \in \operatorname{JE}_\mathscr{K}(\mathcal{B}_1,\mathcal{B}_2)$ such that the inequality $$d\bigl(\eta_1 \circ \iota_1(a), \eta_2 \circ \iota_2(a) \bigr) \leq \varepsilon$$ holds for all $a \in G$.
In the sequel, we fix a category $\mathscr{K}$ of finitely generated separable metric $L$-structures and $L$-embeddings with JEP and NAP.
1. Let $\mathcal{A}, \mathcal{B}$ be objects of $\mathscr{K}$ and $\varphi \colon |\mathcal{A}| \times |\mathcal{B}| \to [0, \infty]$ be a bi-Katětov map, that is, a map satisfying $$\begin{aligned}
\varphi(a, b) &\leq d(a, a') + \varphi(a', b), &
d(a, a') &\leq \varphi(a, b) + \varphi(a', b), \\
\varphi(a, b) &\leq d(b, b') + \varphi(a, b'), &
d(b, b') &\leq \varphi(a, b) + (a, b')
\end{aligned}$$ for all $a, a' \in |\mathcal{A}|$ and $b, b' \in |\mathcal{B}|$. Then $\varphi$ is called an *approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphism* from $\mathcal{A}$ to $\mathcal{B}$ if for any finite subsets $A_0 \subseteq |\mathcal{A}|$ and $B_0 \subseteq |\mathcal{B}|$ and any $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $(\iota, \eta) \in \operatorname{JE}_\mathscr{K}(\mathcal{A}, \mathcal{B})$ such that the inequality $$d\bigl(\iota(a), \eta(b)\bigr) \leq \varphi(a, b) + \varepsilon$$ holds for all $a \in A_0$ and $b \in B_0$. We denote by $\operatorname{Apx}_\mathscr{K}(\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B})$ the set of all approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphisms from $\mathcal{A}$ to $\mathcal{B}$.
2. A *$\mathscr{K}$-structure* is a metric $L$-structure $\mathcal{M}$ together with a distinguished inductive system $$\begin{original}
\begin{tikzcd}
\mathcal{A}_1 \arrow[r,"\iota_1"] & \mathcal{A}_2 \arrow[r,"\iota_2"] &
\mathcal{A}_3 \arrow[r,"\iota_3"] & \cdots
\end{tikzcd}
\end{original}
\begin{arxiv}
\xymatrix{
\mathcal{A}_1 \ar[r]^{\iota_1} & \mathcal{A}_2 \ar[r]^{\iota_2} &
\mathcal{A}_3 \ar[r]^{\iota_3} & \cdots
}
\end{arxiv}$$ in $\mathscr{K}$ such that the inductive limit of the system as a metric $L$-structure is $\mathcal{M}$.
3. By definition, an approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphism from a $\mathscr{K}$-structure $\mathcal{M} = \overline{\bigcup_n \mathcal{A}_n}$ to another $\mathscr{K}$-structure $\mathcal{N} = \overline{\bigcup_m \mathcal{B}_m}$ is a bi-Katětov map $\varphi \colon |\mathcal{M}| \times |\mathcal{N}| \to [0,\infty]$ such that the restriction $\varphi|_{\mathcal{A}_n \times \mathcal{B}_m}$ is in $\operatorname{Apx}_\mathscr{K}(\mathcal{A}_n, \mathcal{B}_m)$ for all $n$ and $m$. We denote by $\operatorname{Apx}_\mathscr{K}(\mathcal{M}, \mathcal{N})$ the set of all approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphisms from $\mathcal{M}$ to $\mathcal{N}$.
The following two examples of approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphisms are of most importance.
1. For $L$-embeddings $\iota \colon \mathcal{A} \to \mathcal{C}$ and $\eta \colon \mathcal{B} \to \mathcal{C}$, we set $$\begin{aligned}
\varphi_{\iota,\eta}(a, b) &:=
d\bigl(\iota(a), \eta(b)\bigr) &
(a \in |\mathcal{A}|, \ b \in |\mathcal{B}|).
\end{aligned}$$ If both $\iota$ and $\eta$ are morphisms of $\mathscr{K}$, then $\varphi_{\iota,\eta}$ is an approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphism between objects of $\mathscr{K}$. It is simply written as $\varphi_\iota$ when $\mathcal{C}$ is equal to $\mathcal{B}$ and $\eta$ is the identity map.
Even if $\iota$ and $\eta$ are not morphisms of $\mathscr{K}$, the bi-Katětov map $\varphi_{\iota,\eta}$ can be an approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphism. An $L$-embedding $\iota$ between $\mathscr{K}$-structures is said to be *$\mathscr{K}$-admissible* if $\varphi_\iota$ is an approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphism.
2. Let $\mathcal{M}_1 = \overline{\bigcup_l \mathcal{A}_l}$, $\mathcal{M}_2 = \overline{\bigcup_m \mathcal{B}_m}$ and $\mathcal{M}_3 = \overline{\bigcup_n \mathcal{C}_n}$ be $\mathscr{K}$-structures. If $\varphi$ is an approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphism from $\mathcal{M}_1$ to $\mathcal{M}_2$ and $\psi$ is an approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphism from $\mathcal{M}_2$ to $\mathcal{M}_3$, then $$\begin{aligned}
\psi\varphi(a, c) &:= \inf_{b \in |\mathcal{M}_2|}
\bigl[\varphi(a, b) + \psi(b, c)\bigr] &
(a \in |\mathcal{M}_1|, \ c \in |\mathcal{M}_2|)
\end{aligned}$$ is an approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphism from $\mathcal{M}_1$ to $\mathcal{M}_3$. For a proof, see [@masumoto16:_generalized_fraisse Proposition 3.4].
Now, for each $n \in \mathbb{N}$, set $$\mathscr{K}_n
:= \bigl\{\langle \mathcal{A}, \bar{a} \rangle \bigm|
\mathcal{A} \in \operatorname{Obj}(\mathscr{K}) \ \& \
\text{$\bar{a} \in |\mathcal{A}|^n$ is an ordered generator of $\mathcal{A}$} \bigr\}$$ and define a function $d^\mathscr{K}$ on $\mathscr{K}_n$ by $$\begin{aligned}
d\bigl(\langle \mathcal{A},\bar{a} \rangle, \langle \mathcal{B},\bar{b} \rangle\bigr)
:=& \inf \{ \max_i d\bigl(\iota(a_i),\eta(b_i)\bigr) \mid
{(\iota,\eta) \in \operatorname{JE}_\mathscr{K}(\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B})} \} \\
=& \inf \{ \max_i \varphi(a_i,b_i) \mid
{\varphi \in \operatorname{Apx}_\mathscr{K}(\mathcal{A},\mathcal{B})} \},
\end{aligned}$$ where $\bar{a} = (a_1, \dots, a_n)$ and $\bar{b} = (b_1, \dots b_n)$. Then it follows from JEP and NAP that $d^\mathscr{K}$ is a pseudo-metric on $\mathscr{K}_n$.
1. The category $\mathscr{K}$ is said to satisfy the *weak Polish property (WPP)* if $\mathscr{K}_n$ is separable with respect to the pseudo-metric $d^\mathscr{K}$ for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$.
2. The class $\mathscr{K}$ satisfies the *Cauchy continuity property (CCP)* if
1. for any $n$-ary predicate symbol $P$ in $L$, the map $\bigl\langle\mathcal{A},(\bar{a},\bar{b})\bigr\rangle
\mapsto P^\mathcal{A}(\bar{a})$ from $\mathscr{K}_{n+m}$ into $\mathbb{R}$ sends Cauchy sequences to Cauchy sequences; and
2. for any $n$-ary function symbol $f$ in $L$, the map $\bigl\langle\mathcal{A},(\bar{a},\bar{b})\bigr\rangle \mapsto
\bigl\langle\mathcal{A},(\bar{a},\bar{b},f^\mathcal{A}(\bar{a})\bigr\rangle$ from $\mathscr{K}_{n+m}$ into $\mathscr{K}_{n+m+1}$ sends Cauchy sequences to Cauchy sequences.
A category $\mathscr{K}$ of finitely generated separable metric $L$-structures and $L$-embeddings is called a *Fraïssé category* if it satisfies JEP, NAP, WPP and CCP. A *limit* of a Fraïssé category $\mathscr{K}$ is a $\mathscr{K}$-structure $\mathcal{M}$ with the following properties.
1. *$\mathcal{M}$ is $\mathscr{K}$-universal*: Every member of $\mathscr{K}$ is $\mathscr{K}$-admissibly embeddable into $\mathcal{M}$.
2. *$\mathcal{M}$ is approximately $\mathscr{K}$-homogeneous*: For any member $\mathcal{A}$ of $\mathscr{K}$, any $\mathscr{K}$-admissible $L$-embeddings $\iota, \eta \colon \mathcal{A} \to \mathcal{M}$, any finite subset $A_0 \subseteq |\mathcal{A}|$ and any $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists a $\mathscr{K}$-admissible $L$-automorphism $\alpha$ of $\mathcal{M}$ such that $d\bigl(\alpha \circ \iota(a), \eta(a)\bigr) < \varepsilon$ holds for all $a \in A_0$.
Every Fraïssé category admits a limit. Moreover, its limit is unique up to $\mathscr{K}$-admissible isomorphisms.
We conclude this section by characterizing the limit of a Fraïssé category in terms of approximate isomorphisms. For this, we need to introduce the concepts of strictness and totality.
Let $A \subseteq A'$ and $B \subseteq B'$ be subspaces of metric spaces and $\varphi \colon A \times B \to [0, \infty]$ be a bi-Katětov map. Then the *trivial extension* $\varphi|^{A' \times B'}$ of $\varphi$ is the bi-Katětov map on $A' \times B'$ defined by $$\begin{aligned}
\varphi|^{A' \times B'}(a',b') &:=
\inf_{\substack{a \in A \\ b \in B}}
\bigl[d(a',a)+\varphi(a,b)+d(b,b')\bigr] &
(a' \in A', \ b' \in B').
\end{aligned}$$ Note that if $\psi$ is another bi-Katětov map on $A' \times B'$, then $\psi \leq \varphi|^{A' \times B'}$ is equivalent to $\psi|_{A \times B} \leq \varphi$.
Let $\varphi$ be an approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphism from $\mathcal{A}$ to $\mathcal{B}$.
1. The approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphism $\varphi$ is said to be *strict* if there exist another approximate isomorphism $\psi$ from $\mathcal{A}$ to $\mathcal{B}$, a positive real number $\varepsilon > 0$ and finite subsets $A_0 \subseteq |\mathcal{A}|$ and $B_0 \subseteq |\mathcal{B}|$ such that the inequality $$(\psi|_{A_0 \times B_0})|^{\mathcal{A} \times \mathcal{B}}(a, b) + \varepsilon
\leq \varphi(a, b)$$ holds for all $a \in |\mathcal{A}|$ and $b \in |\mathcal{B}|$.
2. The approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphism $\varphi$ is *$\varepsilon$-total* on a subset $A_0 \subseteq |\mathcal{A}|$ if the inequality $$\varphi^*\varphi(a, a') \leq d(a, a') + 2\varepsilon,$$ holds for all $a, a' \in A_0$, or equivalently, $$\inf_{b \in \mathcal{B}} \varphi(a, b) \leq \varepsilon$$ for all $a \in A_0$.
The following theorem is a weaker version of [@masumoto16:_generalized_fraisse Lemma 4.6].
\[thm:\_recognition\_of\_the\_limit\] Let $\mathcal{M} = \overline{\bigcup_n \mathcal{A}_n}$ be a $\mathscr{K}$-structure. Then $\mathcal{M}$ is the Fraïssé limit of $\mathscr{K}$ if and only if for any object $\mathcal{B}$ of $\mathscr{K}$, any strict approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphism $\varphi$ from $\mathcal{B}$ to $\mathcal{A}_n$, any finite subset $B_0 \subseteq |\mathcal{B}|$ and any $\varepsilon > 0$, there exist $N > n$ and an approximate $\mathscr{K}$-isomorphism $\psi$ from $\mathcal{B}$ into $\mathcal{A}_N$ which is $\varepsilon$-total on $B_0$ and dominated by $\varphi|^{\mathcal{B} \times \mathcal{A}_N}$.
The Jiang–Su algebra
====================
In this paper, we shall denote by $\mathbb{M}_n$ the C\*-algebra of all $n$-by-$n$ complex matrices. For natural numbers $p$ and $q$, the *dimension drop algebra* $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ is defined as the C\*-algebra of all $\mathbb{M}_p \otimes \mathbb{M}_q$-valued continuous functions $f$ on the closed interval $[0,1]$ such that $f(0)$ and $f(1)$ are contained in $\mathbb{M}_p \otimes 1_q$ and $1_p \otimes \mathbb{M}_q$ respectively. It is said to be *prime* if $p$ and $q$ are coprime. Note that if $(e_{ij})_{i,j}$ and $(f_{kl})_{k,l}$ are systems of matrix units of $\mathbb{M}_p$ and $\mathbb{M}_q$ respectively, then $(e_{ij} \otimes f_{kl})_{(i,k),(j,l)}$ is a system of matrix units, so $\mathbb{M}_p \otimes \mathbb{M}_q$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb{M}_{pq}$.
We denote by $c_p^{p,q}$ the map from $\mathbb{M}_p \otimes 1_q$ to $\mathbb{M}_p$ defined by $a \otimes 1 \mapsto a$. The map $c_q^{p,q} \colon 1_p \otimes \mathbb{M}_q \to \mathbb{M}_q$ is defined similarly. When no confusion arises, these maps are simply denoted by $c$. Also, for $t \in [0,1]$, we denote by $e_t$ the evaluation map at $t$.
The following proposition is a trivial modification of [@masumoto16:_jiang_su Proposition 3.5].
\[prop:\_approximate\_diagonalizability\] Let $\iota \colon \mathcal{Z}_{p,q} \to \mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$ be a unital $*$-homomorphism. Then the following statements hold.
1. \[prop:\_approximate\_diagonalizability:itemi\] There exist integers $a, b$ with $0 \leq a < q$ and $0 \leq b < p$, continuous maps $t_1, \dots, t_k$ from $[0,1]$ into $[0,1]$ and a family $\{v_s\}_{s \in [0,1]}$ of unitary matrices of size $p'q'$ such that $\iota$ is of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\iota\bigl(f\bigr)(s)
= \operatorname{Ad}(v_s) \Bigl( \operatorname{diag}
\bigl[\overbrace{c(f(0)), \dots, c(f(0))}^a, & \\
f(t_1(s)), \dots, f(t_k(s)), &\underbrace{c(f(1)), \dots, c(f(1))}_b \bigr] \Bigr)
\end{aligned}$$ for $f \in \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ and $s \in [0,1]$, where $\operatorname{Ad}(v)$ denotes the inner automorphism associated to $v$, and $\operatorname{diag}[a_1,\dots,a_n]$ is the block diagonal matrix with $a_i$ as its $i$-th block.
2. Suppose that $t_1, \dots, t_k$ are as in \[prop:\_approximate\_diagonalizability:itemi\]. Then for any finite $G \subseteq \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ and any $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists a continuous path $u \colon [0,1] \to \mathbb{M}_{p'q'}$ of unitaries such that the $*$-homomorphism $\iota' \colon \mathcal{Z}_{p,q} \to \mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$ defined by $$\begin{aligned}
\iota'\bigl(f\bigr)(s)
= \operatorname{Ad}(u(s)) \Bigl( \operatorname{diag}
\bigl[\overbrace{c(f(0)), \dots, c(f(0))}^a, & \\
f(t_1(s)), \dots, f(t_k(s)), &\underbrace{c(f(1)), \dots, c(f(1))}_b \bigr] \Bigr)
\end{aligned}$$ satisfies $\|\iota(g) - \iota'(g)\| < \varepsilon$ for all $g \in G$.
The family $t_1, \dots, t_k$ of continuous maps and the integers $a$ and $b$ that appeared in Proposition \[prop:\_approximate\_diagonalizability\] are called an *eigenvalue pattern* and the *remainder indices* of the $*$-homomorphism $\iota$. An eigenvalue pattern $t_1, \dots, t_k$ is said to be *normalized* if it satisfies the inequality $t_1 \leq \dots \leq t_k$. Note that the normalized eigenvalue pattern is unique for each $*$-homomorphism. Also, if $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ is prime, then the remainder indices depend only on the integers $p$, $q$, $p'$ and $q'$. Indeed, if $\eta$ is another $*$-homomorphism from $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ into $\mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$, and if $a_\eta$ and $b_\eta$ are the remainder indices of $\eta$, then the congruence equation $$pa + qb \equiv p'q' \equiv pa_\eta + qb_\eta \pmod{pq}$$ holds, so that $$\begin{aligned}
a &\equiv a_\eta \pmod{q}, & b \equiv b_\eta \pmod{p},
\end{aligned}$$ as $p$ and $q$ are coprime.
Let $\iota$ be a $*$-homomorphism between dimension drop algebras with an eigenvalue pattern $t_1, \dots, t_k$. We shall denote by $V(t_1, \dots, t_k)$ the maximum of the diameters of the images of $t_1, \dots, t_k$, and call it the *variation* of the eigenvalue pattern. The infimum of the variations of the eigenvalue patterns is clearly equal to the variation of the normalized eigenvalue pattern, which is called the variation of $\iota$ and denoted by $V(\iota)$. The next proposition is a variant of [@masumoto16:_jiang_su Proposition 4.4].
\[prop:\_embeddability\_of\_dimension\_drop\_algebras\] Let $p, q \in \mathbb{N}$ be coprime and $\varepsilon$ be a positive real number. Then there exists $M \in \mathbb{N}$ such that if $p', q'$ are larger than $M$, then there exists a unital embedding of $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ into $\mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$ with its variation less than $\varepsilon$.
Since $p$ and $q$ are coprime, there exists $M \in \mathbb{N}$ with $M \geq pq(1/\varepsilon+2)$ such that if $p', q' > M$, then $$pa + pqk + qb = p'q'$$ for some $a, b, k \in \mathbb{N}$. Without loss of generality, we may assume $0 \leq a < q$ and $0 \leq b < p$. Also, one can find $l^0, m^0 \in [0,q)$ and $l^1, m^1 \in [0,p)$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
pl^0 & \equiv p' \pmod{q}, & pm^0 & \equiv q' \pmod{q}, \\
ql^1 & \equiv p' \pmod{p}, & qm^1 & \equiv q' \pmod{p}.
\end{aligned}$$ Then, $$\begin{aligned}
pq'l^0 &\equiv pp'm^0 \equiv p'q' \equiv pa \pmod{q}, \\
qq'l^1 &\equiv qp'm^1 \equiv p'q' \equiv qb \pmod{p},
\end{aligned}$$ so $$\begin{aligned}
q'l^0 &\equiv p'm^0 \equiv a \pmod{q}, & q'l^1 \equiv p'm^1 \equiv b \pmod{p}.
\end{aligned}$$ We set $$\begin{aligned}
n_0^0 &:= \frac{q'l^0-a}{q}, & n_0^1 &:= \frac{q'l^1-b}{p}, \\
n_0^0 &:= \frac{p'm^0-a}{q}, & n_0^1 &:= \frac{p'm^1-b}{p}.
\end{aligned}$$ so that $$\begin{aligned}
a+qn_0^0 &\equiv b + pn_0^1 \equiv 0 \pmod{q'}, \\
a+qn_1^0 &\equiv b + pn_1^1 \equiv 0 \pmod{p'}.
\end{aligned}$$
We claim that
- $n_0^0 + n_0^1$ and $n_1^0 + n_1^1$ are smaller than $k$;
- $k - n_0^0 - n_0^1$ and $k - n_1^0 - n_1^1$ are multiples of $q'$ and $p'$ respectively; and
- $(k - n_0^0 - n_0^1)/q'$ and $(k - n_1^0 - n_1^1)/p'$ are larger than $1/\varepsilon$.
Indeed, we have $$\begin{aligned}
n_0^0 + n_0^1
&= \frac{q'l^0 - a}{q} + \frac{q'l^1 - b}{p} \\
&= \frac{q'(pl^0+ql^1) - pa - qb}{pq} \\
&< \frac{2q'pq - p'q' + pqk}{pq} < k.
\end{aligned}$$ Also, note that $$pq(k - n_0^0 - n_0^1) = p'q' - pq'l^0 - qq'l^1 = q'(p' - pl^0 - ql^1).$$ Since $p$ and $q$ divide $p'-ql^1$ and $p'-pl^0$ respectively, and since $p$ and $q$ are coprime, it follows that $pq$ divides $p' - pl^0 - ql^1$, so $q'$ divides $k - n_0^0 - n_0^1$; and $$\frac{k - n_0^0 - n_0^1}{q'} = \frac{p' - pl^0 - ql^1}{pq}
> \frac{p' - 2pq}{pq} > \frac{1}{\varepsilon}.$$ Similarly, it follows that $n_1^0 + n_1^1$ is smaller than $k$, that $p'$ divides $k - n_1^0 + n_1^1$, and that $(k - n_1^0 - n_1^1)/p'$ is larger than $1/\varepsilon$.
From the claim in the previous paragraph, one can easily construct a family $t_1, \dots t_k$ of continuous maps from $[0,1]$ into $[0,1]$ such that
- the union of the images of $t_1, \dots, t_k$ is equal to $[0,1]$;
- the diameter of the image of $t_i$ is smaller than $\varepsilon$ for all $i$;
- $\#\{ i \mid t_i(x) = y \} = n_x^y$ for $x,y = 0,1$; and
- for each $y$ with $0 < y < 1$, the integers $q'$ and $p'$ divide $\#\{ i \mid t_i(0) = y \}$ and $\#\{ i \mid t_i(1) = y \}$ respectively.
If we define a $*$-homomorphism $\eta$ from $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ into $C([0,1],\mathbb{M}_{p'q'})$ by $$\begin{aligned}
\eta\bigl(f\bigr)(s)
= \Bigl( \operatorname{diag}
\bigl[\overbrace{c(f(0)), \dots, c(f(0))}^a, & \\
f(t_1(s)), \dots, f(t_k(s)), &\underbrace{c(f(1)), \dots, c(f(1))}_b \bigr] \Bigr),
\end{aligned}$$ then one can easily verify from the construction of $t_1, \dots, t_k$ that the images of $e_0 \circ \eta$ and $e_1 \circ \eta$ are included in isomorphic copies of $\mathbb{M}_{p'} \otimes 1_{q'}$ and $1_{p'} \otimes \mathbb{M}_{q'}$ respectively, so there is a unitary $u \in C([0,1],\mathbb{M}_{p'q'})$ with $\operatorname{Im} \operatorname{Ad}(u) \circ \eta \subseteq \mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$.
Note that the integers $a$ and $b$ in the proof of the previous proposition is the reminder indices of the embedding that is constructed. In particular, both of the indices are equal to $0$ if $pq$ divides $p'q'$.
The next proposition is also a slight modification of [@masumoto16:_jiang_su Lemma 4.9]. Recall that a *modulus of uniform continuity* of a function $f$ on $[0,1]$ is a map $\Delta_f \colon (0,1] \to (0,1]$ such that $|s-s'| < \Delta_f(\varepsilon)$ implies $\|f(s) - f(s')\| \leq \varepsilon$.
\[prop:\_inner\_automorphisms\] Let $p, q$ be coprime positive integers, $\iota_1, \iota_2 \colon \mathcal{Z}_{p,q} \to \mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$ be unital $*$-homomorphisms with eigenvalue patterns $t_1^1, \dots t_k^1$ and $t_1^2, \dots, t_k^2$ respectively, $G$ be a finite subset of $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$, and $\varepsilon$ be a positive real number. If the inequality $$\max_i\|t_i^1 - t_i^2\|_\infty < \min_{g \in G} \Delta_g(\varepsilon)$$ holds, where $\Delta_g$ is a modulus of uniform continuity of $g$, then there exists a unitary $w \in \mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$ with $$\|\operatorname{Ad}(w) \circ \iota_1(g) - \iota_2(g)\| < 5\varepsilon$$ for all $g \in G$.
By Proposition \[prop:\_approximate\_diagonalizability\], we may assume without loss of generality that $\iota_j$ is of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\iota_j\bigl(f\bigr)(s)
= \operatorname{Ad}(u^j(s)) \Bigl( \operatorname{diag}
\bigl[\overbrace{c(f(0)), \dots, c(f(0))}^a, & \\
f(t_1^j(s)), \dots, f(t_k^j(s)), &\underbrace{c(f(1)), \dots, c(f(1))}_b \bigr] \Bigr)
\end{aligned}$$ for $f \in \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$, where $u^j \in C([0,1],\mathbb{M}_{p'q'})$ is a unitary and $t_1^j \leq \dots \leq t_k^j$. Also, we may assume that $\|g\| \leq 1$ for all $g \in G$.
Let $n_0^0$ and $n_0^1$ be the least non-negative integers such that $$a + qn_0^0 \equiv b + pn_0^1 \equiv 0 \pmod{q'}.$$ Then, from the condition $\iota_j(f) \in \mathbb{M}_{p'} \otimes 1_{q'}$, it easily follows that $$\begin{aligned}
0 = t_{n_0^0}^j(0)
&\leq t_{n_0^0+1}^j(0) = \dots = t_{n_0^0+q'}^j(0) \\
&\leq t_{n_0^0+q'+1}^j(0) = \dots = t_{n_0^0+2q'}^j(0) \\
&\leq \dots \leq t_{k-n_0^1+1}^j(0) = 1,
\end{aligned}$$ and there exists a unitary $v_0^j \in \mathbb{M}_{p'}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
c\bigl(\iota_j\bigl(f\bigr)(0)\bigr)
= \operatorname{Ad}(v_0^j) \Bigl( \operatorname{diag}
\bigl[&\overbrace{c(f(0)), \dots, c(f(0))}^{a'}, \\
&f\bigl(t_{n_0^0 + q'}^j(0)\bigr), f\bigl(t_{n_0^0 + 2q'}^j(0)\bigr), \dots,
f\bigl(t_{k-n_0^1}^j(0)\bigr), \\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad\underbrace{c(f(1)), \dots, c(f(1))}_{b'} \bigr] \Bigr)
\end{aligned}$$ for some non-negative integers $a'$ and $b'$. Similarly, for suitable non-negative integers $n_1^0, n_1^1, a''$ and $b''$ and a unitary $v_1^j \in \mathbb{M}_{q'}$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
c\bigl(\iota_j\bigl(f\bigr)(1)\bigr)
= \operatorname{Ad}(v_1^j) \Bigl( \operatorname{diag}
\bigl[&\overbrace{c(f(0)), \dots, c(f(0))}^{a''}, \\
&f\bigl(t_{n_1^0 + p'}^j(1)\bigr), f\bigl(t_{n_1^0 + 2p'}^j(1)\bigr), \dots,
f\bigl(t_{k-n_1^1}^j(p)\bigr), \\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\quad\underbrace{c(f(1)), \dots, c(f(1))}_{b''} \bigr] \Bigr).
\end{aligned}$$ Thus, if $v$ is a path of unitaries connecting $\bigl[v_0^2(v_0^1)^*\bigr] \otimes 1_{q'}$ to $1_{p'} \otimes \bigl[v_1^2(v_1^1)^*\bigr]$, then $v$ is in $\mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$ and $\bigl(\operatorname{Ad}(v) \circ \iota_1\bigr)\bigl(f\bigr)(s) =
\bigl(\operatorname{Ad}(u^2(u^1)^*) \circ \iota_1\bigr)\bigl(f\bigr)(s)$ for $s = 0, 1$. Therefore, considering $\operatorname{Ad}(v) \circ \iota_1$ instead of $\iota_1$ if necessary, we may assume from the outset that $u^2(0)u^1(0)^*$ and $u^2(1)u^1(1)^*$ commutes with every matrix in the image of $e_0 \circ \iota_1$ and $e_1 \circ \iota_1$.
Now, take $\delta > 0$ so that $|s-s'| < \delta$ implies $|t_i^j(s) - t_i^j(s')| < \min_{g \in G} \Delta_g(\varepsilon)$ and $\|u^j(s) - u^j(s')\| < \varepsilon$. Let $w \colon [0,1] \to \mathbb{M}_{p'q'}$ be a path of unitaries such that
- $w|_{[0, \delta/2]}$ connects $1_{p'q'}$ to $u^2(0)u^1(0)^*$ within the commutant of the image of $e_0 \circ \iota_1$;
- $w(s) = u^2(2s-\delta')u^1(2s-\delta)^*$ for $s \in [\delta/2, \delta]$;
- $w(s) = u^2(s)u^1(s)^*$ for $s \in [\delta, 1-\delta]$;
- $w(s) = u^2(2s-1+\delta)u^1(2s-1+\delta)^*$ for $s \in [1-\delta, 1-\delta/2]$; and
- $w|_{[1-\delta/2, 1]}$ connects $u^2(1)u^1(1)^*$ to $1_{p'q'}$ within the commutant of the image of $e_0 \circ \iota_1$.
Then it is not difficult to see that this $w$ has the desired property.
Now, let $\mu$ be a probability Radon measure on $[0,1]$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
f &\mapsto \int_0^1 \operatorname{tr}(f(t))\, d\mu(t) & (f \in \mathcal{Z}_{p,q})
\end{aligned}$$ is a tracial state on $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$, where $\operatorname{tr}$ denotes the normalized trace on $\mathbb{M}_{pq}$. One can easily show that every tracial state on a dimension drop algebra is of this form. Henceforth, we identify probability Radon measures on $[0,1]$ with tracial states on dimension drop algebras and use the same adjectives for measures and traces in common. Thus, for example, a trace is said to be atomless if its corresponding measure is atomless.
The following lemma is useful for dealing with faithful measures on $[0,1]$. A proof can be found in [@masumoto16:_jiang_su Lemma 3.1 and Proposition 3.2], for example.
\[lem:\_transformations\_of\_measures\] If $\lambda$ is an atomless faithful probability measure on $[0,1]$, then for any faithful probability measure $\tau$ on $[0,1]$, there exists a non-decreasing continuous surjection $\beta$ from $[0,1]$ onto $[0,1]$ with $\beta_*(\lambda) = \tau$, so that $\beta^*$ is a trace-preserving embedding of $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau \rangle$ into $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \lambda \rangle$.
We shall define the category $\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z}$ as following.
- $\operatorname{Obj}(\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z})$ is the class of all the pairs $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau \rangle$, where $p, q$ are coprime and $\tau$ is a faithful tracial state on $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$.
- Every $L_{\mathrm{TC}^*}$-embedding between objects of $\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z}$ is a morphism of $\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z}$.
The following theorem was first proved in [@eagle16:_fraisse_limits]. The proof presented here is essentially the same as that of [@masumoto16:_jiang_su].
\[thm:\_dimension\_drop\_algebras\_form\_a\_fraisse\_class\] The category $\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z}$ is a Fraïssé category.
In view of Lemma \[lem:\_transformations\_of\_measures\], one can easily modify the proof of Proposition \[prop:\_embeddability\_of\_dimension\_drop\_algebras\] to show the following claim: For any coprime integers $p$ and $q$ and any faithful tracial state $\tau$ on $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$, there exists a natural number $M$ such that if $p'$ and $q'$ are larger than $M$ and $pq$ divides $p'q'$, then we can construct a *trace-preserving* $*$-homomorphism from $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau \rangle$ into $\langle\mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}, \lambda \rangle$, where $\lambda$ is any atomless tracial state on $\mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$. (For a precise proof of this claim, see [@masumoto16:_jiang_su Proposition 4.4].) So $\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z}$ satisfies JEP. Also, a combination of Propositions \[prop:\_approximate\_diagonalizability\], \[prop:\_embeddability\_of\_dimension\_drop\_algebras\] and \[prop:\_inner\_automorphisms\] immediately yields a proof of NAP. Next, fix an atomless measure $\lambda$ on $[0,1]$. Then any object $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau \rangle$ of $\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z}$ can be embedded into $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q},\lambda \rangle$ by Lemma \[lem:\_transformations\_of\_measures\], so WPP follows. Finally, CCP is automatic, since all the relevant functions and relations are $1$-Lipschitz on the unit ball.
Henceforth, we shall denote by $\langle \mathcal{Z}, \operatorname{tr} \rangle$ the Fraïssé limit of $\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z}$. From Theorem \[thm:\_characterization\_of\_jiang\_su\_algebra\] below, it follows that the C\*-algebra $\mathcal{Z}$ is the same as the one constructed in [@jiang99:_simple_unital Section 2], the so-called Jiang–Su algebra.
We shall say an inductive system of prime dimension drop algebras with distinguished traces is *regular* if its inductive limit is isomorphic to $\langle \mathcal{Z}, \operatorname{tr} \rangle$. In the sequel, we shall establish a method of recognizing regular systems.
\[lem:\_universal\_measures\] Suppose that $p$ and $q$ are coprime and $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ is embeddable into $\mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$. Then there exists a tracial state $\lambda_{p',q'}$ on $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ with the following properties.
1. There exists a trace-preserving embedding from $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \lambda_{p',q'} \rangle$ into $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}, \lambda \rangle$, where $\lambda$ corresponds to the Lebesgue measure on $[0,1]$.
2. If $\tau$ is a tracial state on $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ of the form $\iota^*(\tau')$ for some embedding $\iota$ of $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ into $\mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$ and some tracial state $\tau'$ on $\mathcal{Z}_{p'q'}$, then there exists a non-decreasing continuous map $\beta$ from $[0,1]$ onto $[0,1]$ with $\beta_*(\lambda_{p,q}) = \tau$.
Since $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ is embeddable into $\mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$, there is an embedding $\rho$ of $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ into $\mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$ of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\rho\bigl(f\bigr)(s)
= \operatorname{Ad}(u(s)) \Bigl( \operatorname{diag}
\bigl[\overbrace{c(f(0)), \dots, c(f(0))}^a, & \\
f(t_1(s)), \dots, f(t_k(s)), &\underbrace{c(f(1)), \dots, c(f(1))}_b \bigr] \Bigr),
\end{aligned}$$ where $t_1, \dots, t_k$ are piecewise strictly monotone functions such that the union of the images is equal to $[0,1]$. We shall set $\lambda_{p',q'} := \rho^*(\lambda)$. Note that if $\lambda_{p',q'} = \lambda_{p',q'}^d + \lambda_{p',q'}^c$ is the Lebesgue decomposition, then the discrete measure $\lambda_{p',q'}^d$ is equal to $(ap\delta_0 + bq\delta_1)/p'q'$, where $\delta_0$ and $\delta_1$ are the Dirac measures supported on $\{0\}$ and $\{1\}$ respectively, and the support of the atomless measure $\lambda_{p,q}^c$ is $[0,1]$.
If $\tau$ is of the form $\iota^*(\tau')$ for some embedding $\iota$ of $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ into $\mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$ and some tracial state $\tau'$ on $\mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$, then necessarily $\tau = \lambda_{p',q'}^d + \mu$ for a suitable measure $\mu$ on $[0,1]$, and $\|\lambda_{p',q'}^c\| = \|\mu\|$. Since $\lambda_{p',q'}^c$ is continuous, there exists a non-decreasing continuous map $\beta$ from $[0,1]$ onto $[0,1]$ with $\beta_*(\lambda_{p',q'}^c) = \mu$, so $\beta_*(\lambda_{p',q'}) = \tau$, as desired.
\[lem:\_perturbation\_of\_almost\_constant\_functions\] Let $\iota \colon \mathcal{Z}_{p,q} \to \mathcal{Z}_{p',q'}$ be a unital $*$-homomorphism, $\beta \colon [0,1] \to [0,1]$ be a non-decreasing continuous surjection, $G$ be a finite subset of $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$, and $\varepsilon$ be a positive real number. Suppose that the inequality $V(\iota) < \min_{g \in G} \Delta_g(\varepsilon)$ holds, where $\Delta_g$ denotes a modulus of uniform continuity of $g$. Then there exists a unitary $w \in \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ with $\|\bigl(\operatorname{Ad}(w) \circ \beta^* \circ \iota \bigr)(g) - \iota(g)\|
< 5\varepsilon$ for all $g \in G$.
Note that if $t_1 \leq \dots \leq t_k$ is the normalized eigenvalue pattern of $\iota$, then $\|t_i - t_i \circ \beta\|_\infty < \min_{g \in G} \Delta_g(\varepsilon)$. Thus, the claim is immediate from Proposition \[prop:\_inner\_automorphisms\].
At first sight, the proof of the following proposition might seem to be complicated. However, the underlying idea is very simple; see Remark \[rem:\_idea\_of\_the\_proof\].
\[prop:\_variation\_and\_limit\] An inductive system $\{\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n},\tau_n \rangle,\iota_{n,m}\}$ of prime dimension drop algebras with distinguished traces is regular if $\lim_{n \to \infty} V(\iota_{n,m}) = 0$ for all $m$.
We shall apply Theorem \[thm:\_recognition\_of\_the\_limit\]. Let $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau \rangle$ be a prime dimension drop algebra with a fixed faithful trace, $F$ be a finite subset of $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$, and $\varphi$ be a strict approximate $\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z}$-isomorphism from $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau \rangle$ into $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \tau_n \rangle$. Our goal is to find an approximate $\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z}$-isomorphism $\psi$ from $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau \rangle$ into $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}, \tau_N \rangle$ for some $N > n$ such that
- $\psi(f,g) \leq \varphi(f,g)$ for $f \in \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ and $g \in \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}$, and
- $\psi$ is $\varepsilon$-total on $F$ for a given $\varepsilon > 0$.
By the definition of strict approximate isomorphisms, there exist finite subsets $G_1 \subseteq \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ and $G_2 \subseteq \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}$, morphisms $\theta_1, \theta_2$ from $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau \rangle$ and $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \tau_n \rangle$ into some $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{r,s},\sigma \rangle$, and a positive real number $\delta$ such that $$\varphi \geq (\varphi_{\theta_1,\theta_2}|_{G_1 \times G_2})
|^{\mathcal{Z}_{p,q} \times \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}} + \delta.$$ Here, we may assume the following. Fix an arbitrary positive real number $\gamma$.
1. The subset $G_1$ includes $F$. This is because we may replace $G_1$ with a larger subset.
2. There exist $m < n$ and a finite subset $G_2' \subseteq \mathcal{Z}_{p_m,q_m}$ such that $\iota_{n,m}[G_2'] = G_2$ and $V(\iota_{n,m}) < \Delta_g(\gamma)$ for all $g \in G_2'$, where $\Delta_g$ is a modulus of uniform continuity for $g$. This is because, taking our goal into account, we may replace $\varphi$ with $\varphi|^{\mathcal{Z}_{p,q} \times \mathcal{Z}_{p_l,q_l}}$ for $l > n$, and we have $$\begin{aligned}
\varphi|^{\mathcal{Z}_{p,q} \times \mathcal{Z}_{p_l,q_l}}
&\geq \bigl[(\varphi_{\theta_1,\theta_2}|_{G_1 \times G_2})
|^{\mathcal{Z}_{p,q} \times \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}} + \delta\bigr]
|^{\mathcal{Z}_{p,q} \times \mathcal{Z}_{p_l,q_l}} \\
&= (\varphi_{\theta_1,\theta_2}|_{G_1 \times \iota_{l,n}[G_2]})
|^{\mathcal{Z}_{p,q} \times \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}} + \delta.
\end{aligned}$$
3. The embedding $\theta_1$ satisfies $V(\theta_1) < \Delta_f(\gamma)$ for all $f \in G_1$, by Proposition \[prop:\_embeddability\_of\_dimension\_drop\_algebras\].
4. The tracial state $\sigma$ is atomless, by Lemma \[lem:\_transformations\_of\_measures\].
Now, take sufficiently large $N$ so that there exists an embedding $\zeta$ of $\mathcal{Z}_{r,s}$ into $\mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}$ with $V(\zeta) < \Delta_g(\gamma)$ for all $g \in \theta_i[G_i]$. Let $\lambda$ be the tracial state on $\mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}$ corresponding to the Lebesgue measure, $\alpha$ be the nondecreasing surjective continuous map from $[0,1]$ to $[0,1]$ with $\alpha_*(\lambda) = \tau_N$, and $\Sigma_\alpha$ be the closed subset of $[0,1]$ such that $f \in \mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}$ is in the image of $\alpha^*$ if and only if $f$ is constant on $\Sigma_\alpha$. Also, let $\lambda_{p_N,q_N}$ be the tracial state on $\mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}$ as in Lemma \[lem:\_universal\_measures\], and set $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma' &:= \zeta^*(\lambda), &
\tau' &:= \theta_1^*(\sigma'), &
\tau_n' &:= \theta_2^*(\sigma').
\end{aligned}$$
By Lemmas \[lem:\_universal\_measures\] and \[lem:\_perturbation\_of\_almost\_constant\_functions\] and assumption (2) in the first paragraph, there exists a morphism $\eta$ from $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \tau_n \rangle$ to $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \lambda_{p_N,q_N} \rangle$ with $\|\eta(g) - g\| < 5\gamma$ for all $g \in G_2$. Similarly, there exists a morphism $\eta'$ from $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \tau_n' \rangle$ to $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \lambda_{p_N,q_N} \rangle$ with $\|\eta'(g) - g\| < 5\gamma$ for all $g \in G_2$. Also, by Lemmas \[lem:\_transformations\_of\_measures\] and \[lem:\_perturbation\_of\_almost\_constant\_functions\] and assumption (3) in the first paragraph, there exists a morphism $\rho$ from $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{r,s}, \sigma' \rangle$ to $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{r,s}, \sigma \rangle$ with $\|\rho(f) - f\| < 5\gamma$ for all $f \in \theta_1[G_1]$. Finally, by Lemma \[lem:\_universal\_measures\], one can find a morphism $\iota$ from $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \lambda_{p_N, q_N} \rangle$ to $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_N, q_N}, \lambda \rangle$. Here, by Proposition \[prop:\_inner\_automorphisms\] and assumption (2) in the first paragraph, we can modify $\iota$ and $\zeta$ by inner auromorphisms so that the inequalities $\|\alpha^* \circ \iota_{N,n}(g) - \iota \circ \eta(g)\| < 5\gamma$ and $\|\zeta \circ \theta_2(g) - \iota \circ \eta'(g)\| < 5\gamma$ for all $g \in G_2$. Finally, by Proposition \[prop:\_approximate\_diagonalizability\], we may assume that $\zeta$ is of the form $$\begin{aligned}
\zeta\bigl(f\bigr)(s)
= \operatorname{Ad}(u(s)) \Bigl( \operatorname{diag}
\bigl[c(f(0)), \dots, c(f(0)), & \\
f(t_1(s)), \dots, f(t_k(s)), &c(f(1)), \dots, c(f(1)) \bigr] \Bigr),
\end{aligned}$$ where $t_1, \dots, t_k$ is the normalized eigenvalue pattern of $\zeta$. Since $V(\zeta) < \Delta_g(\gamma)$ for all $g \in \theta_i[G_i]$, and since $$\begin{aligned}
&\|\zeta \circ \theta_2(g) - \alpha^* \circ \iota_{N,n}(g)\| \\
{}<{}& \|\zeta \circ \theta_2(g) - \iota \circ \eta'(g)\|
+ \|\iota \circ \eta'(g) - \iota \circ \eta(g)\|
+ \|\iota \circ \eta(g) - \alpha^* \circ \iota_{N,n}(g)\| \\
{}<{}& 20\gamma,
\end{aligned}$$ for all $g \in G_2$, one can easily modify the unitary $u$ as in the last paragraph of the proof of Proposition \[prop:\_inner\_automorphisms\] so that $u$ is constant on $\Sigma_\alpha$ while $\zeta$ still satisfies the inequality $\|\zeta \circ \theta_2(g) - \alpha^* \circ \iota_{N,n}(g)\| < 100\gamma$ for all $g \in G_2$. Then, since $u$ is constant on $\Sigma_\alpha$ and $V(\zeta) < \Delta_f(\gamma)$ for all $f \in \theta_1[G_1]$, the inequality $$\inf_{\mathclap{g \in \mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}}}
\|\zeta \circ \theta_1(f) - \alpha^*(g)\| < \gamma$$ holds for all $f \in G_1$. $$\begin{original}
\begin{tikzcd}
& \langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \tau_n' \rangle
\arrow[rd,"\theta_2"] \arrow[dd,pos=0.3,"\eta'"] & & \\
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau' \rangle
\arrow[rr,pos=0.3,"\theta_1"] & &
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{r,s}, \sigma' \rangle
\arrow[rd,"\zeta"] \arrow[dd,pos=0.3,"\rho"] & \\
& \langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \lambda_{p_N,q_N} \rangle
\arrow[rr,pos=0.3,"\iota"] & &
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}, \lambda \rangle \\
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau \rangle
\arrow[rr,pos=0.3,"\theta_1"] & &
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{r,s}, \sigma \rangle & \\
& \langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \tau_n \rangle
\arrow[uu,pos=0.3,"\eta"] \arrow[ru,"\theta_2"] \arrow[rr,"\iota_{N,n}"]
& & \langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}, \tau_N \rangle
\arrow[uu,"\alpha^*"]
\end{tikzcd}
\end{original}
\begin{arxiv}
\xymatrix{
& \langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \tau_n' \rangle
\ar[rd]^{\theta_2} \ar[dd]_(0.3)\eta & & \\
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau' \rangle
\ar[rr]^(0.3){\theta_1} & &
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{r,s}, \sigma' \rangle
\ar[rd]^\zeta \ar[dd]^(0.3)\rho & \\
& \langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \lambda_{p_N,q_N} \rangle
\ar[rr]^(0.3)\iota & &
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}, \lambda \rangle \\
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau \rangle
\ar[rr]^(0.3){\theta_1} & &
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{r,s}, \sigma \rangle & \\
& \langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \tau_n \rangle
\ar[uu]^(0.3)\eta \ar[ru]^{\theta_2} \ar[rr]^{\iota_{N,n}}
& & \langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}, \tau_N \rangle
\ar[uu]^{\alpha^*}
}
\end{arxiv}$$
Set $\psi := \varphi_{\zeta,\alpha^*}\varphi_{\theta_1,\rho}$. Then, for $f \in G_1$ and $g \in G_2$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\psi\bigl(f, \iota_{N,n}(g)\bigr)
&\leq \varphi_{\theta_1,\rho}\bigl(f, \theta_1(f)\bigr)
+ \varphi_{\zeta,\alpha^*}\bigl(\theta_1(f),\iota_{N,n}(g)\bigr) \\
&= \|\theta_1(f) - \rho \circ \theta_1(f)\|
+ \|\zeta \circ \theta_1(f) - \alpha^* \circ \iota_{N,n}(g)\| \\
&\leq \|\zeta \circ \theta_1(f) - \zeta \circ \theta_2(g)\|
+ 105\gamma \\
&= \varphi_{\theta_1,\theta_2}(f,g) + 105\gamma.
\end{aligned}$$ Also, since $\|\theta_1(f) - \rho \circ \theta_1(f)\| < 5\gamma$ and $\inf_g \|\zeta \circ \theta_1(f) - \alpha^*(g)\| < \gamma$, one can easily see that $\psi$ is $6\gamma$-total on $G_1$. Since $\gamma$ was arbitrary, we may assume $\gamma < \min\{\varepsilon/6, \delta/105\}$ so that $\psi$ has the desired property.
\[rem:\_idea\_of\_the\_proof\] Here, for the reader’s better understanding, we shall present a simpler version of the proof above in a certain special case. Let $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau \rangle$ be an object of $\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z}$, $F$ be a finite subset of $\mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$, and $\varphi$ be a strict approximate $\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z}$-isomorphism from $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau \rangle$ to $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \tau_n \rangle$. Then there exist finite subsets $G_1 \subseteq \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}$ and $G_2 \subseteq \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}$, a joint $\mathscr{K}$-embedding $(\theta_1, \theta_2)$ of $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p,q}, \tau \rangle$ and $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \tau_n \rangle$ into some $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{r,s}, \sigma \rangle$ and $\delta > 0$ such that $$\varphi \geq (\varphi_{\theta_1, \theta_2}|_{G_1 \times G_2})
|^{\mathcal{Z}_{p,q} \times \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}} + \delta.$$ Without loss of generality, we may assume that $G_1$ includes $F$.
Now, assume that there happens to be a trace-preserving $*$-homomorphism $\zeta'$ from $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{r,s}, \sigma \rangle$ to $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}, \tau_N \rangle$ for sufficiently large $N$. Since $V(\iota_{N,m}) \to 0$ as $N \to \infty$ for each $m$, we may assume that both $V(\iota_{N,n})$ and $V(\zeta' \circ \theta_2)$ are smaller than $\delta/5$, whence there is a unitary $u$ in $\mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}$ with $$\bigl\|(\operatorname{Ad}(u) \circ \zeta' \circ \theta_2\bigr)(g) - \iota_{N,n}(g)\|
< \delta$$ for all $g \in G_2$. Now, set $\psi := \varphi_{\zeta' \circ \theta_1}$. Then we have $$\begin{aligned}
\psi\bigl(f, \iota_{N,n}(g)\bigr)
&= \|\zeta' \circ \theta_1(f) - \iota_{N,n}(g)\| \\
&\leq \|\zeta' \circ \theta_1(f) - \zeta' \circ \theta_2(g)\|
+ \|\zeta' \circ \theta_2(g) - \iota_{N,n}(g)\| \\
&< \varphi_{\theta_1, \theta_2}(f, g) + \delta,
\end{aligned}$$ so $\psi \leq \varphi|^{\mathcal{Z}_{p,q} \times \mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}}$. Of course, $\psi$ is $\varepsilon$-total for any $\varepsilon > 0$, since clearly $$\inf_{g \in \mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}} \psi(f, g) = 0$$ for all $f$. This was what we would like to show, in view of Theorem \[thm:\_recognition\_of\_the\_limit\].
In general, $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{r,s}, \sigma \rangle$ is not necessarily embeddable into some $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}, \tau_N \rangle$, however. This is why we need to approximate the measures $\tau_N$ and $\sigma$ by $\lambda$ and $\sigma'$ in the original proof above, which causes all the other additional steps.
In the sequel, we fix an inductive system $\{\iota_{n,m} \colon \mathcal{Z}_m \to \mathcal{Z}_n\}$ of prime dimension drop algebras and write its limit by $\mathcal{Z}_0$. Note that every $*$-homomorphism between prime dimension drop algebras is automatically unital and injective, and $\mathcal{Z}_0$ admits a tracial state. We also let $t_1^{m,n} \leq \dots \leq t_{k(m,n)}^{m,n}$ be the normalized eigenvalue pattern of $\iota_{n,m}$.
\[lem:\_characterization\_of\_simplicity\] The following two conditions are equivalent.
1. The limit $\mathcal{Z}_0$ is simple.
2. For any $\varepsilon > 0$, any $y \in [0,1]$ and any $m \in \mathbb{N}$, there exists $n > m$ such that if $x \in [0,1]$ satisfies $t_i^{m,n}(x) = y$ for some $i$, then the Hausdorff distance between $\{t_1^{m,n}(x), \dots, t_{k(m,n)}^{m,n}(x)\}$ and $[0,1]$ is less than $\varepsilon$.
\(1) $\Rightarrow$ (2). Suppose that (2) does not hold. Then there exist $\varepsilon >0$, $y_0 \in [0,1]$ and $m_0 \in \mathbb{N}$ such that for any $n > m_0$ there is $x_n \in [0,1]$ with $t_i^{m_0,n}(x_n) = y_0$ for some $i$ and $$d\bigl(\{t_1^{m_0,n}(x_n), \dots, t_{k(m_0,n)}^{m_0,n}(x_n)\}, [0,1]\bigr)
\geq \varepsilon.$$ Take $N \in \mathbb{N}$ so that $1/N < \varepsilon/2$. For each $n > m_0$ there is $a(n) \in \{0, \dots, N\}$ with $$U(a(n)/N, 1/N) \cap \{t_1^{m_0,n}(x_n), \dots, t_{k(m_0,n)}^{m_0,n}\} = \varnothing,$$ where $U(z, \delta)$ denotes the open ball of center $z$ and radius $\delta$. Passing to a subsystem if necessary, we may assume that $a(n)$ is constant, say $a$. Put $U := U(a/N, 1/N)$.
For each $m, n \in \mathbb{N}$ with $m_0 \leq m \leq n$, set $$\begin{aligned}
C_{m_0,n} &:= \{ x \in [0,1] \mid t_i^{m_0,n}(x) \notin U \text{ for any } i \}, \\
C_{m,n} &:= \{ t_i^{m,n}(x) \mid x \in C_{m,n} \}, \\
C_m &:= \bigcap_{n \geq m} C_{m,n}.
\end{aligned}$$ Note that $C_{m_0,n}$ is nonempty, since $x_n$ is in $C_{m_0,n}$. Also, if $y$ is in $C_{m,n+1}$, then there exists $x$ in $C_{m_0,n+1}$ with $t_i^{m,n+1}(x) = y$ for some $i$. Now, since $\iota_{n+1,m} = \iota_{n+1,n} \circ \iota_{n,m}$, there are some $j, j'$ with $t_i^{m,n+1}(x) = t_j^{m,n}\bigl(t_{j'}^{n,n+1}(x)\bigr)$. On the other hand, $t_i^{m_0,n}\bigl(t_{j'}^{n,n+1}(x)\bigr)$ is not in $U$ for any $i$, because $x$ is in $C_{m_0,n+1}$. Therefore, $t_{j'}^{n,n+1}(x)$ is in $C_{m_0,n}$, whence $y = t_j^{m,n}\bigl(t_{j'}^{n,n+1}(x)\bigr)$ is in $C_{m,n}$. Consequently, $C_m$ is a nonempty closed subset of $[0,1]$.
We shall show $$C_m = \bigcup_{i=1}^{k(m,n)} t_i^{m,n}[C_n]. \tag{$*$}$$ Clearly, the right-hand side is included in the left-hand side. To see the opposite inclusion, let $y$ be in $C_m$. Then, for each $l \geq n$, there is $z_l$ in $C_{n,l}$ with $t_i^{m,n}(z_l) = y$ for some $i$. By the pigeonhole principle, there is $i_0$ with $t_{i_0}^{m,n}(z_l) = y$ for infinitely many $l$. Let $z$ be a limit point of such $z_l$’s. Then clearly $z$ is in $C_n$ and $t_{i_0}^{m,n}(z) = y$.
For each $m \geq m_0$, set $$\mathcal{I}_m := \{ f \in \mathcal{Z}_{p_m,q_m} \mid f|_{C_m} \equiv 0 \}
\subsetneq \mathcal{Z}_{p_m,q_m}.$$ Then, by ($*$), we have $\iota_{m+1,m}[\mathcal{Z}_{p_m,q_m}] \cap \mathcal{I}_{m+1} = \iota_{m+1,m}[\mathcal{I}_m]$, so the sequence $\{\mathcal{I}_m\}$ defines a closed ideal $\mathcal{I}$ of $\mathcal{Z}_0$. Since $\mathcal{I}_{m_0}$ includes $\{ f \mid \operatorname{supp} f \subseteq U \}$, the ideal $\mathcal{I}$ is nontrivial, so $\mathcal{Z}_0$ is not simple.
\(2) $\Rightarrow$ (1). Let $\mathcal{I}$ be a proper ideal of $\mathcal{Z}_0$, and set $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{I}_m &:= \mathcal{I} \cap \mathcal{Z}_{p_m,q_m}, \\
C_m &:= \{x \mid f(x) = 0 \text{ for all } f \in \mathcal{I}_m \}
\end{aligned}$$ It suffices to show that $C_m$ coincides with $[0,1]$. For this, we may assume $\mathcal{I}_m \subsetneq \mathcal{Z}_{p_m,q_m}$, so $C_m$ is nonempty. Let $y$ be in $C_m$. By assumption, for any $\varepsilon > 0$ there is $n_0 > m$ such that if $t_i^{m,n_0}(x) = y$, then $$d\bigl(\{t_1^{m,n_0}(x), \dots, t_{k(m,n_0)}^{m,n_0}(x)\}, [0,1]\bigr) < \varepsilon.$$ However, since $C_m = \bigcup_{i=1}^{k(m,n_0)} t_i^{m,n_0}[C_{n_0}]$ by construction, we can find $x \in C_{n_0}$ with $t_i^{m,n_0}(x) = y$ for some $i$, and $$\{ t_1^{m,n_0}(x), \dots, t_{k(m,n_0)}^{m,n_0}(x) \} \subseteq C_m.$$ Consequently, it follows that the Hausdorff distance between $C_m$ and $[0,1]$ is less than arbitrary $\varepsilon$, so $C_m = [0,1]$.
For $y \in [0,1]$ and $\varepsilon > 0$, we set $$\begin{aligned}
a_{m,n}(y, \varepsilon) :=& \max\{ i \mid \max t_i^{m,n} \leq y+\varepsilon \}, \\
b_{m,n}(y, \varepsilon) :=& \max\{ i \mid \min t_i^{m,n} < y-\varepsilon \} \\
c_{m,n}(y,\varepsilon) :=& \max\{b_{m,n}(y,\varepsilon) - a_{m,n}(y,\varepsilon), 0\} \\
=& \# \{ i \mid \min t_i^{m,n} < y-\varepsilon \ \& \
\max t_i^{m,n} > y+\varepsilon \}.
\end{aligned}$$
\[lem:\_characterization\_of\_monotraciality\] The following are equivalent.
1. The limit $\mathcal{Z}_0$ is monotracial.
2. For any $y$, any $\varepsilon$ and any $m$, $$\lim_{n \to \infty} c_{m,n}(y,\varepsilon)/k(m,n) = 0.$$
\(1) $\Rightarrow$ (2). Suppose (2) does not hold. Then, passing to a subsystem if necessary, we may assume that there exist $y \in [0,1]$, $\varepsilon > 0$ and $\delta > 0$ with $c_{m,n}(y,\varepsilon)/k(m,n) \geq \delta$ for all $n > m$. Let $x_{m,n}^1, x_{m,n}^2 \in [0,1]$ be such that $$\begin{aligned}
t_{a_{m,n}(y,\varepsilon)+1}^{m,n}(x_{m,n}^1) &> y+\varepsilon, &
t_{b_{m,n}(y,\varepsilon)+1}^{m,n}(x_{m,n}^2) &< y-\varepsilon,
\end{aligned}$$ and $\tau_1, \tau_2$ be limit points of the tracial states $\iota_{n,m}^*(\delta_{x_{m,n}^1}), \iota_{n,m}^*(\delta_{x_{m,n}^2})$ respectively. We note that these are restrictions of some tracial states on $\mathcal{Z}_0$. Now, if $f \in C[0,1]$ is taken so that $$\begin{aligned}
f|_{[0,y-\varepsilon]} &\equiv 0, & f|_{[y+\varepsilon,1]} &\equiv 1, &
0 &\leq f \leq 1,
\end{aligned}$$ then $$\begin{aligned}
\tau_1 &\geq \varlimsup \bigl[1-a_{m,n}(y,\varepsilon)/k(m,n)\bigr], \\
\tau_2 &\leq \varliminf \bigl[1 - b_{m,n}(y,\varepsilon)/k(m,n)\bigr],
\end{aligned}$$ whence $$\tau_1(f) - \tau_2(f)
\geq \varlimsup c_{m,n}(y,\varepsilon)/k_{m,n}(y,\varepsilon) \geq \delta.$$ Consequently, $\mathcal{Z}_0$ is multitracial.
\(2) $\Rightarrow$ (1). Suppose (2) holds. We shall first show that, given $m \in \mathbb{N}$, $\delta > 0$ and $\varepsilon > 0$, one can find $n > m$ with $$\#\{ i \mid \operatorname{diam} \operatorname{Im} t_i^{m,n} > \delta \}/k(m,n)
< \varepsilon.$$ Indeed, take $N \in \mathbb{N}$ with $1/N < \delta/3$, and let $n(j)$ be sufficiently large so that $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{c_{m,n(j)}(j/N, 1/N)}{k(m,n(j))} &< \frac{\varepsilon}{N} &
(j = 1, \dots, N-1).
\end{aligned}$$ Set $n := \max_j n(j)$. If $\operatorname{diam}\operatorname{Im}t_i^{m,n} > \delta$, then $$\begin{aligned}
\min t_i^{m,n} &< (j-1)/N, & \max t_i^{m,n} > (j+1)/N
\end{aligned}$$ for some $j$, so the desired inequality follows.
We shall next show that, for $f \in C[0,1]$, $m \in \mathbb{N}$ and $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $n > m$ with $$\sup_{x,x' \in [0,1]}
\bigl|\bigl[\iota_{n,m}^*(\delta_x) - \iota_{n,m}^*(\delta_{x'})\bigr](f)\bigr|
\leq \varepsilon.$$ For this, we may assume $\|f\| \leq 1$. Take $\delta > 0$ so that $|y-y'| < \delta$ implies $\|f(y)-f(y')\| \leq \varepsilon/3$, and put $J := \{ i \mid \operatorname{diam} \operatorname{Im} t_i^{m,n} > \delta \}$. By what we proved in the preceding paragraph, there exists $n > m$ with $\#J/k(m,n) < \varepsilon/3$. Then, for $x,x' \in [0,1]$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
& \bigl|\bigl[\iota_{n,m}^*(\delta_x) - \iota_{n,m}^*(\delta_{x'})\bigr](f)\bigr| \\
{}={}& \frac{1}{k(m,n)}
\Bigl|\sum_i f\bigl(t_i^{m,n}(x)\bigr)-f\bigl(t_i^{m,n}(x')\bigr)\Bigr| \\
{}\leq{}& \frac{1}{k(m,n)}\Bigl(\sum_{i \in J} + \sum_{i \notin J}\Bigr)
\bigl|f\bigl(t_i^{m,n}(x)\bigr)-f\bigl(t_i^{m,n}(x)\bigr)\bigr| \\
{}\leq{} &\varepsilon,
\end{aligned}$$ as desired.
Finally, we shall show that $\mathcal{Z}_0$ is monotracial. Let $\tau, \tau'$ be tracial states on $\mathcal{Z}_0$ and $\mu_\tau, \mu_{\tau'}$ be the corresponding measures on $[0,1]$. Fix an element $f$ in the center of $\mathcal{Z}_{p_m,q_m}$, which is canonically identified with an element of $C[0,1]$, and take sufficiently large $m > n$ so that $$\sup_{x,x' \in [0,1]}
\bigl|\bigl[\iota_{n,m}^*(\delta_x) - \iota_{n,m}^*(\delta_{x'})\bigr](f)\bigr|
\leq \varepsilon/3.$$ Since the convex combinations of the Dirac measures are weakly\* dense in the set of probability measures, we can find $x_1, \dots, x_l, x_1', \dots, x_l'$ in $[0,1]$ with $$\begin{aligned}
\Bigl|\Bigl(\mu_\tau - \sum_j \delta_{x_j}/l\Bigr)(f \circ t_i^{m,n})\Bigr|
&< \varepsilon/3, \\
\Bigl|\Bigl(\mu_{\tau'} - \sum_j \delta_{x_j'}/l\Bigr)(f \circ t_i^{m,n})\Bigr|
&< \varepsilon/3
\end{aligned}$$ for all $i$. Consequently, $$\begin{aligned}
&|\tau(f) - \tau(f')| \\
{}={}& \frac{1}{k(m,n)}
\Bigl|\sum_i \mu_\tau(f \circ t_i^{m,n}) - \mu_{\tau'}(f \circ t_i^{m,n})\Bigr| \\
{}\leq{}& \frac{2}{3}\varepsilon + \frac{1}{k(m,n) \cdot l}
\Bigl|\sum_{i,j} \delta_{x_j}(f \circ t_i^{m,n}) -
\delta_{x_j'}(f \circ t_i^{m,n})\Bigr| \\
{}={}& \frac{2}{3}\varepsilon + \frac{1}{l}
\Bigl|\sum_j\bigl[\iota_{n,m}^*(\delta_{x_j})
- \iota_{n,m}^*(\delta_{x_j'})\bigr](f)\Bigr| \\
{}\leq{}& \varepsilon.
\end{aligned}$$ Since $\varepsilon$ was arbitrary, $\tau(f) = \tau'(f)$, and so $\tau = \tau'$.
\[prop:\_simplicity\_and\_monotraciality\] The limit C\*-algebra $\mathcal{Z}_0$ is simple and monotracial if and only if $\lim_n V(\iota_{n,m}) = 0$ for each $m$.
It is clear from Lemmas \[lem:\_characterization\_of\_simplicity\] and \[lem:\_characterization\_of\_monotraciality\] that if $\lim_n V(\iota_{n,m}) = 0$ for all $m$, then $\mathcal{Z}_0$ is simple and monotracial. For the opposite implication, first note that if $\mathcal{Z}_0$ is simple, then $$\lim_n \operatorname{diam} \operatorname{Im} t_1^{m,n} = 0$$ for each $m$. Indeed, for any $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists sufficiently large $n$ such that if $t_i^{m,n}(x) = \varepsilon$ for some $i$ and $x \in [0,1]$, then $$d\bigl(\{t_1^{m,n}(x), \dots, t_{k(m,n)}^{m,n}(x)\}, [0,1]\bigr) < \varepsilon,$$ by Lemma \[lem:\_characterization\_of\_simplicity\]. This implies that $\varepsilon \notin \operatorname{Im} t_1^{m,n}$, and since $0 \in \operatorname{Im} t_1^{m,n}$, it follows that $\operatorname t_1^{m,n} \subseteq [0,\varepsilon)$.
Next, for each $m, n \in \mathbb{N}$, let $\Delta_{m,n}$ be a map from $(0,1]$ to $(0,1]$ such that $|x-x'| \leq \Delta_{m,n}(\varepsilon)$ implies $|t_i^{m,n}(x)-t_i^{m,n}(x')| \leq \varepsilon$ for all $i$. Passing to a subsystem if necessary, we may assume that $\operatorname{Im} t_1^{n,n+1}$ is included in $[0,\Delta_{n-1,n}(\varepsilon/2)]$. For a fixed $m \in \mathbb{N}$, set $$F_n := \operatorname{Im} t_1^{m,m+1} \circ \dots \circ t_1^{n,n+1}$$ and take $y_0 \in \bigcap_n F_n$. By Lemma \[lem:\_characterization\_of\_simplicity\], there is $n > m$ such that if $x \in [0,1]$ satisfies $t_i^{m,n}(x) = y_0$ for some $i$, then the distance between $\{t_1^{m,n}(x), \dots, t_{k(m,n)}^{m,n}(x)\}$ and $[0,1]$ is less than $\varepsilon/2$. On the other hand, by definition of $F_n$, we can find $x \in \operatorname{Im} t_1^{n,n+1} \subseteq [0,\Delta_{n,n+1}(\varepsilon/2)]$ with $t_i^{m,n}(x) = y_0$ for some $i$. Consequently, it follows that for any $y \in [0,1]$ there exists $i$ with $\operatorname{Im} t_i^{m,n} \circ t_1^{n,n+1} \subseteq [y-\varepsilon,y+\varepsilon]$.
Now, let $f \colon [0,1] \to [0,1]$ be a continuous map such that the image of $f$ includes $[y-\varepsilon, y+\varepsilon]$ for some $y \in [0,1]$. We shall show the existence of $\delta > 0$ such that if a continuous map $g \colon [0,1] \to [0,1]$ satisfies $\operatorname{Im} f \circ g \supseteq [y-\varepsilon, y+\varepsilon]$, then $\operatorname{diam} \operatorname{Im} g \geq \delta$. Indeed, let $(a_n)_n$ and $(b_n)_n$ be enumerations of the boundaries of $f^{-1}(y-\varepsilon)$ and $f^{-1}(y+\varepsilon)$ respectively. If the image of $f \circ g$ includes $[y-\varepsilon, y+\varepsilon]$, then the image of $g$ must contain $a_{n'}$ and $b_{n''}$ such that there is no $a_n$ or $b_n$ between $a_{n'}$ and $b_{n''}$. However, there can be only finitely many such pairs $(n',n'')$, because otherwise $f$ cannot be uniformly continuous. Thus, $$\delta := \min \bigl\{|a_{n'} - b_{n''}| \bigm| \not\exists n, \
a_{n'} \lessgtr a_n \lessgtr b_{n''} \text{ or }
a_{n'} \lessgtr b_n \lessgtr b_{n''} \bigr\}$$ has the desired property.
Finally, suppose that there is $m \in \mathbb{N}$ with $\lim_n V(\iota_{n,m}) > 0$. Without loss of generality, we may assume $m = 1$. Also, by passing to a subsystem if necessary, we may assume that there is $y \in [0,1]$ and $\varepsilon > 0$ with the following property: For any $n$, there exists $i$ such that the image of $t_i^{1,n}$ includes $[y-\varepsilon, y+\varepsilon]$. By what we proved in the second paragraph, it is easy to find $n_0, i_1, i_2 \in \mathbb{N}$ with $$\operatorname{Im} t_{i_1}^{1,2} \circ t_{i_2}^{2,n_0} \circ t_1^{n_0,n_0+1}
\subseteq [y-\varepsilon/2, y+\varepsilon/2].$$ We may assume $n_0 = 3$. Set $$F := \{ t_h^{1,2} \circ t_i^{2,3} \circ t_j^{3,4} \mid
\operatorname{Im} t_h^{1,2} \circ t_i^{2,3} \circ t_j^{3,4} \supseteq
[y-\varepsilon, y+\varepsilon] \}$$ and take $\delta > 0$ so that if $f$ is in $F$ and if the image of $f \circ g$ includes $[y-\varepsilon, y+\varepsilon]$, then $\operatorname{diam} \operatorname{Im} g \geq \delta$. Since $\mathcal{Z}_0$ is monotracial, we may assume $$\#\{t_k^{4,5} \mid \operatorname{diam} \operatorname{Im} t_k^{4,5} \geq \delta \}/k(4,5)
< 1/\#F,$$ by Lemma \[lem:\_characterization\_of\_monotraciality\]. Then $$\begin{aligned}
& \#\{ t_h^{1,2} \circ t_i^{2,3} \circ t_j^{3,4} \circ t_k^{4,5} \mid
\operatorname{Im}t_h^{1,2} \circ t_i^{2,3} \circ t_j^{3,4} \circ t_k^{4,5}
\supseteq [y-\varepsilon, y+\varepsilon] \} \\
{}\leq{} & \#F \times \#\{t_k^{4,5} \mid \operatorname{diam} t_k^{4,5} \} \leq k(4,5) \\
{}\leq{} & \#\{ t_h^{1,2} \circ t_i^{2,3} \circ t_j^{3,4} \circ t_k^{4,5} \mid
\operatorname{Im}t_h^{1,2} \circ t_i^{2,3} \circ t_j^{3,4} \circ t_k^{4,5}
\subseteq [y-\varepsilon/2, y+\varepsilon/2] \}.
\end{aligned}$$ However, this implies that there is no $i$ with $\operatorname{Im} t_i^{1,5} \supseteq [y-\varepsilon,y+\varepsilon]$, which is a contradiction.
Combining Propositions \[prop:\_variation\_and\_limit\] and \[prop:\_simplicity\_and\_monotraciality\], we obtain the following result.
\[thm:\_characterization\_of\_jiang\_su\_algebra\] For an inductive system $\{\iota_{n,m} \colon \mathcal{Z}_m \to \mathcal{Z}_n\}$ of prime dimension drop algebras, the following are all equivalent.
1. The inductive limit of $\{\iota_{n,m} \colon \mathcal{Z}_m \to \mathcal{Z}_n\}$ is isomorphic to $\mathcal{Z}$.
2. The equality $\lim_n V(\iota_{n,m}) = 0$ holds for all $m$.
3. The inductive limit of $\{\iota_{n,m} \colon \mathcal{Z}_m \to \mathcal{Z}_n\}$ is simple and monotracial.
It was shown by X. Jiang and H. Su that every unital $*$-endomorphism of $\mathcal{Z}$ is approximately inner. We shall conclude this section by partially recovering this result.
\[prop:\_endomorphisms\] Every $\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z}$-admissible endomorphism of $\langle \mathcal{Z}, \operatorname{tr} \rangle$ is approximately inner.
Let $$\begin{original}
\begin{tikzcd}
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_1,q_1}, \tau_1 \rangle \arrow[r,"\iota_{2,1}"] &
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_2,q_2}, \tau_2 \rangle \arrow[r,"\iota_{3,2}"] &
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_3,q_3}, \tau_3 \rangle \arrow[r,"\iota_{4,3}"] & \dots
\end{tikzcd}
\end{original}
\begin{arxiv}
\xymatrix{
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_1,q_1}, \tau_1 \rangle \ar[r]^{\iota_{2,1}} &
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_2,q_2}, \tau_2 \rangle \ar[r]^{\iota_{3,2}} &
\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_3,q_3}, \tau_3 \rangle \ar[r]^{\iota_{4,3}} & \dots
}
\end{arxiv}$$ be a regular sequence with the following property, the existence of which follows from Theorem \[thm:\_characterization\_of\_jiang\_su\_algebra\]:
1. $p_nq_n$ divides $p_{n+1}q_{n+1}$ and $\tau_n$ is atomless for all $n$.
2. For any natural number $a$, there exists sufficiently large $n$ such that $a$ divides $p_nq_n$.
We shall first show that if $\rho$ is a $\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z}$-admissible endomorphism of $\langle \mathcal{Z}, \operatorname{tr} \rangle$, then for any finite subset $F \subseteq \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}$ and any $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists a morphism $\iota$ from $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \tau_n \rangle$ to $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}, \tau_N \rangle$ with $\|\rho(f) - \iota(f)\| < \varepsilon$ for all $f \in F$. Take sufficiently large $m$ and so that for any $f \in F$, there exists $f' \in \mathcal{Z}_{p_m,q_m}$ with $\|\rho(f) - f'\| < \varepsilon/4$. We shall fix such $f'$ for each $f \in F$ and set $F' := \{f' \mid f \in F\}$. Put $$\psi := (\varphi_\rho|_{F \times F'})
|^{\mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n} \times \mathcal{Z}_{p_m,q_m}}
+ \varepsilon/4$$ and note that this is a strict approximate $\mathscr{K}_\mathcal{Z}$-isomorphism, as $\rho$ is $\mathscr{K}$-admissible. Since $\psi$ is strict, there exists a joint $\mathscr{K}$-embedding $(\theta_1, \theta_2)$ of $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_n,q_n}, \tau_n \rangle$ and $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_m,q_m}, \tau_m \rangle$ into some object $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{r,s}, \sigma \rangle$ with $\varphi_{\theta_1,\theta_2} \leq \psi$, whence $\|\theta_1(f) - \theta_2(f')\| \leq \varepsilon/2$. Now by Proposition \[prop:\_embeddability\_of\_dimension\_drop\_algebras\], one can embed $\mathcal{Z}_{r,s}$ into $\mathcal{Z}_{p_{m'},q_{m'}}$ for some $m' > m$. By assumption (2), we may assume that $rs$ divides $p_{m'}q_{m'}$, so the remainder indices vanish. Consequently, since $\tau_{m'}$ is atomless by assumption (1), one can easily find a morphism $\eta$ from $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{r,s}, \sigma \rangle$ to $\langle \mathcal{Z}_{p_{m'},q_{m'}}, \tau_{m'} \rangle$. Since $V(\iota_{N,m''}) \to 0$ as $N \to \infty$ by Theorem \[thm:\_characterization\_of\_jiang\_su\_algebra\], one can find $N > m''$ and a unitary $u$ in $\mathcal{Z}_{p_N,q_N}$ with $$\bigl\|\bigl(\operatorname{Ad}(u) \circ \iota_{N,m'} \circ
\zeta \circ \theta_2\bigr)(f') - \iota_{N,m}(f')\bigr\| < \varepsilon/4$$ for all $f' \in F'$, by Proposition \[prop:\_inner\_automorphisms\]. We set $\iota := \operatorname{Ad}(u) \circ \iota_{N,m'} \circ \zeta \circ \theta_1$. Then, for $f \in F$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\|\rho(f) - \iota(f)\|
&\leq \|\rho(f) - f'\| \\
&+ \bigl\|\iota_{N,m}(f') -
\bigl(\operatorname{Ad}(u) \circ \iota_{N,m'} \circ
\zeta \circ \theta_2\bigr)(f')\bigr\| \\
&+ \bigl\|\bigl(\operatorname{Ad}(u) \circ \iota_{N,m'} \circ
\zeta \circ \theta_2\bigr)(f') - \bigl(\operatorname{Ad}(u) \circ \iota_{N,m'} \circ
\zeta \circ \theta_1\bigr)(f)\bigr\| \\
&< \varepsilon,
\end{aligned}$$ as desired.
Now, since $V(\iota_{M,N}) \to 0$ as $M \to \infty$, there exists sufficiently large $M$ and a unitary $v$ in $\mathcal{Z}_{p_M,q_M}$ with $\bigl\|\bigl(\operatorname{Ad}(v) \circ \iota\bigr)(f) - f\bigr\| < \varepsilon$ for all $f \in F$, by Proposition \[prop:\_inner\_automorphisms\] This implies $\|\rho(f) - \operatorname{Ad}(v^*)(f)\| < 2\varepsilon$, so $\rho$ is approximately inner, which completes the proof.
It was shown by the author that every UHF algebra can be recognized as a Fraïssé category of C\*-algebras of all matrix-valued functions on cubes with distinguished faithful traces and diagonalizable morphisms, and that *every* endomorphism of UHF algebra is automatically admissible [@masumoto16:_generalized_fraisse Theorems 5.4 and 5.10]. In view of this fact, one should be able to show that every endomorphism of $\mathcal{Z}$ is $\mathscr{K}$-admissible, although the author could not do that.
**Acknowledgement.** The author would like to thank Yuhei Suzuki for stimulating conversations. This work was supported by Research Fellow of the JSPS (no. 26–2990) and the Program for Leading Graduate Schools, MEXT, Japan.
[Eag+15]{} Itaï <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Ben Yaacov</span>, Fraïssé Limits of Metric Structures, *Journal of Symbolic Logic* **80** (2015), no. 1, 100–115. C. J. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Eagle</span>, I. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Farah</span>, B. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Hart</span>, B. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Kadets</span>, V. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Kalashnyk</span> and M. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Lupini</span>, Fraïssé Limits of C\*-Algebras, *Journal of Symbolic Logic* **81** (2016), no. 2, 755–773. G. A. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Elliott</span> and A. S. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Tom</span>, Regularity Properties in the Classification Program for Separable Amenable C\*-Algebras, *Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society* **45** (2008), no. 2, 229–245. Roland <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Fraïssé</span>, Sur l’extension aux relations de quelques propriétés des ordres, *Annales Scientifiques de l’École Normale Supérieure*, Sér. 3, **71** no. 4 (1954), 363–388. X. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Jiang</span> and H. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Su</span>, On a Simple Unital Projectionless C\*-Algebra, *American Journal of Mathematics* **121** (1999), no. 2, 359–413. Shuhei <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Masumoto</span>, The Jiang–Su algebra as a Fraïssé limit, to appear in *Journal of Symbolic Logic*. Shuhei <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Masumoto</span>, On a generalized Fraïssé limit construction, preprint, 2016. Konstantinos <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Schoretsanitis</span>, Fraïssé Theory for Metric Structures. PhD thesis, the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2007.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Quantum mechanics is difficult to learn because it is counterintuitive, hard to visualize, mathematically challenging, and abstract. The Physics Education Technology (PhET) Project, known for its interactive computer simulations for teaching and learning physics, now includes 18 simulations on quantum mechanics designed to improve learning of this difficult subject. Our simulations include several key features to help students build mental models and intuitions about quantum mechanics: visual representations of abstract concepts and microscopic processes that cannot be directly observed, interactive environments that directly couple students’ actions to animations, connections to everyday life, and efficient calculations so students can focus on the concepts rather than the math. Like all PhET simulations, these are developed using the results of education research and feedback from educators, and are tested in student interviews and classroom studies. This article provides an overview of the PhET quantum simulations and their development. We also describe research demonstrating their effectiveness and share some insights about student thinking that we have gained from our research on quantum simulations.'
author:
- 'S. B. McKagan'
- 'K. K. Perkins'
- 'M. Dubson'
- 'C. Malley'
- 'S. Reid'
- 'R. LeMaster'
- 'C. E. Wieman'
date: 'January 17, 2008'
title: Developing and Researching PhET simulations for Teaching Quantum Mechanics
---
Introduction
============
Quantum mechanics has challenged many of the greatest minds in physics, so it is no surprise that it is a difficult subject for students to learn. In addition to the standard rigors associated with any topic in physics, quantum mechanics presents many of its own unique challenges that conspire to make it extraordinarily difficult and frustrating for most students to build mental models. It is counterintuitive and surprising to find that the microscopic world does not behave at all the way we would expect, as the intuitions we have built up from interacting with our daily environment do not hold up. Because most of the phenomena we study in quantum mechanics cannot be observed directly, it is often difficult to construct mental models by which to visualize such elusive phenomena. It is also mathematically challenging, involving lengthy calculations to analyze the simplest phenomena, with most real-world phenomena falling outside the realm of our ability to calculate. Finally, at least in the form it is often taught, quantum mechanics is disconnected from everyday life, focusing on simplified abstract models at worst, and phenomena with which we have no direct experience at best.
Extensive research in quantum mechanics education shows that students often do not learn what instructors would like them to learn in high school modern physics courses [@Petri1998a; @Mashhadi1999a; @Harrison2000a; @Olsen2002a; @Taber2005a], sophomore level modern physics courses [@Steinberg1996a; @Wittmann2002a; @Wittmann2005a; @McKagan2006a; @Vokos2000a; @Bao2002a], junior level quantum mechanics courses [@Vokos2000a; @Bao2002a; @Johnston1998a; @Singh2001a; @Sadaghiani2006a; @Brookes2006a], and even graduate courses [@Singh2006a]. Research on the development of transformed modern physics courses [@Muller2002a; @Zollman2002a; @McKagan2007a], as well as on tutorials targeting specific student difficulties [@Ambrose2005a; @Wittmann2005b; @Wittmann2006a; @Singh2006b], suggests that improved student learning is possible. However, most research that has been done so far has focused on only a few key topics such as atomic models, the photoelectric effect, and the properties of wave functions. This is only the tip of the iceberg, and much remains to be discovered regarding student learning of other topics, including non-traditional topics such as real-world applications and interpretations of quantum mechanics, as well as student beliefs about quantum mechanics and the nature of science, and how to best improve student understanding of all aspects of quantum mechanics. There is a need for further research and development of techniques and tools for effectively teaching quantum mechanics.
Educational computer simulations are promising tools that have been shown to be effective in helping students learn many topics in introductory physics [@Finkelstein2005a; @Adams2008a; @Adams2008b]. Because of the added problems of visualizing and building an intuition for the abstract principles of quantum mechanics, the power of simulations to provide interaction, visualization, and context has the potential to be even more helpful in this subject than in introductory physics.
Many teachers and researchers have developed computer simulations to assist students in learning quantum mechanics. [@Goldberg1967a; @Brandt1995a; @Hiller1995a; @Thaller2000a; @Belloni2006a; @vqm; @qpo; @falstad] While many of these simulations may be useful for providing visual models of quantum phenomena, research on their user interface and effectiveness for learning has been limited. Many of the user interfaces or representations of physics are not consistent with research on user-interface design [@Adams2008b] and how students learn [@Bransford1999a], potentially limiting their effectiveness.
The Physics Education Technology (PhET) Project creates research-based interactive computer simulations for teaching and learning physics and makes them freely available from the PhET website (http://phet.colorado.edu). The simulations are animated, interactive, and game-like environments where students learn through exploration. We emphasize the connections between real-life phenomena and the underlying science, and seek to make the visual and conceptual models of expert physicists accessible to students. We have attempted to address the problem of student learning of quantum mechanics by developing PhET simulations in this subject using our research-based design principles [@Adams2008a; @Adams2008b], and conducting research on their effectiveness in various contexts.
In this paper we present an overview of the PhET quantum simulations (Section II), how they are developed (Section III), examples of classroom use and studies of their effectiveness (Section IV), and insights into student thinking we have gained from conducting student interviews on these simulations (Section V).
Quantum Mechanics simulations
=============================
We have two main goals for PhET simulations: increased student engagement and improved learning. Simulations are specifically designed to support students in constructing a robust conceptual understanding of the physics through exploration. Their design is grounded in research. We draw from existing research literature on how students learn, conceptual difficulties in physics, and educational technology design. We also make extensive use of student interviews and classroom testing to explore usability, interpretation, and learning issues, and to develop general simulation design principles.
PhET is best known for our simulations on topics in introductory physics, such as *Circuit Construction Kit*, *Masses and Springs*, and *The Moving Man*. [@Perkins2006a; @Wieman2006a; @Wieman2008a] However, the features that make these simulations effective for learning introductory physics are even more important for learning quantum mechanics.
We now have a suite of 18 simulations on various aspects of quantum phenomena. These fall into three broad categories, illustrated in Table 1: fundamental principles of quantum mechanics, key ideas in historical experiments, and quantum principles underlying everyday life applications. The PhET quantum simulations are available from http://www.phet.colorado.edu/quantum. Each simulation has a web page that includes a brief description, learning goals, sample classroom activities, and “Tips for Teachers,” which discuss approximations made in the simulation, common student difficulties, and suggestions for classroom use.
Visualization
-------------
![*Photoelectric Effect* simulation.[]{data-label="PEsim"}](PEsim){width="\columnwidth"}
Simulations are powerful tools for helping students visualize electrons, photons, atoms, wave interference, and other quantum phenomena that they cannot observe directly. While students can conduct experiments on topics such as the photoelectric effect and double slit interference in many physics labs, there is much going on inside these experiments that they cannot observe. *Photoelectric Effect* (Fig. \[PEsim\]) allows students to watch electrons travel between the plates, helping them to build a model of why the current increases when you increase the intensity (they can see that more electrons leave the plate) but does not increase when you increase the voltage (they can see that the electrons travel faster between the plates but the number of electrons stays the same). *Quantum Wave Interference* (Fig. \[QWIsim\]) allows students to follow a light wave from the source and through the slits, observing it interfering with itself and collapsing into a dot on the screen. *Models of the Hydrogen Atom* (not shown) allows students to “see” inside atoms.
![*Quantum Wave Interference* simulation.[]{data-label="QWIsim"}](QWIsim){width="\columnwidth"}
Interactivity
-------------
PhET simulations are highly interactive, directly coupling students’ actions with the animation. Adjustment of controls results in an immediate animated response in the visual representations. Our research with student interviews shows that this interactivity helps students engage with the content and establish cause-and-effect relationships. [@Adams2008a] Further, interactivity that allows students to switch between representations enhances students’ abilities to connect multiple representations. [@Adams2008a] This interaction appears to be particularly effective for helping students construct understanding and intuition for abstract and unfamiliar quantum phenomena. For example, in *Quantum Bound States* (Fig. \[twowells\]), students can learn about the relationship between potential energy and wave function by clicking and dragging directly on the potential energy diagram to change the offset, height, and width of potential wells, and immediately see the effect on the shape of the wave function.
Context
-------
The focus on real-world contexts and applications that is a characteristic of nearly all PhET simulations is particularly helpful in grounding quantum mechanics in students’ everyday experiences. For example, *Simplified MRI* (Fig. \[MRIsim\]) enables students to learn about nuclear spin and energy splitting in the context of MRI. *Neon Lights and other Discharge Lamps* (not shown) enables students to see how neon lights work based on the concepts of atomic energy levels, energy transfer from electrons to atoms, photon emission, and atomic spectra. Putting basic concepts in these real-world contexts helps students appreciate the relevance of the physics, and working through how MRIs and discharge lamps work also has the potential to help them understand the physics behind these applications.
![*Simplified MRI* simulation.[]{data-label="MRIsim"}](MRIsim){width="\columnwidth"}
Taking advantage of the Computer
--------------------------------
Many of the quantum simulations take advantage of the power of computers to quickly do complex calculations without exposing the user to the details. Thus, students can explore quantum tunneling and quantum wave interference qualitatively and focus on understanding the concepts without getting bogged down in the math. This has the potential to radically transform the way quantum mechanics is taught because it allows the instructor to focus on the problems that are most important for students to understand rather than on the problems that are easiest to calculate. For example, while plane waves are certainly easier to calculate than wave packets, we have found that plane waves are actually much more difficult conceptually for students to understand. [@McKagan2007e] *Quantum Tunneling and Wave Packets* (Fig. \[QTsim\]) allows us to begin our instruction on tunneling with wave packets, so that students can visualize an electron as a slightly-but-not-completely delocalized object that approaches a barrier, interacts with it, and then partially reflects and partially transmits. This is not only much easier to visualize and understand than a wave packet spread over infinite space interacting with a barrier for all time, but also more physically accurate.
![*Quantum Tunneling and Wave Packets* simulation.[]{data-label="QTsim"}](QTsim){width="\columnwidth"}
Simulations provide a unique tool for exploring time dependence in a way that is impossible in print media, helping students to see how quantum phenomena evolve and change in time. In *Models of the Hydrogen Atom*, *Neon Lights and Other Discharge Lamps*, and *Lasers*, students can observe atoms absorbing and emitting photons. In *Quantum Tunneling and Wave Packets* and *Quantum Bound States*, students can observe how wave functions change in time, exploring, for instance, the interchange between real and imaginary parts, the oscillation of superposition states, and the collapse of the wave function when a position measurement is made.
Developing Research-Based Sims
==============================
Fig. \[design\] illustrates the design process for creating PhET simulations. The design cycle starts with content and student interface experts creating a detailed initial layout based on the learning goals of the simulation and the research base, including education and cognitive science research and the PhET design guidelines [@design]. After creating an initial version of the simulation that all team members feel is clear, accurate and engaging, we conduct student interviews to determine whether students can understand how to use the simulation and achieve the learning goals. These interviews always reveal interface weaknesses, resolve interface questions that were not agreed upon by the team, and often reveal pedagogically undesirable (and occasionally unexpected desirable) features and subtle programming bugs. Subsequent revisions are made, and if they are extensive, a further set of interviews are conducted. These interviews are not only used to improve the particular simulation but continue to improve our research base. After interviews establish that the desired engagement and learning is being achieved, the simulation is used in a classroom setting where student use is observed and informally evaluated.
![The PhET Design Process[]{data-label="design"}](design){width="\columnwidth"}
Building on Previous Research
-----------------------------
Research on how people learn [@Bransford1999a] demonstrates that students learn by actively constructing their own understanding, building on their prior knowledge. Further, experts and novices think about subjects differently. Experts build an organized structure of knowledge that allows them to monitor and reflect on their own understanding and focus on the underlying concepts. Novices often don’t know what to focus on and get caught up in details that experts view as irrelevant. Because working memory is limited, education should focus on essential features to reduce cognitive load.
PhET simulation design incorporates this research in many ways. Visualization and interactivity help students construct mental models. Putting physics in familiar real-world contexts helps students relate new concepts to prior knowledge. Simulations eliminate extraneous details that are unavoidable when working with real equipment, such as the color of the wires or details of how the variable voltage supply works in the photoelectric effect experiment.
We reduce cognitive load and help students construct their own understanding by starting simulations in simple states, allowing students to gradually work up to exploring more advanced features. For example, many simulations include several tabs (e.g. Figs. \[QWIsim\]-\[MRIsim\]), where the first tab focuses on the basic ideas, and later tabs include more complex ideas. In *Neon Lights and Other Discharge Lamps* and *Lasers*, the first tab allows students to explore the behavior of a single atom before exploring a gas of many atoms. *Fourier: Making Waves* starts up with only a single non-zero Fourier component and an invitation to add more, so that students can build up complex patterns at their own pace rather than trying to make sense of a pre-existing pattern. These designs are based on both education research about how students learn [@Bransford1999a], and our own research showing that when we start simulations in more complex states, students become overwhelmed [@Adams2008a; @Adams2008b].
Research on faculty adoption of research-based curriculum [@Henderson2007a] demonstrates that instructors rarely adopt a curriculum as is, but tend to adapt it to suit their local circumstances. At the same time, instructors need guidance on the essential features of a curriculum to help them adapt it effectively. To enable adaptation, we design the simulations to be open-ended and general-purpose, so that each can be used in many different ways to achieve many different learning goals. To assist instructors in using the simulations effectively, we provide guidelines for developing guided inquiry activities [@guidelines] and “Tips for Teachers” with guidance on the use of individual simulations. In addition, we provide a database of activities including lesson plans, lecture notes, and homework. [@activities] The database includes activities developed by the PhET team as well as those contributed by teachers.
Simulation design is also based on research into student understanding of the specific content area of the simulation. There has been some previous research on student understanding of quantum mechanics, which we have incorporated into the design of the quantum simulations. For example, research on student learning of the photoelectric effect shows that students often have difficulty interpreting the circuit diagram, drawing qualitatively correct I-V graphs, distinguishing the effects of changing intensity and changing wavelength, and recognizing that electrons are ejected by the light rather than by the voltage. [@Steinberg1996a; @McKagan2007b] We designed the *Photoelectric Effect* simulation to address each of these difficulties. The circuit is shown as a cartoon-like physical picture, rather than as an abstract diagram, and the variable voltage supply is illustrated as a battery with a slider. Students can interactively create I-V graphs. They can change the intensity, wavelength, and voltage, and immediately see the effects of each. In our modern physics class, we use interactive lecture demonstrations and homework designed to use these features of the simulation to address known student difficulties. This curriculum has been shown to be very effective at helping students understand the photoelectric effect. [@McKagan2007b]
Research on student learning about quantum tunneling and wave functions shows that students often mix up wave function and energy. [@Ambrose1999a; @Wittmann2005a; @McKagan2006a] One possible cause of this confusion is that instructors and textbooks often draw both on the same graph. In *Quantum Tunneling and Wave Packets* and *Quantum Bound States*, we show the two quantities on separate graphs. *Quantum Bound States* has also been designed to address research showing that students often have difficulty relating the shape of the wave function to the shape of the potential [@Ambrose1999a] by allowing students to interactively explore the relationship between the two for a wide variety of potentials.
Observations of Students
------------------------
In addition to addressing student difficulties seen in the literature, we often design simulations to address difficulties we see during observations of students when taking field notes in lecture and problem-solving sessions.
While there are many existing simulations on double slit interference of electrons, none address what we observed to be the biggest problem for students in understanding this phenomenon: visualizing the behavior of the electrons in between the slits and the screen. Standard instruction often shows the pattern on the screen and assumes that students will know how to interpret this pattern, filling in the gap of the wave interference that must have created it. Our experience interacting with students in a variety of contexts indicates that students need help constructing a model of how the electrons create this pattern. Thus, in *Quantum Wave Interference*, we show an electron as a particle-like wave packet approaching the slits and interfering with itself before collapsing to a dot on the screen.
When teaching the Davisson Germer experiment, we observed in problem-solving sessions that many students did not understand the main point of the experiment after instruction. When instructors asked them to explain the purpose of this experiment, students remembered that electrons were only detected at certain angles, but could not explain why. They viewed the electrons as particles that happened to bounce off at certain angles for some reason they could not understand, rather than recognizing how the observations could be explained by the wave nature of electrons. Although *Quantum Wave Interference* was not designed to address this difficulty, we found that it could be used to do so. In working with students one-on-one, we found that if we set up an array of barriers to represent atoms and demonstrated how electron wave packets aimed at this array reflected and interfered such that there were intensity maxima at certain angles and minima at other angles, students immediately responded with expressions like, “Oh, it’s interfering like a wave!” and were then able to correctly explain the purpose of the experiment. While this method was effective in helping students develop a correct explanation, the array of barriers was tedious to construct and difficult to change. Students often attempted to explore how changing the spacing and size of the barriers would change the pattern, but gave up quickly when they realized how hard it was to modify each barrier. To facilitate such exploration, we developed a new simulation, *Davisson Germer: Electron Diffraction*, in which an array of atoms is set up automatically and the spacing and size can be changed by moving a slider. A classroom study demonstrating the effectiveness of this simulation will be presented in Section IVB.
Student Interviews
------------------
After developing an initial version of a PhET simulation, we test it in interviews in which students are directed to “think out loud” as they explore a simulation, either with no directions or with a simple guiding question. These interviews help us refine the user interface and pedagogical effectiveness of simulations. As we will discuss in Section \[interviews\], interviews also provide new insights into student thinking and simulation effectiveness. In this section, we illustrate some examples of how we have used interviews to refine simulations. Unless otherwise noted, in all examples discussed in this article, students were engaged in undirected exploration of a simulation.
Sometimes we come up with ideas that just don’t work. In the initial version of *Photoelectric Effect*, we attempted to reduce students’ cognitive load by starting with a “simple” model in which all electrons were ejected with the same energy. We thought that as students became more comfortable with this simple model, we would then introduce the “realistic” model, in which electrons were ejected with a range of energies. The simulation allowed students to switch between models with radio buttons labeled “simple” and “realistic.” In interviews every student got caught up trying to figure out the difference between these two modes, and either gave up or developed an incorrect explanation. Further, when we used the simulation in class, many of the student questions during lectures and problem-solving sessions revolved around trying to understand the difference between the simple and realistic models. In response, we modified the simulation by replacing the “simple” and “realistic” radio buttons with a checkbox labeled “show only highest energy electrons.” It is unchecked by default, so that the simulation starts in the “realistic” model where electrons are ejected with a range of energies. When we used the new version in class the following semester, student questions focused much more on the physics behind the simulation.
Interviews often reveal that seemingly small details can make a big difference in student understanding. For example, $\Delta k$ and $\sigma_k$ are two common labels for the width of a wave packet in Fourier space. Since most physicists are equally comfortable with both, the choice between the two seems irrelevant. However, in interviews on an early version of *Fourier: Making Waves* in which we used the label $\Delta k$, students referred to it as “the change in k.” Because this incorrect interpretation of the label seemed so plausible, they were never able to determine what it actually meant. In interviews after we changed the label to $\sigma_k$, students initially had no idea what the label meant. They were thus more willing to to explore it and were able to determine the correct meaning.
Observations of what students attempt to do with simulations often helps determine what additional features are needed. These features are often not obvious and could not have been foreseen by the developers. For example, *Neon Lights and other Discharge Lamps* includes an option for configurable atoms, in which students can modify the energy levels by clicking and dragging on them. In the initial version, students tried to drag the pictures of atoms labeling the energy levels rather than the levels themselves, and got frustrated when this didn’t work. In response, we modified the simulation to allow students to click and drag the atoms as well as the levels.
Unfortunately, interviews sometimes reveal problems that we do not know how to solve. We have found that students recognize when the scale is unrealistic and don’t attempt to attribute meaning to the relative size of objects such as for the macroscopic images of electrons, photons, and atoms in *Photoelectric Effect*, *Neon Lights and other Discharge Lamps*, and *Lasers*. [@Adams2008a] However, we have not found any method that communicates clearly to students when the scale changes within a simulation. For example, in *Quantum Wave Interference*, students can choose to view interference of photons, electrons, neutrons, or Helium atoms, all of which exhibit wave properties at vastly different time and distance scales. We initially indicated the change in scale only by changing the units on the ruler and stopwatch, but students either did not notice or did not know how to interpret this change. We then tried adding a feature in which a clock with a note that says “slowing down time” and/or a magnifying glass with a note that says “zooming out” appears when the time/distance scale changes, but students did not know how to interpret this either. We left this feature in as a reminder, because while it didn’t help students, it also didn’t hurt. Students can still learn many other things from the simulation without recognizing the change in scale, and if instructors want students to notice this change, they can point it out explicitly or incorporate this idea into homework activities.
The issue of changing scale also caused problems in an early version of *Models of the Hydrogen Atom*, which allowed students to explore both atomic spectra and Rutherford scattering by shooting light and alpha particles at an atom. However, because light interacts with the electrons and alpha particles interact with the nucleus, these two processes occur at very different scales. Initially we tried to gloss over this fact by showing both at an intermediate scale. This led to a great deal of confusion in interviews. Students thought the alpha particles were interacting with the electrons and often drew incorrect conclusions, such as that alpha particles are negatively charged. After these interviews we decided that we were trying to show too many different things in a single simulation, and split the alpha particle feature into a separate simulation called *Rutherford Scattering*.
Classroom Use and Testing
=========================
Examples of Classroom Use
-------------------------
Most of the quantum simulations were developed for use in a reformed large-lecture modern physics course for engineering majors. [@McKagan2007a] This course used the simulations in a variety of contexts including: general visual aids; interactive lecture demonstrations, where we demonstrated key phenomena and asked students to make predictions about the behavior of simulations using clickers; and homework, which guided students through exploration of simulations. Our course material is available from the PhET activities database [@activities] (search for author “McKagan”) or from our modern physics course archive [@2130].
An example of a visual aid is our use of *Quantum Wave Interference* in lecture to demonstrate how the double slit experiment shows that light must be both a wave that goes through both slits and a particle that hits the screen at a single location. [^1] This lecture led to an unexpected onslaught of deep, fundamental questions that took up nearly an entire class period. Student questions included:
- How can it be such a huge blob and then be detected in one place?
- Is it that we just don’t know where it is or is it really spread out in space?
- What does it take for a photon to collapse to a single point? How does that happen?
- In real life can you really turn it down so low that you only have one photon coming out at a time?
- How big is a photon? Can it be a meter wide?
These questions are similar to those asked by the founders of quantum mechanics as they worked out the meaning of this new theory. Student difficulties often do not reflect the historical questions of scientists because students struggle with much more basic questions. In this case, we argue that the visualization provided by the simulation allowed students to see the heart of the issue and ask deep questions earlier in the learning process.
Fig. \[reflection\] illustrates the use of a simulation for an interactive lecture demonstration. This is a typical question in which students discuss with their neighbors and then select an answer using clickers. After asking a few students to give explanations for their answers to the whole class, we use *Quantum Tunneling and Wave Packets* (Fig. \[QTsim\]) to demonstrate what actually happens. Students always point out that the simulation in fact shows the wave being partially reflected and partially transmitted, rather than reflected OR transmitted, as in the correct answer D. After a class discussion of this discrepancy, we use the “Make Quantum Measurement” button in the simulation to demonstrate that after it is measured, the electron is always reflected or transmitted, never both.
Another way to use simulations is in homework. In our modern physics class, students work through a series of questions using *Lasers* to build up an understanding of how a laser works. [^2] The homework starts with basic questions about absorption and spontaneous and stimulated emission, works through the steps of building a laser and troubleshooting a broken laser, and ends with essays on why a population inversion is necessary to build a laser and why this requires atoms with three energy levels instead of two. Most students are able to give correct and thorough explanations in these essays.
Classroom testing of simulation effectiveness
---------------------------------------------
We have conducted several studies in our reformed modern physics course to test the effectiveness of simulations and other aspects of the course.
The most extensive testing of classroom use of a specific quantum simulation has involved *Photoelectric Effect*. In a recent study we showed that with our curriculum that included both interactive lectures and homework using the simulation, learning much greater than with either traditional or previous reformed instruction. [@McKagan2007b] For example, on an exam question about whether increasing the voltage between the plates would lead to electrons being ejected when the light frequency was too low, an average of $83\%$ of students answered correctly with correct reasoning in the courses using the simulation, compared to $20\%$ of students in a traditional course and $40\%$ of students in a traditional course supplemented by a research-based computer tutorial.
In the course as a whole, where simulations were used extensively in all the ways discussed in Section IVA, we found high learning gains (measured by the Quantum Mechanics Conceptual Survey [@QMCS]) and a lack of shift in beliefs about physics (measured by the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey [@Adams2006a]). In contrast, in the course for engineering majors the semester before our reforms and in the corresponding course for physics majors, there were low learning gains and large negative shift in beliefs. [@McKagan2007a] While we made many reforms in this course, the simulations played a large role in all of them, and likely contributed to the improved learning and beliefs.
Student perceptions provide a further indicator of simulation effectiveness. On the end-of-term survey for our modern physics course ($N = 173$), the average student ranking of the usefulness of the simulations for their learning on a scale of 1 (not useful) to 5 (a great deal) was 4.0, close to the highest ranked aspect of the course. The usefulness rankings for other aspects of the course ranged from 3.2 (the textbook) to 4.3 (the posted lecture notes). Students also had the opportunity to make comments about the simulations in the survey, and $35\%$ ($N = 61$) chose to do so. Of these comments, $80\%$ were positive comments about the usefulness of the simulations, for example:
- Great sims, I can’t imagine QM without them.
- The simulations were crucial in the learning process.
- The simulations were the best part of class, they practically answer physics questions all by themselves. I would recommend continuing to develop these and add more. Without these I think I would have been lost in the course.
- I definitely not only enjoyed the simulations, but I’d go as far to say that the simulations taught me the most about the course because I could really visualize the inner workings of the physics processes that were going on.
- I thought the simulations were great. It helped me to gain intuition about the topic. This is especially useful in quantum mechanics where it is not normally possible to directly observe the described phenomena.
Other types of comments about the simulations included pointing out: that the simulations need guidance to be useful ($13\%$); that the simulations were incorrect or not useful ($8\%$); specific technical problems ($7\%$) (most of these have since been resolved); and that the simulations are not experiments ($3\%$).[^3]
We also conducted qualitative observations of students in this course by taking field notes in lecture and problem-solving sessions and conducting regular interviews with six students. In all these observations, we consistently saw that for topics where we used simulations, students developed extremely vivid mental models. For example, when we asked students in problem-solving sessions and interviews about topics related to simulations, they gave animated responses easily and without much time for thought. On exam questions on topics such as the photoelectric effect, discharge lamps, and lasers, students gave vivid, detailed responses, often referring to the simulations explicitly and correctly remembering minute details. On the other hand, when we asked students about other topics not related to simulations, such as models of the atom or infinite square wells (before we developed simulations on these topics), students had to think for a long time, attempting to retrieve memorized facts, and often mixed up important details.
In another classroom study, we set out to determine the prevalence of student difficulties with the Davisson Germer experiment discussed in Section IIIB, and to evaluate the effectiveness of the simulation in addressing these difficulties. This study was conducted in a modern physics course for physics majors that used much of the same curriculum as the course for engineering majors discussed elsewhere in the paper, but had a very different population of students. In general, the physics majors seemed to pick things up more quickly and had fewer of the difficulties observed among the engineering majors.
![\[DGresults\]Student responses to reading quiz on Davisson Germer experiment.](DGresults){width="\columnwidth"}
In the class before students were expected to read the relevant section of the textbook (Knight 24.4 [@Knight2004a]), they were told that there would be a reading quiz on the Davisson Germer experiment in the next class. This reading quiz was emphasized much more than usual, to ensure that students would do the reading. In the quiz, students were asked to answer to the following question: “In the Davisson Germer experiment, Davisson and Germer shot a beam of electrons at a lattice of Nickel atoms and found that the electrons were only detected at certain angles. Explain the reason for this result and why it was important.” The correct answer, that the observed pattern was characteristic of an interference pattern and therefore it showed that electrons behave as waves, is illustrated by the first sample student response in Fig. \[DGresults\]. As shown in Fig. \[DGresults\]a, only about a third of students gave this type of answer. Another third said that electrons are waves but did not explain this result in terms of interference, as in the second sample response. Most of the remaining third gave an incorrect explanation that did not involve wave behavior at all, as in the third sample response.
Since it is possible that these poor results were the result of students not doing the reading, a clicker question in the next class asked students whether they did the reading on the Davisson Germer experiment. Students were promised that their instructor would not look at their individual responses, and $35\%$ admitted to not doing the reading or not remembering whether they did or not. Fig. \[DGresults\]b shows the responses to the reading quiz for the students who said they did the reading. (Students who may have done the reading but were not present for the clicker question are not included in Fig. \[DGresults\]b.) When counting only students who did the reading, the percentage of students who answered the reading quiz question correctly goes up to nearly half. However, the remaining half either did not explain how the experiment leads to a wave model, suggesting that they had simply memorized the answer without understanding it, or gave explanations of the experiment that did not involve waves at all.
The reading quiz was followed by an interactive lecture on the Davisson Germer experiment, in which the *Davisson Germer: Electron Diffraction* simulation was used in one of the two sections, and a homework in which students in both sections were asked to use the simulation to explain the Davisson Germer experiment and its application to understanding the structure of crystals. [^4] On a midterm exam, students were again asked to explain the inferences that could be drawn from this experiment, but were not told what was seen in the experiment. On the exam question, $92\%$ of students correctly explained that there was an interference pattern that illustrated the wave nature of electrons. These exam results indicate that the simulation, along with the accompanying lecture and homework, was extremely effective in helping students understand the Davisson Germer experiment.
Learning from Student Interviews {#interviews}
================================
The primary purpose of the think-aloud interviews that we conduct as part of our simulation design process is to find problems with the simulations in order to improve them. However, interviews are also valuable for demonstrating the effectiveness of simulations and giving general insights into student thinking. In this section we present some examples of what we have learned from interviews on quantum simulations.
Interviews help us determine what students can and cannot learn from each simulation. (Details of these insights are provided in the “Tips for Teachers” available from the web page for each simulation.) We have found that students can usually learn some important concepts from undirected exploration of simulations, but they can learn much more from using the simulations in conjunction with activities that guide their exploration. With undirected exploration, students can often give correct explanations of many of the concepts that the simulation is designed to teach, but do not necessarily recognize that they have learned, often because they do not understand the significance or application of the content.
For example, students with no previous instruction on Fourier analysis who explored *Fourier: Making Waves* in interviews were able to give correct descriptions of Fourier analysis and explain everything in the first tab, but claimed that they did not understand the point of the simulation. Students with no background in modern physics who explored *Photoelectric Effect* were able to correctly explain how the experiment worked and the results, but did not make connections to the greater implications for the nature of light.
The simulations can be greatly enhanced by a good activity (e.g. homework, lab, or interactive lecture) that guides students’ exploration towards the learning goals of the instructor and helps place the concepts within a larger context. Many activities are available for the quantum simulations on the PhET website [@activities], some developed by PhET team members as part of our modern physics course transformation, and some contributed by users. While we have not done studies that directly compare undirected and guided exploration of the simulations, we have measured learning gains from using guided activities in the studies discussed in the previous section, and we have seen improved student learning as a result of guidance in interviews.
![\[measurement\]The “Make Quantum Measurement” button in *Quantum Tunneling and Wave Packets* measures the position of the electron in the probability density vs. position graph in (a) “wave packet” mode and (b) “plane wave” mode.](measurement){width="\columnwidth"}
For example, in interviews on *Quantum Tunneling and Wave Packets*, most students were able to explain the behavior of the simulation after they hit the ‘Make Quantum Measurement’’ button in “wave packet” mode, but needed help from the interviewer to explain the behavior in “plane wave” mode (see Fig. \[measurement\]). In “wave packet” mode, this button causes the probability density to collapse to a narrow packet whose position is determined randomly according to the probability density immediately before measurement. In “plane wave” mode, this button causes the probability density to go to zero everywhere. Out of six students interviewed on this simulation, three were able to explain the behavior in “wave packet” mode without help, two were able to explain it after a hint from the interviewer, and one never made sense out of it. Three students who had successfully explained the behavior in “wave packet” mode then tried the button in “plane wave” mode. All three expressed confusion over what they saw and none were able to explain it on their own. The interviewer then asked, “How far does a plane wave extend in space?” All three students quickly answered that it extends over infinity, and therefore the probability of measuring it in the region shown on the screen is zero. The results of these interviews suggest that a guided activity including the question asked by the interviewer could help students learn the effects of measurement on plane waves much more effectively than unguided exploration.
![\[twowells\]The “Two Wells” tab of *Quantum Bound States* (also *Double Wells and Covalent Bonds*), showing the symmetric ($\psi_1$) and anti-symmetric ($\psi_2$) states. The “Many Wells” tab (also *Band Structure*), not shown, allows users to create an array of up to $10$ wells.](twowells){width="\columnwidth"}
An interview on *Quantum Bound States* provides an example of a student learning an advanced topic from undirected exploration of a simulation. This simulation contains two advanced tabs that allow students to explore double and multiple wells (Fig. \[twowells\]). (These tabs are also available separately as the simulations *Double Wells and Covalent Bonds* and *Band Structure*.) In most of our interviews with *Quantum Bound States*, the students spent so long playing with single wells that they never got to the advanced tabs, so we have only conducted one interview in which the student spent more than a few minutes playing with two wells. This student, who had previous instruction on single wells but not double wells, was able to explain, based on his exploration of the simulation, the reason for the pairs of symmetric and anti-symmetric states for double wells: “...because we have two wells here, so... I want to think that one is more centered around this one and the other is more around this one, and I guess we don’t know which one is which, which is why they’re both symmetrical around these.” He was troubled, however, that he was unable to determine the physical interpretation of the difference between these two states. While it is possible that this interview result was idiosyncratic, it is a valuable existence proof that it is possible for a student to learn a very advanced concept from undirected exploration of the simulation. If one student can learn so much with so little guidance, it is likely that many students can learn this concept with a guided activity.
Interviews also help us determine the range of levels of students for which simulations are appropriate. There are a few simulations, such as *Quantum Tunneling and Wave Packets*, *Quantum Bound States*, *Double Wells and Covalent Bonds*, *Band Structure*, and *Davisson Germer: Electron Diffraction*, that require a basic knowledge of the phenomena being illustrated and therefore do not appear to be effective for students who have not had any instruction on the relevant topics. Other simulations that one might imagine are too advanced have proven to be surprisingly effective for a wide range of students. For example, several simulations have been used successfully in lecture demos and homework in courses for non-science majors, including *Nuclear Physics*, *Conductivity*, and *Semiconductors* in “The Physics of Everyday Life,” and *Fourier: Making Waves* in “Sound and Music.” In interviews, after a half hour of unguided exploration, students with no science background have been able to give good qualitative explanations of the physics behind simulations such as *Quantum Wave Interference*, *Lasers*, *Neon Lights and Other Discharge Lamps*, *Photoelectric Effect*, *Nuclear Physics*, and *Semiconductors*. Finally, a PhET team member’s 9-year-old son enjoys playing with *Lasers* and *Models of the Hydrogen Atom*, and has figured out much of the basic physics behind these simulations. For example, he can explain how the photons change the energy levels and how to change the separation of energy levels to match energy of light to get lasing in *Lasers*.
In interviews with students who have had previous instruction on the topics covered by the simulations, we find that the visual representations can help students address incorrect models that would otherwise be difficult for an instructor to detect. For example, one student, upon seeing the wave packet representing a photon in *Quantum Wave Interference*, said, “Until now, I thought that, if I were to represent one particle, it would just be one thin line going up. I did not know that it would be like, all over here.” When the interviewer asked why he thought it would be one thin line, he described his instructor drawing a series of thin lines \[wave fronts\] and referring to a line as “this one wave.” Another student initially predicted that if you moved the slits further from the screen the separation between the interference fringes would decrease, and was able to use the simulation to correct his prediction and develop an explanation for why the separation actually increases.
Interviews on *Models of the Hydrogen Atom* provide a further example of a simulation uncovering an incorrect model developed from previous instruction. In these interviews, some students described the Plum Pudding model as a cloud of negative charge filled with little specks of positive charge, rather than the other way around. The use of the word “cloud” suggests that these students are mixing up the Plum Pudding model with the Schrodinger model, in which the electrons are often described as a cloud of negative charge. These students initially thought that the electron in the simulation was a proton, but were eventually able to identify it correctly by using the legend or by comparing it to the electrons in other models.
The development of *Quantum Wave Interference*, *Quantum Tunneling and Wave Packets*, and *Quantum Bound States* illustrates what we have learned about what representations of wave functions are most conducive to student learning. Our team put a lot of thought into how to represent quantum wave functions (Fig. \[wavefunction\]) in these simulations. Most textbooks only show plots of the real part of the wave function, but also discuss the imaginary part of the wave function. The magnitude and phase may be discussed in a junior level quantum mechanics course, but usually not in a sophomore level modern physics course. Most non-PhET simulations of wave functions use a “phase color” representation in which a curve representing the magnitude of the wave function is filled in with colors representing the phase (Fig. \[wavefunction\]b).
![\[wavefunction\]Representations of the wave function in *Quantum Tunneling and Wave Packets*: (a) real and imaginary parts and (b) magnitude and phase. In interviews students can make sense of (a) but struggle with (b).](representation){width="\columnwidth"}
In observations and interviews in many contexts, we noticed that students often asked about the meaning of the imaginary part of the wave function, but never about the real part. Further, students often forgot about the imaginary part entirely, or said that you only need to consider the real part when squaring the wave function. We hypothesize that students overestimate the importance of the real part and underestimate the importance of the imaginary part for two reasons. First, the unfortunate choice of words “real” and “imaginary” naturally leads to the idea that one is more “real” than the other in the common English sense of the word, when in fact both components are on equal footing mathematically. Second, the fact that many textbooks illustrate only the real part (but label it as $\psi$) may encourage students to focus only on this part of the wave function.
To address this problem, we illustrate both the real and imaginary parts on equal footing in the simulations (Fig. \[wavefunction\]a). We suspected that the real and imaginary parts of the wave function would be easier for students to understand than the magnitude and phase, because these representations relate more easily to what students typically calculate and to familiar sine and cosine waves. However, we also included options to show the magnitude and phase color for completeness.
In interviews on *Quantum Wave Interference*, one student commented that he did not understand real and imaginary numbers, and one student who wondered why the imaginary part didn’t look different from the real part until he paused the simulation and could see that they were out of phase. Aside these two students, whose confusion stemmed more from their expectations than from the simulation, students did not express any confusion over the real and imaginary representations of the wave function in interviews on *Quantum Tunneling and Wave Packets* and *Quantum Wave Interference*. Several students also learned important concepts by playing with the real and imaginary views. For example, students learned from the simulation that the real and imaginary parts were 90 degrees out of phase, and that the real and imaginary parts add up to a constant probability density in an energy eigenstate even though each individual component changes in time.
On the other hand, the “phase color” representation caused significant problems for most students. In interviews on *Quantum Wave Interference*, three out of five students interviewed explored this view. None of the three made any comments on it on their own, aside from one student who said it hurt his eyes, so the interviewer asked them what it was showing. One student said it was “some sort of frequency type of thing” and speculated that teal would constructively interfere with teal and destructively interfere with the opposite of teal. Another stared at the screen in confusion for a minute, and then described it as “some sort of representation of both the real part and the imaginary part” showing that “pink is areas of high real part and low imaginary part or something?” Another student was unable to give any explanation. When the same three students were interviewed later on *Quantum Tunneling and Wave Packets*, the two who had given explanations in earlier interviews did not comment on phase view again. The student who had been unable to give any explanation remembered that this view had been used in his quantum course, but still could not explain what it meant. Of three additional students who were interviewed on *Quantum Tunneling and Wave Packets* but not *Quantum Wave Interference*, two expressed frustration over the phase view and were unable to explain it, and the third, when asked to explain it, said only that it showed “something about wavelength.” When given a choice, none of the students spent much time in phase mode, returning quickly to real or magnitude mode after answering the interviewer’s questions.
“Phase color” is still an option in the simulations for instructors who would like to explicitly teach the use of this representation or use activities developed for other simulations, but we recommend caution in its use.
Conclusion
==========
In summary, PhET quantum simulations are designed to address previously-known student difficulties in quantum mechanics, as well as many new student difficulties uncovered as a result of our research. The key features of PhET simulations - visualization, interactivity, context, and effective use of computations - are particularly effective for helping students understand the abstract and counterintuitive concepts of quantum mechanics. Our research has shown these simulations to be effective in helping students learn, and has revealed new insights into how students think about quantum mechanics.
Acknowledgments
===============
We thank Noah Finkelstein, Wendy Adams, and the rest of the PhET team and the Physics Education Research Group at the University of Colorado. We gratefully acknowledge the NSF, the Hewlett Foundation, the Kavli Foundation, and the University of Colorado for providing the support to develop the simulations, and to make them freely available to all educators and students.
[49]{} natexlab\#1[\#1]{}bibnamefont \#1[\#1]{}bibfnamefont \#1[\#1]{}citenamefont \#1[\#1]{}url \#1[`#1`]{}urlprefix\[2\][\#2]{} \[2\]\[\][[\#2](#2)]{}
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, in **, edited by , , (), .
, , , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, in **, edited by , , ().
, in **, edited by , , ().
, in **, edited by , , ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , in **, edited by , , (), .
, in **, edited by , , ().
, , , , ** (, , ).
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , , , , , , ****, ().
, , , , , , ****, (), .
, , , , , , ****, (), .
, , , ****, ().
, , , ** (, ).
, , , ** (, ).
, ** (, , ).
, , , ** (, , ).
.
.
.
, , , ** (, , ).
, , , , , , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ().
, , , (), .
.
, ().
.
.
, , , , (), .
, Ph.D. thesis, ().
.
.
, , , , , , ****, ().
, ** (, ), ed.
[^1]: http://phet.colorado.edu/new/teacher\_ideas/view-contribution.php?contribution\_id=198
[^2]: http://phet.colorado.edu/new/teacher\_ideas/view-contribution.php?contribution\_id=56
[^3]: The percentages add up to more than $100\%$ because some students made more than one type of comment.
[^4]: http://phet.colorado.edu/new/teacher\_ideas/view-contribution.php?contribution\_id=319
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The concern of this work is the generalization of an Asymptotic Preserving method for the highly anisotropic elliptic equations presented in [@DLNN]. The limitations of the method introduced there in are omitted by the introduction of a stabilization term in the Asymptotic Reformulation. Furthermore, anisotropic error indicators and mesh adaptation algorithms are proposed and tested allowing to reduce considerably the number of mesh points required to achieve prescribed precision. Reported meshes have maximum aspect ratio greater than 500.'
author:
- 'Jacek Narski[^1]'
bibliography:
- 'bib\_aniso.bib'
title: Anisotropic finite elements with high aspect ratio for an Asymptotic Preserving method for highly anisotropic elliptic equations
---
anisotropic adaptive finite elements, singular perturbation problem, asymptotic preserving reformulation
65N30, 65N20, 65N50
Introduction
============
Anisotropic problems are common in mathematical modeling of physical problems. They appear in various fields of application, such as flows in porous media [@porous1; @TomHou], semiconductor modeling [@semicond], quasi-neutral plasma simulations [@Navoret], image processing [@image1; @Weickert], atmospheric or oceanic flows [@ocean] and so on, the list being not exhaustive. The direct motivation of this work is related to numerical simulations of strongly magnetized plasma such as internal fusion plasma of tokamak [@Beer; @Sangam], atmospheric plasma [@Kelley2; @Kes_Oss] or plasma thrusters [@SPT]. In this context a strong magnetic field is defining the anisotropy direction. Fast rotation of charged particles around magnetic field lines is causing a large number of collisions in the plane perpendicular to the magnetic field. On the other hand the motion in the direction of the field is rather undisturbed. In consequence the particle mobility depends on the direction and may differ by several orders of magnitude. Anisotropy ratio $1/\varepsilon $ can be as high as $10^{10}$.
The main difficulty associated with these anisotropic problems is that they are singular in the limit $\varepsilon \rightarrow 0$. On the discrete level this is manifested by very bad conditioning of linear systems obtained by a direct discretization of the problem for $\varepsilon \ll 1$. In this paper we propose an approach based on the Asymptotic Preserving reformulation introduced initially by Shi Jin in [@ShiJin]. Our approach is an extension of the method proposed in a previous paper [@DLNN] to the case of more general anisotropy field structure (such as closed field lines).
The model problem we are interested in, reads $$\begin{gathered}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
- \nabla \cdot \mathbb A_\varepsilon \nabla u^{\varepsilon } = f & \text{ in }
\Omega, \\[3mm]
n \cdot \mathbb A_\varepsilon \nabla u^{\varepsilon }= 0
& \text{ on } \Gamma_N\,,\\[3mm]
u^{\varepsilon }= 0
& \text{ on } \Gamma_D\,,
\end{array}
\right.
\label{InitP}\end{gathered}$$ where $\Omega \subset \RR^{2}$ is a bounded domain with boundary $\partial \Omega = \Gamma_D \cup
\Gamma_N$ and outward normal $n$. The direction of the anisotropy is given by a vector field $B$, where we suppose $\text{div} B = 0$ and $B \neq 0$. The direction of $B$ shall be denoted by the unit vector field $b = B/|B|$. The domain boundary is decomposed into $\Gamma_D:= \{ x
\in \partial\Omega \ | \ b (x) \cdot n = 0 \}$ and $\Gamma_N:= \partial \Omega \backslash \Gamma_D$. The anisotropic diffusion matrix is then given by $$\begin{gathered}
\mathbb A_\varepsilon = \frac{1}{\varepsilon }
A_\parallel b \otimes b + (Id - b \otimes b)A_\perp (Id - b \otimes
b)\,.
\label{eq:Jh0a}\end{gathered}$$ The scalar field $A_\parallel>0$ and the symmetric positive definite matrix field $A_\perp$ are of order one while the parameter $0 <
\varepsilon < 1$ can be very small, provoking thus the high anisotropy of the problem. The system becomes ill posed if we consider the formal limit $\eps \rightarrow 0$. It is thus very ill conditioned for $\eps \ll 1$. This problem has been studied before in the Asymptotic Preserving context. A special case of anisotropy direction aligned with one of the coordinate axis was addressed in [@DDN]. A generalization of this approach was presented in [@besse], where the problem with curvilinear anisotropy field was reduced to one with the anisotropy direction aligned with the coordinate system by a change of variables. Another work [@DDLNN] proposed a different generalization based rather on the introduction of Lagrange multipliers. This resulted in a considerably bigger linear system but allowed to avoid a necessity of change of variables which could be troublesome for time dependent anisotropy direction. Finally, a different method presented in [@DLNN] allowed to reduce considerably computational cost without any adaptation of the coordinate system. All those methods shared the same drawback: they didn’t allow more complex geometries such as the presence of closed field lines.
In this paper we introduce yet another Asymptotic Preserving scheme, improving the idea presented in [@DLNN] and removing the restrictions on the anisotropy direction by a simple penalty stabilization technique. Furthermore, the anisotropic error indicator is presented and the mesh adaptation algorithm developed in order to optimize the number of mesh points required to obtain a prescribed error.
The outline of the paper is following. Section \[sec:prob\_def\] contains a definition of the problem and introduces the Asymptotic Preserving reformulation. Section \[sec:num\_met\] describes an anisotropic error indicator and mesh adaptation algorithm. They are both tested and the numerical results are provided.
Problem definition {#sec:prob_def}
==================
We consider a two dimensional anisotropic problem, given on a regular, bounded domain $\Omega \subset \mathbb R^2$, with boundary $\partial
\Omega$. The direction of the anisotropy is defined by the vector field $b(x)$, which satisfies the following hypothesis\
[**Hypothesis A**]{} [*The field $b(x)$ is derived from a vector field $B(x)= |B(x)|\, b(x)$, satisfying $div\,\, B(x)=0$ and $|b(x)|=1$ for all $x \in \Omega$. Moreover, we suppose that $b \in
(C^{\infty}(\Omega))^d$.*]{}\
Given this vector field $b$, one can decompose now vectors $v \in \mathbb R^2$, gradients $\nabla \phi$, with $\phi(x)$ a scalar function, and divergences $\nabla \cdot v$, with $v(x)$ a vector field, into a part parallel to the anisotropy direction and a part perpendicular to it. These parts are defined as follows : $$\begin{array}{llll}
\ds v_{||}:= (v \cdot b) b \,, & \ds v_{\perp}:= (Id- b \otimes b) v\,, &\textrm{such that}&\ds
v=v_{||}+v_{\perp}\,,\\[3mm]
\ds \nabla_{||} \phi:= (b \cdot \nabla \phi) b \,, & \ds
\nabla_{\perp} \phi:= (Id- b \otimes b) \nabla \phi\,, &\textrm{such that}&\ds
\nabla \phi=\nabla_{||}\phi+\nabla_{\perp}\phi\,,\\[3mm]
\ds \nabla_{||} \cdot v:= \nabla \cdot v_{||} \,, & \ds
\nabla_{\perp} \cdot v:= \nabla \cdot v_{\perp}\,, &\textrm{such that}&\ds
\nabla \cdot v=\nabla_{||}\cdot v+\nabla_{\perp}\cdot v\,,
\end{array}$$ where we denoted by $\otimes$ the vector tensor product. With these notations we can now introduce the mathematical problem, the so-called Singular Perturbation problem, whose numerical resolution is the main concern of this paper.
The Singular Perturbation problem (P-model)
-------------------------------------------
The objective of this paper is to introduce an efficient scheme for the precise ($\varepsilon$-independent) resolution of the following Singular Perturbation problem $$\begin{gathered}
(P)\,\,\,
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
-{1 \over \varepsilon} \nabla_\parallel \cdot
\left(A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel \phi^{\varepsilon }\right)
- \nabla_\perp \cdot
\left(A_\perp \nabla_\perp \phi^{\varepsilon }\right)
= f
& \text{ in } \Omega, \\[3mm]
{1 \over \varepsilon}
n_\parallel \cdot
\left( A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel \phi^{\varepsilon } \right)
+
n_\perp \cdot
\left(A_\perp \nabla_\perp \phi^{\varepsilon }\right)
= 0
& \text{ on } \partial\Omega _{in} \cup \partial\Omega _{out}, \\[3mm]
\phi^{\varepsilon }= 0
& \text{ on } \partial\Omega _D\,,
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:J07a} \end{gathered}$$ where $n$ is the outward normal to $\Omega $ and the boundaries are defined by $$\begin{gathered}
\partial\Omega _D = \{ x \in \partial\Omega \ | \ b (x) \cdot n = 0 \},\\
\partial\Omega_{in} = \{ x \in \partial\Omega \ | \ b (x) \cdot n < 0 \},\\
\partial\Omega_{out} = \{ x \in \partial\Omega \ | \ b (x) \cdot n > 0 \}
\label{eq:Ju9a}.\end{gathered}$$ The parameter $0<\eps <1$ can be very small and is responsible for the high anisotropy of the problem. We shall assume in the rest of this paper the following hypothesis on the diffusion and source terms\
[**Hypothesis B**]{} \[hypo\] [ *Let $f \in L^2(\Omega)$ and $\overset{\circ}{\partial\Omega _D} \neq \varnothing$. Furthermore, the diffusion coefficients $A_{\parallel} \in
L^{\infty} (\Omega)$ and $A_{\perp} \in \MM_{d \times d} (L^{\infty}
(\Omega))$ are supposed to satisfy $$\begin{gathered}
0<A_0 \le A_{\parallel}(x) \le A_1\,, \quad \textrm{f.a.a}\,\,\,x \in \Omega,
\label{eq:J48a1}
\\[3mm]
A_{\perp} (x) b(x)=A_{\perp}^t (x) b(x)=0\,, \quad \textrm{f.a.a}\,\,\, x \in \Omega,
\label{eq:J48a2}
\\[3mm]
A_0 ||v||^2 \le v^t A_{\perp}(x) v \le A_1 ||v||^2\,,
\quad \forall v\in \mathbb R^d\,\,\, \text{with} \,\,\, v\cdot
b(x)=0\,\,\, \text{and} \,\,\, \textrm{f.a.a}\,\,\, x \in \Omega.
\label{eq:J48a3}
\end{gathered}$$* ]{}
As we conceive to use the finite element method for the numerical resolution of the P-problem, let us put (\[eq:J07a\]) under variational form. For this let $\mathcal{V}$ be the Hilbert space $$\mathcal{V}:=\{ \phi \in H^1(\Omega)\,\, / \,\, \phi_{| \partial \Omega_D} =0 \}
\,, \quad (\phi,\psi)_{\mathcal{V}} := (\nabla_{\parallel} \phi,\nabla_{\parallel}
\psi)_{L^2} + \eps (\nabla_{\perp} \phi,\nabla_{\perp}
\psi)_{L^2}\,.$$ We are searching thus for $\phi^\eps \in \mathcal{V}$, solution of $$\begin{gathered}
\label{eq:Ja8a}
a_\parallel(\phi^\eps,\psi) + \eps
a_\perp(\phi^\eps,\psi)=\eps (f,\psi)\,, \quad \forall \psi \in \mathcal{V}\,, \end{gathered}$$ where $(\cdot,\cdot)$ stands for the standard $L^2$ scalar product and the continuous, bilinear forms $a_\parallel : \mathcal{V} \times \mathcal{V}
\rightarrow \RR$ and $a_\perp: \mathcal{V} \times \mathcal{V} \rightarrow \RR$ are given by $$\begin{gathered}
\label{bil}
\begin{array}{lll}
\ds a_\parallel (\phi,\psi)&:=&\ds \int_{\Omega} A_{||} \nabla_{||}
\phi \cdot \nabla_{||}\psi\, dx\,, \quad a_\perp(\phi,\psi):=\ds
\int_{\Omega} ( A_{\perp} \nabla_{\perp}
\phi) \cdot \nabla_{\perp}\psi\, dx\,.
\end{array}\end{gathered}$$ Thanks to Hypothesis B and the Lax-Milgram theorem, the problem (\[eq:J07a\]) admits a unique solution $\phi^\eps \in \mathcal{V}$ for all fixed $\eps >0$. However, the numerical resolution of (\[eq:J07a\]) is very inadequate for $\varepsilon \ll 1$. When $\varepsilon$ tends to zero, the problem reduces to $$\begin{gathered}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\displaystyle
-\nabla_\parallel \cdot
\left(A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel \phi\right)
= 0
& \text{ in } \Omega, \\[3mm]
\displaystyle
n_\parallel \cdot
\left( A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel \phi \right)
= 0
& \text{ on } \partial\Omega _{in} \cup \partial\Omega _{out}, \\[3mm]
\displaystyle
\phi^{0 }= 0
& \text{ on } \partial\Omega _D.
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:Jc8a}\end{gathered}$$ This is an ill-posed problem as it has an infinite number of solutions $\phi \in \mathcal G$, where $$\begin{gathered}
\mathcal G = \{ \phi \in \mathcal V \ | \ \nabla_\parallel \phi =0\}\,,
\label{eq:Jd8a}\end{gathered}$$ is the Hilbert space of functions, which are constant along the field lines of $b$. On the discrete level this is manifested by a very bad conditioning of the system for small values of $\varepsilon $. However, as shown in [@DDLNN], the solution $\phi ^\varepsilon \in \mathcal V$ converges to $\phi ^0 \in \mathcal G$, a unique solution of $$\begin{gathered}
(L)\,\,\,
\int_\Omega A_{\perp} \nabla_{\perp} \phi^{0}
\cdot
\nabla_{\perp} \psi \, dx
=
\int_\Omega f \psi \, dx
\;\; , \;\; \forall \psi \in \mathcal G\,.
\label{eq:Jv9a}\end{gathered}$$
The Asymptotic Preserving approach (AP-model)
---------------------------------------------
Let us introduce a so called AP-formulation, which is a reformulation of the Singular Perturbation problem (\[eq:J07a\]), permitting a “continuous” transition from the (P)-problem (\[eq:J07a\]) to the (L)-problem (\[eq:Jv9a\]), as $\eps
\rightarrow 0$. The AP-formulation was introduced and is a subject of more detailed analysis in a separate publication [@DLNN]. We will shortly recall the results of the previous studies. For this, each function shall be decomposed into two parts: constant part along the anisotropy direction and a part containing fluctuations. The constant part converges to the limit solution and the fluctuating to $0$ as $\varepsilon
\rightarrow 0$ (see also [@DLNN]).
Let us introduce the following Hilbert space: $$\begin{gathered}
\mathcal A : =
\{ q \in L^2(\Omega ) \ / \nabla_\parallel q \in L^2(\Omega )
\text{ and } q|_{\partial \Omega_{in}} =0 \}
\\
(q,w)_{\mathcal A} = (\nabla_\parallel q, \nabla_\parallel w) \;\; ,
\;\; \forall q,w\in \mathcal A
\label{eq:Jg8a}.\end{gathered}$$
Let $\phi^{\eps}$ be a solution to the Singular Perturbation problem (\[eq:J07a\]) and set $\phi^{\eps} = p^{\eps} + \eps q^{\eps}$ with $p^{\eps} \in \GG$ and $q^{\eps} \in \AA$. This decomposition is unique and we observe $$\begin{gathered}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
a_\perp (p^{\eps},v) + \eps a_\perp (q^{\eps},v) + a_\parallel
(q^{\eps},v) = (f,v) & \forall v\in \VV\,,\\[3mm]
a_\parallel (p^{\eps},w) = 0 & \forall w\in \AA\,,
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:Jo0a}\end{gathered}$$ or equivalently $$\begin{gathered}
(AP)\,\,\,
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
a (\phi^{\eps},v) + (1-\eps) a_\parallel (q^{\eps},v) = (f,v) & \forall v\in \VV\,,\\[3mm]
a_\parallel (\phi^{\eps},w) = \eps a_\parallel (q^{\eps},w) & \forall w\in \AA\,,
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:AP2}\end{gathered}$$ with the bilinear form $a(v,w)$ defined as $$\begin{gathered}
a(v,w) = \int_\Omega \mathbb A\nabla v \cdot \nabla w
\label{eq:Jbab}.\end{gathered}$$ The matrix $\mathbb A$ is given by $$\begin{gathered}
\mathbb A = A_\parallel b \otimes b + (Id - b \otimes b)A_\perp (Id - b \otimes b)
\label{eq:Jcab},\end{gathered}$$ and is $\eps$ independent, $\mathbb A = \mathbb A_1$.
The above formulation is the Asymptotic Preserving reformulation based on the Micro Macro decomposition.
The stabilized Asymptotic Preserving approach (AP-model)
--------------------------------------------------------
The Asymptotic Preserving approach presented above has some limitations originating in the choice of the vector space $\AA$. Note that in the previous paper the uniqueness of $q^\varepsilon $ was ensured by setting $q^\varepsilon $ to $0$ on the $\Gamma _{in}$ boundary under hypothesis that every field line of $b$ has its beginning on $\Gamma _{in}$ and an end on $\Gamma _{out}$. In other words, more complex geometries, like for example closed field lines are not permitted. In this paper we propose a new way of providing the uniqueness of $q^\varepsilon $ which overcomes the limitations of our previous method. The idea is based on the penalty stabilization method introduced in [@BrezziDouglas88] for the Stokes problem.
Let us propose a new Asymptotic Preserving method: find $(\phi ^\varepsilon ,q^\varepsilon )\in \VV \times \VV$ such that $$\begin{gathered}
(APS)\,\,\,
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
a (\phi^{\eps},v) + (1-\eps) a_\parallel (q^{\eps},v) = (f,v) & \forall v\in \VV\,,\\[3mm]
a_\parallel (\phi^{\eps},w) = \eps a_\parallel (q^{\eps},w) +
\sum_{K\in\tau_h } h_K^2 \int_K \mathbb A \nabla q^\varepsilon \cdot \nabla w & \forall w\in \VV\,,
%%h^2 a(q^\varepsilon ,w) & \forall w\in \VV\,,
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:AP2S}\end{gathered}$$ where $h_K$ denotes the size of the element $K$. Note that now, instead of seeking $q^\varepsilon \in \AA$ we are looking for $q^\varepsilon
\in \VV$. Existence and uniqueness of the above problem can be easily proved by the Lax-Milgram theorem.
Numerical method {#sec:num_met}
================
This section concerns the discretization of the Asymptotic Preserving formulation (\[eq:AP2S\]), based on a finite element method. The anisotropic error indicator is introduced and the obtained numerical results are studied.
Let us denote by $\mathcal{V}_{h} \subset \mathcal{V}$ and $\mathcal{A}_{h}
\subset \mathcal{A}$ the finite dimensional approximation spaces, constructed by means of $P_1$ finite elements. We are thus looking for a discrete solution $(\phi^\varepsilon_h,\;q^\varepsilon_h) \in
\VV_h\times \AA_h$ of the following system $$\begin{gathered}
(APS)_h\,\,\,
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
a (\phi^{\eps}_h,v_h) + (1-\eps) a_\parallel (q^{\eps}_h,v_h) =
(f_h,v_h) & \forall v_h\in \VV_h\,,\\[3mm]
a_\parallel (\phi^{\eps}_h,w_h) = \eps a_\parallel (q_h^{\eps},w_h) +
\sum_{K\in\tau_h } h_K^2 \int_K \mathbb A \nabla q^\varepsilon_h \cdot \nabla w_h & \forall w_h\in \VV_h\,.
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:AP2disc}\end{gathered}$$
Adaptive finite elements with large aspect ratio
------------------------------------------------
We now propose an adaptive finite element algorithm. The goal is to build successive triangulations with large aspect ratio such that the relative estimated error of the function $\phi^{\eps} =p^{\eps}+\eps
q^{\eps}$ in the $H^1(\Omega)$ norm is close to a preset tolerance $TOL$. For this purpose, we introduce an error indicator which requires some further notations. This error indicator measures the error of the numerical solution $\phi^{\eps}$ in the directions of maximum and minimum stretching of the triangle. The goal of the adaptive algorithm is then to equidistribute the error indicator in the directions of maximum and minimum stretching, and to align the directions of maximum and minimum stretching with the directions of maximum and minimum error. We refer to [@picasso-03a; @picasso-03; @burman-picasso-03; @FormaggiaPerotto01; @FormaggiaPerotto03] for theoretical justifications.
![A simple example of transformation from reference triangle $\hat K$ to generic triangle $K$.[]{data-label="fig_aniso"}](xfig/aniso){height="2cm"}
(0,0)(-75,5)
(60,15)[$\hat x_1$]{} (0,80)[$\hat x_2$]{} (55,75)[$T_K$]{} (225,20)[$x_1$]{} (100,80)[$x_2$]{} (40,10)[$1$]{} (0,55)[$1$]{} (200,10)[$H$]{} (97,55)[$h$]{} (160,35)[$\mathbf r_{1,K}$]{} (125,70)[$\mathbf r_{2,K}$]{}
For any triangle $K$ of the mesh, let $T_K: \hat K\to K$ be the affine transformation which maps the reference triangle $\hat K$ into $K$. Let $M_K$ be the Jacobian of $T_K$ that is $$\begin{gathered}
\mathbf x=T_K(\hat {\mathbf x})=M_K \hat {\mathbf x} + \mathbf t_K.
\nonumber\end{gathered}$$ Since $M_K$ is invertible, it admits a singular value decomposition $M_K=R_K^T\Lambda_K P_K$, where $R_K$ and $P_K$ are orthogonal and where $\Lambda_K$ is diagonal with positive entries. In the following we set $$\begin{gathered}
\Lambda_K=\begin{pmatrix}\lambda_{1,K} & 0\nonumber\\ 0 & \lambda_{2,K}
\end{pmatrix}
\qquad\text{and}\qquad
R_K=\begin{pmatrix}\mathbf r_{1,K}^T \nonumber\\ \mathbf r_{2,K}^T\end{pmatrix},
\label{eq:lr}\end{gathered}$$ with the choice $\lambda_{1,K}\ge\lambda_{2,K}$. A simple example of such a transformation is $x_1=H \hat x_1$, $x_2=h \hat x_2$, with $H\ge h$, thus $$\begin{gathered}
M_K=
\begin{pmatrix}
H & 0 \nonumber\\
0 & h
\end{pmatrix}
\quad \lambda_{1,K}=H,
\quad \lambda_{2,K}=h,
\quad \mathbf r_{1,K}=\begin{pmatrix}1\nonumber\\0\end{pmatrix},
\quad \mathbf r_{2,K}=\begin{pmatrix}0\nonumber\\1\end{pmatrix},
\nonumber\end{gathered}$$ see Figure \[fig\_aniso\]. In other words $\mathbf r_{1,K}$ and $\mathbf r_{2,K}$ are the directions of maximum and minimum stretching, while $\lambda_{1,K}$ and $\lambda_{2,K}$ measure the amplitude of stretching.
Let $I_h : H^{1}_0 (\Omega) \rightarrow \VV_h$ be a Clément or Scott-Zhang like interpolation operator. We now recall some interpolation results due to [@FormaggiaPerotto01; @FormaggiaPerotto03; @MichelettiPerottoPicasso03].
\[prop:est\] There is a constant $C = C (\hat{K})$ such that for all $v \in H^{1}
(\Omega)$, for all $K \in \tau_h$, for all edges $e$ of $K$, we have $$\begin{gathered}
||v-I_hv||_{L^{2} (\Omega)} \leq
C
\left(
\lambda_{1,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{1,K} G_K (v)\mathbf r_{1,K}) +
\lambda_{2,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{2,K} G_K (v)\mathbf r_{2,K})
\right)^{1/2}
\label{eq:Jq0a1}, \\
||v-I_hv||_{L^{2} (e)} \leq
Ch_K^{1/2}
\left(
\frac{\lambda_{1,K}}{\lambda_{2,K}}(\mathbf r_{1,K} G_K (v)\mathbf r_{1,K}) +
\frac{\lambda_{2,K}}{\lambda_{1,K}}(\mathbf r_{2,K} G_K (v)\mathbf r_{2,K})
\right)^{1/2}
\label{eq:Jq0a2}, \\
||\nabla(v-I_hv)||_{L^{2} (K)} \leq
C
\left(
\frac{\lambda_{1,K}^{2}}{\lambda_{2,K}^{2}}(\mathbf r_{1,K} G_K (v)\mathbf r_{1,K}) +
(\mathbf r_{2,K} G_K (v)\mathbf r_{2,K})
\right)^{1/2}
\label{eq:Jq0a3}.
\end{gathered}$$ Here $h_k = \text{diam }K$, $\lambda_{i,K}$ and $\mathbf r_{i,K}$ are given by (\[eq:lr\]), and $G_K (v)$ denotes the $2\times 2$ matrix defined as $$\begin{gathered}
G_K(v) =
\begin{pmatrix}
\displaystyle{\int_K
\left(\frac{\partial v}{\partial x_1}\right)^2 dx}
&
\displaystyle{\int_K
\left(\frac{\partial v}{\partial x_1}\right)
\left(\frac{\partial v}{\partial x_2}\right) dx}
\\
\displaystyle{\int_K
\left(\frac{\partial v}{\partial x_1}\right)
\left(\frac{\partial v}{\partial x_2}\right) dx}
& \displaystyle{\int_K
\left(\frac{\partial v}{\partial x_2}\right)^2 dx}
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{gathered}$$
The first estimate is in Proposition 3.1 of [@FormaggiaPerotto01], the second estimate is in Proposition 2.2 of [@FormaggiaPerotto03], the third estimate is in Proposition 2.5 of [@MichelettiPerottoPicasso03].
The results of Proposition \[prop:est\] are now used to derive an anisotropic error indicator for the Asymptotic Preserving reformulation. The error is first related to the equation residual. The Clément interpolant is introduced. Then the anisotropic interpolation results are used. Finally, a Zienkiewicz-Zhu error estimator is used to approach the error gradient.
Let $e = \phi^{\eps} - \phi^{\eps}_h$ and $e_q = q^{\eps} -
q^{\eps}_h$. The following error estimate for the Asymptotic Preserving reformulation (\[eq:AP2\]) holds.
\[prop:ee\] There exist a constant $C$ depending only on the interpolation constants from Proposition \[prop:est\] and not on the mesh size nor aspect ratio such that $$\begin{gathered}
\int_\Omega \mathbb A \nabla e \cdot \nabla e
+ (1-\varepsilon ) \varepsilon
\int_\Omega A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel e_q \cdot \nabla_\parallel e_q
+ (1-\eps)
\sum_{K\in\tau_h } h_K^2 \int_K \mathbb A \nabla e_q \cdot\nabla e_q
%% \int_\Omega A \nabla e \cdot \nabla e
\leq
\\
\
C \sum_{K \in \tau_h}
\Bigg(
||f+\nabla \cdot (\mathbb A \nabla \phi^{\eps}_h) +
(1-\eps) \nabla_\parallel \cdot (A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel
q^{\eps}_h )||_{L^{2}(K)}
\\
+ \frac{1}{2\lambda_{2,K}^{1/2}} ||[\mathbb A\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h \cdot
n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
+ \frac{1-\varepsilon }{2\lambda_{2,K}^{1/2}} ||[A_\parallel\nabla_\parallel
q^{\eps}_h \cdot n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
\Bigg) \\
\times
\left(
\lambda_{1,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{1,K} G_K (e)\mathbf r_{1,K}) +
\lambda_{2,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{2,K} G_K (e)\mathbf r_{2,K})
\right)^{1/2}
\\
+
(1-\eps )
\Bigg(
||\nabla_\parallel \cdot (A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel
(\phi^\eps_h-\eps q^\eps_h) )||_{L^{2}(K)}
+
\frac{1}{2\lambda_{2,K}^{1/2}} ||[A_\parallel\nabla_\parallel
q^{\eps}_h \cdot n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
\\
+\lambda_{2,K}^2 || \nabla \cdot (\mathbb A \nabla q^\eps_h ) ||_{L^{2}(K)}
+ \lambda_{2,K}^{3/2}
|| \mathbb A \nabla q^\eps_h \cdot n||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
\Bigg)
\\
\times
\left(
\lambda_{1,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{1,K} G_K (e_q)\mathbf r_{1,K}) +
\lambda_{2,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{2,K} G_K (e_q)\mathbf r_{2,K})
\right)^{1/2}
\label{eq:Js0a}.
\end{gathered}$$ Here $[\cdot]$ denotes the jump of the bracketed quantity across an internal edge, $[\cdot]=0$ for an edge on the boundary $\partial\Omega_D$, $[\cdot]$ is set to twice the imposed flux on the $\partial\Omega_{in} \cup \partial\Omega_{out}$ and $n$ is the unit edge normal in arbitrary direction.
Setting $v = e$ in the AP reformulation (\[eq:AP2\]) yields $$\begin{gathered}
a(e,e) + (1-\varepsilon ) a_\parallel(e, e_q) =
(f,e) - a(\phi^{\eps}_h , e) - (1-\varepsilon ) a_\parallel (q^\eps_h , e)
\label{eq:J40a}.
\end{gathered}$$ Now, since $a_\parallel (\phi^\eps-\eps q^\eps ,e_q) =
\sum_{K\in\tau_h } h_K^2 \int_K \mathbb A \nabla q^\eps \cdot \nabla e_q $ we obtain $$\begin{gathered}
a_\parallel(e, e_q) = \eps a_\parallel(e_q,e_q) +
\sum_{K\in\tau_h } h_K^2 \int_K \mathbb A \nabla q^\eps \cdot
\nabla e_q
- a_\parallel(\phi ^\eps_h -\eps q^\eps _h, e_q)
\label{eq:Jkdb}
\end{gathered}$$ and hence $$\begin{gathered}
\int_\Omega \mathbb A \nabla e \cdot \nabla e
+ (1-\varepsilon ) \varepsilon \int_\Omega A_\parallel
\nabla_\parallel e_q \cdot \nabla_\parallel e_q
+\sum_{K\in\tau_h } h_K^2 \int_K \mathbb A \nabla e_q \cdot\nabla e_q
=
\\
\int_\Omega fe - \int_\Omega \mathbb A \nabla\phi^{\eps}_h \cdot \nabla e
\ - (1-\varepsilon )\! \int_\Omega A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel q_h
\cdot \nabla_\parallel e
\ + (1-\varepsilon )\! \int_\Omega A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel (\phi^{\eps}_h-\eps q^\eps_h)
\cdot \nabla_\parallel e_q
\\ - (1-\varepsilon) \sum_{K\in\tau_h } h_K^2 \int_K \mathbb A \nabla q^\eps_h \cdot\nabla e_q
\label{eq:J50a}.
\end{gathered}$$ For any $v\in V$ we have $$\begin{gathered}
(f,v) - a(\phi^{\eps}_h, v)
- (1-\eps ) a_\parallel (q^\eps_h , v)
\\
\qquad =(f,v-I_hv) - a(\phi^{\eps}_h,v-I_hv)
- (1-\eps ) a_\parallel (q^\eps_h ,v-I_hv)
\hfill
\\
\qquad=\sum_{K \in \tau_h}
\Bigg(
\int_K (f+\nabla \cdot (\mathbb A \nabla \phi^{\eps}_h) +
(1-\eps) \nabla_\parallel \cdot (A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel
q^{\eps}_h )) (v - I_h v) \hfill
\\
\qquad\qquad
+ \frac{1}{2} \int_{\partial K} [\mathbb A\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h \cdot n](v - I_h v)
+ \frac{1-\eps}{2} \int_{\partial K} [A_\parallel\nabla_\parallel q^{\eps}_h \cdot n](v - I_h v)
\Bigg)
\hfill
\label{eq:J70a}.
\end{gathered}$$ Furthermore, for any $w\in A$ the following holds true : $$\begin{gathered}
a_\parallel (\phi^\eps_h -\eps q^\eps_h, w)
- \sum_{K\in\tau_h } h_K^2 \int_K \mathbb A \nabla q^\eps_h \cdot\nabla w
\\
\qquad
=
a_\parallel (\phi^\eps_h -\eps q^\eps_h, w - I_h w)
- \sum_{K\in\tau_h } h_K^2 \int_K \mathbb A \nabla q^\eps_h \cdot\nabla (w - I_h w)
\\
\qquad
=
\sum_{K \in \tau_h}
\Bigg(
\int_K \nabla_\parallel \cdot (A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel (\phi^{\eps}_h-\eps q^\eps_h))
(w - I_h v) \hfill
+ \frac{1}{2} \int_{\partial K} [A_\parallel\nabla_\parallel
(\phi^{\eps}_h-\eps q^\eps_h) \cdot n](w - I_h w) \hfill
\\- h_K^2 \int_K \nabla \cdot (\mathbb A \nabla q^\eps_h ) (w - I_h w)
+ h_K^2 \int_{\partial K} (\mathbb A \nabla q^\eps_h \cdot n) (w - I_h w)
\Bigg)
\label{eq:J80a} .
\end{gathered}$$ Now, choosing $v =e$, $w = e_q$ and using the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality together with the interpolation results of the Proposition \[prop:est\] the following is obtained: $$\begin{gathered}
\int_\Omega \mathbb A \nabla e \cdot \nabla e
+ (1-\varepsilon ) \varepsilon
\int_\Omega A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel e_q \cdot \nabla_\parallel e_q
\\ +
(1-\varepsilon ) \sum_{K\in\tau_h } h_K^2 \int_K \mathbb A \nabla e_q \cdot\nabla e_q
\leq
C \sum_{K \in \tau_h}
\Bigg(
||f+\nabla \cdot (\mathbb A \nabla \phi^{\eps}_h) +
(1-\eps) \nabla_\parallel \cdot (A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel
q^{\eps}_h )||_{L^{2}(K)}
\\
+ \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{h_K}{\lambda_{1,K}\lambda_{2,K}}\right)^{1/2}
||[\mathbb A\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h \cdot n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
+ \frac{1-\varepsilon }{2}\left(\frac{h_K}{\lambda_{1,K}\lambda_{2,K}}\right)^{1/2}
||[A_\parallel\nabla_\parallel q^{\eps}_h \cdot n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
\Bigg) \\
\times
\left(
\lambda_{1,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{1,K} G_K (e)\mathbf r_{1,K}) +
\lambda_{2,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{2,K} G_K (e)\mathbf r_{2,K})
\right)^{1/2}
\\
+
(1-\varepsilon )
\Bigg(
||\nabla_\parallel \cdot (A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel (\phi^{\eps}_h-\eps q^\eps_h))||_{L^{2}(K)}
+ \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{h_K}{\lambda_{1,K}\lambda_{2,K}}\right)^{1/2} \!\!
||[A_\parallel\nabla_\parallel (\phi^{\eps}_h-\eps q^\eps_h) \cdot n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
\\
+ h_K^2 || \nabla \cdot (\mathbb A \nabla q^\eps_h ) ||_{L^{2}(K)}
+ \left(\frac{h^5_K}{\lambda_{1,K}\lambda_{2,K}}\right)^{1/2}
|| \mathbb A \nabla q^\eps_h \cdot n||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
\Bigg)
\\
\times
\left(
\lambda_{1,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{1,K} G_{K} (e_q)\mathbf r_{1,K}) +
\lambda_{2,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{2,K} G_{K} (e_q)\mathbf r_{2,K})
\right)^{1/2}
\label{eq:J90a}
\end{gathered}$$ where $C = C (\hat{K})$. Since $\int_\Omega A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel e_q \cdot
\nabla_\parallel e_q \geq 0$ and $$\begin{gathered}
\lambda_{1,K} h_{\hat{K}} \leq h_K \leq \lambda_{2,K} h_{\hat{K}}
\label{eq:J00a},
\end{gathered}$$ the inequality (\[eq:Js0a\]) holds true.
Note that the above result does not contain any terms inversely proportional to $\varepsilon $ as it involves matrix $\mathbb A$ rather than $\mathbb A_\varepsilon$. The standard anisotropic error indicator for an anisotropic diffusion problem studied in [@picasso-03; @picasso-06] takes form: $$\begin{gathered}
\int_\Omega \mathbb A_\varepsilon \nabla e \cdot \nabla e
\leq
C \sum_{K \in \tau_h}
\Bigg(
||f+\nabla \cdot (\mathbb A_\varepsilon \nabla \phi^{\eps}_h)
+ \frac{1}{2\lambda_{2,K}^{1/2}} ||[\mathbb A_\varepsilon \nabla \phi^{\eps}_h \cdot
n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
\Bigg)
\\
\times
\left(
\lambda_{1,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{1,K} G_K (e)\mathbf r_{1,K}) +
\lambda_{2,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{2,K} G_K (e)\mathbf r_{2,K})
\right)^{1/2} ,
\label{eq:Jaab}
\end{gathered}$$ thus it involves terms of the order $\frac{1}{\varepsilon}$. While this error indicator remains valid it is of no practical use for small values of $\varepsilon $. Indeed, the remeshing algorithm which aims in keeping the error indicator close to a given value would yield meshes with mesh size proportional to $\varepsilon $.
In the case of $\varepsilon = 1$ the above error indicator reduces to the standard anisotropic error indicator for a diffusion problem studied in \cite{} : $$\begin{gathered}
\int_\Omega \mathbb A \nabla e \cdot \nabla e
\leq
C \sum_{K \in \tau_h}
\Bigg(
||f+\nabla \cdot (\mathbb A \nabla \phi^{\eps}_h)
+ \frac{1}{2\lambda_{2,K}^{1/2}} ||[\mathbb A\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h \cdot
n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
\Bigg)
\\
\times
\left(
\lambda_{1,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{1,K} G_K (e)\mathbf r_{1,K}) +
\lambda_{2,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{2,K} G_K (e)\mathbf r_{2,K})
\right)^{1/2}
\label{eq:Jaab2}.
\end{gathered}$$
Estimate (\[eq:Js0a\]) is not a usual a posteriori error estimate as it involves $\phi^{\eps}$ and $q^{\eps}$ on the right hand side. If we can guess $\phi^{\eps} - \phi^{\eps}_h$ and $q^{\eps} - q^{\eps}_h$, (\[eq:Js0a\]) can be used to derive an anisotropic error indicator. In order to do that, we introduce an error estimator based on the superconvergent gradient recovery, namely Zienkiewicz Zhu like error estimator [@AZCZ89; @ZZ87; @ZZ92] in its simplest form as defined in [@AinsworthOden97; @Rodriguez94], [*i.e.*]{} the difference between $\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h$ resp. $\nabla
q^{\eps}_h$ and an approximate $L^{2}$ projection of $\nabla
\phi^{\eps}_h$ resp. $\nabla q^{\eps}_h$ onto $\VV^{2}$ : $$\begin{gathered}
\mathbf \eta^{ZZ} (\phi^{\eps}_h) =
\begin{pmatrix}
\eta_{1}^{ZZ}(\phi^{\eps}_h)
\\
\eta_{2}^{ZZ}(\phi^{\eps}_h)
\end{pmatrix}
=
\begin{pmatrix}
(I-\Pi_h)\left(\pd{\phi^{\eps}_h}{x_1}\right)
\\
(I-\Pi_h)\left(\pd{\phi^{\eps}_h}{x_2}\right)
\end{pmatrix},
\label{eq:Jt0a}\end{gathered}$$ where $\Pi_h$ is the projection operator which builds values at vertices $P$ from constant values on triangles using the formula $$\begin{gathered}
\begin{pmatrix}
\Pi_h\left(\pd{\phi^{\eps}_h}{x_1}\right)(P)
\nonumber\\
\Pi_h\left(\pd{\phi^{\eps}_h}{x_2}\right)(P)
\end{pmatrix}
=
\dfrac{1}
{\displaystyle{\sum_{\underset{P\in K}{\text{tria. }K}}|K|}}
\begin{pmatrix}
{\displaystyle{\sum_{\underset{P\in K}{\text{tria. }K}}|K|
\left(\pd{\phi^{\eps}_h}{x_1}\right)_{|K}}}
\nonumber\\
{\displaystyle{\sum_{\underset{P\in K}{\text{tria. }K}}|K|
\left(\pd{\phi^{\eps}_h}{x_2}\right)_{|K}}}
\end{pmatrix}.
\nonumber\end{gathered}$$ Z-Z like error estimator is asymptotically exact for a parallel meshes and smooth solutions [@AinsworthOden97; @Rodriguez94]. Our error indicator is obtained by replacing the matrices $G_K (e)$ and $G_K (e_q)$ by approximate ones $\tilde{G}_K (\phi^{\eps}_h)$ and $\tilde{G}_K (q^{\eps}_h)$ defined by $$\begin{gathered}
\tilde{G}_K (\phi^{\eps}_h)
=
\begin{pmatrix}
\displaystyle{\int_K (\eta_{1}^{ZZ}(\phi^{\eps}_h))^2 dx}
& \displaystyle{\int_K \eta_{1}^{ZZ}(\phi^{\eps}_h)\eta_{2}^{ZZ}(\phi^{\eps}_h)dx}
\\
\displaystyle{\int_K \eta_{1}^{ZZ}(\phi^{\eps}_h)\eta_{2}^{ZZ}(\phi^{\eps}_h) dx}
& \displaystyle{\int_K (\eta_{2}^{ZZ}(\phi^{\eps}_h))^2 dx}
\end{pmatrix}.
\label{eq:Ju0a}\end{gathered}$$ The anisotropic error indicator defined on each triangle $K$ takes the form $$\begin{gathered}
\Big(\eta_K^A (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h))\Big)^{2} =
\Bigg(
||f+\nabla \cdot (\mathbb A \nabla \phi^{\eps}_h) +
(1-\eps) \nabla_\parallel \cdot (A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel
q^{\eps}_h )||_{L^{2}(K)}
\\
+ \frac{1}{2\lambda_{2,K}^{1/2}} ||[\mathbb A\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h \cdot
n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
+ \frac{1-\varepsilon }{2\lambda_{2,K}^{1/2}} ||[A_\parallel\nabla_\parallel
q^{\eps}_h \cdot n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
\Bigg) \\
\times
\left(
\lambda_{1,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{1,K} \tilde{G}_K (\phi^{\eps}_h)\mathbf r_{1,K}) +
\lambda_{2,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{2,K} \tilde{G}_K (\phi^{\eps}_h)\mathbf r_{2,K})
\right)^{1/2}
\\
+
(1-\varepsilon )
\Bigg(
||\nabla_\parallel \cdot (A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel (\phi^\eps_h-\eps q^\eps_h))||_{L^{2}(K)}
+ \frac{1}{2\lambda_{2,K}^{1/2}} ||[A_\parallel\nabla_\parallel
(\phi^\eps_h-\eps q^\eps_h) \cdot n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
\\
+\lambda_{2,K}^2 || \nabla \cdot (\mathbb A \nabla q^\eps_h ) ||_{L^{2}(K)}
+ \lambda_{2,K}^{3/2}
|| \mathbb A \nabla q^\eps_h \cdot n||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
\Bigg)
\\
\times
\left(
\lambda_{1,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{1,K} \tilde{G}_{K} (q^{\eps}_h)\mathbf r_{1,K}) +
\lambda_{2,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{2,K} \tilde{G}_{K} (q^{\eps}_h)\mathbf r_{2,K})
\right)^{1/2}
\label{eq:Jdab}.\end{gathered}$$ Introducing $$\begin{aligned}
\rho_{\phi,K}
&=
||f+\nabla \cdot (\mathbb A \nabla \phi^{\eps}_h) +
(1-\eps) \nabla_\parallel \cdot (A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel
q^{\eps}_h )||_{L^{2}(K)}
\\
& \quad+ \frac{1}{2\lambda_{2,K}^{1/2}} ||[\mathbb A\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h \cdot
n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
+ \frac{1-\varepsilon }{2\lambda_{2,K}^{1/2}} ||[A_\parallel\nabla_\parallel
q^{\eps}_h \cdot n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)} ,
\\
\Big(\eta_{\phi ,K}^A (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h))\Big)^{2}
&=
\rho_{\phi,K}
\left(
\lambda_{1,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{1,K} \tilde{G}_K (\phi^{\eps}_h)\mathbf r_{1,K}) +
\lambda_{2,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{2,K} \tilde{G}_K (\phi^{\eps}_h)\mathbf r_{2,K})
\right)^{1/2}
\label{eq:Jmdb}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\rho_{q,K}
&=
(1-\varepsilon )
\Bigg(
||\nabla_\parallel \cdot (A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel (\phi^\eps_h-\eps q^\eps_h))||_{L^{2}(K)}
\\
&\quad+ \frac{1}{2\lambda_{2,K}^{1/2}} ||[A_\parallel\nabla_\parallel
(\phi^\eps_h-\eps q^\eps_h) \cdot n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
\\
&\quad+\lambda_{2,K}^2 || \nabla \cdot (\mathbb A \nabla q^\eps_h ) ||_{L^{2}(K)}
+ \lambda_{1,K}^{3/2}
|| \mathbb A \nabla q^\eps_h \cdot n||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
\Bigg),
\\
\Big(\eta_{q,K}^A (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h))\Big)^{2}
&=
\rho_{a,K}
\left(
\lambda_{1,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{1,K} \tilde{G}_K (\phi^{\eps}_h)\mathbf r_{1,K}) +
\lambda_{2,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{2,K} \tilde{G}_K (\phi^{\eps}_h)\mathbf r_{2,K})
\right)^{1/2}
\label{eq:Jndb}\end{aligned}$$ allows to introduce a more compact notation $$\begin{gathered}
\Big(\eta_K^A (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h))\Big)^{2}
=
\Big(\eta_{\phi ,K}^A (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h))\Big)^{2}
+ \Big(\eta_{q,K}^A (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h))\Big)^{2}
\label{eq:J7ab}.\end{gathered}$$
Adaptive algorithm
------------------
The goal of our adaptive algorithm is to build a triangulation such that the error is equidistributed in the direction of the maximal and minimal stretching of triangles and the relative global error indicator is closed to prescribed tolerance $TOL$. We have $$0.75\ TOL\le
\dfrac{
\Bigl(\eta^A (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)
}
{
\sqrt{\displaystyle{\int_\Omega|\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h|^2}}
}
\le 1.25\ TOL.
\label{goal_adap}$$ with $$\begin{gathered}
\Bigl(\eta^A (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^2
=
\displaystyle{\sum_{\text{tria. }K}
\Bigl(\eta_K^A (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^2}
\label{eq:Jfab}.\end{gathered}$$
A sufficient condition to satisfy (\[goal\_adap\]) is to build a triangulation with large aspect ratio such that $$\begin{split}
\dfrac{0.75^2 TOL^2}{NT}
\int_\Omega|\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h|^2
\le
\Bigl(\eta^A_{K}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^2
\le \dfrac{1.25^2 TOL^2}{NT}
\int_\Omega|\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h|^2
\end{split}$$ for each triangle $K$, where $NT$ is the number of triangles of the mesh. Since the mesh generator `BL2D` mesh generator used in our simulations [@bl2d] requires data on the mesh vertices rather than on the triangles, we need to translate the above local triangle condition into a condition for mesh for the mesh vertices. Let us introduce a point defined error indicator : $$\begin{gathered}
\eta_P^A (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h) =
\left(
\sum_{\underset{P\in K}{\text{tria. }K}}
\Bigl(\eta^A_{K}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4
\right)^{1/4}
\label{eq:Jgab}\end{gathered}$$ and hence $$\begin{gathered}
\sum_P
\Bigl(\eta^A_{P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4
=
3
\sum_K
\Bigl(\eta^A_{K}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4
\label{eq:Jhab}.\end{gathered}$$ Therefore, the following local condition holds $$\begin{gathered}
\begin{split}
\dfrac{\sqrt{3}}{NV}0.75^2 TOL^2
\int_\Omega|\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h|^2
\le
\Bigl(\eta^A_{P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^2
\le \dfrac{\sqrt{3}}{NV}1.25^2 TOL^2
\int_\Omega|\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h|^2
\end{split}
\label{eq:Jiab}\end{gathered}$$ where $NV$ is a number of mesh vertices. Then, we define $\eta^{A}_{i,P} (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)$, with $i = 1,2$ at the mesh nodes $$\begin{gathered}
\Bigl(\eta^A_{i,P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4
=
\sum_{\underset{P\in K}{\text{tria. }K}}
\lambda_{i,K}^{2}
\left(
\mathbf r_{i,K}
\left(
\rho_{\phi,K}^2\tilde{G}_K (\phi^{\eps}_h)
+
\rho_{q,K}^2
\tilde{G}_{K} (q^{\eps}_h)
\right)
\mathbf r_{i,K}
\right)
\label{eq:Jjab}.\end{gathered}$$ The value of $\eta^A_{i,P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)$ represents the error in the direction of the maximum and minimum stretching of the triangle $K$. We note that the point error indicator is bounded by $$\begin{gathered}
\Bigl(\eta^A_{1,P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4 +
\Bigl(\eta^A_{2,P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4
\leq
\Bigl(\eta^A_{P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4
\\
\qquad\leq
2 \left( \Bigl(\eta^A_{1,P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4 +
\Bigl(\eta^A_{2,P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4 \right)
\label{eq:Jqdb}.\end{gathered}$$
The mesh adaptation algorithm can be summarized as follows. For all vertices $P$ of the mesh $\eta^A_{1,P} (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)$ and $\eta^A_{2,P} (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)$ are computed. Furthermore, we compute $\lambda_{1,P}$ and $\lambda_{2,P}$ as an average of the $\lambda_{1,K}$ and $\lambda_{2,K}$ of the neighboring triangles $K$.
The input data for the `BL2D` mesh generator is computed: the stretching amplitude $h_{i,P}$, $i=1,2$ and the direction of the anisotropy $\theta_P$. In the first step new $h_{i,P}$ are obtained. For every mesh point $P$, if $$\begin{gathered}
4 \Bigl(\eta^A_{i,P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4 <
\dfrac{3}{(NV)^2}0.75^4 TOL^4
\left( \int_\Omega|\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h|^2\right)^2
\label{eq:Jmab}\end{gathered}$$ then $h_{i,P}$ is set to $3/2 \lambda_{i,P}$. If $$\begin{gathered}
2 \Bigl(\eta^A_{i,P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4 >
\dfrac{3}{(NV)^2}1.25^4 TOL^4
\left( \int_\Omega|\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h|^2\right)^2
\label{eq:Jnab}\end{gathered}$$ then $h_{i,P}$ is set to $2/3 \lambda_{i,P}$. Otherwise, $h_{i,P}$ is set to $\lambda_{i,P}$.
In the second step of the mesh adaptation the new anisotropy direction is found. For every mesh point average matrices $\tilde{G}_P
(\phi^\eps_h)$ and $\tilde{G}_{P} (q^\eps_h)$ are calculated. The angle $\theta_P$ is set to the angle between the eigenvector corresponding to the largest eigenvalue of the matrix $$\begin{gathered}
\rho_{\phi,K}^2\tilde{G}_K (\phi^{\eps}_h)
+
\rho_{q,K}^2
\tilde{G}_{K} (q^{\eps}_h)
\label{eq:J8ab}\end{gathered}$$ and the $Ox$ direction. Finally, new mesh is generated using the `BL2D` mesh generator.
Simplified error indicator
--------------------------
The anisotropic error indicator introduced in the previous sections involves the term $\tilde{G}_K (q^\eps_h)$. This means that the perpendicular derivatives of $q^\eps_h$ will play role in the error estimation procedure. This is not necessarily desirable since in some cases this may result in mesh over-refinement in the direction perpendicular to the anisotropy direction. That is to say the adaptive algorithm could continue to refine the mesh in the perpendicular direction without any increase of precision in $\phi^\eps_h$. This is why we propose an alternative approach where the simplified error indicator is related only to the residue of the first equation and the matrix $\tilde{G}_K (\phi^\eps_h)$: $$\begin{gathered}
\Big(\eta_K^{SA} (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Big)^{2} =
\Bigg(
||f+\nabla \cdot (\mathbb A \nabla \phi^{\eps}_h) +
(1-\eps) \nabla_\parallel \cdot (A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel
q^{\eps}_h )||_{L^{2}(K)}
\\
+ \frac{1}{2\lambda_{2,K}^{1/2}} ||[\mathbb A\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h \cdot
n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
+ \frac{1-\varepsilon }{2\lambda_{2,K}^{1/2}} ||[A_\parallel\nabla_\parallel
q^{\eps}_h \cdot n] ||_{L^{2}(\partial K)}
\Bigg) \\
\times
\left(
\lambda_{1,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{1,K} \tilde{G}_K (\phi^{\eps}_h)\mathbf r_{1,K}) +
\lambda_{2,K}^{2}(\mathbf r_{2,K} \tilde{G}_K (\phi^{\eps}_h)\mathbf r_{2,K})
\right)^{1/2}
\label{eq:Jdab2},\end{gathered}$$ or in more compact notation: $$\begin{gathered}
\Big(\eta_K^{SA} (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h))\Big)^{2} =
\Big(\eta_{\phi ,K}^A (\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h))\Big)^{2}
\label{eq:Jebb}.\end{gathered}$$ As in the previous section the nodal simplified error indicator is defined: $$\begin{gathered}
\sum_P
\Bigl(\eta^{SA}_{P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4
=
3
\sum_K
\Bigl(\eta^{SA}_{K}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4
,
\\
\Bigl(\eta^{SA}_{i,P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4
=
\sum_{\underset{P\in K}{\text{tria. }K}}
\rho_{\phi,K}^2
\lambda_{i,K}^{2}
\mathbf r_{i,K}
\tilde{G}_{K} (\phi^{\eps}_h)
\mathbf r_{i,K}
\label{eq:Jfbb}.\end{gathered}$$ The obtained adaptive algorithm is almost the same as before. Only now $\eta^{A}_{i,P}$ is replaced by a simplified version $\eta^{A}_{i,P}$, the coarsening criterion is slightly changed : if $$\begin{gathered}
2 \Bigl(\eta^{SA}_{i,P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4 <
\dfrac{3}{(NV)^2}0.75^4 TOL^4
\left( \int_\Omega|\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h|^2\right)^2
\label{eq:Jmab1}\end{gathered}$$ then $h_{i,P}$ is set to $3/2 \lambda_{i,P}$. If $$\begin{gathered}
2 \Bigl(\eta^{SA}_{i,P}(\phi^{\eps}_h, q^{\eps}_h)\Bigr)^4 >
\dfrac{3}{(NV)^2}1.25^4 TOL^4
\left( \int_\Omega|\nabla \phi^{\eps}_h|^2\right)^2
\label{eq:Jnab1}\end{gathered}$$ then $h_{i,P}$ is set to $2/3 \lambda_{i,P}$. Otherwise, $h_{i,P}$ is set to $\lambda_{i,P}$. Finally, the mesh anisotropy direction is aligned with the largest eigenvalue of the matrix $\tilde{G}_K(\phi^\eps_h)$.
Numerical results {#sec:test case}
-----------------
### Numerical study of the effectivity index and the convergence of the stabilized AP scheme
Let us define $$\begin{gathered}
\eta^{ZZ} =\left( \sum_{K\in \tau_h} \int_K |\mathbf \eta^{ZZ}(\phi^{\eps}_h)|^2 \right)^{1/2} ,
\\
\eta^{A} =\left( \sum_{K\in \tau_h} \int_K (\mathbf \eta^{A} (\phi^{\eps}_h))^2 \right)^{1/2} ,\\
\eta^{SA} =\left( \sum_{K\in \tau_h} \int_K (\mathbf \eta^{SA}(\phi^{\eps}_h))^2 \right)^{1/2} ,
\label{eq:Jgbb}\end{gathered}$$ the Z-Z error estimator, the anisotropic error estimator and the simplified error indicator. We also define $$\begin{gathered}
ei^{ZZ} = \frac{\eta^{ZZ}}{ || \nabla e||_{L^2(\Omega)}}, \\
ei^{A } = \frac{\eta^{A }}{ (\int_\Omega A\nabla e \cdot \nabla
e + \eps (1-\eps) \int_\Omega A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel e_q
\cdot \nabla_\parallel e_q)^{1/2}}, \\
ei^{SA} = \frac{\eta^{SA}}{ (\int_\Omega A\nabla e \cdot \nabla e)^{1/2}},
\label{eq:Jhbb}\end{gathered}$$ the effectivity indices.
We test the robustness of the error indicators and the convergence of the stabilized AP scheme in the following test case. Let $\Omega = (0,1) \times (0,1)$, the anisotropy direction is given by $$\begin{gathered}
b = \frac{B}{|B|}\, , \quad
B =
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\alpha (2y-1) \cos (\pi x) + \pi \\
\pi \alpha (y^2-y) \sin (\pi x)
\end{array}
\right)
\label{eq:J99a}\,\quad. \end{gathered}$$ Note that we have $B \neq 0$ in the computational domain. The parameter $\alpha$ describes the variations of the anisotropy direction. For $\alpha = 0$ the anisotropy is aligned in the direction of $x$ coordinate. We set $A_\perp =
A_\parallel = 1$. Now, we choose $\phi^\varepsilon $ to be a function that converges to the limit solution $\phi^{0}$ as $\varepsilon
\rightarrow 0$: $$\begin{gathered}
\phi^{0} = \sin \left(\pi y +\alpha (y^2-y)\cos (\pi x) \right), \\
\phi^{\varepsilon } = \sin \left(\pi y +\alpha (y^2-y)\cos (\pi
x) \right) + \varepsilon \cos \left( 2\pi x\right) \sin \left(\pi
y \right)
\label{eq:Jc0a}.\end{gathered}$$ Finally, the force term is calculated accordingly, i.e. $$\begin{gathered}
f = - \nabla_\perp \cdot (A_\perp \nabla_\perp \phi^{\varepsilon })
- \frac{1}{\varepsilon }\nabla_\parallel \cdot (A_\parallel \nabla_\parallel \phi^{\varepsilon })
\nonumber.\end{gathered}$$
We study the effectivity indices on the unstructured meshes for constant and variable anisotropy direction ($\alpha =0$ and $\alpha
=2$ respectively) and for small and large anisotropy ($\eps=1$ and $\eps = 10^{-10}$ respectively).
[|c||c|c|c|c|]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$h_1$–$h_2$ & $ei^{ZZ}$ & $ei^{A}$ & $ei^{SA}$ & $|| \nabla (\phi
^\eps_h -\phi ^\eps) ||_{L^2(\Omega )} / || \nabla \phi ^\eps_h ||_{L^2(\Omega )}$\
$0.1-0.1$ & 1.05 & 2.53 & 2.53 & $1.5 \times 10^{-1}$\
$0.05-0.05$ & 1.02 & 2.54 & 2.54 & $7.7 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.025-0.025$ & 1.01 & 2.54 & 2.54 & $3.9 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.0125-0.0125$ & 1.00 & 2.53 & 2.53 & $1.9 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.00625-0.00625$ & 1.00 & 2.53 & 2.53 & $9.8 \times 10^{-3}$\
\
$\alpha = 0$, $\eps = 1$\
[|c||c|c|c|c|]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$h_1$–$h_2$ & $ei^{ZZ}$ & $ei^{A}$ & $ei^{SA}$ & $|| \nabla (\phi
^\eps_h -\phi ^\eps) ||_{L^2(\Omega )} / || \nabla \phi ^\eps_h ||_{L^2(\Omega )}$\
$0.1-0.1$ & 0.99 & 4.74 & 4.68 & $8.0 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.05-0.05$ & 0.99 & 4.78 & 4.71 & $4.1 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.025-0.025$ & 0.96 & 4.76 & 4.67 & $2.1 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.0125-0.0125$ & 0.93 & 4.89 & 4.65 & $1.1 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.00625-0.00625$ & 0.87 & 5.08 & 4.68 & $6.1 \times 10^{-3}$\
\
$\alpha = 0$, $\eps = 10^{-10}$\
[|c||c|c|c|c|]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$h_1$–$h_2$ & $ei^{ZZ}$ & $ei^{A}$ & $ei^{SA}$ & $|| \nabla (\phi
^\eps_h -\phi ^\eps) ||_{L^2(\Omega )} / || \nabla \phi ^\eps_h ||_{L^2(\Omega )}$\
$0.1-0.1$ & 1.05 & 2.54 & 2.54 & $1.5 \times 10^{-1}$\
$0.05-0.05$ & 1.02 & 2.54 & 2.54 & $7.7 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.025-0.025$ & 1.01 & 2.54 & 2.54 & $3.9 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.0125-0.0125$ & 1.00 & 2.53 & 2.53 & $1.9 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.00625-0.00625$ & 1.00 & 2.53 & 2.53 & $9.9 \times 10^{-3}$\
\
$\alpha = 2$, $\eps = 1$\
[|c||c|c|c|c|]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$h_1$–$h_2$ & $ei^{ZZ}$ & $ei^{A}$ & $ei^{SA}$ & $|| \nabla (\phi
^\eps_h -\phi ^\eps) ||_{L^2(\Omega )} / || \nabla \phi ^\eps_h ||_{L^2(\Omega )}$\
$0.1-0.1$ & 0.99 & 4.07 & 3.99 & $ 1.1 \times 10^{-1}$\
$0.05-0.05$ & 0.98 & 4.24 & 4.07 & $ 5.4 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.025-0.025$ & 0.97 & 4.30 & 4.09 & $ 2.7 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.0125-0.0125$ & 0.94 & 4.41 & 4.08 & $ 1.4 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.00625-0.00625$ & 0.90 & 4.69 & 4.19 & $ 7.5 \times 10^{-3}$\
\
$\alpha = 2$, $\eps = 10^{-10}$
Table \[tab:ei\_iso\] shows the numerical results for isotropic unstructured meshes in different regimes. In the case of no anisotropy ($\eps =1$) the Zienkiewicz-Zhu error estimator converges to true error as $h$ goes to zero. The simplified and full effectivity indexes are the same and converge also to a constant value. In the case of small anisotropy ($\eps = 10^{-10}$) the effectivity index for Zienkiewicz-Zhu error estimator is close to one for all testes isotropic meshes in the case of variable anisotropy direction. However, its value seems to decrease with the mesh size meaning that the estimator slightly underestimate the true error for fine meshes. The divergence is observed for a constant direction of anisotropy and small value of $\eps$. This shows that the Zienkiewicz-Zhu error indicator is not always equivalent to the true error. The stabilized Asymptotic Preserving scheme converges to the exact solution in all four cases with the optimal convergence rate. Table \[tab:ei\_aniso\_bc\] presents the numerical results corresponding to the of large anisotropy aligned with the coordinate system. This time we are interested in the behavior of the error indicators when the mesh refinement is anisotropic. In the first table the mesh is refined in the direction perpendicular to the anisotropy direction with aspect ration ranging from 10 to 1280. In this case the Zienkiewicz-Zhu remains constant and close to 1. The relative error converges until the aspect ratio of 80 is reached. The effectivity index for the full error indicator increases from $6.28$ to $15.6$ with the mesh size until the aspect ratio reaches the value of 160. At the same time the effectivity index for the simplified error indicator is between $5.57$ and $6.64$. This suggests that the latter could perform better in the anisotropic mesh refinement. Its effectivity index does not seem to depend on the aspect ration wen the mesh is refined in the “right” direction (perpendicular to the anisotropy).
Next, the influence of the mesh refinement in the “wrong” (parallel to the anisotropy) direction is performed. For aspect ration ranging from 1 to 16 the divergence of the $ei^{ZZ}$ and the relative error is clearly observed. In fact, all effectivity indexes approach zero with the refinement. The last table displays the results of the convergence of $ei^{ZZ}$ in the case of anisotropic mesh with aspect ration 4 and triangles aligned in the “wrong” direction. In this case, when the mesh is refined in both direction, the effectivity index for Zienkiewicz-Zhu error estimator approaches 1. The effectivity indexes of both error indicator diverge.
[|c||c|c|c|c|]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$h_1$–$h_2$ & $ei^{ZZ}$ & $ei^{A}$ & $ei^{SA}$ & $|| \nabla (\phi
^\eps_h -\phi ^\eps) ||_{L^2(\Omega )} / || \nabla \phi ^\eps_h ||_{L^2(\Omega )}$\
$0.1-0.01$ & 0.98 & 6.28 & 5.83 & $7.8 \times 10^{-3}$\
$0.1-0.005$ & 0.97 & 7.68 & 6.09 & $4.3 \times 10^{-3}$\
$0.1-0.0025$ & 0.95 & 10.6 & 6.20 & $2.5 \times 10^{-3}$\
$0.1-0.00125$ & 0.93 & 14.2 & 6.64 & $1.7 \times 10^{-3}$\
$0.1-0.000625$ & 0.95 & 15.6 & 5.57 & $1.6 \times 10^{-3}$\
$0.1-0.0003125$ & 0.98 & 9.88 & 3.94 & $2.3 \times 10^{-3}$\
$0.1-0.00015625$ & 0.97 & 9.20 & 4.01 & $2.2 \times 10^{-3}$\
$0.1-0.000078125$ & 0.98 & 5.09 & 2.95 & $3.1 \times 10^{-3}$\
\
Aspect ratio from 1:10 to 1:1280\
[|c||c|c|c|c|]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$h_1$–$h_2$ & $ei^{ZZ}$ & $ei^{A}$ & $ei^{SA}$ & $|| \nabla (\phi
^\eps_h -\phi ^\eps) ||_{L^2(\Omega )} / || \nabla \phi ^\eps_h ||_{L^2(\Omega )}$\
$0.1 -0.1$ & 0.99 & 4.74 & 4.68 & $8.0 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.05-0.1$ & 0.91 & 4.56 & 4.33 & $1.2 \times 10^{-1}$\
$0.025-0.1$ & 0.32 & 4.75 & 4.04 & $4.4 \times 10^{-1}$\
$0.0125-0.1$ & 0.005 & 0.44 & 0.36 & $5.2 \times 10^{1}$\
$0.00625-0.1$ & 0.0002 & 0.075 & 0.059 & $1.9 \times 10^{3}$\
\
Aspect ratio from 1:1 to 16:1\
[|c||c|c|c|c|]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$h_1$–$h_2$ & $ei^{ZZ}$ & $ei^{A}$ & $ei^{SA}$ & $|| \nabla (\phi
^\eps_h -\phi ^\eps) ||_{L^2(\Omega )} / || \nabla \phi ^\eps_h ||_{L^2(\Omega )}$\
$0.025-0.1$ & 0.32 & 4.75 & 4.04 & $4.4 \times 10^{-1}$\
$0.0125-0.05$ & 0.40 & 6.66 & 5.66 & $2.0 \times 10^{-1}$\
$0.00625-0.025$ & 0.53 & 8.86 & 7.53 & $7.4 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.003125-0.0125$ & 0.55 & 9.54 & 8.09 & $3.6 \times 10^{-2}$\
$0.0015625-0.00625$ & 0.69 & 12.87 & 10.09 & $1.4 \times 10^{-2}$\
\
Aspect ratio 4:1
### Mesh adaptation
We now apply our adaptive algorithm to build a sequence triangulations in the following way starting from an isotropic unstructured grid with $h=0.02$. At every iteration of the algorithm the error indicator is used to construct a subsequent mesh. We compare results of the simplified and full error indicators in various regimes: small and large anisotropy, $b$ direction constant and variable. We focus on the resulting mesh size and error in the $H^1$-norm as well as on the error convergence in terms of prescribed tolerance $TOL$.
Let $\Omega = (0,1) \times (0,1)$, the anisotropy direction is given by (\[eq:J99a\]). We set $A_\perp = A_\parallel = 1$. We choose $\phi^\varepsilon $ to be a function that converges to the limit solution $\phi^{0}$ as $\varepsilon \rightarrow 0$: $$\begin{gathered}
\phi^{0} = \sin \left(\pi y +\alpha (y^2-y)\cos (\pi x) \right)
e^{-(\frac{\pi y +\alpha (y^2-y)\cos (\pi x) - 0.5}{\delta})^2}
, \\
\phi^{\varepsilon } = \sin \left(\pi y +\alpha (y^2-y)\cos (\pi
x) \right)
e^{-(\frac{\pi y +\alpha (y^2-y)\cos (\pi x) - 0.5}{\delta})^2}
+ \varepsilon \cos \left( 2\pi x\right) \sin \left(\pi
y \right)
\label{eq:Jc0a}.\end{gathered}$$ Finally, the force term is calculated accordingly. The limit solution is nothing else than the limit solution from previous section multiplied by a Gaussian following the anisotropy direction. The parameter $\delta$ controls the width of the exponential part. Setting $\delta = 0.1$ in our simulations yields a solution which has a strong gradient in the direction perpendicular to the anisotropy direction in a small subregion of a computational domain. The adaptive algorithm should be able to capture this strong variation of the solution and produce a mesh that is much finer in this subregion than in the remaining part of the domain.
$ $
#### Small anisotropy $\eps =1$, constant and variable direction of $b$ ($\alpha = 0$ and $\alpha = 2$)
$ $
In the first two test cases the adaptive algorithm is studied in the $\eps =1$ regime, [*i.e.*]{} when no anisotropy is present. In this case the two error indicators : full and simplified are equivalent.
[|c||c|c|c|c|c|]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$TOL$ & $err$ & $NV$ & $ei^{ZZ}$ & $ei^{A}$ & $ei^{SA}$\
0.25 & 0.096 & 698 & 1.03 & 2.55 & 2.55\
0.125 & 0.048 & 2457 & 1.01 & 2.54 & 2.54\
0.0625 & 0.024 & 8834 & 1.00 & 2.57 & 2.57\
0.03125 & 0.012 & 34587 & 1.00 & 2.54 & 2.54\
[|c||c|c|c|c|c|]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$TOL$ & $err$ & $NV$ & $ei^{ZZ}$ & $ei^{A}$ & $ei^{SA}$\
0.25 & 0.094 & 785 & 1.03 & 2.58 & 2.58\
0.125 & 0.047 & 2696 & 1.01 & 2.59 & 2.59\
0.0625 & 0.024 & 10141 & 1.00 & 2.59 & 2.59\
0.03125 & 0.012 & 39035 & 1.00 & 2.58 & 2.58\
Tables \[tab:adapt\_bc\_e1\] and \[tab:adapt\_bv\_e1\] show the results for $b$ field with constant and variable direction respectively. The values in the tables are given after 15 iterations of mesh adaptation algorithm. In both cases the optimal convergence is obtained. The true error is clearly related to the prescribed error tolerance $TOL$ and the node number is multiplied by 4 every time $TOL$ is divided by 2. The Z-Z effectivity index converges to 1 with $TOL$ and the values of indexes for error indicators remain almost constant. This is not surprising since in this case the proposed error indicators reduce to the standard [*a posteriori*]{} error indicator studied before. The adapted meshes are presented on Figure \[fig:mesh\_eps1\].
Numerical relative error obtained on the isotropic uniform mesh with $h=0.00625$ (31325 mesh points) give the relative error equal to $0.021$, which is comparable with the results obtained for $TOL=0.0625$. The adapted giving the same numerical precision are three times smaller.
\
$ $
#### constant direction of $b$ ($\alpha = 0$), large anisotropy $\eps =10^{-10}$
$ $
In the next test case we consider large anisotropy $\eps = 10^{-10}$ and aligned $b$ direction. The simplified error indicator and the full error indicator are no longer equivalent. The results presented in Table \[tab:adapt\_bc\_e-10\] display the true error and effectivity indexes obtained by applying those two different algorithms. In this particular case we display results after 30 mesh adaptations. The number is bigger than in previous case in order to allow the algorithm to fully converge and exploit the reduced dimensionality of this particular test. Note that in both cases the true error is comparable and converges with $TOL$. The Zienkiewicz-Zhu effectivity index is close to 1 for both error indicator. The aspect ratio for the smallest $TOL$ studied is over 500. The simplified error indicator seems to perform better : the mesh size for the smallest $TOL$ tested is three times smaller than for the full error indicator. The relative $H^1$ error is also slightly smaller for the simplified error indicator. The adapted meshes are presented on Figure \[fig:mesh\_bcst\_eps1e-10\].
Numerical relative error obtained on the isotropic uniform mesh with $h=0.00625$ (31325 mesh points) give the relative error equal to $0.035$, which is comparable with the results obtained for $TOL=0.0625$. The adapted giving the same numerical precision are 115 (40) times smaller for the simplified (full) error indicator.
[|c||c|c|c|c|c|c|]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$TOL$ & $err$ & $NV$ & $(\frac{h_2}{h_1})_{max}$& $(\frac{h_2}{h_1})_{avg}$ & $ei^{ZZ}$ & $ei^{A}$\
0.25 & 0.072 & 272 & 67 & 12 & 1.01 & 3.20\
0.125 & 0.037 & 758 & 86 & 14 & 1.01 & 3.26\
0.0625 & 0.018 & 2435 & 91 & 17 & 0.99 & 3.32\
0.03125 & 0.0093 & 6642 & 296 & 23 & 0.98 & 3.28\
\
full error indicator\
[|c||c|c|c|c|c|c|]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$TOL$ & $err$ & $NV$ & $(\frac{h_2}{h_1})_{max}$& $(\frac{h_2}{h_1})_{avg}$ & $ei^{ZZ}$ & $ei^{SA}$\
0.25 & 0.060 & 105 & 130 & 35 & 1.01 & 3.65\
0.125 & 0.031 & 271 & 224 & 48 & 1.00 & 3.49\
0.0625 & 0.016 & 652 & 501 & 87 & 0.98 & 3.74\
0.03125 & 0.0076 & 2018 & 536 & 106 & 0.99 & 4.07\
\
simplified error indicator\
$ $
#### variable direction of $b$ ($\alpha = 2$), large anisotropy $\eps =10^{-10}$
$ $
In the last studied test case we have applied the mesh adaptation algorithm to the problem with large anisotropy with variable direction. Table \[tab:adapt\_bv\_e1\] shows obtained results of numerical simulations. The simplified error indicator performs more efficiently than the full error indicator. Poor performance of the full error indicator for the smallest tolerance is caused by the perpendicular derivatives of $q^\eps_h$ which cause the over refinement in the direction perpendicular to the anisotropy direction. The resulting mesh is almost eight times bigger. For smaller values of the tolerance the difference in mesh sizes is much smaller and the meshes constructed for the full error indicator give slightly better precision. In both cases the Z-Z error estimator is close to 1. The adapted meshes are presented on Figure \[fig:mesh\_bvar\_eps1e-10\].
Numerical relative error obtained on the isotropic uniform mesh with $h=0.00625$ (31325 mesh points) give the relative error equal to $0.038$, which is comparable with the results obtained for $TOL=0.0625$. The adapted giving the same numerical precision are 20 (10) times smaller for the simplified (full) error indicator.
[|c||c|c|c|c|c|c|]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$TOL$ & $err$ & $NV$ & $(\frac{h_2}{h_1})_{max}$& $(\frac{h_2}{h_1})_{avg}$ & $ei^{ZZ}$ & $ei^{A}$\
0.5 & 0.137 & 183 & 16 & 5.4 & 1.04 & 3.21\
0.25 & 0.070 & 587 & 21 & 5.8 & 1.01 & 3.45\
0.125 & 0.033 & 3195 & 54 & 8.2 & 0.99 & 3.83\
0.0625 & 0.015 & 52658 & 165 & 17 & 0.98 & 4.88\
\
full error indicator\
[|c||c|c|c|c|c|c|]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$TOL$ & $err$ & $NV$ & $(\frac{h_2}{h_1})_{max}$& $(\frac{h_2}{h_1})_{avg}$ & $ei^{ZZ}$ & $ei^{A}$\
0.5 & 0.15 & 138 & 27 & 5.98 & 1.03 & 3.18\
0.25 & 0.073 & 445 & 25 & 6.88 & 1.01 & 3.34\
0.125 & 0.037 & 1720 & 33 & 7.07 & 1.00 & 3.29\
0.0625 & 0.018 & 6884 & 43 & 7.48 & 0.97 & 3.36\
\
simplified error indicator\
Conclusion
==========
A stabilized Asymptotic Preserving method for strongly anisotropic Laplace equation has been proposed and tested numerically. The error indicators including first order derivatives has been developed for this reformulated problem. Numerical experiments show the performance of the remeshing routine. The resulting meshes are considerably smaller by the factor from 3 to 115 than the isotropic uniform grids giving the same precision. The biggest gain is obtained for strong anisotropy in the constant direction.
[^1]: Université de Toulouse, UPS, Institut de Mathématiques de Toulouse, F-31062 Toulouse, France
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
The H II region W40 harbors a small group of young, hot stars behind roughly 9 magnitudes of visual extinction. We have detected gaseous carbon monoxide (CO) and diatomic carbon (C$_2$) in absorption toward the star W 40 IRS 1a. The 2-0 R0, R1, and R2 lines of $^{12}$CO at 2.3 $\mu$m were measured using the CSHELL on the NASA IR Telescope Facility (with upper limits placed on R3, R4, and R5) yielding an $N_{CO}$ of $(1.1 \pm 0.2) \times 10^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$. Excitation analysis indicates $T_{kin} > 7$ K. The Phillips system of C$_2$ transitions near 8775 Å was measured using the Kitt Peak 4-m telescope and echelle spectrometer. Radiative pumping models indicate a total C$_2$ column density of $(7.0 \pm 0.4)
\times 10^{14}$ cm$^{-2}$, two excitation temperatures (39 and 126 K), and a total gas density of $n \sim 250$ cm$^{-3}$. The CO ice band at 4.7 was not detected, placing an upper limit on the CO depletion of $\delta < 1\%$. We postulate that the sightline has multiple translucent components and is associated with the W40 molecular cloud. Our data for [W40 IRS 1a]{} coupled with other sightlines, shows that the ratio of CO/[C$_2$]{} increases from diffuse through translucent environs. Finally, we show that the hydrogen to dust ratio seems to remain constant from diffuse to dense environments, while the CO to dust ratio apparently does not.
author:
- 'R. Young Shuping and Theodore P. Snow'
- Richard Crutcher
- 'Barry L. Lutz'
title: 'CO and C$_2$ Absorption Toward W40 IRS 1a'
---
Introduction
============
Molecular species are useful diagnostics for understanding the physics and chemistry of the interstellar medium (ISM), and have been studied in various ways for many years. Most molecules are observed in dense molecular clouds via rotational emission lines in the radio band. These emission studies are indispensable to our understanding of galactic ecology and the ISM: They yield maps of dense regions, have very high spectral (velocity) resolution, and allow us to study complex molecules not otherwise observable.
There are some drawbacks to molecular emission studies, however. First, analysis of the line excitation is very model-dependent and can lead to significant systematic errors. Second, since spatial resolution is typically low (and varies from species to species), it is sometimes hard to discern whether emission from different species comes from the same location within a cloud. This makes comparisons among species difficult.
Molecular absorption line observations have some important advantages over emission line studies. First, absorption from different species observed in the same line of sight are more likely to coexist spatially, thus reducing geometrical ambiguities and allowing more reliable inter-species comparisons. Second, because the unexcited molecules are observed directly, column density determinations are not as model-dependent as for emission studies, and hence more accurate. Third, some molecular species (notably H$_2$ and [C$_2$]{}) are essentially unobservable in the radio due to lack of a dipole moment. These species can sometimes be observed via electronic transitions in the ultraviolet (e.g., [@sb82]), or through rotational-vibrational transitions in the visible or infrared (e.g. [@fetal94]; [@letal94]). And finally, molecular abundances derived from absorption measures can easily be compared to line-of-sight bulk properties (e.g., extinction, polarization, and atomic abundances) which are also derived from absorption measures.
CO and [C$_2$]{} have transitions at 2.3 $\mu$m and 8775 Å, respectively, which can be observed in absorption. The primary drawback to studying molecular absorption lines in the infrared (IR) is finding a suitable background star. The target must be bright in the IR yet fortuitously placed behind a substantial amount of absorbing material.
In our effort to find background sources for absorption line studies in regions also accessible to emission-line studies, we have selected the target [W40 IRS 1a]{}, an OB star embedded within the radio source W40. This source appears well-suited for our purposes; Though dim in the visible ($V
= 15.0$) it is bright in the IR ($K = 5.6$), and lies behind about 9 magnitudes of extinction in $V$ ([$A_V$]{}). W40 itself is a blister-type region breaking out of a local molecular cloud, about 400 pc away towards the galactic center ([@zl78]; [@cc82]). A group of hot stars (most likely B-class) is bathing the region with ionizing radiation; W40 IRS 2a (OS 2a) seems to be producing most of the energy ([@setal85]). IRS 1a is brighter than 2a in the optical and near-IR indicating somewhat greater extinction toward IRS 2a. Crutcher and Chu (1982) mapped $^{12}$CO and $^{13}$CO, HCO$^+$, HCN and H$\alpha$ emission toward W40, generating a comprehensive kinematic interpretation of the region. Vallée et al. (1987, 1991, 1992, and 1994) have done extensive studies on the properties of the molecular cloud and its interaction with the region using recombination lines, radio continuum emission, and CO emission. The existence of circumstellar dust shells around W40 IRS 1a, 2a and 3a ($T \sim
250-350$ K and $M < 0.1 M_\odot$) has been suggested based on broad-band IR imaging and continuum measurements in the millimeter and sub-millimeter ([@setal85]; [@vm94]).
Both CO and [C$_2$]{} are important interstellar molecules. CO is the most abundant molecule in the ISM after molecular hydrogen, and has a number of important roles: The CO emission lines at 2.6 mm and shorter are not only responsible for cooling molecular clouds but also serve as tracers for H$_2$ and dense molecular gas (e.g., [@mo95] and references therein). [C$_2$]{} is much less abundant than CO and has been observed primarily in diffuse and translucent clouds (e.g. [@vdb89]; [@lsf95]). Like H$_2$, C$_2$ has no dipole moment and hence no pure rotational spectrum. It is a very useful diagnostic of cloud physical conditions such as kinetic temperature, density, and radiation field intensity ([@vdb82]; [@vd84]). Both CO and [C$_2$]{} are important to carbon chemistry everywhere in the ISM.
CO absorption at 2.3 $\mu$m ($v = 2 - 0$) has not been observed as frequently as the v = 1 - 0 band at 4.7 $\mu$m, most likely owing to the smaller transition probabilities. It is, however, easier to observe at 2.3 $\mu$m since the thermal background from the Earth’s atmosphere is much lower than at 4.7 $\mu$m. Black and Willner (1984) and Black et al. (1990) used the lines at 2.3 $\mu$m to study the physical conditions and chemistry toward NGC 2024, NGC 2264 and AFGL 2591. Recently, Lacy et al. (1994) were able to observe both CO and H$_2$ absorption near 2.3 $\mu$m toward NGC 2024 IRS 2 yielding for the first time a direct measure of the H$_2$/CO ratio in a molecular cloud.
Absorption lines of [C$_2$]{} have been used to address a number of problems in the ISM, including: Diffuse interstellar cloud chemistry (e.g. [@lsf95]), carbon chemistry in translucent clouds (e.g. [@vdb89]), molecular cloud envelopes (e.g. [@fetal94]), and the line of sight structure toward $\zeta$ Oph (e.g. [@crawford97]). Federman et al. (1994) provide a good compilation of [C$_2$]{} measurements up to 1992.
In this paper we report on absorption-line studies of CO and [C$_2$]{} toward [W40 IRS 1a]{}. The line of sight is discussed in the next section. In Section 3 we describe our observations and the results, and in Section 4 we discuss their implication for the physical state of the material in this line of sight. The final section contains a brief summary of our conclusions.
Line Of Sight
=============
Very little is known about the interstellar sightline to [W40 IRS 1a]{}. Both Crutcher and Chu (1982) and Smith et al. (1985) infer $A_V \sim 9$. The average extinction due to diffuse material over 400 pc is about 0.6 mag (see [@s78], p. 155). Therefore the obscuring material is most likely local to the W40 region and more dense than the diffuse ISM. In addition, Crutcher and Chu (1982) found a molecular [$^{13}$CO]{} component in front of the W40 region with $V_{LSR} = 8$ km s$^{-1}$, $N_{CO} \simeq 1.2 \times 10^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$, and $\log{(nT)}
\sim 4$, further suggesting that the sightline passes through cold material, most likely associated with the neighboring molecular cloud.
The line of sight intersects at least 3 distinct physical regimes. As noted above there appears to be some cold foreground material, perhaps associated with the nearby molecular cloud. Closer to [W40 IRS 1a]{} there must be a photon-dominated region (PDR), and closer still, the W40 region itself. If [W40 IRS 1a]{} has a circumstellar dust shell, it is not clear what its effect on the CO and [C$_2$]{} spectra might be. A warm dust shell might be associated with an elevated gas temperature, and hence the appearance of high-$J$ molecular rotational lines.
The region is roughly 0.9 pc across and has an electron density of 200 cm$^{-3}$ (based on results in Crutcher and Chu \[1982\] and a distance of 400 pc). The column density of ionized hydrogen associated with the region should be about $3 \times
10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$, assuming spherical geometry and that all hydrogen is ionized. Using the relation of total hydrogen column density to extinction found in Bohlin, Savage, & Drake (1978), the region should contribute $A_V \sim 0.1$ mag to the line-of-sight extinction. This, of course, assumes a standard gas-to-dust ratio, which may not apply to regions in general. The contribution to [$A_V$]{} could increase or decrease depending primarily on the nature of any grain-destroying shocks which may have passed through the region. In either case, the region probably does not strongly contribute to the total extinction on the line of sight to [W40 IRS 1a]{}. In addition, molecules like CO and [C$_2$]{} cannot survive in the harsh environment, so the region should not contribute to the line-absorption for these molecules either.
There is almost surely a photon-dominated region (PDR) on the line of sight to [W40 IRS 1a]{}, which could account for as much as $A_V \sim 10$, nearly the entire measured visual extinction (see [@hollenbach90] for a good discussion). Hydrogen is expected to be neutral or molecular throughout the PDR. CO and perhaps [C$_2$]{} cannot survive in the regions of the PDR closest to the region. The effect of dust in PDRs is poorly understood, and so a quantitative treatment of these regions in general is difficult.
In summary, CO and [C$_2$]{} absorption lines should sample the cold material in the foreground, at least part of the PDR, and none of the region. A circumstellar dust shell, if it exists, would most likely only contribute to high-$J$ molecular absorption. The visual extinction ($A_V
\sim 9$) should arise almost entirely in the foreground material (which may be part of the local molecular cloud) and the PDR, though we note that the PDR could in theory produce all of the observed extinction.
Data and Analysis for [$^{12}$CO]{} and [C$_2$]{} toward [W40 IRS 1a]{}
=======================================================================
C$_2$ Observations at 8775 Å
----------------------------
The observations of [W40 IRS 1a]{} were obtained with the Cassegrain echelle spectrograph and the RCA CCD camera on the 4-m Mayall telescope at Kitt Peak National Observatory on the night of UT 16 June 1983. Two spectra, each of one hour’s duration, were recorded in the region of the 2-0 band of the Phillips system (A$^1 \Pi_u$ – X$^1 \Sigma_g^+$) of [C$_2$]{}. The entire 2-0 band was contained in a single order with its center near 8775 Å and with a nominal reciprocal dispersion of 0.074 Å per pixel at the face of the CCD chip. Quartz lamp and thorium-argon spectra were obtained for flat-fielding and wavelength calibration. An 84 $\mu$m wide slit was employed, providing a nominal resolution of 0.15 Å which in turn corresponds to approximately 2 pixels on the chip.
The two consecutive one-hour frames were co-added and averaged. Similarly, two separate flat-field frames were co-added and averaged, and the result was divided into the averaged stellar frame to produce the final photometric spectrum. Both flat-field and stellar frames were bias-corrected. The average of fifteen bias frames was first subtracted from the flat-field and stellar frames, after which a second-order bias correction was accomplished by subtracting from the average stellar and flat-field frames the mean row biases obtained from the masked bias columns of each.
The final spectrum was extracted by collapsing the three columns along the slit direction which contained the maximum signal. This spectrum is shown in Figure 1. Spikes are due to cosmic ray hits and possibly OH airglow lines. Rotational lines in all three branches (P, Q and R) were identified, with the rotational quantum number $J$ reaching as high as 12 for the Q-branch. Unfortunately, there were problems with the wavelength calibration at the telescope and we were not able to derive a precise measure for the radial velocities of the [C$_2$]{} lines. Equivalent widths for these lines were determined using standard spectral reduction procedures in the NOAO/IRAF package, and column densities for each of the rotational levels were calculated from the rotational lines using a simple Gaussian curve-of-growth (c.f. [@s78]). Initially, the $f$-value derived by Erman et al. (1982) was used. Recently, the Phillips system transition probabilities have been refined (see [@lsf95] and references therein) and the column densities have been adjusted to reflect the new $f$-value derived by Lambert, Sheffer, and Federman (1995), $(1.23 \pm 0.16) \times 10^{-3}$. The data for each line and the column densities for each $J$ are shown in Tables 1 and 2. Several of the lines exhibited effects of saturation, and an estimate of the Doppler constant ($b$) was derived by requiring that rotational lines originating from the same rotational energy level yield the same rotational population for that level. This method is a simple extension of the doublet ratio method used in the analysis of saturated atomic species. The best value for the Doppler constant was found to be 1.25 km s$^{-1}$. The $J = 12$ data are not included due to high uncertainty: Only the Q12 line was observed and it is very weak.
[$^{12}$CO]{} Observations at 2.3 $\mu$m
----------------------------------------
The $v=2-0$ rotational-vibrational lines for CO fall near 2.3 $\mu$m, within the K band. Since the oscillator strengths are smaller, the $v=2-0$ lines are not as saturated as their $v=1-0$ cousins at 4.7 $\mu$m. In addition, it is somewhat easier to observe at 2.3 $\mu$m, as the sky emission at 4.7 $\mu$m is much greater and more problematic. Contamination from stellar CO absorption should be negligible since [W40 IRS 1a]{} appears to be a hot O or B star, which would not allow stellar CO to survive ([@cc82]; [@setal85]). Circumstellar gas and dust, if it exists, could affect the high-$J$ molecular levels.
Ro-vib transitions at 2.3 $\mu$m for [$^{12}$CO]{} were observed UT 11 June 1994 and UT 21 July 1997 using the CSHELL IR spectrometer at NASAs Infrared Telescope Facility (IRTF) on Mauna Kea. The IRTF is a 3 meter primary, off-axis cassegrain yielding f/13.67 at the spectrometer slit. The CSHELL is a cryogenically cooled echelle spectrometer with a 256 x 256 SBRC InSb detector array ([@greene93]). We used the 0.5 slit which gives $R
\simeq 43,000$. Only the R0, 1, and 2 transitions were detected (Figure 3) with upper limits placed on R3, 4 and 5. A summary of the observations is shown in Table 3. The data were obtained and reduced following typical IR observing procedures which we briefly summarize below.
Dark frames were coadded and subtracted from the flat-field image for each wavelength setting. [W40 IRS 1a]{} and the standard stars were observed in both the “A” and “B” beams (each beam places the spectrum in a different spatial location on the detector). Beam differences (A-B and B-A) were calculated to eliminate sky emission, then coadded and normalized using the flat field for the appropriate wavelength setting. Wavelength calibration was achieved using Ar, Kr, and Xe lamps with 3 lines per wavelength setting. One dimensional spectra for [W40 IRS 1a]{}, the standard stars, and the calibration lamps were then extracted from the detector images using the APALL task in IRAF.
Once the wavelength solution was applied, telluric absorption features were identified in both the standard stars and [W40 IRS 1a]{} spectra. Telluric lines were eliminated from the [W40 IRS 1a]{} spectra using the IRAF task TELLURIC, which shifts and scales the standard star spectrum before dividing into the object spectrum. It is important to note that merely dividing the standard star spectrum into the object spectrum does not produce the [*true*]{} object spectrum without telluric features. To properly remove telluric features, one must generate an [*expected*]{} object spectrum, convolve it with the standard star spectrum, and compare to the actual observed object spectrum. Lacy et al. (1994) give a good discussion of this technique. We opted to merely divide, however, as our data quality did not warrant more sophisticated techniques.
The R0, 1, and 2 lines are shown in Figure 3. These lines imply $v_{lsr} = 2 \pm 2$ km s$^{-1}$, in contrast with the 8 km s$^{-1}$ foreground molecular material seen in emission ([@cc82]). Since emission line data sample a large, beam-averaged area, and absorption lines just a pencil beam, we do not necessarily expect velocities derived from both to agree. We merely note that they are not wildly different.
$R = 43,000$ corresponds to a resolution of $\Delta v \simeq 7$ km s$^{-1}$. The R0, 1, and 2 lines all have FWHM $\sim 8$ km s$^{-1}$ and hence are not well-resolved. After continuum normalization, each line was directly integrated for equivalent width. Errors reflect continuum placement ambiguity and are of high confidence ($2\sigma$). All the widths (along with transition information and errors) are given in Table 4. Widths for the R3, R4 and R5 lines are 2$\sigma$ upper limits based on the noise in the continuum at the expected line position.
The equivalent width of any absorption line is dependent on the column density of the species and, if saturated, the velocity parameter [*b*]{} (c.f. [@s78]). We generated a model curve of growth (COG) using $b = 1.25$ km s$^{-1}$, as determined from the C$_2$ lines. Each [$^{12}$CO]{} equivalent width was fit to the COG independently and the column density for each rotational level ($N_J$) is given in Table 5. The R2 through R5 lines were clearly optically thin while the R0 and R1 lines were more optically thick, falling on the transition from the linear portion to the saturated part of the COG. If the $b$-value for CO is greater than 1.25 km s$^{-1}$, then the R0 and R1 lines become more optically thin and their abundances drop by 2 and 0.5 $\times
10^{17}$ cm$^{-2}$ respectively. Summing the abundances for each line gives a total column density of $N_{CO} = (1.1 \pm 0.2) \times 10^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$ (assuming $^{12}$CO to be the dominant isotope). Depending on the excitation of the higher $J$ levels, this value could be slightly too small, and if $b > 1.25$ km s$^{-1}$, then it would be too high. Our column density for CO is nearly identical to that inferred by Crutcher & Chu (1982) for the foreground, $N_{CO}
\simeq 1.2 \times 10^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$.
CO Ice Band at 4.7
-------------------
In an effort to detect the CO ice band at 4.7 we made observations with moderate spectral resolution at the United Kingdom IR Telescope (UKIRT) using the CGS4 on 19 August 1998. All observations were carried out while nodding along the slit to remove atmospheric emission. The total integration time on [W40 IRS 1a]{} was 11.2 minutes at an average airmass of 1.45. The spectrum for [W40 IRS 1a]{} was ratioed by BS 7236 (B9V) to remove telluric absorption features. The S/N is $\sim 44$ at 4.67 and no CO ice feature is apparent. An upper limit for the optical depth of the band is $\tau_{4.67} < 0.02$ (2$\sigma$), implying $N_{CO}(Ice) < 10^{16}$ cm$^{-2}$ ([@ta87]). The depletion of CO into icy mantles for the [W40 IRS 1a]{} sightline must be less than 1 %.
Discussion
==========
Excitation Conditions and the Foreground Cloud Physical Properties
------------------------------------------------------------------
We have three basic diagnostics for the temperature and density toward [W40 IRS 1a]{}. The $^{13}$CO emission data imply $\log{(nT)} \sim 4$, much lower than the nearby molecular cloud, $\log{(nT)} \sim 6.5$ ([@cc82]). Excitation conditions can also be derived from the rotational populations of CO and [C$_2$]{}.
The rotational level populations of the [C$_2$]{} Phillips system ($v
= 0,J$) are attained via radiative pumping. Lifetimes of these levels are so long that collisions and upward electronic transitions are the most important depopulation mechanisms. Hence the rotational populations reflect the competition between pumping and collisions and are non-thermal in general ([@vdb82]). For densities greater than $100$ cm$^{-3}$ the $J = 0$ and $J = 2$ levels are very nearly thermal. Otherwise, the populations depend on the thermal temperature, $T$, and the radiation parameter, $\frac{n_c \sigma}{I_R}$, where $n_c$ is the collision partner density (usually $n($H$) + n($H$_2)$), $\sigma$ is the effective cross section for collisional de-excitation, and $I_R$ is the scaling factor for the radiation field in the far-red ([@vdb82]).
Total molecular abundance and excitation temperatures were calculated from models which fit a Maxwell-Boltzmann population distribution to the observed rotational level abundances. As had been found for other relatively dense clouds ([@lc83]), the rotational abundances could not be fit with a single temperature distribution, presumably as a result of radiative pumping ([@chaffee80]; [@vdb82]). Consequently, we fit these data with a two-temperature model used by Lutz and Crutcher (1983): J-levels 4 through 10 were fit with an excitation temperature ($T_{ex}$) of 126 K, which we associate with the effects of radiative pumping. After correcting the populations in J = 0 and 2 for the contributions from the 126 K population distribution, we derived a J=2/J=0 excitation temperature of 39 K, which we associate with the thermal distribution of the gas. The resulting total column density of [C$_2$]{} towards [W40 IRS 1a]{} is $(7.0 \pm 0.4) \times 10^{14}$ cm$^{-2}$, based on a Boltzmann distribution for both temperatures. This is the highest column density of [C$_2$]{} yet seen in absorption. Figure 2 shows the final fits.
In comparing the results for [W40 IRS 1a]{} to the radiative pumping models calculated by van Dishoeck (1984), we found that they are best characterized by her model with a kinetic temperature of 40 K and a radiation parameter, $\frac{n_c \sigma}{I_R}$ of $5.27 \times 10^{-14}$. Assuming $I_R = 1$, $\sigma \sim 2 \times 10^{-16}$ cm$^2$ ([@vdb89]), and that hydrogen ( + H$_2$) is the only important collision partner, we get $n_H \sim 250$ cm$^{-3}$ for the [W40 IRS 1a]{}sightline. Since the value of $\sigma$ is not known to better than a factor of 2 ([@vdb89]), our value for $n_H$ is equally imprecise. In addition, for an enhanced (or depleted) radiation field, the estimated collision (hydrogen) density would scale accordingly.
Rotational transitions of CO are primarily excited by collisions with hydrogen. De-excitation can occur via collisions with hydrogen or by spontaneous line emission. The critical density at which collisions begin to overtake spontaneous emission is around 3000 cm$^{-3}$. More detailed studies of the excitation, photodissociation, and chemistry have been conducted by van Dishoeck & Black (1988) and Warin, Benayoun, & Viala (1996). In general it is found that the rotational populations of CO are sub-thermal except for the first few levels in dense cases ([@wbv96]). Hence the assumption of LTE will almost always produce excitation temperatures which underestimate the actual thermal temperature ($T_{ex} <
T_{kin}$). Recent work by Wannier, Penprase, & Andersson (1997) suggests that the dominant form of CO excitation in diffuse and translucent clouds can be line emission from nearby molecular clouds, if the clouds have similar velocity vectors.
As a start, we constructed a Boltzmann plot for the [$^{12}$CO]{} data (Figure 4). Fitting the temperature to all lines gives $T_{ex} = 7$ K. This value is similar to that found by Cruther & Chu (1982), but it is important to note that the excitation temperatures for [$^{13}$CO]{} and [$^{12}$CO]{} are different in general ([@wbv96]). Since the thermal temperature is greater than the CO rotational temperature in general, $T_{kin} > 7$ K, which is consistent with the [C$_2$]{} analysis. Warin, Benayoun, & Viala (1996) have constructed models of CO excitation for the dense, translucent, and diffuse cloud regimes, including UV photodissociation. These models show very clearly that the excitation temperature is much lower than the thermal temperature for diffuse and translucent clouds. The excitation of CO in dense clouds is nearly thermal and $T_{ex} = T_{kin}$. If we assume that the cloud(s) toward [W40 IRS 1a]{} are dense, then $T_{kin} \simeq 7$ K. For diffuse and translucent clouds, the level populations observed can be scaled (see Section 4.2 of Warin, Benayoun, & Viala \[1996\]) to derive “pseudo-LTE” rotational populations, i.e. representative LTE populations for the actual thermal temperature of the gas. A slope can be fitted to these populations and a thermal temperature inferred. If the cloud(s) toward [W40 IRS 1a]{} are translucent, then the R0 population is reduced by $\sim 1.75$ (changes in R1 and R2 happen to be negligible). The resulting populations imply $T_{kin} \simeq 9$ K (see Figure 4), which still does not agree with the [C$_2$]{} analysis. It is not clear, however, that the models constructed by Warin, Benayoun, & Viala (1996) apply to our line of sight: The UV field is probably higher than normal near W40, and it seems very likely that there are multiple clouds on the sightline.
Since the cloud(s) on the [W40 IRS 1a]{} line of sight are very near the W40 molecular cloud, and the LSR velocities of both are similar (5 and 8 km s$^{-1}$), the excitation for [$^{12}$CO]{} may be at least partially radiative. Comparing to models constructed by Wannier, Penprase, & Andersson (1997) it is apparent that our $T_{ex} = 7$ K is degenerate: It can be accounted for by many combinations of radiative excitation, collision partner density, and kinetic temperature. The [C$_2$]{} excitation conditions can help constrain those for [$^{12}$CO]{}. If we assume $T_{kin}
\simeq 40$ K, the density of the gas can range from 0 to 450 cm$^{-3}$, depending on the efficiency of radiative excitation. Collisional excitation becomes dominant as $n$ approaches 450 cm$^{-3}$ (which we use as an upper limit). If we further assume $n \sim 250$ cm$^{-3}$ (as indicated by the [C$_2$]{} data), then the excitation of CO can only be explained by collisional and radiative processes combined.
A summary of the [W40 IRS 1a]{} sightline cloud physical properties based on the CO and [C$_2$]{} data in this paper as well as the CO emission study by Crutcher and Chu (1982) is given in Table 6. As discussed in Section 2, we assume that nearly all of the absorption on this line of sight arises in one cloud complex (single or multiple components) local to the W40 region, since it is only 400 pc distant (i.e., the cloud(s) cannot be diffuse). The physical conditions are best determined by [C$_2$]{}: $n
\sim 250$ cm$^{-3}$ and $T \simeq 40$ K. The CO emission and absorption values and limits agree very well. The cloud(s) are clearly not dense enough to be considered molecular, but could be considered translucent. Translucent lines of sight typically have $A_V = 2 -- 5$ and can be studied via both absorption lines (UV, optical, and/or IR), and radio emission lines. In addition, translucent material is expected in the outer envelopes of molecular clouds ([@vdb89]). We postulate that the [W40 IRS 1a]{} sightline is composed of multiple translucent components associated with the W40 molecular cloud.
Molecular Abundances
--------------------
CO and [C$_2$]{} abundances have been determined jointly for a number of sightlines, a sample of which is shown in Table 7. [W40 IRS 1a]{} is one of few sightlines allowing a direct comparison of CO and [C$_2$]{} in [*absorption*]{}. The abundance ratio we derive is CO/[C$_2$]{} $= 1600 \pm 600$ (2$\sigma$). The depletion of CO onto dust is negligible ($< 1 \%$), in view of our failure to detect CO ice, but the [C$_2$]{}depletion has not been assessed. Note that the CO/[C$_2$]{} ratio increases from diffuse to translucent and molecular regimes indicating (to first order) that the formation/destruction rates favor CO over [C$_2$]{}as cloud type changes. This may merely be due to self-shielding of CO, but other processes may also be in action: The data are not yet precise enough to tell.
Assuming all hydrogen is molecular, we can estimate the amount of H$_2$ on the [W40 IRS 1a]{} line of sight from $N_{CO}$. Using an H$_2$/CO ratio of $3700_{-2700}^{+3100}$ (based on the direct comparison of H$_2$ and CO IR absorption lines toward NGC 2024 IRS 2 ($A_V = 21.5 \pm 5$), [@letal94]), we find $N_{H_2} =
4.4_{-3.2}^{+3.8}
\times 10^{21}$ cm$^{-2}$. The H$_2$:CO ratio is derived from a direct comparison of weak absorption lines and hence should be reliable, but is based on only one data point: NGC 2024 IRS 2. If this sightline is abnormal in any way, then the ratio does not necessarily apply to other lines of sight such as [W40 IRS 1a]{}.
Dust Indicators
---------------
The [$A_V$]{} calculated by Crutcher and Chu (1982) and Smith et al. (1985) assumes a “normal” extinction law ($R_V \sim 3$), which may be incorrect. The ratio of visual to selective extinction, $R_V$, is a grain size distribution indicator ([@ccm89]): $R_V < 3$ implies an abundance of small grains compared to the typical size distribution, whereas $R_V > 3$ implies that larger grains dominate the extinction. As interstellar clouds collapse the dust grains tend to agglomerate, eliminating the smaller particles ([@j80]). If the line of sight toward [W40 IRS 1a]{} does indeed sample the edge of a molecular cloud, then we would expect a population of larger grains and $3 < R_V < 5$. Smith et al. (1985) found $(B-V)$ = 2.2 for [W40 IRS 1a]{} and assuming it is an OB star, $E_{B-V} \simeq 2.5$. For $R_V = 3-5$, we get a range in [$A_V$]{} of 7.5 to 12.5, which agrees with the previous work by Crutcher and Chu (1982) and Smith et al. (1985).
Our calculated value of [$A_V$]{} can be used to predict the amount of CO expected toward [W40 IRS 1a]{}. As discussed in Section 2, however, the extinction and CO absorption may not be well-correlated in the PDR, leading us to slightly [*overestimate*]{} $N_{CO}$ based on [$A_V$]{}. Conversely, most studies of the CO/[$A_V$]{} ratio have not addressed the depletion of CO into ice mantles (which may be as high as 40 %, [@cetal95]). Since CO is almost entirely in the gas-phase for the [W40 IRS 1a]{} line of sight, these studies will [*underestimate*]{} the predicted CO column density. Using radio maps, spectroscopic data, and star counts in the Taurus and $\rho$ Oph clouds, Frerking, Langer, and Wilson (1982) found: $$N(C^{18}O) = 1.7 \times 10^{14} (A_V - 1.3)$$ for $N$ in cm$^{-2}$ and $4 < A_V < 21$. This relation predicts $N_{CO} = (0.5 - 1.0) \times
10^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$ (with $N($CO$)/N($C$^{18}$O$) = 490$) for our line of sight, very nearly the same as we have measured. Interestingly, it may be that the PDR effect nearly balances the depletion effect.
There is no strong correlation between [C$_2$]{} and $E_{B-V}$ ([@vdb89]) though other dust indicators have not been investigated. The lack of correlation may be due to the fact that many of the stars included in [C$_2$]{} absorption studies to date have been distant supergiants where some of the sightline extinction is caused by diffuse clouds, which lack abundant [C$_2$]{}.
Comparing the [W40 IRS 1a]{} sightline to others in Table 7, it is apparent that CO and [C$_2$]{} generally increase with [$A_V$]{} but the data are too scattered to draw any strong conclusions.
The measurement of CO and [C$_2$]{} absorption toward Cyg OB2 No. 12, the classic diffuse cloud line of sight with $A_V \simeq 10$, is quite interesting. Lutz and Crutcher (1983) found $N_{C_2} = (3.0 \pm 0.2)
\times 10^{14}$ cm$^{-2}$ (adjusted for new Phillips system $f$-values in Lambert, Sheffer, and Federman (1995)), about half of the abundance on the [W40 IRS 1a]{} sightline. Recently, McCall et al. (1998) measured CO IR absorption toward Cyg OB2 No. 12 yielding $N_{CO} = 2 \times 10^{16}$ cm$^{-2}$, a factor of 60 less than what we find for [W40 IRS 1a]{} over nearly the same total visual extinction. The 4.7 $\mu$m CO ice feature is not seen on this line of sight; therefore, depletion of CO onto ice mantles cannot readily explain the discrepancy. This clearly shows that the gaseous CO to dust ratio changes from diffuse to denser environments.
As an interesting side note, we have compared the total hydrogen column density (assuming all of it to be molecular) for both [W40 IRS 1a]{} and NGC 2024 IRS 2 to the hydrogen/reddening correlations found by Bohlin, Savage, and Drake (1978) and Dickman (1978) (Figure 5). The $E_{B-V}$ for NGC 2024 IRS 2 assumes $A_V = 21$ ([@letal94]; [@jpl84]) and $R_V$ ranging from 3 to 5. The correlations (“intercloud” and “cloud”) from Bohlin, Savage, and Drake (1978) are based on L$\alpha$ absorption for lightly reddened sightlines with $E_{B-V} < 0.6$, while the relation from Dickman (1978), derived from CO emission, is good to $E_{B-V} \sim 3$. In Figure 5 we have extrapolated out to $E_{B-V} = 10$. The data from [W40 IRS 1a]{} and NGC 2024 IRS2 agree with the extrapolated relations surprisingly well, within factors of 2 or so.
Conclusions
===========
We have used [$^{12}$CO]{} and [C$_2$]{} IR and visible absorption lines to investigate the line of sight toward [W40 IRS 1a]{}. The [C$_2$]{} data were obtained at the 4 m Mayall Telescope at KPNO and the [$^{12}$CO]{} data from the CSHELL on the IRTF. The CO ice band at 4.7 was not detected. This sightline is clearly much more dense than diffuse, based on $A_V \sim 9$ and a distance of only 400 pc (we calculate a range in [$A_V$]{} of 7.5 to 12.5, assuming a population of large grains). Our [$^{12}$CO]{} and [C$_2$]{} data show:
1\. The [C$_2$]{} excitation conditions, $T \simeq 40$ K and $n \sim 250$ cm$^{-3}$, agree with limits determined from CO emission and absorption. Since the [$A_V$]{} is large and both absorption and emission measures are available, we postulate that the [W40 IRS 1a]{}sightline has multiple translucent components.
2\. The non-detection of CO ice indicates a CO depletion of $\delta < 1\%$.
3\. Comparing to other sightlines in Table 7, we find an overall increase in $N_{CO}$ and $N_{C_2}$ with increasing [$A_V$]{}. The data, however, are too scattered to draw any further conclusions at this point. The ratio of CO to [C$_2$]{} appears to increase from diffuse to translucent and molecular sightlines probably due to the self-shielding of CO.
4\. The column density of CO toward [W40 IRS 1a]{} is $\sim 60$ times that found for Cyg OB2 No. 12, the classic diffuse line of sight ([@mccall98]), despite very similar [$A_V$]{} values. This is not a depletion effect, and suggests that the CO-to-dust ratio changes from diffuse to dense environments.
5\. Finally, the relationship of hydrogen column density to interstellar reddening ([@bsd78]; [@dickman78]) was found to be roughly consistent with recent data out to $E_{B-V}
\sim 10$ (Figure 5). Contrary to the CO-to-dust ratio, the hydrogen-to-dust ratio appears to be valid from diffuse to dense regimes.
This research was supported by NASA Graduate Student Research Program grant (NGT5-50032) to R. Y. Shuping and NASA grant NAG5-4184 to T. P. Snow. We would like to thank the staff and operators at KPNO, the IRTF (J. Rayner), and the UKIRT (T. Kerr) for their help and tireless duty through the night. Many thanks to J. Black and the referee S. Federman, whose comments and suggestions greatly improved the content and quality of this paper. B. L. Lutz would like to thank K. Sheth who carried out the curve-of-growth analysis and temperature fits for the [C$_2$]{} lines. R. Y. Shuping would like to thank B-G Andersson, J. H. Lacy, and D. Jansen for their helpful input, and also D. E. Schutz for useful conversations and support.
Black, J. H. & Willner, S. P. 1984, , 279, 673 Black, J. H., van Dishoeck, E. F., Willner, S. P., & Woods, R. C. 1990, , 358, 459 Bohlin, R. C., Savage, B. D., & Drake, J. F. 1978, , 224, 132 Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, , 345, 245 Chackerian, C. & Tipping, R. H. 1983, J. Molec. Spectrosc., 99, 431 Chaffee, F. H., Jr., Lutz, B. L., Black, J. H., Vanden Bout, P. A., & Snell, R. L. 1980, , 236, 474 Chiar, J. E., Adamson, A. J., Kerr, T. H., & Whittet, D. C. B. 1995, , 455, 234 Crawford, I. A. 1997, , 290, 41 Crutcher, R. M. & Chu, Y. 1982, Regions of Recent Star Formation, 53, Roger, R. S. & Dewdney, P. E. eds. Dickman, R. L. 1978, , 37, 407 Erman, P., Lambert, D. L., Larsson, M., & Mannfors, B. 1982,, 253, 983 Federman, S. R., Strom, C. J., Lambert, D. L., Cardelli, J. A., Smith, V. V., & Joseph, C. L. 1994, , 424, 772 Federman, S. R., Lambert, D. L., van Dishoeck, E. F., Andersson, B-G, & Zsargo, J. 1999, in prep Frerking, M. A., Langer, W. D., & Wilson, R. W. 1982, , 262, 590 Gredel, R., van Dishoeck, E. F., de Vries, C. P., & Black, J. H. 1992, , 257, 245 Gredel, R. , van Dishoeck, E. F., & Black, J. H. 1994, , 285, 300 Greene, T. P., Tokunaga, A. T., Toomey, D. W., & Carr, J. S. 1993, Proc. SPIE, 1946, 313 Hollenbach, D. J. 1990, ASP Conference Series Vol. 12, The Evolution of the Interstellar Medium, L. Blitz ed., p. 167 Jiang, D. R., Perrier, C., & Lena, P. 1984, , 135, 249 Jura, M. 1980, , 235, 63 Lacy, J. H., Knacke, R., Geballe, T. R., & Tokunaga, A. T. 1994, , 428, L69 Lambert, D. L., Sheffer, Y., & Federman, S. R. 1995, , 438, 740 Lutz, B. L. & Crutcher, R. M. 1983, , 271, L101 Magnani, L. & Onello, J. S. 1995, , 443, 169 Mantz, A. W. & Maillard, J.-P. 1974, J. Molec. Spectrosc., 53, 466 McCall, B. J., Geballe, T. R., Hinkle, K. H., & Oka, T. 1998, Science, 279, 1910 Shull, J. M. & Beckwith, S. 1982, , 20, 163 Smith, J., Bentley, A., Castelaz, M., Gehrz, R. D., Grasdalen, G. L., & Hackwell, J. A. 1985, , 291, 571 Spitzer, L.Jr. 1978, Physical Processes in the Interstellar Medium, (New York: Wiley) Tielens, A. G. G. M. & Allamandola, L. J. 1987, Physical Processes in Interstellar Clouds, eds. G. E. Morfill & M. Scholer, p. 333, Dordrecht: Reidel Vallée, J.P. 1987, , 178,237 Vallée, J. P. & MacLeod, J. M. 1991, , 250, 143 Vallée, J. P., Guilloteau, S. & MacLeod, J. M. 1992, , 266, 520 Vallée, J. P. & MacLeod, J. M. 1994, , 108, 998 van Dishoeck, E. F. 1984, PhD Thesis, Leiden University van Dishoeck, E. F. & Black, J. H. 1982, , 258, 533 van Dishoeck, E. F. & Black, J. H. 1988, , 334, 771 van Dishoeck, E. F. & Black, J. H. 1989, , 340, 273 Wannier, P., Penprase, B. E., & Andersson, B-G 1997, , 487, L165 Warin, S., Benayoun, J. J., & Viala, Y.P. 1996, , 308, 535 Zeilik, M. & Lada, C. J. 1978, , 222, 896
[ccc]{} R0 & 8757.7 & $37.0 \pm 3.0$ R2 & 8753.9 & $52.5 \pm 1.5$ Q2 & 8761.2 & $55.0 \pm 5.0$ P2 & 8766.0 & $18.0 \pm 3.0$ R4 & 8751.6 & $42.5 \pm 7.5$ Q4 & 8763.7 & $36.0 \pm 3.0$ P4 + Q8 & 8773.3 & $43.0 \pm 4.0$ R6 & 8750.8 & $22.8 \pm 3.0$ Q6 & 8767.7 & $31.5 \pm 4.5$ P6 & 8782.3 & $12.5 \pm 2.5$ P8 & 8792.6 & $9.5 \pm 2.0$ Q10 & 8780.1 & $17.5 \pm 2.5$ Q12 & 8788.5 & $6.5 \pm 2.0$
[ccc]{} 0 & 0.000 & $5.4 \pm 0.8$ 2 & 15.635 & $19.8 \pm 2.0$ 4 & 52.114 & $11.2 \pm 1.6$ 6 & 109.430 & $9.2 \pm 0.7$ 8 & 187.572 & $5.6 \pm 0.7$ 10 & 286.526 & $4.1 \pm 0.4$ Total & & $70 \pm 4$
[ccccc]{} 2.334-2.340 & R3, R4 and R5 & 25 & 90 & BS 6714, 7110 and 5 Aql 2.340-2.346 & R0,1, and 2 & 25 & 90 & Spica
[cccc]{} R0 & 2.34530523 & 8.78 & $130 \pm 20$ R1 & 2.34326929 & 5.89 & $100 \pm 10$ R2 & 2.34127497 & 5.33 & $60 \pm 17$ R3 & 2.33932336 & 5.11 & $< 20$ R4 & 2.33741273 & 5.00 & $< 20$ R5 & 2.33554435 & 4.94 & $< 20$
[ccc]{} 0 & 0 & $ 5.0 \pm 2.0 $ 1 & 5.532 & $ 4.0 \pm 1.5 $ 2 & 16.60 & $2.2 \pm 0.7 $ 3 & 33.19 & $< 0.8$ 4 & 55.32 & $< 0.8$ 5 & 82.98 & $< 0.8$ Total & & $11 \pm 2$
[ccccccc]{} [C$_2$]{}& ... & 1.25 & $7.0 \pm 0.4 \times 10^{14}$ & 39 and 126 & $\sim 250$ & ... $^{13}$CO Em. & 8 & ... & $1.2 \times 10^{18}$ & ... & ... & $\sim 4$ $^{12}$CO & $2 \pm 2$ & ... &$1.1 \pm 0.2 \times 10^{18}$ & $> 7$ & $< 450$ & ...
[ccccccc]{} W40 IRS 1a & $1.1 \pm0.2$(18) & $7.0 \pm 0.4$(14) & $1600 \pm 600$ & T & 7.5 – 12.5 & This Work Cyg OB2 \#12 & 2(16) & $3.0 \pm 0.2$(14) & $67 \pm 5$ & D & $\sim 10$ & 1, 2 HD94413 & 0.7–1.2(16) & 2.8(13) & 250–430 & T & 2.4 & 3 HD154368 & 0.6–1.5(16) & 4.6(13) & 130–330 & T & 2.5 & 3 HD169454 & 0.55–1.8(16) & 5.6(13) & 100–320 & T & 3.3 & 3 $o$ Per & 1.1(15) & 1.8(13) & 60 & D & 0.9 & 4 HD27778 & 2.5(16) &3.0(13) & 830 & T & 1.2 & 4 $\rho$ Oph A & 1.9(15) & 2.1(13) & 90 & T & 1.4 & 4,7 $\zeta$ Oph & 2.3(15) & $1.79 \pm 0.06$(13) & 130 & D/T & 0.96 & 4 20 Aql & 3(15) & 4.2(13) & 71 & D/T & 0.99 & 4 HD207198 & 2.6(15) & 2.4(13) & 110 & T & 1.9 & 4 HD21483 & 1.0(18) & 7.4(13) & 100 - $10^5$ & T & 1.7 & 4 $\zeta$ Per & 1.2(15) & 2.8(13) & 43 & D/T & 1.0 & 4 X Per & 5.0(15) & 4.2(13) & 120 & T & 1.4 & 4 HD 26571 & 6.0(16) & 8.8(13) & 680 & D/T & 0.9 & 4 AE Aur & 1.3(15) & 4.6(13) & 28 & T & 1.6 & 4 HD110432 & 1.0(15) & 2.4(13) & 42 & T & 1.2 & 4 $\pi$ Sco & 1.0(12) & $<1.0(12)$ & $>1$ & D & 0.19 & 5 $\beta^1$ Sco & 1.2(13) & $<1.0(12)$ & $>12$ & D & 0.62 & 5 $\omega^1$ Sco &4.0(13) & $<2.0(12)$ & $>23$ & D & 0.68 & 5 $\chi$ Oph & 3.0(14) & 2.8(13) & 11 & T & 1.2 & 4 9 Cep & 1.7(13) & 1.0(13) & 2 & D & 1.5 & 4 HD 210121 & 3.0(15) & 5.2(13) & 58 & T (High Lat.) & $\sim 1$ & 6 $\lambda$ Cep & 1.4(15) & 1.4(13) & 100 & D & 1.8 & 4
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We propose and investigate two model classes for forward power price dynamics, based on continuous branching processes with immigration, and on Hawkes processes with exponential kernel, respectively. The models proposed exhibit jumps clustering features. Models of this kind have been already proposed for the spot price dynamics, but the main purpose of the present work is to investigate the performances of such models in describing the forward dynamics. We adopt a Heath-Jarrow-Morton approach in order to capture the whole forward curve evolution. By examining daily data in the French power market, we perform a goodness-of-fit test and we present our conclusions about the adequacy of these models in describing the forward prices evolution.'
author:
- 'Giorgia Callegaro[^1] Andrea Mazzoran[^2] Carlo Sgarra[^3]'
title: 'A Self-Exciting Modelling Framework for Forward Prices in Power Markets'
---
**Keywords:** Branching Processes, Forward Prices, Power Markets, Heath-Jarrow-Morton Model, Self-Exciting Processes, Jumps Clustering, Hawkes Processes.\
Introduction
============
Energy markets, and in particular, electricity markets, exhibit very peculiar features. The historical series of both futures and spot prices include seasonality, mean-reversion, spikes and small fluctuations. One can alternatively describe the power price dynamics by modelling the spot or the forward price. In the former case, the spot price can be obtained as a limit of the forward price when the maturity is close to the current time, in the latter case it is possible to derive the forward price from the spot by computing the conditional expectation with respect to a suitable risk-neutral measure of the spot price at the maturity.
After the pioneering paper by Schwartz [@Schwarz], where an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck dynamics is assumed to describe the spot price behaviour, several different approaches have been investigated in order to describe the power price evolution. A comprehensive literature review until $2008$ is offered in the book by Benth et al. [@BBK]. A similar effort has been devoted to identify reliable models for the forward price dynamics, and a huge amount of literature is available focusing on Heath-Jarrow-Morton type models as in Benth et al. [@BPV18] and in Filimonov et al. [@LPV18], in the attempt to provide a description of the whole forward curves dynamics, in analogy with forward interest rates in fixed-income markets as in Heath et al. [@HJM]. Some of the classical models proposed include jumps and/or stochastic volatility. Benth and Paraschiv [@BP17] propose a random field approach based on Gaussian random fields by adopting the Musiela parametrization in order to describe the forward curve dynamics. Empirical evidence suggests that in many assets prices often jumps appear in cluster, thus requiring the introduction of jump processes exhibiting a clustering or self-exciting behaviour.
Kiesel and Paraschiv [@Kiesel] recently presented a systematic empirical investigation of electricity intraday prices and suggested an approach based on Hawkes processes in order to describe the power price dynamics with jump clustering features. Self-exciting features in electricity prices attracted already some attention by several authors: Herrera and Gonzalez [@HerGon2014] proposed a self-excited model for electricity spot prices, while Christensen et al. [@CHL2009], Clements et al. [@CFH2013] pointed out that time between spikes has a significant impact on the likelihood of future occurrences, thus providing a strong support to models including self-exciting properties.
The large class of models available in the literature describing the power price dynamics is then widening in order to include models exhibiting self-exciting features.
We also mention the paper by Jiao et al. [@JMSS], where a model based on continuous branching processes with immigration for power spot prices was proposed, and the forward prices computed with respect to a suitable structure preserving equivalent martingale measure.
Eyjolfsson and Tj[ø]{}shteim [@Eyjolfsson2018] describe a class of Hawkes processes and present an empirical investigation based on data from UK power market supporting Hawkes-type models for spot prices.
The purpose of the present paper is to investigate if self-exciting features can arise in the power forward prices evolution as well, and in order to perform this investigation we shall focus on two different model classes: the Continuous Branching Processes with Immigration (CBI henceforth) and the Hawkes processes. While CBI processes are always affine, Hawkes processes in general are not, but when the kernel describing the intensity dynamics is of exponential type they are, and this feature makes the Hawkes processes with exponential kernel appealing from the modeling point of view. By considering the two model classes mentioned before, i.e. CBI and Hawkes processes, we then want to provide the description of the full term structure of power forward prices, following a Heath-Jarrow-Morton approach.
Power is a flow commodity, this meaning that instantaneous forward contracts are not directly traded on the market, but futures (sometimes called flow forward) are. So, in order to perform any kind of inference on the model proposed, it is necessary to extract the relevant information on the forward dynamics included in the futures prices. This can be done by applying suitable optimization procedures proposed in the literature, eventually modified in order to provide the best performances in the case under examination. These procedures are far from trivial from the computational point of view and require a careful implementation of the optimization step. We deliberately chose to work on daily data, in order to show how self-exciting effects can arise not only on a small time scale, but also at a coarser level.
The paper is organized as follows: in Section \[Modeling Framework\] we introduce the processes on which our models are based and in Section \[Forward Model\] we present and discuss the models proposed for the forward power price dynamics. In Section \[Futures-Dynamics\] we discuss the dynamics of Futures contracts when the forward dynamics is assumed to be given by the models introduced. From Sections \[Section: Data Analysis\] to \[Section: Testing the Models\], we provide the theoretical background and numerical results relative to the calibration/parameters’ estimation for the model proposed. In the final section we provide some concluding remarks and discuss future extensions of the present work.
The Modeling Framework {#Modeling Framework}
======================
Continuous Branching Processes with Immigration {#CBI}
-----------------------------------------------
We now introduce our modeling framework for the electricity price, which is based on stochastic differential equations driven by Lévy random fields. We consider a Lévy random field, which is a combination of a Gaussian random measure $W$ and a compensated Poisson random measure $N$ independent of $W$. For a background on such general stochastic equations with jumps, we refer the readers e.g. to Dawson and Li [@DawsonLi], Li and Ma [@LM13] and Walsh [@Walsh1980].
Let us now briefly introduce all the relevant ingredients of our work and recall some preliminary results. We fix a probability space $(\Omega,\mathcal A,\mathbb P)$. A [*white noise*]{} $W$ on $\mathbb R_+^2$ is a Gaussian random measure such that, for any Borel set $A\in\mathcal B(\mathbb R_+^2)$ with finite Lebesgue measure $|A|$, $W(A)$ is a normal random variable of mean zero and variance $|A|$ and if $A_1,\cdots,A_n$ are disjoint Borel sets in $\mathcal B(\mathbb R_+^2)$, then $W(A_1),\cdots,W(A_n)$ are mutually independent. We denote by $N$ the Poisson random measure on $\mathbb R_+^3$ with [*intensity*]{} $\lambda$ which is a Borel measure on $\mathbb R_+^3$ defined as the product of the Lebesgue measure on $\mathbb R_+\times\mathbb R_+$ with a Borel measure $\mu$ on $\mathbb R^+$ such that $\int_0^{\infty} (z \wedge z^2)\mu(dz)<+\infty$. Note that $\mu$ is a Lévy measure since $\int_0^\infty (1 \wedge z^2)\mu(dz)<+\infty$. Recall that for each Borel set $B \in\mathcal B(\mathbb R_+^3)$ with $\lambda(B)<+\infty$, the random variable $N(B)$ has the Poisson distribution with parameter $\lambda(B)$. Moreover, if $B_i, i=1,\ldots, n$ are disjoint Borel sets in $\mathcal B(\mathbb R_+^3)$, then $N(B_1),\cdots,N(B_n)$ are mutually independent. We let $\widetilde N=N-\lambda$ be the compensated Poisson random measure on $\mathbb R_+^3$ associated to $N$.
We introduce the filtration $\mathbb F=(\mathcal F_t)_{t\geqslant 0}$ as the natural filtration generated by the Lévy random field (see Dawson and Li [@DawsonLi]) and satisfying the usual conditions, namely, for any Borel subset $A\in\mathcal B(\mathbb R_+)$ and $B\in\mathcal B(\mathbb R_+^2)$ of finite Lebesgue measure, the processes $(W([0,t]\times A),t\geq 0)$ and $(\widetilde N([0,t]\times B),t\geq 0)$ are $\mathbb F$-martingales.
We consider the following stochastic differential equation in the integral form. Let $a, b,\sigma, \gamma \in \mathbb R_+$ be constant parameters. Consider the equation: $$\label{lambda-integral}
Y(t) = Y(0) + \int_0^t a \left( b - Y(s) \right) ds + \sigma \int_0^t \int_0^{Y(s)} W(ds,du)
+ \gamma \int_0^t \int_0^{Y(s-) } \int_{\mathbb{R}^+} z \widetilde{N} (ds,du, dz),$$ where $W(ds,du)$ is a white noise on $\mathbb{R}_+^2$ with unit covariance, $\widetilde N(ds,du,dz)$ is an independent compensated Poisson random measure on $\mathbb{R}_+^3$ with intensity $ds \ du \ \mu(dz)$ with $\mu(dz)$ being a Lévy measure on $\mathbb{R}_+$ and satisfying $\int_0^\infty (z \wedge z^2)\mu(dz)<\infty $.
The integrals appearing in Equation (and in the following) are both in the sense of Walsh [@Walsh1980]. It follows from Dawson and Li [@DawsonLi Theorem 3.1] or Li and Ma [@LM13 Theorem 2.1] that Equation has a unique strong solution.
Our model actually belongs to the family of CBI processes. Continuous Branching Processes with Immigration (CBI) are a class of stochastic processes commonly used in modelling population dynamics as in Padoux [@Pardoux2016]. The self-exciting features, arising from the integrals in Equation extended on the domain $[0,Y(s))$ with respect to the integration variable $u$, describe the growth of the population due to the reproduction of the previous generations. In the present modelling framework they just describe jumps generated by previous jumps. We briefly recall the definition by Kawazu and Watanabe [@KaW71] \[Def. 1.1\]. A Markov process $Y$ with state space $\mathbb R_+ $ is called a CBI process characterized by branching mechanism $\Psi(\cdot)$ and immigration rate $\Phi(\cdot)$, if its characteristic representation is given, for $p\geq 0$, by: $$\label{laplace}
\mathbb{E}_{y} \left[e^{- p Y(t)}\right]=\exp\left(-yv(t,p)-\int_{0}^{t}\Phi\big(v(s,p)\big)ds\right),$$ where $\mathbb{E}_{y}$ denotes the conditional expectation with respect to the initial value $Y(0) = y$. The function $v:\mathbb R_+\times\mathbb R_+\rightarrow\mathbb R_+$ satisfies the following differential equation: $$\label{ODE0}
\frac{\partial v(t,p)}{\partial t}=-\Psi(v(t,p)),\quad v(0,p)=p$$ and $\Psi$ and $\Phi$ are functions of the variable $q\geq 0$ given by $$\begin{aligned}
\Psi(q) = a q+\frac{1}{2}\sigma^{2}q^{2}+ \gamma \int_{0}^{\infty}(e^{-qu}-1+qu)\pi(du), \\
\Phi(q) = ab q+\int_{0}^{\infty}(1-e^{-qu})\nu(du),\end{aligned}$$ with $\sigma, \gamma \geq 0$, $\beta \in \mathbb{R}$ and $\pi$, $\nu$ being two Lévy measures such that $$\label{levy measure moment}
\int_{0}^{\infty} (u\wedge u^{2})\pi(du)<\infty,\quad \int_{0}^{\infty} (1\wedge u) \nu(du)<\infty.$$ It is proved in Dawson and Li [@DawsonLi Theorem 3.1] that the process in Equation is a CBI process with the branching mechanism $\Psi$ given by: $$\label{equ: Psi general}
\Psi(q)=aq +\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2q^2+ \int_0^{\infty}(e^{-q \gamma z}-1+q \gamma z){\mu}(dz)$$ and the immigration rate $\Phi(q)=a b q$.
The link between CBI processes and the affine term structure models has been established by Filipović [@F01]. If the process $Y$ takes values in $\mathbb{R}_+$ he proves equivalence between the two classes. We recall that the joint Laplace transform of a CBI process $Y$ and its integrated process, which is given in Filipovic [@F01 Theorem 5.3], is defined as follows: for non-negative real numbers $\xi$ and $\theta$, we have: $$\label{non conservative}
{\mathbb E}_y\Big[e^{-\xi Y(t)-\theta\int_0^t Y(s) ds}\Big]
=\exp\Big\{-y v(t,\xi,\theta)-\int_0^t \Phi\big(v(s,\xi,\theta)\big)ds\Big\},$$ where $v(t,\xi,\theta)$ is the unique solution of $$\label{ODE1}
\frac{\partial v(t,\xi,\theta)}{\partial t}=-\Psi(v(t,\xi,\theta))+\theta, \quad v(0,\xi,\theta)=\xi.$$
Hawkes Processes {#Hawkes Processes}
----------------
A Hawkes process is a special counting process with a random intensity function. We introduce now the Hawkes processes with exponential kernel. They can be written as follows : $$\label{Hawkes Equation}
Y(t)= Y(0) + \sum_i^{N_t} Z_i = Y(0) + \int_0^t \int_0^{\infty} z J(ds,dz)= ,$$ where the last term is an Ito integral, $N_t $ is the number of jumps in the interval between $0$ and $t$ and $J(dz,ds)$ is a Poisson random measure with intensity $\lambda (t)$, satisfying the SDE: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Hawkes Intensity}
\lambda (t) &=& \lambda(0) - \beta \int_0^t \lambda (s) ds + \alpha \int_0^t \int_0^\infty z J(ds,dz) \nonumber \\
&=& \exp {(-\beta t)} \lambda(0) + \alpha \sum_i^{N_t} \exp {[-\beta (t-t_i )} Z_i\end{aligned}$$ Here $\beta>0$ is the rate of exponential decay of the influence of previous jumps on the intensity level and $\alpha$ the amplitude of the memory kernel, $t_i$ are the jumps times and $Z_i $ the jump sizes, which we shall assume distributed according to an exponential density with parameter $\delta$, so that only positive jumps appear in both Equations and , and we can write $\tilde{J}(ds,dz) = J(ds,dz)- \lambda (s) \mu (dz)ds $ and $\mu (dz) = \delta \exp{(- \delta z)} dz$, where $\tilde{J}(ds,dz)$ denotes the compensated version of the Poisson measure $J(ds,dz)$. We assume the following condition holds: $\beta - \alpha/\delta > 0$, granting the non-explosiveness of the Hawkes process (see e.g. Bernis et al. [@BerSalSco]).
Hawkes processes with exponential kernel are the only class of Hawkes processes exhibiting both the Markov property and an affine structure (see e.g. Errais et al.[@ErraisGieseckeGoldberg]). The have been extensively used in order to describe the dynamics of several asset classes, including equities as in Hainaut and Moraux [@HainautMoraux2019], commodities as in Eyjolfsson and Tj[ø]{}steim [@Eyjolfsson2018], exchange rates as in Rambaldi et al. [@Rambaldi2015] and credit risk as in Errais et al. [@ErraisGieseckeGoldberg].
Forward Prices Modelling {#Forward Model}
========================
In this section we are going to introduce the two alternative models for the forward prices, that we are going to test against electricity market data. In both cases the price at time $t$ of a forward contract with maturity $T \ge t$ is additive and it can be defined as follows $$\label{forward-dynamics}
f(t,T) = \Lambda (t) - \Lambda (0) + \sum_i^n X_i (t,T),$$ where $ \Lambda (t)$ is a deterministic seasonality function that will be made precise later on, $n$ is the number of factors used and each of the terms $X_i $ is an underlying factor, whose dynamics will be specified in the following Subsections \[CBI\_Forward\] and \[Hawkes\_Forward\].
The Forward Model based on CBI {#CBI_Forward}
------------------------------
Our first model assumes the following dynamics for the factors $X_i, i=1,\dots,n$: $$\begin{aligned}
X_i (t,T) = X_i (0,T) - \sum_i^n \int_0^t a_i X_i (s) ds + \sigma_i \int_0^t \int_0^{X_i (s,T)} W_i (ds,du) + \nonumber \\
+ \gamma _i \int_0^t \int_0^{X_i (s-,T) } \int_{\mathbb{R}^+} z \widetilde{N}_i (ds,du, dz). \label{factor-dynamics}\end{aligned}$$ Namely, the $X_i$’s evolve in time with respect to the historical measure $\mathbb{P} $ according to Equation with immigration rate $b_i =0$. By recalling that the intensity of the Poisson random measure $\widetilde{N}_i (ds,du, dz)$ is given by $dsdu\mu _i (dz)$, we assume $\mu _i (dz)= \delta _i \exp {(-\delta _i z )} dz$ with $\delta _i > 0$, for $i=1,\cdots , n$, $z>0$.
It is possible to re-write Equation as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
f(t,T) &=& \Lambda (t) - \Lambda (0) + \sum_i^n X_i (0,T) - \sum_i^n \int_0^t a_i X_i (s) ds + \sum_i^n \sigma_i \int_0^t \int_0^{X_i (s,T)} W_i (ds,du) + \\
&&+ \sum_i^n \gamma _i \int_0^t \int_0^{X_i (s-,T) } \int_{\mathbb{R}^+} z \widetilde{N}_i (ds,du, dz),\end{aligned}$$ or, equivalently, as $$\begin{aligned}
f(t,T) &=& \Lambda (t) - \Lambda (0) + f(0,T) - \sum_i^n \int_0^t a_i X_i (s) ds + \sum_i^n \sigma_i \int_0^t \int_0^{X_i (s,T)} W_i (ds,du) + \nonumber \\
&&+ \sum_i^n \gamma _i \int_0^t \int_0^{X_i (s-,T) } \int_{\mathbb{R}^+} z \widetilde{N}_i (ds,du, dz) , \label{eq_f_CBI}\end{aligned}$$ where $f(0,T)= \sum_{i=1}^n X_i (0,T) $.
The relation between the dynamics of the forward price with respect to the historical measure $\mathbb{P} $ and the risk-neutral dynamics, written with respect to $\mathbb{Q} $, can be easily obtained by applying the following result, proved in the paper by Jiao et al. [@JMSS [Proposition 4.1]{}].
\[pro:changementprob\] Let $X_1, X_2,\cdots, X_n$ be independent CBI processes where for each $i\in\{1,\cdots, n\}$, $X_i$ is a CBI process under the probability measure $\mathbb{P} $, with dynamics given by Eq. \[factor-dynamics\]. Assume that the filtration $\mathbb F=(\mathcal F_t)_{t\geq 0}$ is generated by the random fields $W_1, W_2,\cdots, W_n$ and $\widetilde N_1, \widetilde N_2, \cdots, \widetilde N_n$. For each $i$, fix $\eta_i\in\mathbb{R}$ and $\xi_i\in\mathbb{R}_+$ and define $$U_t:= \sum_i^n \eta_i \int_0^t\int_0^{X_i (s)}W_i(ds,du)+ \sum_i^n \int_0^t \int_0^{X_i (s-)}\int_0^\infty (e^{-\xi_i z }-1)\widetilde{N}_i (ds,du,dz).$$ Then the Doléans-Dade exponential $\mathcal{E} (U)$ is a martingale under $\mathbb{P}$ and the probability measure $\mathbb{Q}$ defined by $$\left. \frac{d\mathbb{Q}}{d\mathbb{P}}\right|_{\mathcal{F}_t}=\mathcal{E} (U)_t,$$ is equivalent to $\mathbb{P}$. Moreover, under $\mathbb{Q}$, $X_i$ is a CBI process with parameters $(a_i ^{\mathbb{Q}},b_i ^{\mathbb{Q}},\sigma_i ^{\mathbb{Q}},\gamma_i^{\mathbb Q},\mu_i ^{\mathbb{Q}})$, where:
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{par_measure_change}
& a_i^{\mathbb{Q}} =a_i^{\mathbb{P}} -\sigma_i^{\mathbb{P}} \eta_i - \int_0^\infty z(e^{-\theta_iz}-1)\mu_i^{\mathbb{P}} (dz), & \\
& b_i^{\mathbb{Q}}=a_i^{\mathbb{P}} b_i^{\mathbb{P}} /a_i^{\mathbb{Q}} , \quad \sigma_i^{\mathbb{Q}}=\sigma_i^{\mathbb{P}}, \quad \gamma_i^{\mathbb{Q}}=\gamma_i^{\mathbb{P}} & \\
& \mu_i^{\mathbb{Q}}(dz)= e^{-\theta_i z} \mu_i^{\mathbb{P}} (dz), \quad \delta _i ^{\mathbb{Q}} = \delta _i ^{\mathbb{P}}\end{aligned}$$
In this context, the parameters $\eta_i , \xi_i $ can be interpreted as the Market Price of Risk associated with the diffusion/jump part of $X_i, i=1,\dots,n$, respectively.
In order to avoid arbitrage opportunities we shall assume that the de-seasonalized dynamics of every factor $X_i $ is a local martingale under $\mathbb{Q} $ and this will automatically imply that $a_i= 0$ under $\mathbb{Q} $. Since the first integral is defined with respect to the Gaussian white noise $W_i (ds,du)$ and the second integral is defined with respect to the compensated Poisson random measure $\widetilde{N}_i (ds,du, dz) $, each process $X_i (t,T) $ is in fact a local martingale with respect to $\mathbb{Q} $.
From , specifying the relations between the model parameters under the risk-neutral measure $\mathbb{Q} $ and the historical measure $\mathbb{P} $, it is clear that in the present modelling framework, for each factor $X_i $, a mean reversion speed coefficient $a_i$ can be non-null under $\mathbb{P} $ and zero under $\mathbb{Q} $. As far as the immigration term $b_i $ is concerned, if it vanishes under $\mathbb{Q} $, it will be zero under any equivalent probability measure.
In the estimation procedure applied to the real market data we shall assume that only one process of the type introduced in Equation will drive the forward curve dynamics.
The Forward Model Based on Hawkes Processes {#Hawkes_Forward}
-------------------------------------------
As alternative to the model proposed in the previous subsection, we consider,under $\mathbb{P} $, Equation for the instantaneous forward price, where now each $X_i, i=1,\dots, n$ satisfies a SDE of the following form: $$\label{eq_f_H}
X_i (t,T) = X_i (0,T) - \int_0^t c_i X_i (s, T) ds + \int_0^t \sigma_i \sqrt{X_i (s, T)} dW_i (s) + \int_0^t \int_0^\infty z \tilde{J} _i (dz,ds),$$ where $\tilde{J} _i (dz,ds)$ are compensated marked point process with intensity $\lambda _i (t)$, satisfying the SDE: $$\label{Hawkes Intensity2}
\lambda _i (t)= \lambda _i(0) - \beta _i \int_0^t \lambda _i (s) ds + \alpha _i \int_0^t \int_0^\infty z J_i (ds,dz).$$
We assume the jump size distributed according to an exponential density with parameter $\delta _i$ for each $(\lambda _i , X_i )$, so we can write: $$\tilde{J} _i (ds,dz) = J_i (ds,dz) - \lambda _i (s) \mu (dz) ds = J_i (ds,dz) - \lambda _i (s) \delta _i \exp{(- \delta _i z)} (dz) ds.$$
The choice of a square-root process for the diffusion part of the forward curves dynamics is motivated by the positivity requirement as well as the choice of the exponential distribution for the jumps size.
In order to make the presentation of the two model classes more homogeneous, we can introduce the Dawson-Li representation for the Hawkes-type dynamics as well and write the SDE governing the dynamics of forward prices under the historical measure $\mathbb{P}$ as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Hawkes Dawson}
X_i (t,T) &=& X_i (0,T) - \int_0^t c_i X_i (s, T) ds + \int_0^t \int_0^{X_i (s,T)} \sigma _i W_i(du,ds) \nonumber \\
& & +\int_0^t \int_0^{X_i (s_{-}, T)} \int_{\mathbb R^+} z \tilde{N} _i (dz,du,ds),\end{aligned}$$ where the definition of the integrals and the notations are the same as in Subsection \[CBI\] and the $\lambda _i (t)$ evolve according to Eq. .
It is immediate to remark that the dynamics described by the two model classes look almost identical when written in the Dawson-Li representation, the main difference being the specification of the equation governing the evolution of the intensity processes. This is one of the reasons behind the choice of these two alternative models to describe the forward prices’ evolution.
The dynamics just described is given with respect to the historical probability measure $\mathbb{P}$. In order to obtain a description with respect to the risk-neutral measure $\mathbb{Q}$ we need to introduce a measure change. The following proposition provides a measure change preserving the Hawkes-type dynamics. A proof can be found in Bernis et al. [@Bernis_Scotti_Sgarra].
\[changeP\_Hawkes\] Let $(\lambda _i, X_i )$ be described by Equations and under the historical probability $\mathbb{P}$. Fix $(\eta, \xi) \in \mathbb{R} \times (-\delta _i, \infty)$ and define:
$$U_t:= \sum_i^n \eta _i \sigma _i \int_0^t \int_0^{X_i (s)} W_i (ds,du)+ \sum_i^n
\int_0^t \int_0^{\lambda_i (s-)} \int_{\mathbb{R}^+} \left(e^{- \xi _i z } -1 \right)\, \widetilde{J}_i (ds,du,dz)$$
Then the Doléans-Dade exponential $\mathcal{E}(U)$ is a martingale under $\mathbb P$ and the probability measure $\mathbb{Q}$ defined by $ \left. \frac{d\mathbb{Q}}{d\mathbb{P}} \right|_{\mathcal{F}_t} :=\mathcal{E}(U)_t $ is equivalent to $\mathbb{P}$. The dynamics with respect to $\mathbb{Q}$ takes the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
X_i (t, T) &=& X_i (0,T) + \int_0^t \int_0^{X_i (s,T)} \sigma _i^{\mathbb{Q}} W_i(du,ds) + \int_0^t \int_0^{X_i (s_{-}, T)} z \tilde{J} _i^{\mathbb{Q}} (dz,du,ds), \\
\lambda _i (t) &=& \lambda _i (0) - \int_0^t \beta _i^{\mathbb{Q}} \lambda (s) ds + \alpha _i^{\mathbb{Q}} \int_0^t \int_0^\infty \exp {[-\beta^{\mathbb{Q}} (t-s)]} {J}_i^{\mathbb{Q}}(dz,ds),\end{aligned}$$
where
$$\begin{aligned}
& c_i^{\mathbb{Q}} = c_i^{\mathbb{P}} - \sigma_i^{\mathbb{P}} \eta_i - \int_0^\infty z (e^{-\theta_i z}-1) \mu_i^{\mathbb{P}} (dz), \quad \sigma_i^{\mathbb{Q}}= \sigma_i^{\mathbb{P}} &\\
& \alpha_i^{\mathbb{Q}}= \alpha_i^{\mathbb{P}} , \quad \beta _i^{\mathbb{Q}} = \beta _i^{\mathbb{P}}, \quad
\mu_i^{\mathbb{Q}}(dz)= e^{-\theta_i z} \mu_i^{\mathbb{P}} (dz).&\end{aligned}$$
In this context, the parameters $\eta _i , \xi _i $ can be interpreted as the Market Price of Risk associated with the diffusion/jump part of the $i-th $ factor $X_i$, respectively.
We shall assume, as for the previous model, that the de-seasonalized dynamics of $X_i $ is a local martingale under $\mathbb{Q} $ and this will automatically imply that the mean reversion speed $c_i $ of any $X_i$ must vanish under $\mathbb{Q} $. Both the diffusion and the jump terms are in fact local martingales with respect to $\mathbb{Q} $.
From the formulas in the previous lines, specifying the relations between the model parameters under the risk-neutral measure $\mathbb{Q} $ and the historical measure $\mathbb{P} $, it is clear that in the Hawkes modeling framework, for each factor $X_i $, a mean reversion speed coefficient $c_i$ can be nonzero under $\mathbb{P} $ and zero under $\mathbb{Q} $. A non zero mean-reverting term can then appear in the dynamics written with respect to the historical measure $\mathbb{P} $, although this term vanishes under $\mathbb{Q} $.
In the estimation procedure applied to the real market data we shall assume that only one process of the type introduced in Equation will drive the forward curve dynamics.
The Futures Dynamics {#Futures-Dynamics}
====================
We focus here rigorously on forward contracts delivering a quantity of energy over a finite period of time. We shall refer to them as futures, even if in the literature they are sometimes called swaps or flow forwards.
\[def:future\] The price at time $t \ge 0$ of a futures contract with delivery period $[T_1,T_2]$ with $t \leq T_1 \le T_2$ si given by $$\label{Futures price}
F(t, T_1 , T_2 ) = \frac{1}{T_2 - T_1} \int_{T_1}^{T_2} f(t, x) \, dx,$$ where $f(t,\cdot)$ is the price at time $t$ of the forward contract to be paid upon delivery.
From the above Definition \[def:future\] it is clear why futures are sometimes called flow forwards: the owner of a futures with delivery period over $[T_1,T_2]$ would substantially receive a constant flow of the commodity over this period. Notice also that a futures contract delivering the commodity over a time period which collapses into a single point coincides with a forward.
The value at time $t$ of a Futures contract with delivery period $[T_1 , T_2]$ is given, in our modelling framework, by (recall Equation ): $$F(t, T_1 , T_2 ) = \frac{1}{T_2 -T_1} \int_{T_1}^{T_2} f(t,x) dx = \frac{1}{T_2 -T_1} \left[ (\Lambda (t) - \Lambda (0)) + \sum_i^n \int_{T_1}^{T_2} X_i (t,x) dx \right].$$ By introducing the dynamics of the factors $X_i$ into the above equation, we get the following equation describing the futures’ dynamics under the risk-neutral probability $\mathbb{Q}$ both in the CBI framework (recall Equation ):
$$\begin{aligned}
F(t, T_1 , T_2 ) &=& \frac{1}{T_2 -T_1}(\Lambda (t) - \Lambda (0)) + \frac{1}{T_2 -T_1} \int_{T_1}^{T_2} f(0,x) dx + \\
& & + \frac{1}{T_2 -T_1} \sum_i^n \sigma_i \int_{T_1}^{T_2} \int_0^t \int_0^{X_i (s,x)} W_i (ds,dy) dx \\
& & +\frac{1}{T_2 -T_1} \sum_i^n \gamma _i \int_{T_1}^{T_2} \int_0^t \int_0^{X_i (s-,x)} \int_{\mathbb{R}^+} z \widetilde{N}_i (ds, dy, d z ) dx.\end{aligned}$$
and in the Hawkes setting (recall Equation ):
$$\begin{aligned}
F(t, T_1 , T_2 ) &=& \frac{1}{T_2 -T_1}(\Lambda (t) - \Lambda (0)) + \frac{1}{T_2 -T_1} \int_{T_1}^{T_2} f(0,x) dx \\
&&+ \frac{1}{T_2 -T_1} \sum_i^n \sigma_i \int_{T_1}^{T_2} \int_0^t \sqrt{X_i (s,x)} dW_i (s) dx \\
&& +\frac{1}{T_2 -T_1} \sum_i^n \int_{T_1}^{T_2} \int_0^t \int_{\mathbb{R}^+} z \tilde{J} _i (dz,ds) dx .\end{aligned}$$
From now on, in view of our numerical analysis, we will assume that one driving factor is sufficient. Namely, we will consider the case $i=1$.
In order to rule out arbitrage opportunities the prices of futures with different delivery periods must satisfy specific time-consistency relations. In particular, the value of a futures contract with delivery period $[T_1 , T_n ]$ is linked to the values of the contracts with delivery on intervals $[T_{i} , T_{i+1}], i=1, \dots, n-1 $, where $[T_{i} , T_{i+1}]$ represents a partition of the interval $[T_1 , T_n ]$, by the following relation:
$$F(t, T_1 , T_n ) = \frac{1}{T_n - T_1} \sum_{i=1}^{n-1}(T_{i+1} - T_i ) F(t, T_i , T_{i+1} ) .$$
The situation is described by the following picture, describing the so called “Cascade unpacking mechanism":
at (0.625,18.25)[Jan]{}; at (1.875,18.25)[Feb]{}; at (3.125,18.25)[Mar]{}; at (4.375,18.25)[Apr]{}; at (5.625,18.25)[May]{}; at (6.875,18.25)[Jun]{}; at (8.125,18.25)[Jul]{}; at (9.375,18.25)[Aug]{}; at (10.625,18.25)[Sep]{}; at (11.875,18.25)[Oct]{}; at (13.125,18.25)[Nov]{}; at (14.375,18.25)[Dec]{};
at (7.5,17.75)[Cal 19]{};
(0,18) – (15,18); (0,17.5) – (15,17.5); (0,17.5) – (0,18); (15,17.5) – (15,18);
(1.875,16.75) – (1.875,17.25); (5.625,16.75) – (5.625,17.25); (9.375,16.75) – (9.375,17.25); (13.125,16.75) – (13.125,17.25);
(0,16.5) – (15,16.5); (0,16) – (15,16); (0,16) – (0,16.5); (3.75,16) – (3.75,16.5); (7.5,16) – (7.5,16.5); (11.25,16) – (11.25,16.5); (15,16) – (15,16.5);
at (1.875,16.25)[Q1/19]{}; at (5.625,16.25)[Q2/19]{}; at (9.375,16.25)[Q3/19]{}; at (13.125,16.25)[Q4/19]{};
(0.625,15.25) – (0.625,15.75); (1.875,15.25) – (1.875,15.75); (3.125,15.25) – (3.125,15.75); (5.625,15.25) – (5.625,15.75); (9.375,15.25) – (9.375,15.75); (13.125,15.25) – (13.125,15.75);
(0,15) – (15,15); (0,14.5) – (15,14.5); (0,14.5) – (0,15); (1.25,14.5) – (1.25,15); (2.5,14.5) – (2.5,15); (3.75,14.5) – (3.75,15); (7.5,14.5) – (7.5,15); (11.25,14.5) – (11.25,15); (15,14.5) – (15,15);
at (0.625,14.75)[J/19]{}; at (1.875,14.75)[F/19]{}; at (3.125,14.75)[M/19]{}; at (5.625,14.75)[Q2/19]{}; at (9.375,14.75)[Q3/19]{}; at (13.125,14.75)[Q4/19]{};
(4.375,13.75) – (4.375,14.25); (5.625,13.75) – (5.625,14.25); (6.875,13.75) – (6.875,14.25); (9.375,13.75) – (9.375,14.25); (13.125,13.75) – (13.125,14.25);
(0,13.5) – (15,13.5); (0,13) – (15,13); (0,13) – (0,13.5); (3.75,13) – (3.75,13.5); (5,13) – (5,13.5); (6.25,13) – (6.25,13.5); (7.5,13) – (7.5,13.5); (11.25,13) – (11.25,13.5); (15,13) – (15,13.5);
at (4.375,13.25)[A/19]{}; at (5.625,13.25)[M/19]{}; at (6.875,13.25)[J/19]{}; at (9.375,13.25)[Q3/19]{}; at (13.125,13.25)[Q4/19]{};
Data Analysis: from Futures Prices to Forward Curves {#Section: Data Analysis}
====================================================
From a theoretical point of view the contracts are settled continuously over the delivery period, as you can see from Equation , but in practice they are settled at discrete times. Assuming settlement at $N$ points in time $u_{1} < u_{2} < \ldots < u_{N}$, with $u_{1} = T_1$, $u_{N} = T_2$, and $\Delta_{i} = u_{i+1} - u_{i}$, then the discrete version of Equation becomes
$$F(t,T_1, T_2) = \sum_{i=1}^{N} w(u_{i}, T_1, T_2)f(t,u_{i}) \, \Delta_{i},$$
where, again, $w(u, T_1, T_2) = \frac{1}{T_2 - T_1}$.
The main goal of what follows is to provide a forward dynamics formulation starting from the futures prices that we observe in the market. What we are going to do is to build a smooth curve describing today’s forward prices from quoted futures prices, according to the Heath-Jarrow-Morton framework outlined before.
This is a well studied problem in literature and there are basically two approaches to do so: either fitting a parametric function to the entire yield curve by regression, or fitting all observed yields with a spline (see for example Anderson and Deacon [@ADA1] for a survey on different methods for constructing yield curves). Here we follow the second approach.\
Throughout the paper we will also use the notation $T_i^s,T_i^e$ to denote the first (start) and the last (end) day of the delivery period of the $i$-th contract, and $T^s,T^e$ in case of no ambiguity.
Our data set consists of French futures closing prices downloaded from Thomson Reuters, that span over a period of $17$ years, from $2002$ to $2019$. These contracts are divided with respect to the duration of the delivery period into: weekly (tickers F7B1-B5), monthly (ticker F7BM), quarterly (ticker F7BQ) and yearly (ticker F7BY) contracts. For each of these we have 4 typologies of rolling contracts, namely $c1$, $c2$, $c3$ and $c4$, where $c1$ and $c4$ are the ones with the closest and the farthest delivery period, respectively (for an example to see how rolling contracts work see Section \[Subsection: Working with real data\]).\
On the market we observe the quantity $F(0, T^s , T^e)$ for every contract, for different choices of $T^s , T^e$ ($T^e - T^s = \mbox{7 days}$ for the weekly, $T^e - T^s = \mbox{30 days}$ for the monthly, $T^e - T^s = \mbox{90 days}$ for the quarterly and $T^e - T^s = \mbox{365 days}$ for the yearly), where “$0$" is the current date, the first available being $\text{July } 1, 2002$, while the last available being $\text{March } 15, 2019$, for a total number of $4234$ current dates. More precisely, for each day, representing the “$0$" day, we have a different number of contracts with different delivery periods, depending on the data availability of that day. We want to extract the curve $f(0,u)$ for all the different choices of the “$0$" date.
When possible from now on we will write $f(u)$ instead of $f(0,u)$ and $F(T_1 , T_2)$ instead of $F(0, T_1 , T_2)$ to shorten the notation.
All the code and the computations have been implemented in MATLAB R2018a, on a CPU 2.6 GHz and 12 Gb of RAM HP Notebook with Windows $10$.
Extracting Smooth Forward Curves from market data {#Section: Extracting a Smooth Forward Curves from market data}
-------------------------------------------------
Obtaining a smooth curve of forward prices from futures prices is a well studied problem in the literature, see for example Fleten and Lemming [@Fleten03]. The initial condition for using a Heath-Jarrow-Morton approach when modelling forwards is a smooth curve describing today’s forward prices, which must be extracted from the futures prices observed in the market. We will follow the approach by Benth et al. [@BBK Ch. 7] by imposing the following
The forward curve can be represented as the sum of two continuous functions $\Lambda(u)$ and $\varepsilon(u)$: $$\label{Additive Function f}
f(u)= \Lambda(u) + \varepsilon(u), \quad u \in [T^{b},T^{e}],$$ where $T^s$ is the starting day of the settlement period for the contract with the closest delivery period and $T^e$ is the last day of the settlement period for the contract with the farthest delivery period. We interpret $\Lambda(u)$ as a seasonality function and $\varepsilon(u)$ to be an adjustment function that captures the forward curve’s deviation from the seasonality.
For the specification of the seasonality function we follow Benth et al. [@BBK], namely we define $$\label{Seasonality Function}
\Lambda(u) = a \, \mbox{cos} \left( (u-b) \cdot \frac{2 \pi}{365}\right).$$
The parameter $a \in \mathbb R_+$ is obtained by finding the minimum of the prices over all the contracts, while $b$ is the (normalized[^4]) distance between the end of the last day of the year from the day when the minimum occurs. This procedure leads to: $$\label{a,b parameters}
a=13.600 , \quad b=1358.038.$$ There are several other methods for extracting the seasonality function from the data (see for example Paraschiv [@Paraschiv2013], and Kiesel et al. [@KieselParaschiv2019] for an application to hourly data), but since this topics is not the main focus of our study, we prefer to stick on the well known method proposed by Benth et al. [@BKO07] and systematically described in Benth et al. [@BBK] (Chap.7, Sect.7.2.1).
We shall see now how the adjustment function $\varepsilon$ is obtained.
### The function $\varepsilon$: a maximum smooth forward curve {#Section: Maximum smooth forward curve}
By following the approach followed by Benth et al. [@BBK] and we follow a maximum smoothness criterion applied to the adjustment function $\varepsilon$.
One may ask why the maximum smoothness criterion is applied only to the adjustment function $\varepsilon$ and not to the entire forward function $f$. This ensures the presence of a seasonality pattern that, otherwise, would have possibly been smoothed out.
The properties we require for the adjustment function are that it is twice continuously differentiable and horizontal at time $T_{e}$, i.e. $$\label{eq:flatness}
\varepsilon'(T^{e})=0.$$ This flatness condition is due to the fact that the long end of the curve may be several years ahead, and obviously the market’s view on risk become less and less sensitive as time goes by.
Let us denote by $C^{2}_0([T^{b},T^{e}])$ the set of real-valued functions on the interval $[T^{b},T^{e}]$ which are twice continuously differentiable with zero derivative in $T_{e}$. We consider $\mathcal{C}$ as the set of polynomial spline functions of order four which belong to $C^{2}_0([T^{b},T^{e}])$.
We define the smoothest possible forward curve on an interval $[T^{b},T^{e}]$ as the function which minimizes, over $\mathcal C$, the integral $$\int_{T^{b}}^{T^{e}} [\varepsilon'' (u)]^{2} du$$ and such that the closing prices matching condition holds (this is made precise in Equation ).
We interpret the smoothest forward curve to be the one for which $\varepsilon$ solves the minimization problem above, with $\Lambda$ chosen as in and $a,b$ as in .
### A smooth forward curve constrained by closing prices {#Subsection:A smooth fwd by cls prices}
In this subsection we present the general procedure to extract the forward dynamics in a general situation with a fixed number of contracts from the market, but we will often make references to our own case. Before presenting the algorithm we need to introduce a procedure in order to deal with overlapping periods. Let $$\mathcal{T} = \left\lbrace (T_{1}^{b},T_{1}^{e}), \dots , (T_{m}^{b},T_{m}^{e}) \right\rbrace$$ be a list of start and end dates for the settlement periods of $m$ different futures contracts for a given day (in our case, $m=16$). We need to be able to handle the problem of overlapping settlement periods to rule out arbitrage opportunities. This was a concrete issue working with our data because it happens that, in a given day, two or more contracts have delivery periods that intersect. To overcome this, we construct a new list of dates $\mathcal{\widetilde{T}}$, namely $$\mathcal{\widetilde{T}}=
\left\lbrace T_{0}, T_{1}, \dots , T_{n} \right\rbrace,$$ where overlapping contracts are split into sub-periods. In our case $n$ is typically $24$, $T_0$ denotes the starting day of the contract with the closest delivery period, while $T_n$ denotes the last day of the contract with the farthest delivery period. The procedure is illustrated in the following figure:
(0,14) – (14,14);
(1,15) – (8,15); (1,14) – (1,15); (8,14) – (8,15); at (4.5,15.25)[settlement period for the first contract]{}; at (1,13.65)[$T_{0}:=T_{1}^{b}$]{}; at (8,13.65)[$T_{2}:=T_{1}^{e}$]{};
(4,16) – (12,16); (4,14) – (4,15.1) (4,15.45) – (4,16);
(12,14) – (12,16); at (8,16.25)[settlement period for the second contract]{}; at (4,13.65)[$T_{1}:=T_{2}^{b}$]{}; at (12,13.65)[$T_{3}:=T_{2}^{e}$]{};
As we can see from Figure \[fig:overlapping contracts\], the elements of this new list are basically the elements in $\mathcal{T}$ sorted in ascending order, with duplicate dates removed. The futures prices could be taken into account either by exact matching or by a constraint on the bid-ask spread prices. Dealing with closing prices, here we impose an exact matching prices on closing prices (see Equation ). From now on we denote with $F_{i}^{C}$ the closing price for the future $i$, $i \in \left\lbrace 1, \dots , m\right\rbrace $.
The adjustment functions $\varepsilon$ is chosen in the class $\mathcal{C}$, namely (with a slight abuse of notation we use $\varepsilon(u;\textbf{\textit{x}})$ instead of $\varepsilon(u) $ to stress the dependence on $\textbf{\textit{x}} $) $$\begin{aligned}
\varepsilon(u;\textbf{\textit{x}}) =
\begin{cases}
a_{1} u^{4} + b_{1} u^{3} + c_{1} u^{2} + d_{1} u + e_{1}, \quad u \in [T_{0},T_{1}],\\
a_{2} u^{4} + b_{2} u^{3} + c_{2} u^{2} + d_{2} u + e_{2}, \quad u \in [T_{1},T_{2}],\\
\qquad \qquad \quad \; \; \vdots \\
a_{n} u^{4} + b_{n} u^{3} + c_{n} u^{2} + d_{n} u + e_{n}, \quad u \in [T_{n-1},T_{n}].\\
\end{cases} \end{aligned}$$ where $\textbf{\textit{x}}' = [a_{1}, b_{1}, c_{1}, d_{1}, e_{1}, \dots a_{n}, b_{n}, c_{n}, d_{n}, e_{n}]$ is the row vector of the coefficients of the splines that we want to find. In this way we have, roughly speaking, a spline for every settlement period. To find the unknown parameters $\textbf{\textit{x}}' = [a_{1}, b_{1}, c_{1}, d_{1}, e_{1}, \dots a_{n}, b_{n}, c_{n}, d_{n}, e_{n}]$ in order to fully recover the adjustment function, we need to solve the following equality constrained convex quadratic programming problem $$\label{min-prolem}
\min_{\textbf{\textit{x}}\in \R^{5n}} \int_{T_{0}}^{T_{n}} [\varepsilon'' (u;\textbf{\textit{x}})]^{2} du,$$
subject to the following constraints:
- continuity of the derivatives up to second order at the knots, for $j = 1, \dots , n-1$, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{knots constraints raw 1}
a_{j+1}T^{4}_{j} + b_{j+1}T^{3}_{j} + c_{j+1}T^{2}_{j} + d_{j+1}T_{j} + e_{j+1} &= a_{j}T^{4}_{j} + b_{j}T^{3}_{j} + c_{j}T^{2}_{j} + d_{j}T_{j} + e_{j},\\
\label{knots constraints raw 2}
4a_{j+1}T^{3}_{j} + 3b_{j+1}T^{2}_{j} + 2c_{j+1}T_{j} + d_{j+1} &= 4a_{j}T^{3}_{j} + 3b_{j}T^{2}_{j} + 2c_{j}T_{j} + d_{j},\\
\label{knots constraints raw 3}
12a_{j+1}T^{2}_{j} + 6b_{j+1}T_{j} + 2c_{j+1} &= 12a_{j}T^{2}_{j} + 6b_{j}T_{j} + 2c_{j},
\end{aligned}$$
- flatness at the end (see Equation ) $$\begin{aligned}
\label{flatness constraint}
\varepsilon'(T_{n}; \textbf{\textit{x}}) &= 0,
\end{aligned}$$
- matching of the closing prices (see Equation ), for $i = 1, \dots , m$, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{closing price constraint}
F^{C}_{i} &= \frac{1}{T_{i}^{e}-T_{i}^{b}}\int_{T_{i}^{b}}^{T_{i}^{e}} [\Lambda(u) + \varepsilon(u;\textbf{\textit{x}}) ] \, du.
\end{aligned}$$
In this way the minimisation problem has a total of $3n + m - 2$ constraints (i.e., $3(n-1)$ constraints from -, one constraint from and $m$ constraints from ). By computing the second derivative of $\varepsilon$ and inserting it in Equation and integrating for every delivery period, we can rewrite the minimisation problem as $$\label{min problem with H}
\min_{\textbf{\textit{x}}\in \R^{5n}} \textbf{\textit{x}}' \mbox{\textbf{H}} \textbf{\textit{x}},$$
where $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Block Matrix}
\text{\textbf{H}}= \left[
\begin{matrix}
h_{1} & \dots & 0 \\
& \ddots \\
0 & \dots & h_{n}
\end{matrix}
\right]
& \quad \text{with} \quad
h_{j}= \left[
\begin{matrix}
\frac{144}{5} \Delta_{j}^{5} & 18 \Delta_{j}^{4} & 8 \Delta_{j}^{3} & 0 & 0 \\
18 \Delta_{j}^{4} & 12 \Delta_{j}^{3} & 6 \Delta_{j}^{2} & 0 & 0 \\
8 \Delta_{j}^{3} & 6 \Delta_{j}^{2} & 4 \Delta_{j}^{1} & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0
\end{matrix}
\right] \end{aligned}$$
and $$\label{Delta Coefficients Block Matrix}
\Delta^{l}_{j} = T_{j}^{l} - T_{j-1}^{l},$$ for $j=1, \dots , n$, and $l=1, \dots , 5$.
We clearly see that the constraints - are linear w.r.t. $\textbf{\textit{x}}$, and so they can be formulated in a matrix form as $\textbf{A\textit{x}} = \textbf{b}$, where $\textbf{A}$ is a $(3n+m-2) \times 5n$-dimensional matrix, and $\textbf{b}$ is a $(3n+m-2)$-dimensional vector. Solving the problem with the constraints - is equivalent to solving with the constraints written in the form $\textbf{A\textit{x}} = \textbf{b}$. Let $\lambda′= [\lambda_{1}, \lambda_{2}, \dots , \lambda_{3n+m-2}]$ be the corresponding Lagrange multiplier vector to the constraints -. So, we can now express as the following unconstrained minimization problem
$$\label{lagrange min-problem}
\min_{\textbf{\textit{x}} \in \R^{5n},\lambda \in \R^{3n+m-2}} \textbf{\textit{x}}'\textbf{H\textit{x}} + \lambda'(\textbf{A\textit{x}} - \textbf{b}).$$
The advantage of dealing with problem , instead of with the constraints -, is that is a unconstrained problem that can be simply solved. Indeed the solution $[\bar{\textbf{x}}, \bar{\lambda}]$ is obtained just solving the linear system $$\begin{aligned}
\label{equivalent min-problem}
\left[
\begin{matrix}
2\textbf{\textup{H}} & \textbf{\textup{A}}' \\
\textbf{\textup{A}} & \textbf{\textup{0}}
\end{matrix}
\right]
&
\left[
\begin{matrix}
\textbf{\textit{x}} \\
\lambda
\end{matrix}
\right]
=
\left[
\begin{matrix}
\textbf{\textup{0}} \\
\textbf{\textup{b}}
\end{matrix}
\right].
\end{aligned}$$
The dimension of the left matrix is $(8n+m-2) \times (8n+m-2)$. Solving numerically is standard, and can be done using various techniques (e.g. QR or LU factorisation)[^5].
Numerical Results {#Subsection: Working with real data}
-----------------
Recall that we are working with closing prices of French Futures from $2002$ to $2019$. The yearly contracts span from $2002$ to $2019$, the quarterly from $2011$ to $2019$, the monthly from $2011$ to $2019$ and the weekly from $2010$ to $2019$. We are working with *rolling contracts*, called $c1$, $c2$, $c3$, and $c4$. Below there is an example which shows how these contracts roll for a monthly contract.
(0,14) – (15,14);
(1.5,15) – (4,15); (4.5,15) – (7,15); (7.5,15) – (10,15); (10.5,15) – (13,15);
(0.25,14) – (0.25,15); (1.5,14) – (1.5,15); (4,14) – (4,15); (4.5,14) – (4.5,15); (7,14) – (7,15); (7.5,14) – (7.5,15); (10,14) – (10,15); (10.5,14) – (10.5,15); (13,14) – (13,15);
at (0.25,15.25)[Start]{}; at (2.75,15.25)[c1 contract]{}; at (5.75,15.25)[c2 contract]{}; at (8.75,15.25)[c3 contract]{}; at (11.75,15.25)[c4 contract]{};
at (0.25,12.8); at (1.5,12.8); at (4,12.8); at (4.5,12.8); at (7,12.8); at (7.5,12.8); at (10,12.8); at (10.5,12.8); at (13,12.8);
As you can see from Figure \[fig:rolling contracts\], the c1 contract is the closer one to the current date and its delivery period spans from 01/02/2014 to 28/02/2014. After 28/02/2014, there is a rollover from the c1 contract to the c2 contract and so on.
The following Figure \[fig:subfig1\] shows the plot of the futures closing prices for $c1, c2, c3$ and $c4$ contract for the weekly contract. In the $x$-axis there are the different dates, while in the $y$-axis there is the price. As you can see the presence of seasonality is pretty strong and this could also be seen from the monthly and quarterly contracts.
\
Since we were worried that our analysis could have been affected by the presence of the quarterly contracts being sensible to the seasonality pattern, we did the analysis in both cases, with and without the quarterly contracts. After the analysis was performed, we noticed that the results were coherent in both cases, so from now on we will focus only on contracts different from quarterly.
The algorithm presented takes approximately $40$ seconds to extract the $4234$ different curves, i.e. the curves $f(0,u)$, for all the $4234$ different values of “$0$".\
![De-seasonalized forward curves extracted without considering quarterly contracts. In the $x$-axis there is the time to maturity while in the $y$-axis there are the prices in euros.[]{data-label="fig:Forward Curves Total"}](Forward_curves_2_traslando_80_per_prezzi_positivi)
Figure \[fig:Forward Curves Total\] shows, for every day from $2002$ to $2019$, a different curve $f(0,u)$, for a total number of $4234$ curves. In the $x$-axis we have the time to maturity while in the $y$-axis we have the prices. Note that different colours in the curves mean different type of contracts. Note also that the further we move on the $x$-axis, the flatter the curves become. This is in line with the flatness constraint in Equation . The reason behind the difference in the shapes of the curves is to be investigated in the price constraint but also in the nature of the contracts, since for each day the number and the type of available contracts were different, having to deal also with overlapping settlement periods.
Jump Detection {#Section: Jumps Detection}
==============
We now want to detect the jumps. We will be only dealing with positive jumps since we have supposed that the jump size is distributed according to an exponential density, as already described in Section \[Forward Model\]. In the next subsection we will describe an algorithm that allows to detect jumps, and, as a by-product, which also gives their size.
Description of the Algorithm {#Subsection:JumpsAlgorithm}
----------------------------
In order to detect jumps we proceed in the following way: for a fixed maturity $T$, we define $$V_{t} = f(t,T),$$ the vertical section at maturity $T$, where the parameter $t$ ranges through all the curves, i.e. $t=1, \dots, 4234$. Roughly speaking, looking at Figure \[fig:Forward Curves Total\], this is nothing but the intersection between the vertical line $x=T$ and the curves. There are several ways to detect jumps from the data, maybe the more natural one consisting in fixing a threshold $\Theta \in \R_{+}$ and saying that a jump occurs at time $\tilde t$ if $|V_{\tilde t+1}-V_{\tilde t}| \geq \Theta$. We follow here an iterative weighted least square approach. Define $n=4234$ the total number of curves and $\mathcal{N}=\left\lbrace 1,2, \dots , n-1 \right\rbrace $. The algorithm to detect jumps reads as follows:
1. Define $\sigma_{1}^2 = \frac{1}{n-2} \sum_{t \in \mathcal{N}} \frac{(V_{t+1} - V_{t})^{2}}{V_{t}}$;
2. Identify all the $t \in \mathcal{N}$ such that $\frac{V_{t+1} - V_{t}}{\sqrt{V_{t}}} \geq 3\sigma_{1}$ and denote by $\mathcal{M}_1 \subseteq \mathcal{N}$ this family of indices, so that $m_{1}=|\mathcal{M}_1|$;
3. Define $\sigma_{2}^2 = \frac{1}{n-m_{1}-1} \sum_{t \in \mathcal{N} \smallsetminus \mathcal{M}_1} \frac{(V_{t+1} - V_{t})^{2}}{V_{t}}$;
4. Identify all the $t \in (\mathcal{N} \smallsetminus \mathcal{M}_1)$ such that $\frac{V_{t+1} - V_{t}}{\sqrt{V_{t}}} \geq 3\sigma_{2}$ and denote by $\mathcal{M}_2 \subseteq (\mathcal{N} \setminus \mathcal M_1)$ this family of indices, so that $m_{2}=|\mathcal{M}_2|$;
5. Iterate the procedure updating $\sigma_i^2 = \frac{1}{n-(\sum_{j=1}^{i-1} m_{j}) -1} \sum_{t \in \mathcal{N} \smallsetminus (\bigcup_{j=1}^{i-1} \mathcal{M}_j)} \frac{(V_{t+1} - V_{t})^{2}}{V_{t}}$ and $\mathcal{M}_i \subseteq \mathcal{N} \smallsetminus (\bigcup_{j=1}^{i-1} \mathcal{M}_j)$;
6. Stop when finding $k \in \N$ such that $m_{k}=|\mathcal{M}_k|=0$ (no new jumps are detected).
This procedure finds, at every iterations, new jumps. Clearly as the number of iterations increases, $\sigma_i$ decreases and so the jumps detected become smaller and smaller. After several tests on the data, we noticed that stopping at $k \in \N$ such that $m_k=0$ would lead to too many jumps, of which the last detected are much smaller compared to the ones discovered at the first iterations. So we chose, as a good compromise, to stop the algorithm after the first two iterations.
Jumps Analysis
--------------
We selected different values of $T$, namely $T=200$, $T=400$ and $T=700$ days. This covers all the different shapes of the forward curves and so it represents a good sampling of our data. After applying the algorithm described in Subsection \[Subsection:JumpsAlgorithm\] we end up with the following pictures showing the size and distribution of the jumps detected at $T=200$, represented by the orange vertical lines, together with the corresponding price plot, represented by the continuous blue line:
The number of detected jumps at the various iterations and for different maturities is listed below:
$T$ $200$ $400$ $700$
----- ------- ------- -------
38 19 43
48 55 36
86 74 79
: Number of jumps detected at different maturities and at different iterations.[]{data-label="tab: number of jumps"}
As one can see from the pictures above, at $T=200$ the jumps detected are the bigger ones with respect to their amplitude, and this is not surprising looking at Figure \[fig:Forward Curves Total\], where one can clearly see that the price movements are pretty significant at $T=200$. On the other hand, when $T=700$, the jumps detected are quite small and this is due to the fact that at $T=700$ the curves are pretty flatten, leading to prices which are close to each other.
Parameters Estimation
=====================
Before starting with the statistical tests on the two models, we still have to estimate: the size of the jumps and the parameters characterizing the drift and the volatility coefficients. We start with $\delta$, the jumps’ size. Recall that in Sections \[Hawkes\_Forward\] and \[CBI\_Forward\] we assumed for both models the jumps’ size to be distributed like an exponential random variable with parameter $\delta >0$. Let $z_i$ be the size of the $i$-th jump, where $i=1,\dots , L$ and $L$ is the number of jumps at the chosen maturity $T$ ( see Table \[tab: number of jumps\]). Then $\delta$ can be estimated e.g. via its Maximum Likelihood Estimator: $$\hat{\delta}= \frac{L}{\sum_{i=1}^{n} z_i}.$$ We obtain what follows (the fact that we have the smallest values of $\hat{\delta}$ at $T=200$ is not surprising at all, because at the beginning jumps are bigger, as said before):
$T$ $200$ $400$ $700$
-------------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
$\widehat{\delta}$ 0.064282682 0.194300598 0.430239733
: Parameter estimation for $\delta$.[]{data-label="tab: delta_estimation"}
We now need to estimate the parameter appearing in the drift coefficient of our forward dynamics.
Notice that neither in Equation (stated in the CBI framework), nor in Equation (given for the Hawkes case) the mean-reversion term appears, but it does if we pass under the measure $\mathbb P$ by exploiting, respectively, Propositions \[pro:changementprob\] and \[changeP\_Hawkes\]. In both cases we end up with the following dynamics under $\mathbb P$, for a fixed $T$: $$\widetilde X(t+1,T) = \widetilde X(t,T) - \int_t^{t+1} \widetilde a \widetilde X(s,T) ds$$ where $\widetilde X$ denotes the factor appearing in the forward dynamics without the seasonality and with no jumps (i.e., we remove all the times at which a jump has occurred).
In order to estimate $\widetilde a$ we simply discretize the above equation, by writing $$\widehat {\widetilde a } = 1 - \frac{\widetilde X(t+1,T)}{\widetilde X(t,T)},$$ so that the estimates follow:
$T$ $200$ $400$ $700$
---------------------- -------------- -------------- --------------
$\widehat{\tilde a}$ -0.001387342 -0.001771845 -0.000237952
: Parameters estimation for $\tilde a$[]{data-label="tab: mean_rev_speed_a_estimation"}
As you can see from Table \[tab: mean\_rev\_speed\_a\_estimation\], the estimated value of $\widetilde a$ in all the three cases is really small, very close to $0$.
Now it remains to estimate the volatility parameter $\sigma$, appearing in both Equations and in Equation . By recalling the iterative algorithm presented in Subsection \[Subsection:JumpsAlgorithm\] and taking as $\widehat \sigma$ the value of $\sigma_2$ (namely, the estimation after the second iteration), we get
$T$ $200$ $400$ $700$
-------------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
$\widehat{\sigma}$ 0.218667945 0.129560813 0.066361067
: Parameter estimation for $\sigma$.[]{data-label="tab: sigma_estimation"}
Testing the Models {#Section: Testing the Models}
==================
In this section we want to perform statistical tests concerning the intensity of the jumps. We want to check what is the best process modelling the jumps we have detected before. We test the two models based on Hawkes and branching processes, plus the Poisson, which is a toy-model:
- Poisson process;
- Hawkes process;
- Self exciting branching process.
We will mainly rely on the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) test, namely we will test the null hypothesis $H_0$, stating that the data have the same cumulative distribution function as the one coming from one of the above models, against the alternative $H_1$. We fix a significance level equal to $0.05$.\
Jump Intensity Estimation
-------------------------
Before using the KS test to check whether the jumps distribution comes from one of the three models, we need to estimate the intensity from our data. The input in all the cases will be the time occurrences of the jumps over $[0,T]$ (for the three different values of $T$), $0< \tau_{1} < \tau_{2} < \dots < \tau_{N}=T$, where $N$ can take the values $86$, $74$ and $79$ depending on the chosen maturity $T$, as you can check from Table \[tab: number of jumps\].
- The (constant) intensity, $\lambda^P>0$, is estimated as the ratio between the total number of (positive) jumps and the sum of the inter-times between two consecutive jumps.
- Here the intensity is given by Equation , so this case will be treated in a separate subsection.
- In this case the stochastic intensity $\lambda^B(t) \propto X(t,T)$ and the constant of proportionality $\gamma$ is estimated, for a fixed $T$, as the ratio between the total number of (positive) jumps and the cumulative (de-seasonalized) forward prices.
### The Hawkes Setting: Estimating $\lambda$
Recalling Equation , it is clear that we have to estimate three parameters: $\lambda(0)$, $\alpha$ and $\beta$. We mainly rely on the paper by Ozaki [@Ozaki1979] and we will find a Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE).\
The log-likelihood of a Hawkes process whose response function is of the form $\alpha e^{-\beta t}$, is given by
$$\label{Log likelihood function}
\log L\left(\tau_{1}, \cdots, \tau_{N}\right)=-\lambda(0) \tau_{N}+\sum_{i=1}^{N} \frac{\alpha}{\beta}\left(e^{-\beta\left(\tau_{N} -\tau_{i}\right)}-1\right)+\sum_{i=1}^{N} \log \left( \lambda(0)+\alpha A(i) \right) ,$$
where $A(i)=\sum_{\tau_{j} < \tau_{i}} e^{-\beta\left(\tau_{i} - \tau_{j} \right)}$ for $i \geq 2$ and $A(1)=0$.
In order to estimate the parameters $\lambda(0), \alpha,\beta$, we need to find the maximum of the function in , which is a real value function of three variables. The maximum was found using the command *fminsearch* of Matlab.
The following three tables show the parameters estimated for the jump intensity of the three different models at the maturities $T=200$, $T=400$ and $T=700$. As far as the branching model is concerned, $\lambda^B(t)$ is proportional to the process $X(t,T)$ (for a fixed $T$), and the parameter to be estimated is the $\gamma$, which is the constant ratio between the two processes.
----------------------- -------------- ---------- --------- ------------- -----------
(r)[1-1]{} (l)[2-6]{} $\lambda(0)$ $\alpha$ $\beta$ $\lambda^P$ $\gamma$
Poisson [–]{} [–]{} [–]{} $0.023$ [–]{}
Hawkes [0.017]{} 0.074 0.094 [–]{} [–]{}
Branching [–]{} [–]{} [–]{} [–]{} $0.00028$
----------------------- -------------- ---------- --------- ------------- -----------
: Parameters estimation for the three models at $T=200$.[]{data-label="tab:parameters_estimation_T=200"}
----------------------- -------------- ---------- --------- ------------- -----------
(r)[1-1]{} (l)[2-6]{} $\lambda(0)$ $\alpha$ $\beta$ $\lambda^P$ $\gamma$
Poisson [–]{} [–]{} [–]{} $0.018$ [–]{}
Hawkes $0.0026$ $0.012$ $0.016$ [–]{} [–]{}
Branching [–]{} [–]{} [–]{} [–]{} $0.00021$
----------------------- -------------- ---------- --------- ------------- -----------
: Parameters estimation for the three models at $T=400$.[]{data-label="tab:parameters_estimation_T=400"}
----------------------- -------------- ---------- --------- ------------- -----------
(r)[1-1]{} (l)[2-6]{} $\lambda(0)$ $\alpha$ $\beta$ $\lambda^P$ $\gamma$
Poisson [–]{} [–]{} [–]{} $0.0019$ [–]{}
Hawkes $0.040$ $0.059$ $0.085$ [–]{} [–]{}
Branching [–]{} [–]{} [–]{} [–]{} $0.00032$
----------------------- -------------- ---------- --------- ------------- -----------
: Parameters estimation for the three models at $T=700$.[]{data-label="tab:parameters_estimation_T=700"}
KS test for the models
----------------------
We perform a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test in order to check which of the proposed distributions best models the jumps in our data. At the end of the subsection we will provide the p-values to conclude.\
- We check whether the jumps inter-times are drawn from an exponential distribution with parameter $\lambda^P$, where $\lambda^P$ is the one given in Tables \[tab:parameters\_estimation\_T=200\], \[tab:parameters\_estimation\_T=400\] and \[tab:parameters\_estimation\_T=700\]. The $p$-value is automatically given by Matlab via the function *kstest*.
- We mainly adapt the methods in Lallouache and Challet [@LC16] to our purpose. In particular, we check if the time-deformed series of durations $\left\lbrace \theta_i \right\rbrace_{i=1,\dots,N} $, defined by $$\theta_{i}=\int_{\tau_{i-1}}^{\tau_{i}} \widehat{\lambda}_{t} d t,$$ has an exponential distribution of parameter $1$, where $\widehat{\lambda}_{t}$ is the intensity estimated before (the estimated parameters can be found in Tables \[tab:parameters\_estimation\_T=200\], \[tab:parameters\_estimation\_T=400\] and \[tab:parameters\_estimation\_T=700\]), and where recall that the $\tau_i$’s are the jumps arrival times. The $p$-value is automatically given by Matlab via the function *kstest*.
- The procedure here is quite different from the ones adopted before and it is the object of the following subsection.
### Setting the KS Test for the Branching Model
The KS test we will perform in this case was constructed based on the following classical result.
\[NHPP Proposition\] Let $({N}_t)_{t \geq 0}$ be a non homogeneous Poisson process with continuous expectation function. If $n$ events have occured in $(0,T]$, then the arrival times $\tau_1, \dots , \tau_n$ are distributed as the order statistics from a sample with cumulative distribution function $$\label{CDF_CBI}
F(t) = \frac{\int_{0}^{t} \lambda^B(s) ds}{\int_{0}^{T} \lambda^B(s) ds}, \quad 0 \leq t \leq T,$$ where in our case $\lambda^B(s) \propto f(s,T)$, for a fixed $T$.
Recall that $\lambda^B(s) \propto f(s,T)$, for any fixed $T$. It is crucial to notice, from Proposition \[NHPP Proposition\], that the distribution of the arrival times is independent of the factor of proportionality connecting $\lambda^B$ and $f(\cdot, T)$.
So in this case we perform a KS test, comparing the cumulative distribution function $F(t)$ in Equation with the empirical one relative to the jump times.\
Since $F(t)$ given in Proposition is not a priori associated to a known distribution, we cannot use the Matlab command kstest and we have to rely on the classical theory on the KS test. The KS statistics for the test is $$D_{n}=\sup _{x \in \R}\left|S_{n}(x)-F(x)\right|,$$ where $n$ is the number of our data (recall Table \[tab: number of jumps\]), $F$ is the cumulative distribution function in Equation and $S_n(x)$ is the empirical cumulative distribution function of the jump arrival times. We find:
$T$ $200$ $400$ $700$
------- -------- -------- --------
$D_n$ 0.2151 0.2276 0.2513
: Maximum distance between the empirical distribution function and the theoretical one for the Branching case.
In the following Figure \[cdf ecdf comparison\] we graphically compare the two cumulative distribution functions at the three different maturities.
In order to obtain the p-value in the branching case, we apply the asymptotic results in Facchinetti [@Facchinetti2009] in the case when the dataset is greater than $35$. We provide the $p$-values in the following table.
Values of $T$ $200$ $400$ $700$
--------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Poisson $\sim 0$ $\sim 0$ $\sim 0$
Branching 0.041 0.018 0.042
Hawkes 0.23 0.31 0.13
: p-value test for the three models for different $T$[]{data-label="tab: p_value_estimation"}
As one can see from Table \[tab: p\_value\_estimation\], the hypothesis that the intensity follows a Poisson process is highly rejected, as we expected. In the branching case the hypothesis is also rejected, even if the $p$-value in this case was much closer to the acceptance level of $0.05$. For the Hawkes case the test fails to reject the hypothesis since all the three values are above our level of acceptance.
As a conclusion we can resume the main achievement presented in the present paper. We proposed two alternative models for power forward prices evolution, based on a HJM approach, extending to forward prices dynamics two models already proposed for the spot price dynamics [@Eyjolfsson2018], [@JMSS] . After extracting forward curves from quoted futures prices, we proposed a parameters estimation method for both models and then we performed a test on the adequacy of the two models in describing the observed forward prices evolution. The final conclusion of our test is that the hypothesis that forward prices follow a CBI-type dynamics is rejected, while the hypothesis of a Hawkes type dynamics is not. This conclusion suggests that self-exciting effects can arise in power forward dynamics as well as in the spot dynamics, and that an approach based on Hawkes processes can capture these effects in a natural and parsimonious way.
[99]{}
Anderson, F. B., and Deacon, M. (1996): Estimating and Interpreting the Yield Curve. *John Wiley and Sons*.
Benth, F. E., Koekebakker, S. and Ollmar, F. (2007): Extracting and Applying Smooth Forward Curves From Average-Based Commodity Contracts with Seasonal Variation, *Journal of Derivatives*, 15(1), 52-66.
Benth, F. E., Paraschiv, F. (2018): A space-time random field model for electricity forward prices, *Journal of Banking and Finance*, 95, 203-216.
Benth, F. E., Piccirilli, M. and Vargiolu, T. (2019): Mean-reverting additive energy forward curves in a Heath-Jarrow-Morton framework, *Mathematics and Financial Economics*, 13(4), 543-577.
Benth, F. E., Salthyte-Benth J. and Koekebakker S. (2008): *Stochastic Modelling of Electricity and Related Markets* , World Scientific, Singapore.
Bernis, G., Salhi, K. and Scotti, S. (2018): Sensitivity analysis for marked Hawkes processes: application to CLO pricing, *Mathematics and Financial Economics*, 12(4), 541–559.
Bernis, G., Scotti, S. and Sgarra, C. (2019): A Gamma Ornstein-Uhlenbeck model driven by a Hawkes process, preprint, available at SSRN.
Christensen, T.M., Hurn A.S. and Lindsay, K.A. (2009): It never rains, but it pours: modelling the persistence of spikes in electricity markets, *Energy Journal* 30(1), 25-48.
Clements, A., Fuller J. and Hurn, A.S. (2013): Semi-parametric forecasting of spikes in electricity prices, *Economic Records* 89(287), 508-521.
Dawson, D.A. and Li, Z. (2006): Skew convolution semigroups and affine Markov processes. *Annals of Probability*, 34(3), 1103-1142.
Dawson, A and Li, Z. (2012): Stochastic equations, flows and measure-valued processes. *Annals of Probability*, 40(2), 813-857.
Duffie, D., Filipović, D. and Schachermayer, W. (2003): Affine processes and applications in finance, *Annals of Applied Probability*, 13(3), 984-1053.
Errais, E., Giesecke, K. and Goldberg, L.R. (2010): Affine Point Processes and Portfolio Credit Risk, SIAM Journal on Financial Mathematics, 1(1), 642-665.
Eyjolfsson, H., Tj[ø]{}shteim, D. (2018): Self-exciting jump processes with applications to energy markets, Ann. Inst. Stat. Math., 70(2), 373-393.
Facchinetti, S. (2009): A procedure to find exact critical values of Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, Italian Journal of Applied Statistics, 21(3-4), 337-359.
Filimonov, V., Bicchetti, D., Maystre and N., Sornette, D. (2014): Quantification of the high level of endogeneity and structural regime shifts in commodity markets, Journal of International Money and Finance, 42(C), 174-192.
Filipović, D. (2001): A general characterization of one factor affine term structure models, Finance and Stochastics, 5(3), 389-412.
Fleten, S.E. and Lemming J. (2003): Constructing forward price curves in electricity markets, Energy Economics, 25(5), 409–424.
Fu, Z. and Li, Z. (2010): Stochastic equations of non-negative processes with jumps, Stochastic Processes and their Applications, 120(3), 306-330.
D. Hainaut and F. Moraux (2019): A switching self-exciting jump diffusion process for stock prices, Annals of Finance, 15(2), 267-306.
Hawkes, A. G. (1971): Spectra of Some Self-Exciting and Mutually Exciting Point Processes, Biometrika, 58(1), 83-90.
He, X. and Li, Z. (2015): Distributions of jumps in a continuous-state branching process with immigration, Journal of Applied Probability, 53(4), 1166-1177.
Heath, D., Jarrow, R. and Morton, A. (1992): Bond Pricing and the Term Structure of Interest Rates: a New Methodology for contingent Claim Valuation, Econometrica, 60(1), 77-105.
Herrera, R. and Gonzalez, N. (2014): The modeling and forecasting of extreme events in electricity spot markets, International Journal of Forecasting, 30(3), 477-490.
Jiao, Y., Ma, C., Scotti, S., Sgarra, C. (2016): A Branching Process Approach to Power Markets, Energy Economics, 79, 144-156.
Kawazu, K. and Watanabe, S. (1971): Branching processes with immigration and related limit theorems, Theory Probab. Appl., 16(1), 36-54.
Kiesel, R. and Paraschiv, F. (2017): Econometric Analysis of 15-minutes intraday electricity prices, Energy Economics, 64, 77-90.
Kiesel, R., Paraschiv, F., S[æ]{}ther[ø]{}, A. (2019): On the construction of hourly price forward curves for electricity prices, Computational Management Science, 16(1-2), 345-369.
Lallouache, M. and Challet, D. (2016): The limits of statistical significance of Hawkes processes fitted to financial data, Quantitative Finance, 16(1), 1-11.
Latini, L., Piccirilli, M. and Vargiolu, T. (2018): Mean-reverting no-arbitrage additive models for forward curves in energy markets, Energy Economics, 79, 157-170.
Li, Z. (2011): *Measure-Valued Branching Markov Processes*. Springer, Berlin.
Li, Z. and Ma, C. (2015): Asymptotic properties of estimators in a stable Cox-Ingersoll-Ross model, Stochastic Processes and their Applications, 125(8), 3196-3233.
Ozaki, T. (1979): Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Hawkes self-exciting point processes, Ann. Inst. Statist. Math., 31(1), 145-155.
Paraschiv, F. (2013): Price dynamics in electricity markets, in Handbook of Risk Management in Energy Production and Trading, pp. 47-69.
Pardoux, E. (2016): *Probabilistic Models of Population Evolution*, Springer, Berlin.
Rambaldi, Q., Pennesi, X. and Lillo, F. (2015): Modeling foreign exchange market activity around macroeconomic news: Hawkes process approach, Phys. Rev. E, 91(1), 012819.
Schwarz, E.S. (1997): The stochastic behaviour of commodity prices: implications for valuation and hedging, Journal of Finance, 52(3), 923-973.
Walsh, J. (1980): *An Introduction to Stochastic Partial Differential Equations*. Ecole d’été de Probabilités de Saint-Flour XIV-1984, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1180, 265-430. Springer, Berlin.
[^1]: Universitá di Padova, Dipartimento di Matematica Applicata. Email: [email protected]
[^2]: Universitá di Padova, Dipartimento di Matematica Applicata. Email: [email protected]
[^3]: Politecnico di Milano, Dipartimento di Matematica. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR. Email: [email protected]
[^4]: By normalized distance we mean the distance in days multiplied by 252/365.
[^5]: In this work we have used LU factorisation, since in our case it performed better than the QR ones, i.e. it gives a conditioning number smaller than the QR ones.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We consider the problem of existence of entropy weak solutions to [scalar balance]{} laws with a dissipative source term. The flux function may be discontinuous with respect both to the space variable $x$ and the unknown quantity $u$. The problem is formulated in the framework of multi-valued mappings. We use the notion of entropy-measure valued solutions to prove the so-called contraction principle and comparison principle.\
[**AMS 2000 Classification: 35L65, 35R05**]{}\
[**Keywords**]{}: scalar balance laws, entropy weak solutions, entropy measure-valued solutions, semi-Kružkov entropies, comparison principle, discontinuous flux, implicit constitutive relation
author:
- Piotr Gwiazda
- 'Agnieszka Świerczewska-Gwiazda'
- Petra Wittbold
- Aleksandra Zimmermann
bibliography:
- 'hyper.bib'
title: 'Multi-dimensional scalar balance laws with discontinuous flux'
---
\[section\] \[section\] \[theorem\][Lemma]{} \[theorem\][Corollary]{} \[theorem\][Proposition]{} \[theorem\][Remark]{}
[[V]{}]{}
[[M]{}]{}
[[T]{}]{}
[[D]{}]{}
[[R]{}]{}
[[N]{}]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[**Proof:** ]{}]{}
Introduction
============
Our interest is directed to the following Cauchy problem describing the evolution of $u:\R_+\times\R^N\to\R$ $$\begin{aligned}
\label{E1}
u_t + {{\mathrm{div}}\,}\Phi(x,u)\ni f(t,x,u)&\quad \mbox{ on } \R_+\times \R^N,\\ \label{E0}
u(0,\cdot)=u_0 &\quad\mbox{ on } \R^N.\end{aligned}$$ where $\Phi:\R^N\times\R\to2^{\R^N}$ is a multi-valued mapping and $f:\R_+\times\R^N\times\R\to\R$ is a source term. Moreover $u_0:\R^N\to\R$ is a given initial data. The assumptions for $\Phi$ and $f$ shall be presented below. The formulation of the problem in the language of multi-valued flux function allows to capture relations which are not necessarily functions. [We will assume that the flux function is in the form of a composition, which allows, with an appropriate change of variables, to formulate the definition of entropy weak solutions in terms of the new variables]{}. An important property of such defined solutions is that in case of smooth fluxes they correspond to the classical definition of entropy weak solutions, see e.g. Kružkov [@Kr70]. We assume about $\Phi$ and $f$ that:
1. $\Phi(x,u)$ is a multi-valued mapping given by the formula $\Phi(x,u)=A(\theta(x,u))$ where $A: \R\to\R^N$, $A$ is continuous and $\theta : \R^N \times \R \to 2^{\R}\setminus \emptyset $ is a multi-valued mapping such that, for almost every $ x \in \R^N$, $\theta(x,\cdot) : \R \to 2^{\R}\setminus \emptyset $ is a maximal monotone operator with $0\in \theta (x, 0)$. The inverse to $\theta$ (w.r.t $u$), which we call $\eta$, is continuous. Moreover, we assume that $$\label{betaas}
\theta^*(\cdot,l) \in L^1(\R^N)$$ for each $l \in \R$, where $\theta^*$ denotes the minimal selection of the graph of $ \theta $.
2. there exist continuous functions $h_1$ and $h_2$ with [$\lim_{|u|\to\infty}h_1(u)=\infty$ such that$$\label{h1h2}
h_1(u)\le |\overline{\theta}|\le h_2(u)$$ for all $\overline{\theta}\in \theta(x,u)$, almost every $x\in\mathbb{R}^N$ and all $u\in\R$]{}
3. there exists $1\le p\le \frac{N}{N-1}$ and constants $R_\infty >0$ and $C_\infty>0$ such that for all $x>R_\infty$ $$|A(s)|^p\le C_\infty |\eta(x,s)|$$
4. $f(\cdot,\cdot,u)\in L^1_{loc}(\R_+\times\R^N)$ for all $u\in\R$; $f(t,x,\cdot)$ is continuous and $f(t,x,0)=0$ for a.a. $(t,x)\in\R_+\times\R^N$. Moreover $f$ is dissipative ($-f$ is monotone w.r.t. the last variable), i.e., $$\label{A4}
(f(t,x,u)-f(t,x,v))(u-v)\le0\quad \mbox{for all } u,v\in \R \mbox{ and a.a. } (t,x)\in \R_+\times \R^N$$
One could consider [a]{} more general source term, namely for almost all $(t,x)\in\R_+\times\R^N$ a maximal monotone (possibly multi-valued) mapping $f$. Then we would rewrite as $u_t+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}\Phi(x,u)-f(t,x,u)\ni 0$. The scalar conservation laws with a multi-valued source term were considered e.g. in [@GwSw2005].
The approach of considering the flux function in form of a composition was used by Panov in [@Panov] to solve the problem of well-posedness for a scalar conservation law [without source term (i.e. $f=0$) and a]{} flux function discontinuous with respect to $x$. More precisely, the author assumed that $\Phi(x,u)=A(\theta(x,u))$, where $A\in{\cal C}(\R;\R^N)$ and $\theta:\R^N\times\R\to\R$ is a Carathéodory function, which is for almost all $x\in\R^N$ strictly increasing with respect to $u$. Moreover the same condition as (H2) was assumed. Hence if $\eta(x,v)$ is the inverse to $\theta$, i.e., $\theta(x,\eta(x,v))=v$ then $u$ is a solution to – if there exists $v$ such that [$u=\eta(x,v)$ and]{} the following entropy inequality is satisfied in the distributional sense in $\R_+\times\R^N$ for all $k\in\R$ $$|\eta(x,v)-\eta(x,k)|_{t} \!+ {{\mathrm{div}}\,}({\rm sgn}\ (v-k) (\bG(v)-\bG(k)))\le 0.$$
The corresponding approach we find for fluxes discontinuous only with respect to $u$ in the paper by Carrillo, [@Carrillo2003]. The author studied the problem in a bounded domain $$\begin{split}
u_t+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}\Phi(u)\ni f&\quad{\rm in}\ (0,T)\times\Omega\\
u(0)=u_0&\quad{\rm in}\ \Omega
\end{split}$$ under the assumption that $\Phi$ is allowed to have discontinuities of first type on a finite subset of $\R$. After a change of variables the author deals with the following problem $$\begin{split}
g(v)_t+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}\Psi(u)=f&\quad{\rm in}\ (0,T)\times\Omega,\\
g(v(0))=u_0&\quad{\rm in}\ \Omega.
\end{split}$$ The proof of existence of solutions bases upon the comparison principle and the entropy inequality involving a version of semi Kružkov entropies, namely $E(v,k)=(g(v)-g(k))^+$.
The similar problem was considered in Bulíček et al. [@BuGwMaSw2011] with the use of different approach, namely $$\begin{split}
u_t+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}\Phi(u)= 0&\quad{\rm in}\ \R_+\times\R^N,\\
u(0)=u_0&\quad{\rm in}\ \R^N.
\end{split}$$ The authors showed existence and uniqueness of entropy weak solutions for jump continuous $\Phi$ (i.e. having countable, not necessarily finite, number of jumps). For the proof they essentially used the method of entropy measure-valued solutions introduced by DiPerna, cf. [@DiPerna] and later extended by Szepessy in [@Sz89a]. To handle the discontinuity of the flux function Bulíček et al. showed existence of a parametrization $U$, namely a nondecreasing function such that $\Phi\circ U$ is continuous. These ideas are combined in [@BuGwSw2013], where the authors treat the case of a flux function discontinuous in $x$ and $u$ for the problem $$\begin{split}
u_t+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}\Phi(x,u)= 0&\quad{\rm in}\ \R_+\times\R^N,\\
u(0)=u_0&\quad{\rm in}\ \R^N.
\end{split}\label{Bu}$$ The set of assumptions corresponds to the one formulated by Panov in [@Panov], namely $\Phi(x,u)=A(\theta(x,u))$ extended by the possibility that $A$ is a jump continuous function. Again through appropriate estimates for entropy measure-valued solutions and finding the parametrization $U$ the authors showed well-posedness for . Both in [@BuGwSw2013] and [@BuGwMaSw2011] the uniqueness of entropy weak solutions needs to be understood up to the level sets of the parametrization $U$. This is also related with a restricted family of entropies which are allowed, what we will discuss in more detail after the statement of definition and main theorem.
In the present paper we have added a source term, which requires additional attention in various crucial estimates. However the main novelty is to combine the approaches from [@BuGwSw2013] and [@Carrillo2003] and consequently obtain a stronger result. The proof bases on the combination of comparison principle and formulating the definition with help of the entropies of semi-Kružkov type with compactenss arguments. The approach presented here gives additional advantages. If the starting point are considerations on the problem formulated with discontinuous flux (jump continuous), we shall first fill up the jumps. In the case of [@BuGwSw2013] we may only do it with intervals, however in the current setting we have more freedom. We come back to this issue at the end of the introduction, after formulating the definition and recalling in more detail the framework of [@BuGwSw2013].
Before we formulate the definition of entropy weak solutions let us introduce some notation. By ${\cal D}(\Omega)$ we mean the set of smooth functions with a compact support in $\Omega$, ${\cal C}(\Omega;X)$ is the set of continuous functions from $\Omega$ to the space $X$. For $ 1\le p\le\infty$ by $L^p(\Omega)$ we understand standard Lebesgue spaces and by $L^p(\R_+;X)$ Bochner spaces.
\[weak\] Let $ \Phi, f$ satisfy the assumptions (H1)–(H4). We say that a function $u\in L^\infty(\R_+\times\R^N)\cap
L^\infty(\R_+;L^1(\R^N))$ is an entropy weak solution of - if there exists a function $g\in L^\infty(\Rdp)$ such that [$u=\eta(x,g)$ and]{} for all $\psi\in{\cal D}(\R\times\R^N),\,\psi\ge0$ and for all $k\in\R$
- $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber
\int_{\Rdp} \left\{\left(\eta(x,g)-\eta(x,k)\right)^+\psi_t+\chi_{\{g>k\}}(A(g)-A(k))\nabla \psi+\chi_{\{g>k\}} f\psi
\right\} \\
\ge-\int_\Omega(u_0-\eta(x,k))^+\psi(0,\cdot), \end{aligned}$$
- $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber
\int_{\Rdp} \left\{(\eta(x,k)-\eta(x,g))^+\psi_t+\chi_{\{k>g\}}(A(k)-A(g))\nabla \psi-\chi_{\{k>g\}} f\psi
\right\} \\
\ge-\int_{\R^N}(\eta(x,k)-u_0)^+\psi(0,\cdot). \end{aligned}$$
Note that $(i)$ and $(ii.)$ of Definition \[weak\] are equivalent to the conditions $$\label{eqcondI}
\int_{\Rdp} |\eta(x,g)-\eta(x,k)|\psi_t+\operatorname{sgn}(g-k)(A(g)-A(k))\nabla \psi+\operatorname{sgn}(g-k)f\psi \geq 0$$ for all $\psi\in\mathcal{D}((0,T)\times\mathbb{R}^N)$ such that $\psi\geq 0$ and $$\label{eqcondII}
\operatorname{ess}\lim_{t\rightarrow 0}\int_K |u(t,x)-u_0| \ dx=0$$ for any compact $K\subset\mathbb{R}^N$.
Now we are ready to formulate the main result of the paper on the existence of entropy weak solutions.
\[main\] Let $ \Phi, f$ satisfy the assumptions (H1)–(H4). Assume $u_0\in L^1(\R^N)\cap L^{\infty}(\R^N)$. Then there exists an entropy weak solution $u$ to – in the sense of Definition \[weak\]
To understand the advantage of the framework presented here let us closely observe the approach in [@BuGwSw2013] and recall that by an [*admissible parametrization*]{} of $A$ the authors understand a couple $({\cal A},U)$ if the function $U\in \mathcal{C}(\R)$ is nondecreasing and $\lim_{s\to \pm \infty}U(s)=\pm \infty$. [Moreover, defining]{} $$\label{alphabeta}
\alpha_k:= \inf_{\alpha; \; U(\alpha)=z_k}\alpha,
\qquad \beta_k:= \sup_{\beta; \; U(\beta)=z_k}\beta$$ it is required that the function $U$ is constant on $[\alpha_k,\beta_k]$ and strictly increasing on $(\beta_k,\alpha_{k+1})$ for all $k\in\mathbb{N}$. The function ${\cal A}\in {\mathcal{C}(\R;\mathbb{R}^N)}$ satisfies ${\cal A}(s)\in A(U(s))$ and is linear on $[\alpha_k,\beta_k]$ for all $k\in \mathbb{N}$. Then $ {u\in L^{\infty}(0,\infty;L^1(\R^N))\cap L^{\infty}(\R_+\times\mathbb{R}^N)}$ is an entropy weak solution to related to $({ A},\theta)$ and $u_0$ for an admissible parametrization $({\cal A},U)$ of $A$ if there exists a function $g\in L^{\infty}(\Rdp)$ such that $$\eta(x,U(g(t,x)))=u(t,x),\quad {\cal A}(g(t,x))\in \bG(\theta(x,u(t,x))) \qquad \textrm{ a.e. in } \Rdp,\label{u1}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
& {\operatorname{ess}\lim}_{t\to 0} \int_K |u(t,x)-u_0(x)|\; dx =0, &&\textrm{for any compact } K\subset \R^N, \label{u4}\end{aligned}$$ and for all nonnegative $\psi\in \mathcal{D}(\Rdp)$ and arbitrary $k\in \mathbb{R}\setminus\bigcup_{l\in{\mathbb N}}\,(\alpha_l,\beta_l)$ there holds $$\begin{split}
&\int_{\Rdp}|\eta(x,U(g(t,x)))-\eta(x,U(k))| \psi_{t}(t,x)\; dx \; dt\\
&\quad +\int_{\R_+\times\R^N} (\sgn (g(t,x)-k) ({\cal A}(g(t,x))-{\cal A}(k))) \cdot \nabla \psi(t,x) \; dx\; dt \ge 0.\label{u3_en}
\end{split}$$ The numbers $\alpha_l,\beta_l$, $l\in{\mathbb N}$ are defined in .
Any entropy weak solution is a weak solution to -. Indeed, since $g\in {L^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}_+\times\mathbb{R}^N)}$ we may take $k:=\pm \|g\|_{\infty}$ in (or possibly we increase/decrease the value of $k$ such that $U$ is strictly increasing in $k$) and by using the strict monotonicity of $\eta$ and the monotonicity of $U$ we conclude that $$\begin{aligned}
&u_{t} + {{\mathrm{div}}\,}A(g) =0, &&\textrm{in the sense of distribution in } \Rdp,\label{u2}\end{aligned}$$ which is exactly . Next, we can use the fact that by functions $|u-\cdot|$ one can generate any convex function and therefore it is a direct consequence of that (see [@BuGwMaSw2011] for details) for all smooth convex ${E}$, such that ${E}$ is linear on $(\alpha_k,\beta_k)$ for all $\mathbb{N}$, where $\alpha_k$ and $\beta_k$ are introduced in , there holds $$\begin{aligned}
&Q_u(x,g)_{t} + {{\mathrm{div}}\,}\bQ_{A} \le 0, &&\textrm{in sense of
distribution in }\R_+\times\R^N\label{u3}\end{aligned}$$ with $Q_u$ and $\bQ_{A}$ given by $$\partial_s Q_u(x,s)=\partial_s \eta(x,U(s)){E}'(s), \qquad \bQ_{A}(s)= \int_0^s{A'(\tau)} {E}'(\tau)\;d\tau.\footnote{Since $A$ is only continuous, then this relation should be understood as follows $\bQ_{A}(s)= A(s)E'(s)-\int_0^s{A(\tau)} {E}''(\tau)\;d\tau.$}
\label{opet}$$
Hence from here one easily observes that does not hold for all $k\in\R$ and the family of entropies is restricted to such that are linear on the intervals $(\alpha_k, \beta_k)$. In a consequence we lose the information on the intervals where $\theta$ is multi-valued. In the current paper the situation is significantly different. The approximation of the problem follows in two steps. One is the mollification of the multi-valued term (we take a minimal selection and then mollify with a smooth kernel) and the second one consists in subtracting a strictly monotone perturbation from the source term. Then the right hand side becomes strictly dissipative, namely the inequality in becomes strict for $u\neq v$ and this is the sufficient argument to obtain the uniqueness of entropy measure-valued solutions and to show they reduce to a Dirac measure. [Here one needs the initial condition.]{} For passing to the limit with a perturbation of the right-hand side one takes advantage of the semi-Kružkov entropies $E(u,k)=(u-k)^+$ and $E(u,k)=(u-k)^-$ and then combines the information on the monotonicity of appropriate sequences and boundedness to obtain the strong convergence. Hence this is sufficiently powerful information to provide that on the sets where $\theta$ is multi-valued one is not obliged to have linear (or affine) functionals and continuity is enough for the limit passage.
We complete this section by referring to other previous results for scalar conservation laws with discontinuous fluxes. The approach of Panov [@Panov] arises from an idea of [*adapted entropies*]{} introduced for the problems with $x-$discontinuous fluxes in [@BaJe1997] and later in [@AudussePerthame]. The approach consisted in using in classical Kružkov entropies in place of a constant $k$ the solution to a stationary problem. The equivalence between such solutions and entropy weak solutions understood as in [@Kr70] in case of smooth fluxes was shown in [@Chen]. There are various different approaches to fluxes discontinuous in $x$, see e.g. the front tracking method for one dimensional problem, cf. [@Gi1993; @KaRiTo2003; @Risebro]. The multi-dimensional problem was considered among others in [@AnKaRi2010; @Ji2011; @Mi2010]. To motivate the studies in the direction of fluxes discontinuous in $u$ we refer to the implicit constitutive theory and the works of Rajagopal, [@Ra03], described also in more detail in [@BuGwMaSw2011].
The paper is organized as follows. In Section \[entropy\] we collect all the essential tools needed for the proof of Theorem \[main\]. We start with a contraction principle formulated for entropy measure-valued solutions (Lemma \[contraction\]). Then essentially using this result we show a contraction principle for entropy weak solutions [(Lemma \[22\], estimate )]{} and comparison principle for entropy weak solutions [(Lemma \[22\], estimate )]{}. The whole Section \[existence\] is dedicated to the proof of Theorem \[main\]. We start with regularizing the flux function and then add the strictly monotone perturbation to the source term. The scheme of the proof is first showing the existence of entropy measure-valued solutions, then their uniqueness and finally concluding that the solutions are indeed entropy weak solutions. In the final part of the paper there is an appendix which partially recalls the facts from [@BuGwSw2013] and also extends some technical lemmas for the case of multi-valued mappings.
Entropy inequalities {#entropy}
====================
We shall start this section with the definition of entropy measure-valued solutions and then collect the essential estimates used for the proof of existence of solutions: averaged contraction principle and comparison principle.
Averaged contraction principle for entropy measure valued solutions
-------------------------------------------------------------------
We recall that $\M(\R)$ denotes the space of bounded Radon measures and $\prob(\R)$ the space of probablity measures, $\mathcal{C}_b(\mathbb{R})$ stands for the space of continuous bounded functions. [As usual, $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle$ denotes the duality pairing between $\mathcal{C}_b(\mathbb{R})$ and $\mathcal{M}(\mathbb{R})$.]{} By a Young measure $\nu$ we mean a weak$^*$ measurable map $\nu:\Rdp\to{\mathcal M}(\R)$ and such that $\nu_{(t,x)}\ge0, \|\nu_{(t,x)}\|_{{\mathcal M}(\R)}\le 1$ for a.a. $(t,x)\in\Rdp$. Any bounded sequence [of measurable functions]{} $u^n:\Rdp\to\R$ generates a Young measure, which is a probability measure. By $L^\infty_w(\Rdp;{\mathcal M}(\R))$ we understand the space of weak$^*$ measurable maps $\nu:\Rdp\to{\mathcal M}(\R)$ that are essentially bounded.
\[DF2\] Let $ \Phi, f$ satisfy the assumptions (H1)–(H4) and $u_0\in L^1_{loc}(\R^N)$. We say that a Young measure $\nu:\Rdp \to
\prob(\R)$ is an entropy measure-valued solution to if there exists $R(t,x)\in L^{\infty}_{loc}(\R_+\times \R^N)$ such that $$\begin{split}
\supp \nu_{(t,x)} \subset [-R{(t,x)},R{(t,x)}] \qquad \textrm{ for a.a. } (t,x)\in \Rdp
\end{split}\label{ApE}$$ and if for all $\mu \in \R$ and all nonnegative $\psi \in \mathcal{D}(\Rdp)$ there holds
$$\begin{split}
&\int_{\Rdp}\langle (\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu))^+,\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)
\rangle \psi_{t}(t,x)\; dx \; dt \\
&\quad + \int_{\Rdp}\langle \chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}(A(\lambda)-A(\mu))
,\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle \cdot \nabla \psi (t,x) \; dx\; dt \\
&\quad + \int_{\Rdp}
\langle \chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}} f(t,x,\lambda),\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle\psi \; dx\; dt\ge 0 . \label{EQ+}
\end{split}$$
and $$\begin{split}
& {-\int_{\Rdp}\langle (\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu))^-,\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)
\rangle \psi_{t}(t,x)\; dx \; dt} \\
&\quad + \int_{\Rdp}\langle \chi_{\{\lambda<\mu\}}(A(\lambda)-A(\mu))
,\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle \cdot \nabla \psi (t,x) \; dx\; dt \\
&\quad + \int_{\Rdp}
\langle \chi_{\{\lambda<\mu\}} f(t,x,\lambda),\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle \psi\; dx\; dt\le 0 . \label{EQ-}
\end{split}$$ Moreover, for all compact $K\subset \R^N$ the following holds $$\label{ic}
{\operatorname{ess}\lim}_{t\to 0_+} \int_K \langle |\eta(x,\lambda)-u_0(x)|,\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle \; dx =0.$$
The existence of entropy measure-valued solutions will be a byproduct of the proof of existence of entropy weak solutions. Below we formulate and prove the estimate (the averaged contraction principle) which is used both for showing existence and uniqueness of entropy measure-valued solutions. The proof bases on the method of doubling the variables, but on the level of measure-valued solutions.
\[contraction\] Assume that $\nu$, $\sigma$ are two local entropy measure-valued solutions to with a right-hand side $f$ and initial condition $u_0\in L^1_{loc}(\R^N)$. Let[^1] $E(\xi)=|\xi|$ with a corresponding flux $Q(\lambda,\mu)=\sgn(\lambda-\mu)(A(\lambda)-A(\mu))$. Moreover let $$E'(\xi):=(\partial E)^0(\xi)=\left\{\begin{array}{rcl}
-1&{\rm for}&\xi<0\\
0&{\rm for}&\xi=0\\
1&{\rm for}&\xi>0
\end{array}.\right.$$ Then for all nonnegative $\psi \in \mathcal{D}(\Rdp)$ it holds $$\begin{split}
&\int_{\Rdp}\langle E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\otimes \sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle \psi_{t}(t,x)\; dx\; dt\\
&\quad + \int_{\Rdp}\langle Q(\lambda, \mu), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\otimes \sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle \cdot \nabla \psi(t,x)\; dx \; dt \\
&\quad +\int_{\Rdp}\langle E'(\lambda-\mu)(f(t,x,\lambda)-f(t,x,\mu)), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\otimes \sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle\psi(t,x)\;dx\;dt
\ge 0 \label{begin3}
\end{split}$$
Let $\omega\in \mathcal{D}(-1,1)$ be a regularizing kernel, i.e., $\omega(x)=\omega(-x)$ and $\int_{-1}^1 \omega(x)\; dx =1$. Then, for any $\gamma>0$, we define $$\begin{aligned}
\omega_1^{\gamma}(t)&:=\gamma^{-1} \omega (t/\gamma) &&\textrm{for all } t\in \R,\\
\omega_2^{\gamma}(x)&:= \gamma^{-N} \omega(x_1/\gamma)\cdot \ldots\cdot \omega(x_N/\gamma) &&\textrm{for all } x=(x_1,\ldots, x_N)\in \mathbb{R}^N.\end{aligned}$$ For arbitrary $\varepsilon,\delta>0$ we set $\omega^{\delta,\varepsilon}(t,x):=\omega_1^{\delta}(t)\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon}(x)$. Notice that for any Young measure $\nu \in L^{\infty}_{w}([0,T]\times \R^N; \mathcal{M}(\R))$ there exists a Young measure $\nu^\delta\in L^{\infty}_{w}(\R^N;\mathcal{C}^{\infty}([0,T]; \mathcal{M} (\R))) $ with $\|\nu^\delta\|_{L^{\infty}_{w}([0,T]\times \R^N; \mathcal{M}(\R))}\le 1$ such that for any $f\in {\mathcal{C}_b(\R)}$ the following holds[^2] $(\omega_1^\delta*\langle f, \nu \rangle)=\langle f, \nu^{\delta}
\rangle$ for almost all $t\in \R$. Moreover, we can interchange the derivative as $\langle f, \partial_t\nu^\delta \rangle=\langle f, \nu^\delta \rangle_{t}$ for all $t\in \R$. Similarly, there exists $\nu^\varepsilon \in L^\infty_w([0,T];\mathcal{C}^{\infty}(\R^N_{loc}; \mathcal{M} (\R)))$ with $\|\nu^\varepsilon\|_{L^{\infty}_{w}([0,T]\times \R^N; \mathcal{M}(\R))}\le 1$ such that $\omega_2^\varepsilon *\langle f, \nu \rangle
=\langle f, \nu^\varepsilon\rangle$ and $\langle f, \partial_{x_i} \nu^\varepsilon\rangle=\partial_{x_i}\langle f, \nu^\varepsilon \rangle$ for all $x\in \R^N$, see Ref. [@DiPerna].
Let $Q(\lambda,\mu):= \sgn(\lambda-\mu)(A(\lambda)-A(\mu))$. Then $$(\nu,\sigma)\mapsto \langle Q(\lambda, \mu),\nu\otimes \sigma\rangle \in\R$$ is a bounded bilinear form from $\M(\R)\times \M(\R)$ to $\R$ and $$(t,x)\mapsto \nu_{(t,x)}^{\varepsilon,\delta}\in {\cal C}^\infty (K,(\M(\R), \|\cdot\|_{\M}))$$ $$(t,x)\mapsto \sigma_{(t,x)}^{\varepsilon,\delta}\in {\cal C}^\infty (K,(\M(\R), \|\cdot\|_{\M}))$$ for any compact $K\subset \R_+\times \R^N$ and then $$\label{div}
{{\mathrm{div}}\,}\langle Q(\lambda, \mu), \nu_{(t,x)}^\varepsilon\otimes\sigma_{(t,x)}^\varepsilon\rangle
=\langle Q(\lambda, \mu), \nabla \nu_{(t,x)}^\varepsilon\otimes\sigma_{(t,x)}^\varepsilon\rangle
+\langle Q(\lambda, \mu), \nu_{(t,x)}^\varepsilon\otimes\nabla \sigma_{(t,x)}^\varepsilon\rangle.$$ For arbitrary nonnegative $\psi\in \mathcal{D}(\Rdp)$ we observe that for all $\mu \in \R$ $$\begin{split}
&\int_{\Rdp} \langle E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)),\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)
\rangle\ (\psi * (\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon}))_{t} \; dx\; dt\\
&=\int_{\Rdp}\omega_2^{\varepsilon}*\langle E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)),\nu_{(t,x)}^{\delta}(\lambda)
\rangle\, \psi_{t} \; dx\; dt.
\end{split}\label{3.7}$$ Similarly, we obtain for all $\mu \in \R$ $$\begin{split}
&\int_{\Rdp}\langle Q(\lambda,\mu),\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle \cdot \nabla (\psi * (\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon}))\; dx\; dt=\\
&=\int_{\Rdp} \langle Q(\lambda,\mu),\nu_{(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\rangle \cdot \nabla \psi \; dx\; dt.
\end{split}$$ Moreover $$\label{2.11}\begin{split}
&\int_{\Rdp}\langle E'(\lambda-\mu)f(t,x,\lambda), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle \psi * (\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon}) \;dx\;dt\\
&=\int_{\Rdp}(\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'(\lambda-\mu)f(t,x,\lambda), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle \psi \;dx\;dt.
\end{split}$$ Summing and we obtain an entropy inequality with the entropy $E(\xi)=|\xi|$, where we may take $\psi * (\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})$ as a test function and using – we deduce that for all $\mu \in \R$ and all nonnegative $\psi \in \mathcal{D}((\varepsilon,\infty)\times \R^N)$ there holds $$\begin{split}
&\int_{\Rdp}\omega_2^{\varepsilon}*\langle E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)),\nu_{(t,x)}^{\delta}(\lambda)
\rangle \psi_{t}\; dx \; dt \\
&\quad +\int_{\Rdp} \langle Q(\lambda,\mu),\nu_{(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\rangle \cdot \nabla \psi \; dx\; dt
\\
&\quad+\int_{\Rdp}(\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'(\lambda-\mu)
f(t,x,\lambda), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle \psi \;dx\;dt \ge0\label{regularized}
\end{split}$$ which in particular implies that for all $\tilde{\mu}\in \R$ and all $(t,x)\in (\varepsilon,\infty)\times \R^N$ there holds $$\begin{split}
\left(\omega_2^{\varepsilon}*\langle E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\tilde \mu)),\nu_{(t,x)}^\delta(\lambda)
\rangle \right)_{t}
+ {{\mathrm{div}}\,}\langle Q(\lambda,\tilde \mu),\nu_{(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\rangle
\\
\le (\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'(\lambda-\tilde \mu)
f(t,x,\lambda), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle. \label{reg2}
\end{split}$$ Similarly we have for any $\varepsilon>0$, $\tilde \lambda \in \R$ and all $(t,x)\in (\varepsilon,\infty)\times \R^N$ $$\begin{split}
\left(\omega_2^{\varepsilon}*\langle E(\eta(x,\tilde \lambda)-\eta(x, \mu)),\sigma_{(t,x)}^\delta(\mu)
\rangle \right)_{t}
+ {{\mathrm{div}}\,}\langle Q(\tilde \lambda, \mu),\sigma_{(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\rangle
\\
\le (\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'( \mu-\tilde \lambda)
f(t,x,\mu), \sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle. \label{reg3}
\end{split}$$ We apply $\sigma_{(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}$ to . Note that the left-hand side is a continuous function of $\mu$ and the right-hand side is only a Borel function of $\mu$. Similarly we apply $\nu_{(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}$ onto . Summing the resulting expressions we find that for all $(t,x)\in (2\varepsilon,\infty)\times \R^N$ there holds $$\begin{split}
\langle \omega_2^{\varepsilon}*&\langle E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)), \nu_{(t,x)}^\delta(\lambda)\rangle_{t}, \sigma_{(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\rangle\\
&+\langle \omega_2^{\varepsilon}*\langle E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)), \sigma_{(t,x)}^\delta(\mu)\rangle_{t}, \nu_{(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\rangle\\
&+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}\langle Q(\lambda,\mu), \nu_{(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\otimes
\sigma_{(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\rangle \\
&\le \langle (\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'(\lambda- \mu)
f(t,x,\lambda), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle, \sigma^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle
\\
&+
\langle (\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'(\mu-\lambda)
f(t,x,\mu), \sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle, \nu^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle=:I
\end{split}
\label{regf}$$ To proceed with a righ-hand side we define the errors as follows $$\begin{split}
{\cal R}_{\varepsilon,\delta,n}^\lambda:=&
\langle(\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'(\lambda- \mu)
(f(t,x,\lambda)-f^n(t,x,\lambda), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle, \sigma^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle\\
+&
\langle(\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'(\lambda- \mu)
f^n(t,x,\lambda), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle, \sigma^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle\\
-&\langle\langle E'(\lambda- \mu)
f^n(t,x,\lambda), \nu^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle, \sigma^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle
\end{split}$$ and $$\begin{split}
{\cal R}_{\varepsilon,\delta,n}^\mu:=&
\langle(\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'(\mu-\lambda)
(f(t,x,\mu)-f^n(t,x,\mu), \sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle, \nu^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\lambda) \rangle\\
+&
\langle(\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'(\mu-\lambda)
f^n(t,x,\mu), \sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle, \nu^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle\\
-&\langle\langle E'(\mu-\lambda)
f^n(t,x,\mu), \sigma^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle, \nu^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle
\end{split}$$ where $(f^n)_{n\in{\mathbb N}}$ is the sequence of uniformly continuous functions in $(t,x)$ and continuous in $u$ and there exists an $L_K(n)$ such that for a fixed compact $K$ it vanishes as $n\to\infty$ and $$\sup\limits_{\lambda\in K}\|f(\cdot,\cdot,\lambda)-f^n(\cdot,\cdot,\lambda)\|_{L^1(\Rdp)}\le L_K(n).$$ Let ${\cal W}_K^n$ be a modulus of continuity of the function $f^n$, namely ${\cal W}_K^n:\R^2_+\to\R_+$ is continuous, ${\cal W}_K^n(0,0)=0$ and $$\sup\limits_{\lambda\in K}|f^n(t-s,x-y,\lambda)-f^n(t,x,\lambda)|\le {\cal W}_K^n(|s|,|y|)$$ where $K$ is an arbitrary compact subset of $\R$. Hence $$\begin{split}
I&=\langle\langle E'(\lambda- \mu)
f^n(t,x,\lambda), \nu^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle, \sigma^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle +{\cal R}_{\varepsilon,\delta,n}^\lambda\\
&+\langle\langle E'(\mu-\lambda)
f^n(t,x,\mu), \sigma^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle, \nu^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle
+{\cal R}_{\varepsilon,\delta,n}^\mu
\end{split}$$ and as $E'(\xi)=-E'(-\xi)$ and using the Fubini theorem we further conclude $$I=\langle\langle E'(\lambda- \mu)
(f^n(t,x,\lambda)-f^n(t,x,\mu)), \nu^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle, \sigma^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle +{\cal R}_{\varepsilon,\delta,n}^\lambda+{\cal R}_{\varepsilon,\delta,n}^\mu.$$ Note that the function $E'(\lambda- \mu)
(f^n(t,x,\lambda)-f^n(t,x,\mu))$ is continuous, although $E'(\lambda- \mu)=\sgn(\lambda-\mu)$ is not continuous for $\lambda-\mu=0$. We shall estimate the error ${\cal R}_{\varepsilon,\delta,n}^\lambda$, the estimates for ${\cal R}_{\varepsilon,\delta,n}^\mu$ follow the same lines. Then $$\label{error-es}
\begin{split}
|{\cal R}_{\varepsilon,\delta,n}^\lambda|&\le
|\langle(\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'(\lambda- \mu)
(f(t,x,\lambda)-f^n(t,x,\lambda), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle, \sigma^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle|\\
&
+|\int_\R\int_{\R\times \R^N}\omega_1^\delta(s)\omega_2^\varepsilon(y)\langle E'(\lambda-\mu)
f^n(t-s,x-y,\lambda),\nu_{(t-s,x-y)}(\lambda)\rangle \; dy\; ds \; d\sigma^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\mu)\\
&-\int_\R\langle E'(\lambda-\mu) f^n(t,x,\lambda),\nu^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle \; d\sigma^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\mu) |\\
&\le\sup\limits_{\lambda\in K}\|f(\cdot,\cdot,\lambda)-f^n(\cdot,\cdot,\lambda)\|_{L^1(\Rdp)}\\&+
\sup\limits_{|t-s|\le\delta,\,|x-y|\le\varepsilon}|f^n(t-s,x-y,\lambda)-f^n(t,x,\lambda)|
\\
&\le L_K(n)+ {\cal W}_K^n(\delta,\varepsilon).
\end{split}$$
Thus, multiplying by an arbitrary fixed nonnegative $\psi \in \mathcal{D}((2\varepsilon,\infty )\times \R^N)$, integrating the result over $\Rdp$ and using integration by parts, we find that $$\begin{split}
-\int_{\Rdp} &\left(\left\langle \omega_2^{\varepsilon}*\langle |\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)|, \nu_{(t,x)}^\delta(\lambda)\rangle_{t}, \sigma_{(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\right\rangle\right.\\&+
\left.\left\langle \omega_2^{\varepsilon}*\langle |\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)|, \sigma_{(t,x)}^\delta(\mu)\rangle_{t}, \nu_{(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\right\rangle\right)\psi\; dx\; dt \\
& +\int_{\Rdp}\left\langle Q(\lambda,\mu), \nu_{(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\otimes \sigma_{(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\right\rangle
\cdot \nabla \psi \; dx \; dt \\
&\ge -
\int_{\Rdp} \langle E'(\lambda- \mu)
(f^n(t,x,\lambda)-f^n(t,x, \mu)), \nu^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\otimes \sigma^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle
\psi \; dx \; dt\\
&-2\int_{\Rdp}({\cal W}_K^n(\delta,\varepsilon)+L_K(n)) \psi \; dx \; dt
\end{split}\label{regf0}$$
First, we let $\varepsilon\to0_+$. Then let $\Omega_\psi:=\supp \psi$. From it follows that there exists a compact set $K$ such that for $(t,x)\in\Omega_\psi$ we have $\supp\nu^\delta_{(t,x)}\subset K$ and then also $\supp\partial_t\nu^\delta_{(t,x)}\subset K$. The same holds for $\sigma^\delta_{(t,x)}$.
Since $\theta$ is bounded by some function independent of $x$, then there exists a function $h_3$, again independent of $x$, such that for all $x\in\R^N$ and all $v\in\R$ $$|\eta(x,v)|\le h_3(v),$$ which provides that $\eta\in L^\infty(\Rdp;{\mathcal C}(K))$, where $ {(t,x)\mapsto \eta(t,x,\cdot)}$, hence also $\eta\in L^1(\Omega_\psi;{\mathcal C}(K))$. Consequently $E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu))\in L^1(\Omega_\psi;{\mathcal C}(K))$. Thus we can extract a subsequence, that we do not relabel, such that $$\begin{aligned}
\omega_2^{\varepsilon}*\langle E(\eta(\cdot,\lambda)-\eta(\cdot,\mu)), \partial_t\nu^\delta\rangle&\to\langle
E(\eta(\cdot,\lambda)-\eta(\cdot,\mu)), \partial_t\nu^\delta\rangle
&&\mbox{ strongly in }&& L^1(\Omega_\psi;\mathcal{C}(K)),\\
\omega_2^{\varepsilon}*\langle E(\eta(\cdot,\lambda)-\eta(\cdot,\mu)), \partial_t\sigma^\delta\rangle&\to\langle E(\eta(\cdot,\lambda)-\eta(\cdot,\mu)), \partial_t\sigma^\delta\rangle
&&\mbox{ strongly in }&&L^1(\Omega_\psi;\mathcal{C}(K)),\\
\sigma^{\delta,\varepsilon}&\rightharpoonup^*\sigma^{\delta}&&\mbox{ weakly$^*$ in }&&
L^\infty_{w}(\Omega_\psi;{\mathcal M}(K)),\\
\nu^{\delta,\varepsilon}&\rightharpoonup^*\nu^{\delta}&&\mbox{ weakly$^*$ in }&&
L^\infty_{w}(\Omega_\psi;{\mathcal M}(K)),\\
$$ as $\varepsilon\to0$. Using these convergence results, we observe from that $$\label{regf2}
\begin{split}
&-\int_{\Rdp} \langle \langle E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)), \nu_{(t,x)}^{\delta}(\lambda)\rangle_{t},
\sigma_{(t,x)}^{\delta}(\mu)\rangle \psi\; dx\; dt\\
&\qquad-\int_{\Rdp}
\langle\langle E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)), \sigma_{(t,x)}^{\delta}(\mu)\rangle_{t},
\nu_{(t,x)}^{\delta}(\lambda)\rangle\psi\; dx\; dt \\
&\qquad +\int_{\Rdp}\langle \bQ(\lambda,\mu), \nu_{(t,x)}^{\delta}(\lambda)\otimes
\sigma_{(t,x)}^{\delta}(\mu)\rangle
\cdot \nabla \psi \; dx \; dt \\ &\qquad\ge -
\int_{\Rdp}
\langle E'(\lambda- \mu)
(f^n(t,x,\lambda)-f^n(t,x, \mu)), \nu^\delta_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\otimes \sigma^{\delta}_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle
\psi \; dx \; dt\\
&\qquad- 2
\int_{\Rdp} ({\cal W}_K^n(\delta, 0)+L_K(n))
\psi \; dx \; dt.
\end{split}$$ Similarly to it is not difficult to observe that $$\begin{split}
\langle E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)), \nu_{(t,x)}^\delta\otimes \sigma_{(t,x)}^\delta\rangle_{t}&=\langle \langle E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)), \nu_{(t,x)}^{\delta}\rangle, \sigma_{(t,x)}^{\delta}\rangle_{t}\\
&=\langle \omega^{\delta}*\langle E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)), \nu_{(t,x)}\rangle, \sigma_{(t,x)}^\delta\rangle_{t}
\\
&=\left\langle ( \omega^{\delta}*\langle \zeta, \nu_{(t,x)} \rangle)_{t}, \sigma_{(t,x)}^\delta\right\rangle+
\left \langle (\omega^{\delta}*\langle \zeta, \sigma_{(t,x)}
\rangle)_{t},\nu_{(t,x)}^\delta \right\rangle.
\end{split}\label{chain}$$ Thus, using , and integrating by parts with respect to $t$, we find that $$\begin{split}
&\int_{\Rdp} \langle E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)), \nu_{(t,x)}^\delta(\lambda)\otimes
\sigma_{(t,x)}^\delta(\mu)\rangle\psi_{t}\; dx\; dt \\
&\qquad +\int_{\Rdp}\langle \bQ(\lambda,\mu), \nu_{(t,x)}^\delta(\lambda)\otimes
\sigma_{(t,x)}^\delta(\mu) \rangle
\cdot \nabla \psi \; dx \; dt \\
&\qquad\ge-\int_{\Rdp}
\langle E'(\lambda- \mu)
(f^n(t,x,\lambda)-f^n(t,x, \mu)), \nu^\delta_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\otimes \sigma^\delta_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle
\\
&\qquad- 2
\int_{\Rdp} ({\cal W}_K^n(\delta,0)+L_K(n))
\psi \; dx \; dt.
\end{split}$$ Letting $\delta \to 0_{+}$ we conclude by the argument of weak$^*$ convergence of measures $ \nu^\delta$ and $\sigma^\delta$ to $\nu$ and $\sigma$, respectively and ${\cal W}_K^n(\delta,0)\to0$. $$\begin{split}
&\int_{\Rdp} \langle E(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\otimes
\sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle\psi_{t}\; dx\; dt \\
&\qquad +\int_{\Rdp}\langle \bQ(\lambda,\mu), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\otimes
\sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu) \rangle
\cdot \nabla \psi \; dx \; dt \\
&\qquad\ge-\int_{\Rdp}
\langle E'(\lambda- \mu)
(f^n(t,x,\lambda)-f^n(t,x, \mu)), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\otimes \sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle \psi \; dx \; dt
\\
&\qquad-2
\int_{\Rdp} L_K(n)
\psi \; dx \; dt.
\end{split}$$
In the final step we let $n\to\infty$ and since $f^n\to f$ in $L^1(\Omega_\psi;{\cal C}(K))$ we obtain .
Comparison and contraction principles for entropy weak solutions
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the next lemma we included contraction and comparison principle for entropy weak solutions. In order not to involve the method of doubling the variables for weak solutions we use as much as possible the results obtained for measure-valued solutions. Here we consider the solutions $v_1$ and $v_2$ corresponding to the problems with different right-hand side. The purpose is to work later with approximated problems, where the source term shall be perturbed with a strictly monotone term and for the sake of constructing monotone families of approximated sequence we shall be interested in different parameters.
\[22\] Assume that $v_1$, $v_2$ are two entropy weak solutions to with a right-hand side $f_1$ and $f_2$ respectively. Then
1. for all nonnegative $ {\psi} \in \mathcal{D}(\Rdp)$ it holds $$\begin{split}
&\int_{\Rdp} |\eta(x,v_1)-\eta(x,v_2)| \psi_{t}(t,x)\; dx\; dt\\
&\quad + \int_{\Rdp} \sgn(v_1-v_2)(A(v_1)-A(v_2)) \cdot \nabla \psi(t,x)\; dx \; dt \\
&\quad +\int_{\Rdp} \sgn(v_1-v_2)(f_1(t,x,v_1)-f_2(t,x,v_2))\psi(t,x)\;dx\;dt\\
&\quad \ge-\int_{\{(t,x):v_1=v_2\}} |f_1(t,x,v_1)-f_2(t,x,v_2)|\psi(t,x)\;dx\;dt
\label{begin1}
\end{split}$$
2. for all nonnegative $ {\psi} \in \mathcal{D}(\Rdp)$ it holds $$\begin{split}
&\int_{\Rdp} (\eta(x,v_1)-\eta(x,v_2))^+ \psi_{t}(t,x)\; dx\; dt\\
&\quad + \int_{\Rdp} \chi_{\{v_1>v_2\}}(A(v_1)-A(v_2)) \cdot \nabla \psi(t,x)\; dx \; dt \\
&\quad +\int_{\Rdp} \chi_{\{v_1>v_2\}}(f_1(t,x,v_1)-f_2(t,x,v_2))\psi(t,x)\;dx\;dt\\
&\quad \ge -\int_{\{(t,x):v_1=v_2\}} (f_1(t,x,v_1)-f_2(t,x,v_2))^+\psi(t,x)\;dx\;dt
\label{begin2}
\end{split}$$
If $v_1,v_2$ are entropy weak solutions, then the Dirac masses $\delta_{v_1(t,x)}$ and $\delta_{v_2(t,x)}$ are corresponding entropy measure-valued solutions. Repeating step by step the argumentation from previous lemma we arrive at
$$\begin{split}
-\int_{\Rdp} &\left(\left\langle \omega_2^{\varepsilon}*\langle |\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)|, \delta_{v_1(t,x)}^\delta(\lambda)\rangle_{t}, \delta_{v_2(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\right\rangle\right.\\&+
\left.\left\langle \omega_2^{\varepsilon}*\langle |\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)|, \delta_{v_2(t,x)}^\delta(\mu)\rangle_{t}, \delta_{v_1(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\right\rangle\right)\psi\; dx\; dt \\
& +\int_{\Rdp}\left\langle \sgn(\lambda-\mu)(A(\lambda)-A(\mu)), \delta_{v_1(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\otimes \delta_{v_2(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\right\rangle
\cdot \nabla \psi \; dx \; dt \\
&\ge -
\int_{\Rdp}
\sgn(\lambda- \mu)
(f_1^n(t,x,\lambda)-f_2^n(t,x, \mu)), \delta_{v_2(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\otimes \delta_{v_1(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\rangle
\psi \; dx \; dt\\
&+\int_{\Rdp}
({\cal K }_{\varepsilon,\delta,n}^\lambda+{\cal K}_{\varepsilon,\delta,n}^\mu)\psi \; dx \; dt
\end{split}\label{regf00-weak}$$
where $$\begin{split}
{\cal K}_{\varepsilon,\delta,n}^\lambda:=&
\langle(\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'(\lambda- \mu)
(f_1(t,x,\lambda)-f_1^n(t,x,\lambda), \delta_{v_1(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle, \delta^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{v_2(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle\\
+&
\langle(\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'(\lambda- \mu)
f_1^n(t,x,\lambda), \delta_{v_1(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle, \delta^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{v_2(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle\\
-&\langle\langle E'(\lambda- \mu)
f_1^n(t,x,\lambda), \delta^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{v_1(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle, \delta^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{v_2(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle
\end{split}$$ and $$\begin{split}
{\cal K}_{\varepsilon,\delta,n}^\mu:=&
\langle(\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'(\mu-\lambda)
(f_2(t,x,\mu)-f_2^n(t,x,\mu), \delta_{v_2(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle, \delta^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{v_1(t,x)}(\lambda) \rangle\\
+&
\langle(\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle E'(\mu-\lambda)
f^n_2(t,x,\mu), \delta_{v_2(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle, \delta^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{v_1(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle\\
-&\langle\langle E'(\mu-\lambda)
f^n_2(t,x,\mu), \delta^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{v_2(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle, \delta^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{v_1(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle
\end{split}$$
In what follows we shall only concentrate on the first integral on the right hand side of . The error estimates follow the same lines as .
Since the function $ \sgn(\lambda- \mu)
(f_1^n(t,x,\lambda)-f_2^n(t,x, \mu))$ may fail to be continuous for $\lambda=\mu$, hence we shall discuss separately the integrals $$I_1^{\delta,\varepsilon}:=\int_{\{(t,x):v_1\neq v_2\}} \langle\sgn(\lambda- \mu)
(f_1^n(t,x,\lambda)-f_2^n(t,x, \mu)), \delta_{v_2(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\otimes \delta_{v_1(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\rangle
\psi \; dx \; dt\\$$ and $$I_2^{\delta,\varepsilon}:=\int_{\{(t,x):v_1=v_2\}}\langle \sgn(\lambda- \mu)
(f_1^n(t,x,\lambda)-f_2^n(t,x, \mu)), \delta_{v_2(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\otimes \delta_{v_1(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\rangle
\psi \; dx \; dt.\\$$ We let $\varepsilon\to0_+$ and $\delta\to0_+$. Then $$\begin{split}
\lim\limits_{\delta\to0}\lim\limits_{\varepsilon\to0} I_1^{\delta,\varepsilon}&=
\int_{\{(t,x):v_1\neq v_2\}} \langle\sgn(\lambda- \mu)
(f_1^n(t,x,\lambda)-f_2^n(t,x, \mu)), \delta_{v_2(t,x)}(\mu)\otimes \delta_{v_1(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle
\psi \; dx \; dt\\
&=\int_{\Rdp} \sgn(v_1- v_2)
(f_1^n(t,x,v_1)-f_2^n(t,x, v_2))
\psi \; dx \; dt.
\end{split}$$ where the last equality holds since $\sgn 0=0$. The second integral can be estimated as follows $$\begin{split}
|I_2^{\delta,\varepsilon}|&\le\int_{\{(t,x):v_1=v_2\}} |\langle \sgn(\lambda- \mu)
(f_1^n(t,x,\lambda)-f_2^n(t,x, \mu)), \delta_{v_2(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\otimes \delta_{v_1(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\rangle|
\psi \; dx \; dt\\
&\le
\int_{\{(t,x):v_1=v_2\}} \langle |
f_1^n(t,x,\lambda)-f_2^n(t,x, \mu)|, \delta_{v_2(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\otimes \delta_{v_1(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\rangle
\psi \; dx \; dt\\
\end{split}$$ and therefore $$\begin{split}
\lim\limits_{\delta\to0}\lim\limits_{\varepsilon\to0} I_2^{\delta,\varepsilon}\le
\int_{\{(t,x):v_1=v_2\}}
|f_1^n(t,x,v_1)-f_2^n(t,x, v_2)| \psi \; dx \; dt.
\end{split}$$ which completes the proof of point 1.
To prove the second part of the theorem, again we shall argue on the level of measure-valued solutions. Now we will use the entropy inequalities both for convex and concave entropies. First observe that for all $\mu\in\R$ $$\begin{split}
\omega_2^{\varepsilon}*&\langle (\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu))^+, \delta_{v_1(t,x)}^\delta(\lambda)\rangle_{t}
+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}\langle \chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}(A(\lambda)-A(\mu)), \delta_{v_1(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\rangle
\\
&\le (\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle \chi_{\{\lambda> \mu\}}
f_1(t,x,\lambda), \delta_{v_1(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle\rangle
\\
\end{split}
\label{regf39}$$ and all $\lambda\in\R$ $$\begin{split}
- \omega_2^{\varepsilon}*&\langle (\eta(x,\mu)-\eta(x,\lambda))^-, \delta_{v_2(t,x)}^\delta(\mu)\rangle_{t}
+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}\langle \chi_{\{\mu<\lambda\}}(A(\mu)-A(\lambda)), \delta_{v_2(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\rangle
\\
&\ge (\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle \chi_{\{\mu< \lambda\}}
f_2(t,x,\mu), \delta_{v_2(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle\rangle.
\end{split}
\label{regf40}$$ Hence multiplying by -1 and [adding it to]{} we obtain $$\begin{split}
\langle \omega_2^{\varepsilon}*&\langle (\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu))^+, \delta_{v_1(t,x)}^\delta(\lambda)\rangle_{t}, \delta_{v_2(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\rangle\\
&+\langle \omega_2^{\varepsilon}*\langle (\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu))^+, \delta_{v_2(t,x)}^\delta(\mu)\rangle_{t}, \delta_{v_1(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\rangle\\
&+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}\langle \chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}(A(\lambda)-A(\mu)), \delta_{v_1(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\lambda)\otimes
\delta_{v_2(t,x)}^{\delta,\varepsilon}(\mu)\rangle \\
&\le \langle (\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle \chi_{\{\lambda> \mu\}}
f_1(t,x,\lambda), \delta_{v_1(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle, \delta^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{v_2(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle
\\
&-
\langle (\omega_1^{\delta}\cdot \omega_2^{\varepsilon})*\langle \chi_{\{\lambda> \mu\}}
f_2(t,x,\mu), \delta_{v_2(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle, \delta^{\delta,\varepsilon}_{v_1(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle
\end{split}
$$ We repeat the same arguments as in the previous part of the proof.
Existence of entropy weak solutions {#existence}
===================================
[**Proof of Theorem \[main\].**]{} The proof starts with the existence of entropy measure-valued solution, then we shall show that it is unique and is in fact an entropy weak solution.
We construct the approximate problem. Let now $A^j$ be a sequence of smooth functions such that for every compact set $K\subset \R$ $$A^j\to A\quad {\rm strongly\ in\ } {{\cal C}(K;\mathbb{R}^N)}.$$ Let $\theta^*$ be a minimal selection of the graph of $ \theta $. We approximate $\theta$ in two steps. First we shall construct the Yosida approximation of $\theta$ with a parameter $\sqrt j$ and then mollify this $\theta_{\sqrt j}$ with respect to $x$ and $u$. Therefore let us define $${J_{\frac{1}{\sqrt j}}=({\rm id}+{\frac{1}{\sqrt j}}\,\theta)^{-1}}$$ and $${\theta_{\frac{1}{\sqrt j}}=\sqrt{j}\ ({\rm id}-J_{\frac{1}{\sqrt j}})}.$$ Then $$\theta^{(j)}(x,u):= \int_{\R^N\times\R} \omega^{\frac{1}{j}}(x-y,u-z)\theta_{\frac{1}{\sqrt j}}(y,z)\;dy\;dz,$$ where $\omega^{\frac{1}{j}}$ is the standard mollification kernel of radius $\frac{1}{j}$. To provide that the approximation vanishes at zero define $$\theta^j(x,u):=\theta^{(j)}(x,u)-\theta^{(j)}(x,0).$$ Observe that with such a choice of parameters we get $$\label{theta-zero}
\theta^{(j)}(\cdot,0)\to 0\quad \mbox {a.e. in} \ \R^N$$ and we denote by $\eta^{j}(x,z)$ the inverse function to $\theta^{j}(x,u)$, i.e., $\eta^{j}(x,\theta^{j}(x,u))=u$. Moreover, let $$f^{(j)}(t,x,u):= \int_{\R\times\R^N\times \R} \omega^{\frac{1}{j}}(t-s,x-y,u-z)f^{(j)}(s,y,z)\;ds\;dy\;dz$$ and define $$f^j(t,x,u):=f^{(j)}(t,x,u)-f^{(j)}(t,x,0).$$ Moreover, we will add a strictly dissipative perturbation term defined as follows $$\varphi_{\ell,m}(r):=\frac{1}{\ell}\arctan(r^-)-\frac{1}{m}\arctan(r^+).$$ Hence the approximate problem has a form $$\begin{aligned}
u^j_t+ {{\mathrm{div}}\,}A^j(\theta^j(x,u^j))=
f^j(t,x,u^j)+\varphi_{\ell,m}(\theta^j(x,u^j))&\quad \mbox{ on } \R_+\times \R^N,\\
u^j(0,\cdot)= u_0 &\quad\mbox{ on } \R^N.\end{aligned}$$ We will divide the proof into three steps. In the first step we shall concentrate on existence of measure-valued solutions (namely we will pass with $j\to\infty$), in the second step we will show that the measure-valued solution is indeed an entropy weak solution to the problem with a strictly dissipative perturbation and in the final third step we will pass to the limit with $\ell,m\to\infty$ and conclude existence of entropy weak solution to the original problem.
[**Step 1.**]{} Existence of solutions is provided by the classical theory of Kružkov, cf. [@Kr70]. Since condition holds, with the standard estimates one gets that for any $j$ [$\theta^j$, $\frac{\partial}{\partial x_i}\theta^j=\theta_{\frac{1}{\sqrt j}}*\frac{\partial}{\partial x_i}\omega^{\frac{1}{j}}$ is bounded in $\mathbb{R}^N\times[-M,M]$ for all $M>0$ and the assumptions of [@Kr70] are satisfied.]{} By Lemma \[equiv\] we can define $$v^j(t,x):=\theta^j(x,u^j(t,x))$$ which satisfies for all nonnegative $\psi\in\D(\R\times\R^N)$ the entropy inequality
$$\begin{split}\label{entropy-v}
&\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}|\eta^j(x,v^j(t,x))-\eta^j(x,k)|\psi_{t}(t,x)\; dx \; dt\\
&\qquad+\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}\sgn(v^j(t,x)-k)(\bG^j(v^j(t,x))-\bG^j(k))\cdot \nabla \psi(t,x) \; dx \; dt\\
&\qquad +\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}\sgn (v^j(t,x)-k) (f^j(t,x,\eta^j(x,v^j))+\varphi_{\ell,m}(v^j))\psi \;dx\;dt\\
&\qquad+\int_{\R^N}|u_0(x)-\eta^j(x,k)|\psi(0,x) \;dx\ge 0.
\end{split}$$
Since $u^j$ is bounded in $L^\infty(\R^+\times \R^N)$, then by the sequence $v^j$ is also bounded. From the entropy inequality we want to pass to the following entropy inequalities
$$\label{ap-plus}
\begin{split}
&\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}(\eta^j(x,v^j(t,x))-\eta^j(x,k))^+\psi_{t}(t,x)\; dx \; dt\\
&\qquad+\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}\chi_{\{v^j(t,x)>k\}}(\bG^j(v^j(t,x))-\bG^j(k))\cdot \nabla \psi(t,x) \; dx \; dt\\
&\qquad +\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}\chi_{\{v^j(t,x)>k\}} (f^j(t,x,\eta^j(x,v^j))+\varphi_{\ell,m}(v^j))\psi \;dx\;dt\\
&\qquad+\int_{\R^N}{(u_0(x)-\eta^j(x,k))}^+\psi(0,x) \;dx\ge 0
\end{split}$$
and
$$\label{ap-minus}
\begin{split}
&\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}(\eta^j(x,v^j(t,x))-\eta^j(x,k))^-\psi_{t}(t,x)\; dx \; dt\\
&\qquad+\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}\chi_{\{v^j(t,x)<k\}}(\bG^j(v^j(t,x))-\bG^j(k))\cdot \nabla \psi(t,x) \; dx \; dt\\
&\qquad +\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}\chi_{\{v^j(t,x)<k\}} (f^j(t,x,\eta^j(x,v^j))+\varphi_{\ell,m}(v^j))\psi \;dx\;dt\\
&\qquad+\int_{\R^N}{(u_0(x)-\eta^j(x,k))}^-\psi(0,x)\; dx\le 0
\end{split}$$
satisfied for all nonnegative $\psi\in\D(\R\times\R^N)$. For this purpose we first choose in $k=\|v^j\|_{L^\infty}$ and $k=-\|v^j\|_{L^\infty}$, which allows to conclude that the problem $$\label{dist}
\begin{split}
\eta^j(x,v^j)_t+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}A^j(v^j)&=f^j(t,x,\eta(x,v^j))+\varphi_{\ell,m}(v^j),\\
v^j(0,x)&=\theta^j(x,u_0)
\end{split}$$ is satisfied in a distributional sense. Obviously the following problem $$\label{k}
\begin{split}
\eta^j(x,k)_t+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}A^j(k)&=0,
\end{split}$$ with initial condition $k$ is satisfied in $\D'(\R\times\R^N)$. Hence a linear combination of , and allows to conclude and .
We want to pass to the limit with $j\to\infty$ in (and respectively, which we do not present in detail since it is easily concluded from the first part). Obviously, there exists a subsequence (labelled the same) and $v\in L^\infty(\R^+ \times \R^N)$ such that $$\label{conv-g}
v^j\weakstar v\quad \mbox{in } L^\infty(\R^+ \times \R^N).$$ Moreover there exists a Young measure $\nu_{(t,x)}$ associated to the subsequence $v^j$. In the remaining part of this step of the proof we will show that $\nu$ is an entropy measure-valued solution in the sense of Definition \[DF2\]. To pass to the limit in ( follows analogously) with the first terms on the right-hand side we first make an observation on $\theta^j$, namely due to for all $(x,u)\in\R^N\times\R$ where $\theta$ is single-valued and continuous with respect to $u$ $${\theta^j\to\theta^{\ast}} $$ [a.e. in $\mathbb{R}^N$. Hence there exists $M\subset\mathbb{R}^N$ such that $|M|=0$ such that $$\theta^j(x,\cdot)\rightarrow\theta^{\ast}(x,\cdot)$$ for all $x\in\mathbb{R}^N\setminus M$.]{} The strict monotonicity of $\theta^j$ with respect to the last variable allows to conclude with help of Proposition \[inverse-conv\] for a.a. $x\in\R^N$ the locally uniform convergence of $\eta^j(x,\cdot)$. Define $$\zeta^j(x,s):=\left(\eta^j(x,s)-\eta^j(x,k)\right)^+$$ and $$\label{conv-eta}
\begin{split}
\lim\limits_{j\to\infty}\int_{\R_+ {\times \R^N\setminus M}}& \zeta^j(x,v^j)\;dx\;dt
=
\lim\limits_{j\to\infty}
\langle \zeta^j, v^j\rangle\\&=
\int_{\R_+\times \R^N}\int_\R(\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,k))^+d\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda) \;dx\;dt
\end{split}$$ where the duality pairing is understood between the spaces $L^1(\R^d;\mathcal{C}((-R,R);\R))$ and $L^\infty_{w}(\R^d;{\mathcal M}([-R,R]))$. The limit passage in the second term of and follows the same lines as in [@BuGwSw2013].
We direct our attention to the limit passage in the term containing $f^j$. The main problem is the appearance of a discontinuous function $$\lambda\mapsto\chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}(f^j(t,x,\eta^j(x,\lambda))+\varphi_{\ell,m}(\lambda)).$$ For this purpose we shall construct a family of functions which allow to estimate the discontinuous term. We will call it $\chi^\gamma_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}$ and define as follows: for $\mu\ge0$ $$\chi^{\gamma,+}_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}(\lambda):=\left\{
\begin{array}{rcl}
\chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}&{\rm for}& \lambda<\mu, \, \lambda\ge \mu+\gamma,\\[1ex]
{\rm {affine}}&{\rm for} &\mu\le\lambda<\mu+\gamma.
\end{array}\right.$$ For $\mu<0$ $$\chi^{\gamma,-}_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}(\lambda):=\left\{
\begin{array}{rcl}
\chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}&{\rm for}& \lambda<\mu-\gamma, \, \lambda\ge \mu,\\[1ex]
{\rm {affine}} &{\rm for} &\mu-\gamma\le\lambda<\mu.
\end{array}\right.$$ Note that since $f+\varphi_{\ell,m}$ are dissipative, then the above definition of $\chi^\gamma_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}$ provides that $$\chi^\gamma_{\{\lambda>\mu\}} (f(t,x,\lambda)+\varphi_{\ell,m}(\lambda))\ge
\chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}} (f(t,x,\lambda)+\varphi_{\ell,m}(\lambda))$$ for any $\lambda\in\R$, therefore inequality with $\chi^\gamma_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}$ instead of $\chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}$ in the third term on the left-hand side holds. The convergence of convolutions and the dissipativity/monotonicity of $f$, $f^j$ and $\eta, \eta^j$ provide that $f^j(t,x,\eta^j(x,\lambda))$ converges [a.e]{} with respect to $t$ and $x$ and uniformly with respect to $\lambda$ on a bounded interval $[-R,R]$ to the function $f$, see Proposition \[monotone-conv\], namely $$f^j(\cdot,\cdot, \eta^j)\to f(\cdot,\cdot, \eta)\quad \mbox{strongly in }\quad L^1_{loc}(\R_+\times\R^N;
{\cal C}([-R,R]).$$ We obtain that $$\begin{split}
\lim\limits_{j\to\infty}\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}&\chi^\gamma_{\{v^j(t,x)>k\}} (f^j(t,x,\eta^j(x,v^j))+\varphi_{\ell,m}(v^j))\psi \;dx\;dt\\&= \int_{\Rdp}
\langle \chi^\gamma_{\{\lambda>\mu\}} (f(t,x,\lambda)+\varphi_{\ell,m}(\lambda)),\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle\psi \; dx\; dt.
\end{split}$$ Then we pass with $\gamma\to0_+$. The limit passage is obvious for those $ {\mu}$ that $\nu_{(t,x)}(\{ \mu\})\stackrel{{\rm a.e.}}{=}0$ on $\supp\psi$. Let again $\Omega_\psi:=\supp \psi$, where $\psi$ has compact support in $\R_+\times\R^N$ hence $|\Omega_\psi|<\infty$. We shall now concentrate on showing that the set $$I:=\{\mu\in\R: |\{(t,x)\in\Omega_\psi: \nu_{(t,x)}(\{\mu\})>0\}|>0\}$$ is at most countable. Indeed, assume the opposite. If $\nu_{(t,x)}(\{\mu\})>0$ on some subset of $\R_+\times\R^N$ of positive measure, then $\int_{\Omega_\psi}\nu_{(t,x)}(\{\mu\})\;dx\;dt>0$, but also $$\sum\limits_{\mu\in I}\int_{\Omega_\psi}\nu_{(t,x)}(\{\mu\})\;dx\;dt\le \int_{\Omega_\psi}\int_\R 1
\;d\nu_{(t,x)}\;dx\;dt.$$ Since the set $I$ is not countable, then the series diverges, but we know that the Young measure $\nu$ is a probability measure, therefore the right-hand side equals to $|\Omega_\psi|$ and we obtain a contradiction. Consequently the set $\R\setminus I$ is a dense set in $\R$. We conclude that for all $\mu\in\R\setminus I$ and all nonnegative $\psi\in\D(\R_+\times\R^N)$ $$\begin{split}
&\int_{\Rdp}\langle (\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu))^+,\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)
\rangle \psi_{t}(t,x)\; dx \; dt \\
&\quad + \int_{\Rdp}\langle \chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}(A(\lambda)-A(\mu))
,\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle \cdot \nabla \psi (t,x) \; dx\; dt \\
&\quad + \int_{\Rdp}
\langle \chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}} (f(t,x,\lambda)+\varphi_{\ell,m}(\lambda)),\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle\psi \; dx\; dt\ge 0 . \label{EQ+2}
\end{split}$$ To claim that the above inequality holds for all $\mu\in\R$ observe that the function $$\mu\mapsto\int_{\Rdp}\langle (\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu))^+,\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)
\rangle \psi_{t}(t,x)\; dx \; dt$$ as well as $$\mu\mapsto\int_{\Rdp}\langle \chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}(A(\lambda)-A(\mu))
,\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle \cdot \nabla \psi (t,x) \; dx\; dt$$ are continuous w.r.t. $\mu$. Observe now the function $$\label{efy}
\mu\mapsto \int_{\Rdp}
\langle \chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}} (f(t,x,\lambda)+\varphi_{\ell,m}(\lambda)),\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\rangle\psi \; dx\; dt,$$ which is not continuous w.r.t. $\mu$, but one can notice it is decreasing/increasing depending on the sign of $\mu$. For this purpose let us split the integral as follows $$\begin{split}
\int_{\Rdp}
\int_{\R_+} \chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}} (f(t,x,\lambda)+\varphi_{\ell,m}(\lambda)) \;d\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda) \psi \; dx\; dt\\+
\int_{\Rdp}
\int_{\R_-} \chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}} (f(t,x,\lambda)+\varphi_{\ell,m}(\lambda)) \;d\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda) \psi \; dx\; dt.
\end{split}$$ Depending on the sign of $\mu$, always the terms $\chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}$ in one of the above integrals will be constant. In the second integral, because of the dissipativity of $f$ and $\varphi_{\ell,m}$, we know the sign of the integrand, which allows to claim that the function is monotone w.r.t. $\mu$. Therefore if we take $\mu\in I, \mu>0$, then one can find a sequence $\mu^n$ such that $$\begin{split}
\lim\limits_{\mu^n\to\mu^-}&\int_{\Rdp}
\int_{\R}\chi_{\{\lambda>\mu^n\}}f(t,x,\lambda)d\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\ge
\int_{\Rdp}
\int_{\R}\chi_{\{\lambda>\mu\}}f(t,x,\lambda)d\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\\
&\ge
\lim\limits_{\mu^n\to\mu^+}\int_{\Rdp}
\int_{\R}\chi_{\{\lambda>\mu^n\}}f(t,x,\lambda)d\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda).
\end{split}$$ For $\mu\in I, \,\mu<0$ the inequalities hold in an opposite direction. Analogously one can show that holds.
[**Step 2.**]{} Let now $\nu, \sigma$ be two entropy measure-valued solutions. By Lemma \[contraction\] we obtain that holds with $f(t,x,\lambda)+\varphi_{\ell,m}$ instead of $f(t,x,\lambda)$. Let $0<\varepsilon<t_0<T<\infty$ be arbitrary. We define an affine $ {\psi^1_{\varepsilon,t_0}}$ as follows $${\psi^1_{\varepsilon,t_0}}(t):=\left\{ \begin{aligned}&0 &&t\in[0,t_0-\varepsilon)\cup [T,\infty),\\
&\frac{t-t_0+\varepsilon}{\varepsilon} &&t\in (t_0-\varepsilon,t_0),\\
&\frac{T-t}{T-t_0} &&t\in (t_0,T).
\end{aligned}\right.$$ Let $\psi_2^n \in \mathcal{D}(\R^d)$ be arbitrary such that $\|\psi_2^n\|_{\infty}\le 1.$ Then we set $\psi(t,x):= {\psi^1_{\varepsilon,t_0}(t)}\psi_2^n(x)$ in (it is a possible test function since we can mollify $\psi_1$ and then pass to the limit). Hence, using for simplicity the notation $f_{\ell,m}(t,x,\lambda):=f(t,x,\lambda)+
\varphi_{\ell,m}(\lambda)$ and $Q(\lambda,\mu)=\sgn(\lambda-\mu)(A(\lambda)-A(\mu))$ $$\begin{split}
&\frac{1}{T-t_0}\int_{t_0}^T\int_{\R^N}\langle |\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)|, \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\otimes
\sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle \psi^n_2(x)\; dx\; dt \\
& \le\frac{1}{\varepsilon}\int_{t_0-\varepsilon}^{t_0}\int_{\R^N}\langle |\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)|, \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\otimes
\sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle \psi^n_2(x)\; dx \; dt\\
&+ \int_{t_0-\varepsilon}^{T}\int_{\R^N}\langle Q(\lambda,\mu), \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)
\otimes \sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle \cdot \nabla \psi^n_2(x)\psi_1(t) \; dx \; dt\\
&+ \int_{t_0-\varepsilon}^{T}\int_{\R^N}\langle \sgn(\lambda-\mu)\left(f_{\ell,m}(t,x,\lambda)-f_{\ell,m}(t,x,\mu))\right),
\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)
\otimes \sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle \cdot \psi^n_2(x) {\psi^1_{\varepsilon,t_0}} \; dx \; dt\\
\end{split}$$ Our goal is to let $\varepsilon \to 0_+$, and next $t_0\to0_+$. Because of the initial condition [(see )]{} and continuity of the solution in appropriate topology the first term on the right-hand side above will vanish. Considerations concerning the left-hand side and [the second term]{} on the right-hand side follow the same lines as in [@BuGwSw2013]. [There is no problem to pass to the limit in the term with $f_{\ell,m}$]{}. [For arbitrary $\psi^n_2 \in \mathcal{D}(\R^N)$ such that $\|\psi_2^n\|_{\infty}\le 1$ and any $T>0$ at the limit we find]{} $$\begin{split}
&\int_{0}^T\int_{\R^N}\langle |\eta(x,\lambda)-\eta(x,\mu)|, \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\otimes
\sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle \psi^n_2(x)\; dx\; dt \\
&\le T\int_{0}^{T}\int_{\R^N}\langle |\bQ(\lambda,\mu)|, \nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)
\otimes \sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle |\nabla \psi^n_2(x)| \; dx \; dt\\
&+T {\int_{0}^{T}}\int_{\R^N}\langle \sgn(\lambda-\mu)\left(f_{\ell,m}(t,x,\lambda)-f_{\ell,m}(t,x,\mu))\right),
\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)
\otimes \sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle \cdot \psi_1(t)\psi^n_2(x) \; dx \; dt.
\end{split}\label{begin31}$$ [Where $\psi_1(t)=1-\frac{t}{T}$ for $t\in[0,T]$.]{} Note that the term on the left-hand side is nonnegative. Because of the growth conditions that were assumed on $A$, we conclude that $\langle |Q(\lambda,\mu)|,\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)\otimes\sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle\in L^1(0,T;L^p(\R^N))$. Finally, we define a monotone sequence $\psi^n_2\nearrow1$ of smooth nonnegative compactly supported functions as $\psi^n_2(x):=1$ in $B(0,n)$, $\psi^n_2(x):=0$ for $x\in \R^N\setminus B(0,2n)$ such that $|\nabla \psi^n_2|\le
\frac{c}{n}$. For handling the flux term one immediately observes that $$\int_{\R^N}|\nabla \psi^n_2|^{q}\; dx \le C \qquad \textrm{ for all } q\ge N,$$ and $$|\nabla \psi^n|\rightharpoonup^* 0 \textrm{ weakly}^* \textrm{ in } L^{\infty}(0,T; L^q(\R^N)) \qquad \textrm{ for all } q\ge N,\label{2Lp}$$ which is enough that this term vanishes. With the monotone convergence theorem we conclude that $$\begin{split}
0\le \int_{0}^{T}\int_{\R^N}\langle \sgn(\lambda-\mu)\left(f_{\ell,m}(t,x,\lambda)-f_{\ell,m}(t,x,\mu))\right),
\nu_{(t,x)}(\lambda)
\otimes \sigma_{(t,x)}(\mu)\rangle \psi_1(t) \; dx \; dt\le 0.
\end{split}\label{begin4}$$ Because of the strict dissipativity of the function $f_{\ell,m}$ the last inequality is strict except of the diagonal. Since the left-hand side is nonnegative, there exists a function $$v\in L^\infty(\R_+\times \R^N)$$ such that $$\nu_{t,x}=\sigma_{t,x}=\delta_{v(t,x)}\quad\mbox{for a.a } (t,x)\in\Rdp.$$ Hence we conclude that for each $\ell,m$ there exists an entropy weak solution.
[**Step 3.**]{} In the final step we will pass with $\ell,m\to\infty$. Let then $v_{\ell,m}$ and $v_{\ell,m'}$ be entropy weak solutions to the problems with a righ-hand side $f+\varphi_{\ell,m}$ and $f+\varphi_{\ell,m'}$ respectively with $m'>m$. We will now use inequality for the solutions $v_{\ell,m}$ and $v_{\ell,m'}$. We proceed with choosing a test function in the same way and limit passage with $\varepsilon\to0_+$ and next $t_0\to0_+$ as in the previous step. Hence $$\begin{split}
0&\le\int_{\Rdp} (\eta(x,v_{\ell,m})-\eta(x,v_{\ell,m'}))^+\; dx\; dt\\
&\quad \le T \int_{\Rdp} \chi_{\{v_{\ell,m}>v_{\ell,m'}\}}(f_{\ell,m}(t,x,v_{\ell,m})-f_{\ell,m'}(t,x,v_{\ell,m'}))
\psi_1(t)\;dx\;dt\\
&\quad + T\int_{\{(t,x):v_{\ell,m}=v_{\ell,m'}\}} (f_{\ell,m}(t,x,v_{\ell,m})-f_{\ell,m'}(t,x,v_{\ell,m'}))^+\psi_1(t)\;dx\;dt.
\label{be}
\end{split}$$ The second term on the right-hand side can be neglected since $$\begin{split}
\chi_{\{v_{\ell,m}=v_{\ell,m'}\}} &(f_{\ell,m}(t,x,v_{\ell,m})-f_{\ell,m'}(t,x,v_{\ell,m'}))^+
\\
&=\chi_{\{v_{\ell,m}=v_{\ell,m'}\}}\left(f_{\ell,m'}(t,x,v_{\ell,m})
+\left(\frac 1{m'}-\frac 1m\right) \arctan(v_{\ell,m}^+)-f_{\ell,m'}(t,x,v_{\ell,m'})\right)^+\\
&=\chi_{\{v_{\ell,m}=v_{\ell,m'}\}}\left(\left(\frac 1{m'}-\frac 1m\right) \arctan(v_{\ell,m}^+)\right)^+=0.
\end{split}$$ Observe now the first term on the right-hand side $$\begin{split}
&\chi_{\{v_{\ell,m}>v_{\ell,m'}\}}(f_{\ell,m}(t,x,v_{\ell,m})-f_{\ell,m'}(t,x,v_{\ell,m'}))\\
&\quad=\chi_{\{v_{\ell,m}>v_{\ell,m'}\}}(f_{\ell,m'}(t,x,v_{\ell,m})
+\left(\frac 1{m'}-\frac 1m\right) \arctan(v_{\ell,m}^+)-f_{\ell,m'}(t,x,v_{\ell,m'}))\\
&\quad\le\chi_{\{v_{\ell,m}>v_{\ell,m'}\}}(f_{\ell,m'}(t,x,v_{\ell,m})
-f_{\ell,m'}(t,x,v_{\ell,m'}))\le0
\end{split}$$ where the last inequality holds since $m'>m$, $\arctan(v_{\ell,m}^+)\ge0$ and the function $f_{\ell,m'}$ is dissipative. Therefore, since $\psi_1(t)$ is nonnegative, then $$\chi_{\{v_{\ell,m}>v_{\ell,m'}\}}(f_{\ell,m'}(t,x,v_{\ell,m})
-f_{\ell,m'}(t,x,v_{\ell,m'}))=0 \quad{\rm a.e.\ in}\ \R_+\times\R^N.$$ Strict dissipativity of $f_{\ell,m'}$ allows to conclude that $$v_{\ell,m}\le v_{\ell,m'}$$ In the same manner, choosing $\ell'>\ell$ one shows that $$\label{ell}
v_{\ell',m}\le v_{\ell,m},$$ where $ v_{\ell',m}, v_{\ell,m}$ are entropy weak solutions to the problems with a righ-hand side $f_{\ell',m}$ and $f_{\ell,m}.$ We will pass to the limit with $m\to\infty$ and then with $\ell\to\infty$. The monotonicity provides that for each $\ell$ there exists a limit $v_\ell$ such that $$v_{\ell,m}\to v_\ell\quad {\rm a.e.\ in}\ \R_+\times\R^N.$$ Hence, if we denote $v_{\ell'}$ a limit of a sequence $v_{\ell',m}$, then from we conclude that $$v_\ell\le v_{\ell'}$$ for $\ell'>\ell$. Hence as $\ell\to\infty$ $$v_{\ell}\to v\quad {\rm a.e.\ in}\ \R_+\times\R^N.$$
Uniqueness of entropy weak solutions
------------------------------------
[Using the local comparison principle of Lemma \[22\] we obtain uniqueness of the entropy weak solution. Let us assume that $u_1$ and $u_2$ are entropy weak solutions to in the sense of Definiton \[weak\]. Then we take $\psi=\psi^1_{\varepsilon,t_0}(t)\psi_2^n(x)$ as a test function in , where $\psi^1_{\varepsilon,t_0}$ and $\psi_2^n$ are defined as in the proof of Theorem \[existence\] and we repeat the argumentation of this proof, Step 2 to pass to the limit with $\varepsilon\rightarrow 0^+$ and $t_0\downarrow 0$ using the initial condition. Finally we choose $\psi_2^n(x)$ to be a smooth approximation of $\chi_{\mathbb{R}^N}$ and pass to the limit with $n\rightarrow\infty$ repeating the arguments of the proof of Theorem \[existence\], Step 2.]{}
Equivalent notions of entropy solutions {#EqN}
=======================================
In this section we concentrate on relations between different notions of entropy weak solutions for the flux function $\Phi$ in a form $\Phi(x,u)=\bG(\theta(x,u))$ with $\bG, \theta$ satisfying [ (H1)]{}–[(H3)]{} with an additional condition that $\bF$ is sufficiently regular in both variables. This relations play an important role on the level of approximations, namely after passing from discontinuous flux to sufficiently smooth one. We formulate the lemma collecting the relations between different notions of solutions.
\[equiv\] Let $ \Phi, f$ satisfy the assumptions (H1)–(H4) and assume that $\bG\in{\cal C}^1(\R)$, $\theta$ is continuous in $u$ and continuously differentiable in $x$. Assume that $u\in L^{\infty}_{loc}(\mathbb{R}\times\R^N)$ is given and define $$\begin{aligned}
v(t,x)&:=\theta(x,u(t,x)), \label{v}\\
$$ Then the following statements are equivalent.\
[**(N1)**]{} For all $k\in \mathbb{R}$ and all nonnegative $\psi\in \mathcal{D}(\R\times\mathbb{R}^{N})$ there holds $$\label{Kruzw}
\begin{split}
&\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}|u(t,x)-k|\psi_{t}(t,x) -\sgn(u(t,x)-k){{\mathrm{div}}\,}\Phi(x,k)\psi(t,x)\; dx \; dt\\
&\qquad +\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}\sgn(u(x,t)-k) (\Phi(x,u(x,t))-\Phi(x,k))\cdot \nabla \psi(x,t)\; dx \; dt\\
&\qquad +\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}\sgn (u(t,x)-k) f(t,x,u)\psi \;dx\;dt+\int_{\R^N}|u_0(x)-k|\psi(0,x)\; dx\ge0.
\end{split}$$ [**(N2)**]{} For all $k\in \mathbb{R}$ and all nonnegative $\psi\in \mathcal{D}(\R\times\mathbb{R}^{N})$ there holds $$\begin{split}\label{Panovw}
&\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}|\eta(x,v(t,x))-\eta(x,k)|\psi_{t}(t,x)\; dx \; dt\\
&\qquad+\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}\sgn(v(t,x)-k)(\bG(v(t,x))-\bG(k))\cdot \nabla \psi(t,x) \; dx \; dt\\
&\qquad +\int_{\R_+\times\R^N}\sgn (v(t,x)-k) f(t,x,\eta(x,v))\psi \;dx\;dt+\int_{\R^N}|u_0(x)-\eta(x,k)|\psi(0,x) dx\ge 0.
\end{split}$$
To show [**(N1)**]{} $\Rightarrow$ [**(N2)**]{} consider the equation $$(u_i)_{t}+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}\Phi(x,u_i)=f_i(t,x,u_i), \quad i=1,2.$$ For any two entropy weak solutions $u_1,u_2$ the so-called Kato inequality holds $$\label{Kato}
\begin{split}
|u_1-u_2|_{t}+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}\left(\sgn(u_1-u_2)(\Phi(x,u_1)-\Phi(x,u_2))\right)\\
\le \sgn(u_1-u_2)(f_1-f_2)+|f_1-f_2|\chi_{\{u_1=u_2\}}
\end{split}$$ in ${\mathcal D}'(\Rdp)$, cf. Ref. [@GaMa1996]. Choosing in $u_1=\eta(x,v_1)$ and $u_2=\eta(x,k)$ with $f_1= f,\, f_2\equiv 0$. Note that the set of $k\in\R$ such that $|\{(t,x) : u_1(t,x)=\eta(x,k)\}|>0$ is at most countable and hence it allows to pass from to [**(N2)**]{}.
For showing the opposite direction let us consider the problem with $f_i:\Rdp\times\R\to\R$ satisfying Lipschitz condition with respect to the last variable. $$\label{eta-f}
\eta(x,v_i)_t+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}\bG(v_i)=f_i(t,x,\eta(x,v_i)), \quad i=1,2.$$ For any entropy weak solutions $v_1, v_2$ in the sense of [**(N2)**]{} it holds, cf. $$\label{Kato-eta}
\begin{split}
|\eta(x,v_1)-\eta(x,v_2)|_{t}+{{\mathrm{div}}\,}\left(\sgn(v_1-v_2)(\bG(v_1)-\bG(v_2))\right)\\
\le \sgn(v_1-v_2)(f_1-f_2)+|f_1-f_2|\chi_{\{v_1=v_2\}}
\end{split}$$ in ${\mathcal D}'(\Rdp)$. For passing from to [**(N1)**]{} we choose again $u_1=\eta(x,v_1)$ and now $v_2=\theta(x,k)$ with $f_1= f$ and $f_2={{\mathrm{div}}\,}\bG(v_2)={{\mathrm{div}}\,}\Phi(x,k)$. Note again that the set of $k\in\R$ such that $|\{(t,x) : v_2(t,x)=\theta(x,k)\}|>0$ is at most countable and we pass to [**(N1)**]{} what completes the proof.
\[monotone-conv\] Let $[a,b]\subset\R$ and let $f$ be continuous, $f,f_n$ be monotone functions such that $f_n\to f$ pointwisely. Then $f_n\to f$ uniformly on $[a,b]$.
The above fact in an elementary exercise. For the proof see e.g. [@Amann].
\[inverse-conv\] Let $f_n:\R\to\R$, ${\rm Im}\, (f_n)=\R,$ $f_n$ be strictly monotone functions. Let $f$ be a maximal monotone mapping with ${\rm Im}\, (f)=\R$ and let the inverse mapping $f^{-1}$ be continuous and $f_n\to f$ a.e.. Then the inverse functions converge locally uniformly to the inverse of the limit, namely $(f_n)^{-1}\to f^{-1}$ uniformly on every compact subset of $\R$.
We provide the proof by contradiction. Assume that $f_n$ converges a.e. to $f$ and that $(f_n)^{-1}$ does not converge pointwisely to $f^{-1}$. Hence there exist $y, \varepsilon>0$ and a subsequence $(f_{n_k})^{-1}$ such that $$\label{notin}
(f_{n_k})^{-1}(y)\notin[f^{-1}(y)-\bar\varepsilon,f^{-1}(y)+\bar\varepsilon].$$ for every $0<\bar\varepsilon<\varepsilon$.
[*Case 1*]{}: $(f_{n_k})^{-1}(y)> f^{-1}(y)+\bar\varepsilon$. Let $z=f^{-1}(y)$, hence $f(z)\ni y$ and there exists a selection $f^*$ such that $y=f^*(z)$. Define $\bar y_{n_k}:=f_{n_k}^{-1}(f^*(z))$. By we have the estimate $$\bar y_{n_k}>z+\bar\varepsilon.$$ Using the strict monotonicity of $f$ (hence obviously also $f^*$), monotonicity of $f_{n_k}$ and the definition of $\bar y_{n_k}$ we conclude an existence of $\delta$ such that for every $\bar\varepsilon\in(\frac{\varepsilon}{2},\varepsilon)$ $$0<\delta\le f^*(z+\bar\varepsilon)-f^*(z)=
f^*(z+\bar\varepsilon)-f_{n_k}(\bar y_{n_k})\le
f(z+\bar\varepsilon)-f_{n_k}(z+\bar\varepsilon).
\label{contra}$$ Since the number of points where $f$ is not continuous is countable, it is always possible to choose such $\bar\varepsilon$ that $z+\bar\varepsilon$ is the point where $f$ is continuous (single valued). Hence for such $\bar\varepsilon$ contradicts the convergence of $f_n$.
[*Case 2*]{}: $(f_{n_k})^{-1}(y)< f^{-1}(y)-\bar\varepsilon$. Let again $z=f^{-1}(y)$, and $y=f^*(z)$. Define $\bar y_{n_k}:=f_{n_k}^{-1}(f^*(z))$ and observe that $$\bar y_{n_k}<z-\bar\varepsilon.$$ Again we conclude an existence of $\delta$ such that for every $\bar\varepsilon\in(\frac{\varepsilon}{2},\varepsilon)$ $$0<\delta\le f^*(z)-f^*(z-\bar\varepsilon)=
f_{n_k}(\bar y_{n_k})-f^*(z-\bar\varepsilon)\le
f_{n_k}(z-\bar\varepsilon)-f(z-\bar\varepsilon).
\label{contra2}$$ and we conclude in the same way as in the previous case. Hence $(f_n)^{-1}$ converges pointwisely to $f^{-1}$. The uniform convergence of $(f_n)^{-1}$ can be concluded by Proposition \[monotone-conv\].
[**Acknowledgement**]{}\
P. G. thanks to the National Science Centre, project no. 6085/B/H03/2011/40. The project of A. Ś.-G. was financed by the National Science Centre, DEC-2012/05/E/ST1/02218. All the authors participate in the project Research Group Linkage of Alexander von Humboldt Foundation.
[Piotr Gwiazda]{}\
Institute of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics,\
University of Warsaw, Banacha 2, 02-097 Warsaw, Poland\
[pgwiazda]{}@[mimuw.edu.pl]{}\
[Agnieszka Świerczewska-Gwiazda]{}\
Institute of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics,\
University of Warsaw, Banacha 2, 02-097 Warsaw, Poland\
[aswiercz]{}@[mimuw.edu.pl]{}\
[ [Petra Wittbold]{}\
Faculty of Mathematics\
University of Duisburg-Essen\
45117 Essen\
[petra.wittbold]{}@[uni-due.de]{}\
[Aleksandra Zimmermann]{}\
Faculty of Mathematics\
University of Duisburg-Essen\
45117 Essen\
[aleksandra.zimmermann]{}@[uni-due.de]{}]{}
[^1]: We keep the general notation $(E,Q)$ instead of writing the concrete form of the entropy and the entropy flux for the sake of the next lemmas and their proofs, where similar arguments are partially repeated.
[^2]: We extend the measure for $t<0$ and $t>T$ by zero.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We study $N=2$ supersymmetric gauge theories on a large family of squashed 4-spheres preserving $SU(2)\times U(1)\subset
SO(4)$ isometry and determine the conditions under which this background is supersymmetric. We then compute the partition function of the theories by using localization technique. The results indicate that for $N=2$ SUSY, including both vector-multiplets and hypermultiplets, the partition function is independent of the arbitrary squashing functions as well as of the other supergravity background fields.
address:
- 'ICTP, Strada Costiera 11, 34014 Trieste, Italy'
- 'INFN, sezione di Trieste, Italy'
- 'SISSA,Via Bonomea 265, 34128 Trieste, Italy'
author:
- 'Alejandro Cabo-Bizet'
- Edi Gava
- 'Victor I. Giraldo-Rivera'
- 'M. Nouman Muteeb'
- 'K.S. Narain'
bibliography:
- 'bibliography.bib'
nocite: '[@*]'
title: 'Partition Function of N=2 Gauge Theories on an Squashed $S^4$ with $SU(2)\times U(1)$ Isometry'
---
Supersymmetric Gauge Theories
Introduction
============
Supersymmetric Localization techniques furnish a rich ground for exact computation of various quantities in Supersymmetric Quantum Field Theories. This program started with the work of [@Witten:1992xu], later pursued by [@Nekrasov:2003af; @Nekrasov:2003rj] and more recently brought back by [@Pestun:2007rz] which gave rise to an intense activity of exact calculations in various dimensions and/or manifolds. [@Kapustin:2009kz; @Yaakov:2012usa; @Gupta:2012cy; @Hama:2010av; @Nosaka:2013cpa; @Gomis:2012wy; @Hama:2012bg; @Imamura:2012bm]. A systematic way to put rigid SUSY on curved spaces in the case of $N=1$ theories was worked out by [@Festuccia:2011ws; @Dumitrescu:2012ha], and, for $N=2$ theories in [@Klare:2013dka]. The partition function on squashed spheres depend in general on the squashing parameters [@Hama:2010av; @Hama:2012bg]. However for some squashing, preserving a particular isometry of the manifold, the partition function comes out to be independent of squashing parameters. Detailed studies of 3-dimensional cases had appeared [@Hama:2010av], [@Alday:2013lba], [@Closset:2013vra] and [@Nishioka:2013haa; @Huang:2014gca; @Imamura:2013nra]. For the four dimensional case, the analysis of which geometrical background data the partition function depends on, has been performed for $N=1$ SUSY. The four dimensional squashed sphere has also been considered, first in [@Hama:2012bg], and later in [@Nosaka:2013cpa; @Huang:2014pda; @Crossley:2014oea]. The SUSY partition function on the branched $S^4$ in [@Nosaka:2013cpa; @Huang:2014pda] computes the SUSY Rènyi entropy of a circular region in a 4-dimensional space [@Casini:2011kv; @Klebanov:2011uf].\
In this paper we calculate $N=2$ supersymmetric partition function on a very general squashed $S^4$ with $SU(2)\times U(1)$ isometry, and show that it is independent of the squashing metric parameters and of the other supergravity backgrounds. In the case of $N=2$ theories on the ellipsoid considered in [@Hama:2012bg] the isometry is generically $U(1)\times U(1)$. In the limit $l=r$ in [@Hama:2012bg] this symmetry is enhanced to the $SO(3)\times SO(2)$ subgroup of $SO(5)$. On the other hand, the $SU(2)\times U(1)$ isometry in our case is a subgroup of $SO(4)\equiv SU(2)_L\times SU(2)_R$. The paper is organized as follows. In section \[susy curve\], the Killing spinor equations for $N=2$ rigid SUSY on squahsed $S^4$ are given, in section \[Squashed $S^4$\] the squashed $S^4$ metric and spin connection components are given and we solve the Killing spinor equations, calculating various background fields and then giving the conditions for their regularity. Section \[multiplets\] contains the calculation of the $Q^2$ action on the fields of vector-multiplets and hypermultiplets. In sections \[path integration\] and \[One-loop determinant\], we find the saddle point configurations and one-loop determinants for vector multiplet and hypermultiplet respectively. In section \[instanton\] we comment on the contribution of point-like instantons and anti-instantons to the supersymmetic partition function. A brief summary of the main result is given in section \[conclusion\].
Rigid Supersymmetric Theories on Curved Spaces {#susy curve}
==============================================
By now a systematic way to put rigid SUSY on a curved spaces has been developed: the procedure is to start from the supergravity transformations [@Festuccia:2011ws; @Dumitrescu:2012ha; @Dumitrescu:2012at; @Klare:2013dka] and obtain a rigid SUSY theory on a given curved manifold by freezing the quantum fluctuations of the gravitational background by taking the Planck mass limit $M_P\rightarrow \infty$, setting to zero and the fermionic fields in the supergravity multiplet. We following this procedure for $N=2$ one obtaines a set of Killing spinor equations which have to be satisfied in order to obtain rigid 4D $N=2$ SUSY and at the same time constrain the background geometry. They are: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:101}
\begin{split}
D_m\xi_A+T^{kl}\sigma_{kl}\sigma_m\bar{\xi}_A &=-\iota\sigma_m\bar{\xi}^\prime_A,\\ D_m\bar{\xi}_A+\bar{T}^{kl}{\bar{\sigma}}_{kl}{\bar{\sigma}}_m\xi_A &=-\iota {\bar{\sigma}}_m\xi^\prime_A\quad \text{for a given pair} \quad\xi^\prime_A,\bar{\xi}^\prime_A,
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ (where $\iota \equiv \sqrt{-1}$) coming from the gravitino variation, and: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:103}
\begin{split}
\sigma^m{\bar{\sigma}}^n D_mD_n\xi_A+4D_lT_{mn}\sigma^{mn}\sigma^l\bar{\xi}_A &=M\xi_A,\\
{\bar{\sigma}}^m\sigma^n D_m D_n\bar{\xi}_A+4D_l {\bar{T}}_{mn}{\bar{\sigma}}^{mn}{\bar{\sigma}}^l\xi_A &=M\bar{\xi}_A,
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ with $M$ a real scalar background field, which is a consequence of the variation of a spin 1/2 field in the supergravity multiplet.\
Here $\xi_{A}$ and $\bar{\xi}_{A}$ (spinor indices are omitted) are chiral and anti-chiral Killing spinors satisfying reality conditions to be specified later and are the parameters of $N=2$ SUSY. The index $A$ is a $SU(2)_R$ $R$-symmetry index of the $N=2$ theory. The fields $T^{kl}$, $\bar{T}^{kl}$ are a self-dual and anti-self-dual real tensor background fields respectively. The covariant derivatives in and are covariantized also with respect to a background $SU(2)_R$ gauge field $(V_m)^A_{\,{B}}$, in addition to the to the local Lorenz and gauge transformations. We work in four component notation, where is written compactly as $$\begin{aligned}
D_m\xi+T.\Gamma \Gamma_m \xi=-\iota \Gamma_m \xi^\prime,\end{aligned}$$ where $T.\Gamma\equiv T_{kl}\Gamma^{kl}$ [^1]. Now multiplying from left by $\Gamma^m$ and using the identity $\Gamma_m\Gamma_{kl}\Gamma^m=0$ we get $$\begin{aligned}
\xi_p\equiv \Gamma^m D_m\xi=-4\iota \xi^\prime.\end{aligned}$$ Here a new spinor $\xi_p$ is defined which will be useful later on, when we will calculate the square of supersymmetry transformation $Q^2$ acting on different fields of $N=2$ theory.\
Supersymmetry on the Squashed $S^4$ {#Squashed $S^4$}
===================================
The family of squashed 4-spheres which we will consider are defined by the following metric or vielbein one-forms: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
&ds^2=\text{d$r$}^2+\frac{f(r)^2}{4} \left(\text{d$\theta $}^2+ \sin^2{\theta}\text{d$\phi $}^2 \right)+\frac{h(r)^2}{4} (\text{d$\psi $}+ \cos{\theta}\text{d$\phi $} )^2 ,\\
&e^4=\text{d$r$} , \quad e^3=-\frac{h(r)}{2} \left(\text{d$\psi $}+\cos{\theta}\text{d$\phi $} \right),\quad e^2=\frac{f(r)}{2} \left(\sin{\psi}\text{d$\theta $}- \sin{\theta}\cos{\psi} \text{d$\phi $} \right),\\ & e^1=-\frac{f(r)}{2} \left( \cos{\psi} \text{d$\theta $}+ \sin{\theta }\sin{\psi}\text{d$\phi $}\right),
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ where $f(r)$ and $h(r)$ are smooth arbitrary functions of $r$ . The above metric has $SU(2)\times U(1)$ isometry. The spin connection is given by the following non-zero components $\Omega _m^{\text{ab}}$, $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
&\Omega _1^{21} =1-\frac{h(r)^2}{2 f(r)^2}, \quad \Omega _1^{43}=\frac{h'(r)}{2},\quad
\Omega _2^{31} =\frac{h(r) \sin (\psi )}{2 f(r)}, \quad \Omega _2^{32} = \frac{h(r) \cos (\psi )}{2 f(r)},\quad \\
& \Omega _2^{41} =\frac{1}{2} \cos (\psi ) f'(r),
\Omega _2^{42}=-\frac{1}{2} \sin (\psi ) f'(r),\quad \Omega _3^{21}=\cos (\theta )-\frac{h(r)^2 \cos (\theta )}{2 f(r)^2},\quad \\ & \Omega _3^{31}=-\frac{h(r) \sin (\theta ) \cos (\psi )}{2 f(r)}, \quad \Omega _3^{32}=\frac{h(r) \sin (\theta ) \sin (\psi )}{2 f(r)},\quad \Omega _3^{41}=\frac{1}{2} \sin (\theta ) \sin (\psi ) f'(r),\quad \\ & \Omega _3^{42}=\frac{1}{2} \sin (\theta ) \cos (\psi ) f'(r),\quad \Omega _3^{43}=\frac{1}{2} \cos (\theta ) h'(r),
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ where $a,b=1,..,4$ are flat indices and $m=1,...4$ is curved space index.
Solution of Killing Spinor Equation on the Squashed $S^4$ {#killing solution}
---------------------------------------------------------
The purpose of this section is to show that if the background fields $(V_m)^A_{\,{B}}, T_{mn}, \bar{T}_{mn}, M $ are chosen appropriately, the squashed $S^4$ admits a Killing spinor which is solution of the two stets of Killing spinor equations and . We write the backgrounds $T$ and $ V$ in a complexified version: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
&V_m =\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\iota v_{3m} & \iota (v_{1m}+\iota v_{2m}) \\
\iota (v_{1m}-\iota v_{2m}) & -\iota v_{3m} \\
\end{array}
\right),\\
&T = \left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
\iota t_3 & \iota (t_1-\iota t_2) & 0 & 0 \\
\iota (t_1+\iota t_2) & -\iota t_3 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & \iota t_3 & \iota (\bar{t}_1-\iota \bar{t}_2) \\
0 & 0 & \iota (\bar{t}_1+\iota \bar{t}_2) & -\iota \bar{t}_3 \\
\end{array}
\right).
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ We will consider the following ansätz for the Killing spinor and we will calculate the background fields $T$, $V$ and $M$ such that this ansätz satisfies the set of Killing spinor equations $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:ansa}
\xi=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
s_1(r) & 0 \\
0 & t_2(r) \\
s_3(r) & 0 \\
0 & t_4(r) \\
\end{array}
\right).\end{aligned}$$ The Killing spinor satisfies the reality condition given in [@Hama:2012bg]: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
(\xi_{\alpha A})^{\dagger}=\epsilon^{AB}\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}\xi_{\beta B},\qquad
(\bar{\xi}_{\dot{\alpha} A})^{\dagger}=\epsilon^{AB}\epsilon^{\dot{\alpha}\dot{\beta}}\xi_{\dot{\beta} B}.
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ The parameters in the Killing spinor are arbitrary smooth functions of $r$. After solving the Killing spinor equations, it turns out that some of these parameters are constrained.\
The general solution to the main and auxiliary equations using the ans[ä]{}tz takes the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
&s_1(r)=s(r) ,\quad s_3(r)=\frac{\iota~ c~ h(r) }{s(r)},\quad t_2(r)=s(r) ,\\ &t_4(r)=-\frac{\iota~ c~ h(r) }{s(r)},\\
& t_3 =\frac{s(r) \left(f(r) \left(2 f(r) s'(r)-s(r) f'(r)\right)+h(r) s(r)\right)}{4 c f(r)^2 h(r)},\\ & \bar{t}_3 =\frac{c \left(f(r) h(r) \left(s(r) f'(r)+2 f(r) s'(r)\right)-2 f(r)^2 s(r) h'(r)+h(r)^2 s(r)\right)}{4
f(r)^2 s(r)^3},\\& v_{33} =\frac{1}{2} \left(\frac{h(r)}{f(r)^2}+\frac{h'(r)-2}{h(r)}-\frac{2 s'(r)}{s(r)}\right),\\ & M = \frac{2 f''(r)}{f(r)}+\frac{f'(r)^2-2 h'(r)+\frac{4 h(r) s'(r)}{s(r)}}{f(r)^2}+\frac{h(r)^2}{f(r)^4}+\frac{4 s'(r)
\left(s(r) h'(r)-h(r) s'(r)\right)}{h(r) s(r)^2} .
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ Here only the non-zero part of the background fields and Killing spinor components are given, $c$ is a real arbitrary constant which sets normalization of the killing vector we will to localize, $s(r)$ is a smooth function of $r$ and the background fields $T$ and $V_m$ are indexed by flat tangent space indices. For these background fields to be well defined on the squashed $S^4$, it is necessary that $s(r)$ has no zero between the two poles. We thus determined the form of all the additional background fields in order for $N=2$ SUSY to be preserved on the squashed four-sphere. We have set $v_{12}=0$, this choice of background preserves $SU(2)\times U(1)\times U(1)_R$ symmetry. Should we take $v_{12}\ne0$ it can be shown that the symmetry is reduced to $SU(2)\times U(1)^{\prime}$ where $U(1)^{\prime}\equiv (U(1)\times U(1)_R)_{diagonal}$.
Regularity of the Background Fields {#regularity}
-----------------------------------
Our metric should look like the round $S^4$ at the North and South poles, this implies that $f(r)=h(r)=0$ at $r=0$ and $r=\pi$. Moreover for our metric to be non-singular in the interval $\pi>r>0$, the functions $f(r)$ and $h(r)$ are strictly non-zero and do not change sign inside the interval.\
North pole $(r=0)$: Near the North pole the regularity of invariant quantities $R$, $R_{\mu\nu}R^{\mu\nu}$ and of the background fields both in flat tangent space indices and curved space indices, fixes $f(r)$, $h(r)$ and $s(r)$ in the following form: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
&h(r)=r+\text{h}_{n_3} r^3 +O(r^4),\\
&f(r)=r+\text{f}_{n_3} r^3 +O(r^4),\\
&s(r)=s_{n_0}+s_{n_2} r^2+s_{n_3} r^3+O(r^4).
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ There are higher order terms, but those are irrelevant to the present analysis.\
South pole$(r=\pi)$: Similarly near the South pole the regularity requirements fix $f(r)$, $h(r)$ and $s(r)$ in the following way $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
&h(r)=\pi-r+\text{h}_{s_3} (\pi -r)^3+O\left((\pi-r)^4\right), \\
&f(r)=\pi-r+\text{f}_{s_3} (\pi -r)^3 +O\left((\pi-r)^4\right),\\
&s(r)=(\pi -r) s_{s_1}+(\pi -r)^3 s_{s_3}+O\left((\pi-r)^4\right).
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ Where $h_{n_3},f_{n_3},s_{n_0},s_{n_2},s_{n_3},h_{s_3},f_{s_3},s_{s_1},s_{s_3}$ are arbitrary real constants.\
For reasons that will become clear later, a quantity of interest which we want to calculate is $(s(r)^2-\frac{c^2 h(r)^2}{s(r)^2})$. At the North pole it evaluates to $s_{n_0}^2$, whereas at the South pole it evaluates to $-\frac{c^2}{s_{s_1}^2}$. So it has the interesting property that it changes sign between North and South poles and hence passes through zero. This result will have important consequences later on, in section $\ref{One-loop determinant}$ when we will calculate the one-loop determinant, where we show that the relevant differential operators are transversally elliptic. Before proceeding, we want to comment that there is an ambiguity in the choice of the functions $f(r)$, $h(r)$ and $s(r)$ at the North and South poles, that is, if we take following choice for these functions at the North pole $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
&h(r)=-r+\text{h}_{n_3} r^3+O(r^4), \\
&f(r)=r+\text{f}_{n_3} r^3+O(r^4) ,\\
&s(r)= s_{n_1}+s_{n_3} r^3+O(r^4),
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ and the following choice at the South pole $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
&h(r)=r-\pi+\text{h}_{s_3} (\pi-r)^3+O\left((\pi-r)^4\right), \\
&f(r)=\pi-r+\text{f}_{s_3} (\pi-r)^3+O\left((\pi-r)^4\right), \\
&s(r)=s_{s_0}+s_{s_2} (\pi-r)^2+s_{s_3} \left(\pi-r)^3+O((\pi-r)^4\right),
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ all the background fields are still regular there. The only difference is that the quantity $(s(r)^2-\frac{c^2 h(r)^2}{s(r)^2})$ evaluates to $-\frac{c^2}{s_{n_1}^2}$ at the South pole and to $s_{s_0}^2$ at the South pole. Every other result remains the same.
Multiplets
==========
Vector Multiplet
----------------
In 4D N=2 SUSY with Eucildean signature, vector multiplets are made of a gauge field $A_m$, two independent gauginos $\lambda_{\alpha
A}$, $\bar{\lambda}_{\dot{\alpha}A}$, two scalar fields $\phi$, $\bar{\phi}$ and an auxiliary field $D_{AB}=D_{BA}$, all Lie algebra valued. The supersymmetric Yang-Mills Lagrangian with the additional couplings to the backgrounds was written in [@Hama:2012bg], we write it again for completeness: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
& L_{YM}=\text{Tr}[\frac{1}{2}F^{mn}F_{mn}+16F_{mn}(\bar{\phi}T^{mn}+\phi\bar{T}^{mn})+64\bar{\phi}^2T_{mn}T^{mn}+64\phi^2\bar{T}^{mn}\bar{T}_{mn} \\ & -4D_m\bar{\phi}D^m\phi+2M\phi\bar{\phi}-2\iota\lambda^A\sigma^mD_m\bar{\lambda}_A-2\lambda^A[\bar{\phi,\lambda_A}]+2\bar{\lambda}^A[\phi,\bar{\lambda}]+4[\phi,\bar{\phi}]^2-\frac{1}{2}D^{AB}D_{AB}].
\end{split}
\end{aligned}$$ With the inclusion of the $\theta$-term: $$\begin{aligned}
S_{YM}=\frac{1}{g^2_{YM}}\int d^4x\sqrt{g}L_{YM}+\iota\frac{\theta}{8\pi^2}\int \text{Tr}(F\wedge F).
\end{aligned}$$
Hypermultiplet
--------------
The hypermultiplet consists of scalars $q_{AI}$ and fermions $\psi_{\alpha A}$, $\bar{\psi}^{\dot{\alpha}}_I$ satisfying reality conditions [@Hama:2012bg]. The index $I$ runs from $1$ to $2r$. There is also an auxiliary scalar $F_{IA}$ transforming as a doublet under a local $SU(2)_{\check{R}}$ symmetry. This symmetry and the auxiliary field are introduced in the theory by the requirement that the SUSY algebra of matter multiplet is closed off shell respect to the supercharge that is used to localize [@Pestun:2007rz]. From [@Hama:2012bg] the gauge covariant kinetic Lagrangian for the hypermultiplet is $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
L_{mat}=\frac{1}{2}D_mq^AD^mq_A-q^A\{\phi,\bar{\phi}\}q_A+\frac{\iota}{2}q^AD_{AB}q^B+\frac{1} {8}(R+M)q^Aq_A-\frac{\iota}{2}\bar{\psi}\bar{\sigma}^mD_m\psi- \\ \frac{1}{2}\psi\phi\psi+ \frac{1}{2}\bar{\psi}\bar{\phi}\bar{\psi}+\frac{\iota}{2}\psi\sigma^{kl}T_{kl}\psi-\frac{\iota}{2}\bar{\psi}\bar{\sigma}^{kl}\bar{T}_{kl}\bar{\psi}-q^A\lambda_A\psi+\bar{\psi}\bar{\lambda}q^A-\frac{1}{2}F^AF_A.
\end{split}
\end{aligned}$$
Closure of the Supercharge Algebra
----------------------------------
For localization computation we need to identify a continuous fermionic symmetry $\textbf{Q}$ and the corresponding Killing spinor is taken to be commuting. The supersymmetry transformation $Q$ acting on the fields of $N=2$ SUSY theory squares into a combination of bosonic symmetries: $$\begin{aligned}
\textbf{Q}^2\equiv L_v+Gauge(\hat{\Phi})+Lorentz(L_{ab})+Scale({\omega})+R_{U(1)}(\Theta)+R_{SU(2)}(\hat{\Theta}_{AB})+\check{R}_{SU(2)}(\hat{\check{\Theta}}),\end{aligned}$$ with various parameters defined as in [@Hama:2012bg]. For the vector multiplet the SUSY algebra is closed off shell, the only requirement being that the Killing spinor equations be satisfied. For the hypermultiplet the closure of full $N=2$ SUSY algebra requires the existence of infinite number of auxiliary spinors and auxiliary fields. But for localization computation we need only one supercharge corresponding to a particular Killing spinor and in this case only finite number of auxiliary spinors are required. These auxiliary spinors are required to satisfy certain constraint equations (see [@Pestun:2007rz]).\
Next we compute these transformation parameters for our background. First of all, we observe that $\xi^A\xi_{pA}=\bar{\xi}^A\bar{\xi}_{pA}=0$. This condition implies that $\omega=\Theta=0$. In other words the square of the supersymmetry transformation does not give rise to dilation or $U(1)_R$ transformation. This condition is necessary because the non-zero values of the background fields $T_{ab}$ and $\bar{T}_{ab}$ break the $U(1)_R$ symmetry anyway.\
The explicit expression for other transformation parameters are given below $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
L_{ab} &=\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
0 & -8 c & 0 & 0 \\
8 c & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right),\\
\Theta_{AB} &=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
0 & 2 c \left(\frac{h(r)^2}{f(r)^2}-\frac{2 s'(r) h(r)}{s(r)}+h'(r)\right) \\
2 c \left(\frac{h(r)^2}{f(r)^2}-\frac{2 s'(r) h(r)}{s(r)}+h'(r)\right) & 0 \\
\end{array}
\right),\\
\hat{\Theta}^A_{B} &=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
4 c & 0 \\
0 & -4 c \\
\end{array}
\right),\\
Lie_v\xi &=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-\frac{2 c s(r) \left(\left(h'(r)-2\right) f(r)^2+h(r)^2\right)}{f(r)^2} & 0 \\
0 & \frac{2 c s(r) \left(\left(h'(r)-2\right) f(r)^2+h(r)^2\right)}{f(r)^2} \\
\frac{2 \iota c^2 h(r) \left(f(r)^2 \left(h'(r)+2\right)-h(r)^2\right)}{f(r)^2 s(r)} & 0 \\
0 & \frac{2 \iota c^2 h(r) \left(f(r)^2 \left(h'(r)+2\right)-h(r)^2\right)}{f(r)^2 s(r)} \\
\end{array}
\right),
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ where the Lie derivative $Lie_v$ is defined as $L_v\xi\equiv \upsilon^m D_m\xi+\frac{1}{4}D_{[a}\upsilon_{b]}\Gamma^{ab}\xi$. The non-zero $L_{ab}$ implies the fact that the $U(1)$ group which is used to find the fixed points of the manifold, belongs to the Cartan of $SU(2)$ part of the isometry group $SU(2)\times U(1)$. Therefore it follows that our Killing spinor is invariant under $Q^2$. In 4-component notation: $$\begin{aligned}
Q^2\xi= \iota Lie_v\xi-\xi\hat{\Theta}=0.\end{aligned}$$ The auxiliary spinor, which helps to close off-shell the supersymmetry, is given by: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
%&\check{\xi}_A =-\frac{c h(r)}{s(r)^2}\xi_A\\
%&\bar{\check{\xi}}_A = \frac{s(r)^2}{c h(r)}\bar{\xi}_A\\
&\check{\xi} =\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\frac{c h(r)}{s(r)} & 0 \\
0 & \frac{c h(r)}{s(r)} \\
-\iota s(r) & 0 \\
0 & \iota s(r) \\
\end{array}
\right).
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ To fix the background $SU(2)_{\check{R}}$, we have to fix the corresponding gauge field $\check{V}_m$: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
&\check{V}_m =\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\iota \check{v}_{3m} & \iota (\check{v}_{1m}+\iota \check{v}_{2m}) \\
\iota (\check{v}_{1m}-\iota \check{v}_{2m}) & -\iota \check{v}_{3m} \\
\end{array}
\right).
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ The requirement that all the background fields be invariant under the action of $\textbf{Q}^2$ fixes all the components of $\check{V}_m$ to zero except $\check{v}_{33},\check{v}_{34}$, which remain arbitrary.\
After the gauge fixing, $\hat{\check{\Theta}}^A_{B}$ becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{\check{\Theta}}^A_{B}=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-4 (h(r) \check{v}_{33}(r) c+c) & 0 \\
0 & 4 (h(r) \check{v}_{33}(r) c+c) \\
\end{array}
\right).\end{aligned}$$ And also the auxiliary spinor $\check{\xi}$ is proven to be invariant under $Q^2$ $$\begin{aligned}
\textbf{Q}^2\check{\xi}=0.\end{aligned}$$
Localization {#path integration}
============
$S_{YM}$ Saddle Points
-----------------------
The path integral computation of the expectation value of an observable of a supersymmetric $YM$ theory which is invariant under a supercharge $\textbf{Q}$ localizes to a subset $S_{Q}$ of the entire field space. The zero locus of the supercharge $\textbf{Q}$ coincides with the set of bosonic configurations for which the supersymmetry variations of the fermions vanish: $$\begin{aligned}
\textbf{Q}\Psi=0\quad \text{for all fermions}\quad \Psi.\end{aligned}$$ This is easily seen if we can take as regulator the **Q**-exact deformation: $\textbf{Q}V=\textbf{Q}((\textbf{Q}\Psi)^{\dag}\Psi)$.\
To take into account the gauge fixing, the superchage $\textbf{Q}$ is generalized to $\hat{\textbf{Q}}\equiv\textbf{Q}+\textbf{Q}_B$, where $\textbf{Q}_B$ is the BRST-supercharge. However as pointed out in [@Pestun:2007rz], this does not affect the zero locus. To effectively calculate the zero locus of the supercharge, we add to the Lagrangian a $\textbf{Q}$-exact quantity $\textbf{Q}V$, whose critical point set is $S_{Q}$ and whose bosonic part is semi-positive definite. Now either solving the localization equation $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{\textbf{Q}}\lambda=0,\end{aligned}$$ directly or analyzing the $\hat{\textbf{Q}}$-transform of the following quantity, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:QV}
V=\text{Tr}[(\hat{\textbf{Q}}\lambda_{\alpha A})^{\dagger}\lambda_{\alpha A}+(\hat{\textbf{Q}}\bar{\lambda}^{\dot{\alpha}}_A)^{\dagger}\bar{\lambda}^{\dot{\alpha}}_A],\end{aligned}$$ which has semi-positive definite bosonic part. In writing explicitly we use the proper reality conditions which make the action well defined. We get the analogous expression to the equation (4.2) in [@Hama:2012bg].\
Analyzing that expression we get the following partial differential equations for $\phi-\bar{\phi}\equiv \phi_2(\psi,\theta,\varphi,r)$, where we make use of Bianchi identities to get the second equation: $$\begin{aligned}
\partial_{\psi}\phi_2(\psi,\theta,\varphi,r)=0,\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\tilde{\nabla}^2\phi_2(\theta,\varphi,r)+
\frac{f(r)^2}{2h(r)}\xi\Gamma^m\xi_p \partial_m\phi_2(\theta,\varphi,r)+G(r)\phi_2(\theta,\varphi,r)=0,\end{aligned}$$ where in the second equation we used the fact that $\phi_2(\psi,\theta,\varphi,r)$ is independent of $\psi$-coordinate. $\tilde{\nabla}^2$ is the following Laplacian like operator: $$\begin{aligned}
\tilde{\nabla}^2 *=\frac{f(r)^2}{2 h(r)}\frac{h(r)}{\sqrt{g}f(r) \xi_n}\nabla_\mu\Bigl(\sqrt{g}
\xi^2_ng^{\mu \nu}\nabla_\nu(\frac{f(r)}{h(r)}*)\Bigr)\end{aligned}$$ $\xi_n=\xi.\xi$ is the proper norm of the four component spinor and $G(r)$ $$\begin{aligned}
G(r)&=&\frac{1}{h(r)^3 s(r)^3}\Biggl(-c^2 h(r)^4 \left(s(r)
\left(f'(r)^2+2 h'(r)\right)-2 f(r) f'(r) s'(r)\right)\Biggr.\nonumber\\
&-&h(r)^2
\left(-3 c^2 f(r)^2 s(r) h'(r)^2+2 f(r) s(r)^4 f'(r) s'(r)+s(r)^5
f'(r)^2\right) \nonumber\\ &+&h(r)^3 \left(c^2 f(r)^2 s(r) h''(r)+2
s'(r) \left(s(r)^4-2 c^2 f(r)^2 h'(r)\right)\right)+2 c^2 h(r)^5
s'(r)\nonumber\\
&+&f(r) h(r) s(r)^4 \left(2 h'(r) \left(s(r) f'(r)+2 f(r)
s'(r)\right)+f(r) s(r) h''(r)\right) \nonumber\\ \Biggl.&-&f(r)^2 s(r)^5 h'(r)^2\Biggr)\end{aligned}$$ For the round sphere $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
f(r)=\sin{r},\quad h(r)=\sin{r},\quad
s(r)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\cos(\frac{r}{2}),
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ the field $\phi_2=0$ at the localization locus, which will also ensure that $A_m=0$ at the locus. This result is true in an open neighborhood of the round $S^4$, as appears also in [@Hama:2012bg], and so we will assume it is the solution to the locus equations.\
The saddle points are thus labeled by a Lie Algebra valued constant $a_0$, and are given by the equations[@Pestun:2007rz; @Hama:2012bg]: $$\begin{aligned}
A_m=0, \qquad \phi=\bar{\phi}= a_0,\qquad D_{AB}=-\iota a_0 \omega_{AB},\end{aligned}$$ The value of the Super-Yang-Mills action on this saddle point is then: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{g^2_{YM}}\int d^4x\sqrt{g}L_{YM}|_{saddle point}=\frac{2 \pi ^3 \text{Tr}\left[\text{a}_0^2\right]}{c^2\text{g}_{YM}^2}.\end{aligned}$$
Saddle points for Matter multiplet
----------------------------------
To find the saddle points of the matter multiplet we will use the following fermionic functional $$\begin{aligned}
V_{mat}=\text{Tr}[(\hat{\textbf{Q}}\psi_{\alpha I})^{\dagger}\psi_{\alpha I}+(\hat{\textbf{Q}}\bar{\psi}^{\dot{\alpha}}_I)^{\dagger}\bar{\psi}^{\dot{\alpha}}_I].\end{aligned}$$ The bosonic part of $\hat{\textbf{Q}}V_{mat}$ is $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{\textbf{Q}}V_{mat}|_{bos}=\text{Tr}[(\hat{\textbf{Q}}\psi_{\alpha I})^{\dagger}\hat{\textbf{Q}}\psi_{\alpha I}+(\hat{\textbf{Q}}\bar{\psi}^{\dot{\alpha}}_I)^{\dagger}\hat{\textbf{Q}}\bar{\psi}^{\dot{\alpha}}_I].\end{aligned}$$ It is easy to check that: $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{\textbf{Q}}V_{mat}|_{bos}=4
\| \xi\|^2(\frac{1}{2}(D_{m}q^{AI}-P_{m}q^{AI})^2+M_q(r)q^{AI}q_{IA}-\frac{1}{2}F^{AI}F_{IA}),\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
P_{m A}^{ B}=\frac{1}{\| \xi\|^2}(2 (\epsilon\xi\gamma_m\xi_p+\epsilon\xi T\gamma_m\xi)^B_{\quad A}+D^n
\text{Log}(\| \xi\|^2)(\epsilon\xi\gamma_{nm}\xi)^B_{\quad A}),\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
M_q&=-\frac{1}{4}R+\frac{1}{\| \xi\|^2}(8\xi^A_p\xi_{pA}+\xi^A\gamma^mT^2\gamma_m\xi_A-D^n
\text{Log}(\| \xi\|^2)\xi^A(3\gamma_m\xi_{pA}+T\gamma_m\xi_A)+\\ & \frac{1}{2}( P^{mA}_{\qquad B}P_{mA}^B)) -\frac{1}{2\| \xi\|^2}P^{mA}_{\quad A}P^{B}_{m B},
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ where $\xi_A=(\xi_{\alpha A},\bar{\xi}_{\dot{\alpha}A})$,$\epsilon^{AB}$ is the $SU(2)_R$ tensor and $R$ is the Ricci scalar. As a result of the condition $F_{IA}^{\dagger}=-F^{AI}$ which is imposed along the contour of path integration, all the bosonic terms are manifestly positive definite, except the term containing $M_q(r)$. For the round $S^4$ $$\begin{aligned}
M_q(r)=\frac{7}{8}+\frac{\cos (2r)}{8},\end{aligned}$$ and it is bounded from below by $\frac{3}{4}$. Therefore there is a large open neighborhood of the round sphere for which $M_q(r)$ is positive definite. So we get the result for the saddle points of the hypermultiplet as $$\begin{aligned}
q_{IA}=0,\qquad F_{IA}=0.
\end{aligned}$$ Hence there will be no classical contribution from the hypermultiplet sector.
One-loop determinant {#One-loop determinant}
====================
To calculate the one-loop determinant we have to first fix the gauge. We choose the following gauge function[@Hama:2012bg]. $$\begin{aligned}
G=\iota \partial_mA^m+\iota L_v((\xi^A\xi_A-\bar{\xi}_A\bar{\xi}^A)\phi_2-\upsilon^mA_m).\end{aligned}$$ The saddle point conditions do not change under the new supercharge $\hat{Q}^2\equiv (Q_B+Q)^2$, with the zero mode of $\phi_1=a_0$ at the saddle point.
Vector multiplet contribution
-----------------------------
The basic idea of localization is that the actual value of the path integral or any other $Q$-closed observable remains unchanged under any $\hat{\textbf{Q}}$-exact deformation $L\rightarrow L+s\hat{\textbf{Q}}(V+V_{GF})$. By choosing the bosonic part of $L\rightarrow L+s\hat{\textbf{Q}}(V+V_{GF})$ positive definite and sending $s\rightarrow\infty$, Gaussian approximation becomes exact for the path integral over the fluctuations around the locus. The Gaussian integral evaluates to the square root of the ratio between the determinant of a fermionic kinetic operator $K_{fermion}$ and that of a bosonic kinetic operator $K_{boson}$. These kinetic operators coming from the quadratic part of the $\hat{\textbf{Q}}$-exact regulator.\
To compute the 1-loop contribution it is convenient to change variables in the path integral to a set, $X$,$\Xi$, which makes manifest the cohomology of $\hat{\mathbf{Q}}$ [@Pestun:2007rz; @Hama:2012bg] . After doing that, the quadratic part of $V+V_{GF}$ can be written as: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Vquad}
(V+V_{GF})|_{quadratic}=(\hat{\textbf{Q}}\textbf{X},\Xi)\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\text{D}_{00} & \text{D}_{01} \\
\text{D}_{10} & \text{D}_{11} \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\textbf{X} \\
\hat{\textbf{Q}}\Xi \\
\end{array}
\right),\end{aligned}$$ where $D_{ij}$ are differential operators and $X$,$\Xi$ are cohomologically paired bosonic and fermonic fields respectively, $$\begin{aligned}
\Xi \equiv (\Xi_{AB},\bar{C},C),\qquad \textbf{X}=(\phi_2,A_m;\bar{a}_0,B_0),\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\Xi_{AB}\equiv 2 \bar{\xi}_{(A}\bar{\lambda}_{B)}-2 \xi_{(A}\lambda_{B)},\end{aligned}$$ where $\bar{C},C,\bar{a}_0,B_0$ belong to the ghost multiplets The fields $X$ and $\Xi$ can be regarded as sections of bundles $E_0$, $E_1$ over the squashed sphere and hence $D_{10}$ acts on the complex as $D_{10}: \Gamma(E_0)\rightarrow \Gamma(E_1)$. The invariance of the deformation term $\hat{Q}(V+V_{GF})$ under the action of $\hat{Q}$ and the pairing of the fields under $\hat{\textbf{Q}}^2=\textbf{H}$ leads to the cancellations between bosonic and fermionic fluctuations, which gives the following ratio [@Pestun:2007rz; @Hama:2012bg]: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:1-loop}\frac{\textbf{det}_{CokerD_{10}}\textbf{H}}{\textbf{det}_{KerD_{10}}\textbf{H}}.\end{aligned}$$ The fact that $\hat{\textbf{Q}}^2$ commutes with the differential operators $D_{ij}$ is used in the derivation of the last expression and is a result of the invariance of $(V+V_{GF})$ under $\hat{Q}^2$. This can readily be seen by considering $\hat{Q}^2(V+V_{GF})_{Quad}$. $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{Q}(V+V_{GF})_{Quad}=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
X & \hat{Q}\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)\mathbb{D}\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-\hat{Q}^2 & 0 \\
0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{c}
X \\
\hat{Q}\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)-\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\hat{Q}X & \Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)\mathbb{D}\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & \hat{Q}^2 \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\hat{Q}X \\
\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right),\end{aligned}$$ where $\mathbb{D}\equiv \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\text{D}_{00} & \text{D}_{01} \\
\text{D}_{10} & \text{D}_{11} \\
\end{array}
\right)$.\
Then $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
\hat{Q}^2(V+V_{GF})_{Quad}&=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\hat{Q} X & \hat{Q}^2\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-\hat{Q}^2 & 0 \\
0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right)\mathbb{D}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
X \\
\hat{Q}\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)+\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
X & \hat{Q}\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-\hat{Q}^2 & 0 \\
0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right)\mathbb{D}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\hat{Q} X \\
\hat{Q}^2\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)-\\& \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\hat{Q}^2 X & \hat{Q}\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)\mathbb{D}\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & -\hat{Q}^2 \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\hat{Q}X \\
\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)+\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\hat{Q} X & \Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)\mathbb{D}\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & \hat{Q}^2 \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\hat{Q}^2X \\
\hat{Q}\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)\\ &= \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\hat{Q}X & \Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & -\hat{Q}^2 \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-\hat{Q}^2 & 0 \\
0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right)\mathbb{D}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
X \\
\hat{Q}\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)+\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
X & \hat{Q}\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-\hat{Q}^2 & 0 \\
0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right)\\& \mathbb{D}\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & \hat{Q}^2 \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\hat{Q}X \\
\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)-\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
X & \hat{Q}\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
-\hat{Q}^2 & 0 \\
0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right)\mathbb{D}\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & \hat{Q}^2 \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{c}
\hat{Q}X \\
\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)+\\ &\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\hat{Q} X & \Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right)\mathbb{D}\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & \hat{Q}^2 \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\hat{Q}^2 & 0 \\
0 & 1 \\
\end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{c}
X \\
\hat{Q}\Sigma \\
\end{array}
\right).
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ Now with the requirement that $[\hat{Q}^2,D_{ij}]=0$, different terms cancel among each other and we get $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{Q}^2(V+V_{GF})_{Quad}=0.\end{aligned}$$
Index of $D_{10}$
-----------------
To evaluate the ratio through the index computation, we first note that the constant fields $B_0$, $\bar{a}_0$ have each weight $0$ under the action of $U(1)$ at the poles and are thus regarded as sitting in the kernel of $D_{10}$ and making a contribution of $2$. For the contribution of other fields we need an explicit expression for $D_{10}$ [^2], which is read from equation To compute the index of $D_{10}$ it is better to use its, symbol $\sigma(D_{10})$, this is computed by taking the Fourier transform of the operator $D_{10}$ and then retaining only the highest order derivative (momentum) terms [@Pestun:2007rz]. To write the symbol explicitly we have to express the Fourier transform of $D_{10}$ in the following orthonormal basis of four unit vector fields $\mu^m_a~(a=1,2,3,4)$ , which relabels the original vielbein basis $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
-2\iota (\tau^a)^A_B\bar{\xi}^B\bar{\sigma}^m\xi_A=4 c h(r)\mu^m_a,\qquad 2\bar{\xi}^A\bar{\sigma}^m\xi_A=4 c h(r)\mu^m_4,\quad(a=1,2,3),
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ Here $c$ is the constant appearing in the definition of the Killing spinor. So the symbol is given by: $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma(D_{10})=\left(
\begin{array}{ccccc}
p_4 W(r) &p_3 & -p_2 & -p_1 W(r) & -4 c p_1h(r) \\
-p_3& p_4 W(r) & p_1 & -p_2 W(r) & -4 c p_2 h(r) \\
p_2 & -p_1 & p_4 W(r) & -p_3 W(r) & -4 c p_3 h(r) \\
p p_1 p_4 & p_2 p_4 & p_3 p_4 & p_4^2-8 c \left(p_1^2+p_2^2+p_3^2\right) h(r) & 2
\left(p_1^2+p_2^2+p_3^2\right) W(r) \\
\end{array}
\right),\end{aligned}$$ where $W(r)\equiv 2 s(r)^2-\frac{2 c^2 h(r)^2}{s(r)^2}$. This matrix can be block diagonalized in terms of 1$\times$1 and $4\times4$ factors, the relevant part of the symbol to compute the index is the following $4\times4 $ block , $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma(D^{\prime}_{10})=\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
p_4 W(r) &p_3 & -p_2 & -p_1 \\
-p_3 & p_4W(r) & p_1 & -p_2 \\
p_2 & -p_1 & p_4 W(r) & -p_3 \\
p_1 & p_2 & p_3& p_4 W(r) \\
\end{array}
\right).\end{aligned}$$ The determinant of this symbol is: $$\begin{aligned}
\text{Det}(\sigma(D^{\prime}_{10}))=\left(\frac{4 c^4 p_4^2 h(r)^4}{s(r)^4}-8 c^2 p_4^2 h(r)^2+p_1^2+p_2^2+p_3^2+4 p_4^2 s(r)^4\right)^2.\end{aligned}$$ For $p_1=p_2=p_3=0$ and $p_4\not=0$, this value of determinant changes sign between North and South poles as discussed in section \[regularity\], hence it has at least one zero. Therefore the symbol is not invertible at the location of that zero and by definition $D_{10}$ cannot be elliptic. But restricting the momentum to $p_4=0$, $\sigma$ is always invertible provided $(p_1,p_2,p_3)$ are not all zero simultaneously. Therefore $D_{10}$ is a transversally elliptic operator with respect to the symmetry generated by $\upsilon$. In general the kernel and cokernel of such transversally elliptic operator are infinite dimensional, but since $[\hat{Q}^2,D_{ij}]=0$, they can both be splitted into irreps. of $\textbf{H}$ with finite multiplicities, these multiplicities can be read off from the index theorem as explained in [@Pestun:2007rz]. The index theorem localizes the contributions to the fixed points of the action of $\textbf{H}$, that is to the North and South poles of the squashed $S^4$. According to the Atiyah-Bott [@1967] formula, the index is given by, $$\begin{aligned}
ind(D^{\prime}_{10})=\sum_{\text{x=fixed points}}\frac{\text{Tr}_{E_0}(\gamma)-\text{Tr}_{E_1}(\gamma)}{\text{det}(1-\frac{\partial\tilde{x}}{\partial x})},\end{aligned}$$ where $\gamma$ denotes the eigenvalue of the action of the operator $e^{\iota \textbf{H} t}$ on the vector and $SU(2)_R$ indices of the fields. So we need the action of $e^{\iota \textbf{H} t}$ Near the North and South poles, on the local coordinates $z_1\equiv x_1+\iota x_2$,$z_2\equiv x_3+\iota x_4$, where we are defining near the North pole: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
x_1+\iota x_2=r \cos \left(\frac{\theta }{2}\right)e^{\iota\frac{\psi+\varphi}{2}},\\
x_3+\iota x_4=r \sin \left(\frac{\theta }{2}\right)e^{\iota\frac{\psi-\varphi}{2}},
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ so, $$\begin{aligned}
z_1\to e^{4 \iota c t} z_1\equiv q_1 z_1,\qquad z_2\to e^{4\iota c t}z_2\equiv q_2 z_2,\end{aligned}$$ With$0\le \theta \le \pi$, $0\le \phi \le 2 \pi$, $0\le \psi \le 4
\pi$ As for the action of $Q^2$ on the fields of vector multiplet, its eigenvalues turn out to be of the same form as in [@Hama:2012bg], except that in our case $q_1=q_2=q=e^{4 \iota c
t}$. Putting all together, also the similar contribution from the South pole, we get the index $D_{10}$.\
The one loop determinant can be computed by extracting the spectrum of eigenvalues of $\textbf{H}$ from the index. For a non-abelian group G, with $a_0$ in its Cartan sub algebra, the one loop contribution of the vector multiplet can be written as [@Hama:2012bg]: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
Z^{vec}_{1-loop}=(\frac{detK_{fermion}}{detK_{boson}})^{\frac{1}{2}}
=\prod_{\alpha\in\Delta_{+}}\frac{1}{(\hat{a}_0.\alpha)^2}\prod_{m,n\ge0}((m+n)+\iota \hat{a}_0.\alpha)((m+n+2)+\iota \hat{a}_0.\alpha)\\((m+n)-\iota \hat{a}_0.\alpha)((m+n+2)-\iota \hat{a}_0.\alpha)\\=\prod_{\alpha\in\Delta_{+}}
\frac{\Upsilon_{1}(\iota \hat{a}_0.\alpha)\Upsilon_{1}(-\iota \hat{a}_0.\alpha)}{(\hat{a}_0.\alpha)^2},
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ where $\hat{a}_0\equiv \frac{a_0}{4c}$. The function $\Upsilon(x)$ has zeros at $x=-(m+n),(m+n+2)$, this function is implemented to regularized the infinite products. It is defined by: $$\begin{aligned}
\Upsilon_b(x)=\prod_{n_1,n_2\ge 0}(b n_1+\frac{n_2}{b}+x)(b n_1+\frac{n_2}{b}+b+\frac{1}{b}-x),\end{aligned}$$ where $b$ is a constant that in the case of [@Hama:2012bg] is exactly the squashing parameter, while and in our case $b=1$.
Hypermultiplet one-loop contribution
-------------------------------------
We begin also with cohomological pairing [@Pestun:2007rz; @Hama:2012bg] for the matter sector, the computation of the one-loop determinant reduces to that of the index of an operator $D^{mat}_{10}$. This operator corresponds to the terms bilinear in the fields $\Xi$ and $q_{IA}$ in the functional $V_{mat}$. Its symbol $\sigma(D^{mat}_{10})$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma(D^{mat}_{10})=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\frac{2 \left((p_3-\iota p_4) s(r)^4+c^2 h(r)^2 (p_3+\iota p_4)\right)}{s(r)^4+c^2 h(r)^2} & 2 (p_1+\iota p_2) \\
2 ((p_1-\iota p_2) & -\frac{2 \left((p_3+\iota p_4) s(r)^4+c^2 h(r)^2 (p_3-\iota p_4)\right)}{s(r)^4+c^2 h(r)^2} \\
\end{array}
\right).\end{aligned}$$ The determinant of this symbol is $$\begin{aligned}
Det[\sigma(D^{mat}_{10})]=-\frac{4 \left(s(r)^4-c^2 h(r)^2\right)^2}{\left(c^2 h(r)^2+s(r)^4\right)^2} p_4^2-4 p_1^2-4p_2^2-4p_3^2.\end{aligned}$$ For $p_1=p_2=p_3=0 ,p_4\ne 0$, the determinant changes sign somewhere between North and South poles (see section \[regularity\]) and hence it possesses at least one zero. Therefore the operator $D^{mat}_{10}$ is again transversally elliptic with respect to the isometry generated by $L_v$ in the $p_4$ direction.\
The index for the action of $\textbf{H}$ on different fields at the poles can be calculated by using Atiyah-Bott formula. With $q_1=q_2=e^{4 \iota c t}$ in our case of squashed $S^4$, the eigenvalues for the action of $Q^2$ on the matter multiplet case again turn out to have the same form as in [@Hama:2012bg]. For the hypermultiplets coupled to gauge symmetry, in the representation $R\bigoplus\bar{R}$ the final result for the one-loop determinant for the hypermultiplets becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
\begin{split}
Z^{hyp}_{1-loop}=\prod_{\rho\in R}\prod_{m,n\ge 0}((m+n+1)-\iota \hat{a}_0.\alpha)^{-1}((m+n+1)+\iota \hat{a}_0.\alpha)^{-1}\\
=\prod_{\rho\in R}\Upsilon_{1}(\iota \hat{a}_0.\rho+1)^{-1}.
\end{split}\end{aligned}$$ where $\rho$ runs over all the weights in a given representation.
Instanton contribution {#instanton}
======================
Near the North pole the Killing spinor evaluates to $$\begin{aligned}
\xi=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
s_{n_0} & 0 \\
0 & s_{n_0} \\
\frac{\iota c r}{s_{n_0}} & 0 \\
0 & -\frac{\iota c r}{s_{n_0}} \\
\end{array}
\right),\end{aligned}$$ so that $\xi^A\xi_A=2 s_{n_0}^2$ and $\bar{\xi}_A\bar{\xi}^A= \frac{2c^2 r^2}{ s_{n_0}^2}$. Since $\bar{\xi}_A\bar{\xi}^A\rightarrow 0$ at the North pole, the localization equation has to be evaluated away from the North pole to have smooth gauge field configurations.
Similarly near the South pole $$\begin{aligned}
\xi=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
(\pi -r) s_{s_1} & 0 \\
0 & (\pi -r) s_{s_1} \\
\frac{\iota c}{s_{s_1}} & 0 \\
0 & -\frac{\iota c}{s_{s_1}} \\
\end{array}
\right),\end{aligned}$$ and $\xi^A\xi_A=2 (\pi-r)^2s_{s_1}^2$ and $\bar{\xi}_A\bar{\xi}^A= \frac{2c^2 }{ s_{s_1}^2}$. In this case $\xi^A\xi_A\rightarrow 0$. Therefore South pole has also to be excluded if smooth gauge field configurations are assumed.
To include the contribution from the poles, we first notice that because $\bar{\xi}_A\bar{\xi}^A\rightarrow 0$ at the North pole, in general $F^{+}_{mn}\ne 0,F^{-}_{mn}=0$ there and still solve the localization equation. These configurations are the pointlike anti-instantons contribution.
Also at the North pole the following condition is satisfied for our background $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{4}\Omega_m^{ab}\sigma_{ab}\xi_A+\iota \xi_B V^{B}_{mA}=0.\end{aligned}$$
Likewise, at the South pole $\xi^A\xi_A\rightarrow 0$, and we get the point instanton contribution $F^{+}_{mn}= 0,F^{-}_{mn}\ne 0$ and the following twisting condition is satisfied $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{4}\Omega_m^{ab}\bar{\sigma}_{ab}\bar{\xi}_A+\iota \bar{\xi}_B V^{B}_{mA}=0.\end{aligned}$$ The Killing vector near the North pole can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
\upsilon^m\frac{\partial}{\partial x_m}=4c(x_1\frac{\partial}{\partial x_2}-x_2\frac{\partial}{\partial x_1})+4c(x_3\frac{\partial}{\partial x_4}-x_4\frac{\partial}{\partial x_3}).\end{aligned}$$
Notice that near the South pole our $N=2$ theory on squashed $S^4$ approaches topologically twisted theory with Omega deformation parameters $\epsilon_1=4c,\epsilon_2=4c$ [@Nekrasov:2003af; @Nekrasov:2003rj], and the contribution of these point-instantons is given by $Z_{inst}(a_0,\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2,\tau)$, where the parameter $\tau$ is defined by $\tau\equiv \frac{\theta}{2\pi}+\frac{4\pi \iota}{g_{YM}^2}$.
Whereas near the North pole, the contribution of point anti-instantons is given by $Z_{inst}(a_0,\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2,\bar{\tau})$. Putting all together, the final form of the squashed $S^4$ partition function is $$\begin{aligned}
Z=\int d \hat{a}_0 e^{-\frac{2\pi^3 \text{Tr}[a_0^2]}{c^2 g_{YM}^2}}|Z_{inst}|^2\prod_{\alpha\in \Delta_{+}}\Upsilon_{1}(\iota \hat{a}_0.\alpha)\Upsilon_{1}(-\iota \hat{a}_0.\alpha)\prod_{\rho\in R}\Upsilon_{1}(\iota \hat{a}_0.\rho+1)^{-1}.\end{aligned}$$
Conclusions {#conclusion}
===========
We have computed the partition function of $N=2$ SUSY on squashed $S^4$ which admits $SU(2)\times U(1)$ isometry, using SUSY Localization technique. We find that the full partition function is independent of the squashing parameters as well as the other supergravity background fields.
The squashing functions independence of the one-loop part of the partition function, which is obvious from the form of the relevant Killing vector $v$, can perhaps be attributed to the fact that in our squashed $S^4$ the theory is topologically twisted at the poles. This is because the $SU(2)_R$ symmetry which is generically broken down to $U(1)_R$ on the squashed $S^4$ excluding the poles, is again enhanced to $SU(2)_R$ at the poles. So this $SU(2)_R$ can be identified at the poles with the $SU(2)$ Lorentz isometry to topologically twist the theory. The classical part can be written as a total derivative and gives to a contribution which is independent of the squashing parameters.
It will be interesting to explain this independence along the same lines given in [@Closset:2013vra]. That is to say, if we deform the vector multiplet and hypermultiplet actions around the round $S^4$ with respect to e.g. $f(r)$, it might be possible to write these deformed actions as $Q$-exact terms separately. This $Q$-exactness of the deformed action will explain the independence of partition function of the parameter $f(r)$ in the sense of [@Closset:2013vra]. However we have to consider perturbations around the round $S^4$, unlike [@Closset:2013vra], where it is perturbed around flat $R^4$.
#### Acknowledgements
We would like to thank G. Bonelli for discussions, and L.F. Alday and L. Pando-Zayas for comments.
[^1]: Our conventions of $\Gamma$ matrices can be simply read off the Killing spinor equations of [@Hama:2012bg] and their $\sigma$ matrices.
[^2]: Strictly speaking the relevant differential operator for the index computation is a combination of the original $D_{10}$ and $D_{11}$. But it turns out that this operator commutes with $\textbf{H}$ and the distinction becomes irrelevant.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Complex organic molecules (COMs) are known to be abundant toward [*some*]{} low-mass young stellar objects (YSOs), but how these detections relate to typical COM abundance are not yet understood. We aim to constrain the frequency distribution of COMs during low-mass star formation, beginning with this pilot survey of COM lines toward six embedded YSOs using the IRAM 30m telescope. The sample was selected from the Spitzer $c2d$ ice sample and covers a range of ice abundances. We detect multiple COMs, including CH$_3$CN, toward two of the YSOs, and tentatively toward a third. Abundances with respect to CH$_3$OH vary between 0.7 and 10%. This sample is combined with previous COM observations and upper limits to obtain a frequency distributions of CH$_3$CN, HCOOCH$_3$, CH$_3$OCH$_3$ and CH$_3$CHO. We find that for all molecules more than 50% of the sample have detections or upper limits of 1–10% with respect to CH$_3$OH. Moderate abundances of COMs thus appear common during the early stages of low-mass star formation. A larger sample is required, however, to quantify the COM distributions, as well as to constrain the origins of observed variations across the sample.[^1]'
author:
- 'Karin I. Öberg'
- Trish Lauck
- Dawn Graninger
title: |
Complex organic molecules during low-mass star formation:\
Pilot survey results
---
Introduction
============
----------------- ------------- ------------- --------- --------------------------- --------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------------ -------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
Source R.A. Dec Cloud L$_{\rm bol}^{\rm a,b,c}$ M$_{\rm env}^{\rm a,b,c}$ $\alpha_{\rm IR}^{\rm d}$ $N_{\rm H_2O}^{\rm d}$ $x_{\rm CH_3OH}^{\rm d}$ $x_{\rm NH_3}^{\rm e}$ $x_{\rm CH_4}^{\rm f}$
(J2000.0) (J2000.0) L$_\odot$ M$_\odot$ 10$^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$ %$N_{\rm H_2O}$ %$N_{\rm H_2O}$ %$N_{\rm H_2O}$
IRAS 03235+3004 03 26 37.45 +30 15 27.9 Perseus 1.9 2.4 1.44 14\[2\] 4.2\[1.2\] 4.7\[1.0\] 4.3\[1.4\]
B1-a 03 33 16.67 +31 07 55.1 Perseus 1.3 2.8 1.87 $<$1.9 3.3\[1.0\] $<$5.8
[*B1-b*]{} 03:33:20.34 31:07:21.4 Perseus – 26 0.68 18\[3\] 11.2\[0.7\] 4.2\[2.0\] 3.3\[0.6\]
B5 IRS 1 03 47 41.61 +32 51 43.8 Perseus 4.7 4.2 0.78 2.3\[0.3\] $<$3.7 $<$2.1 –
L1489 IRS 04 04 43.07 +26 18 56.4 Taurus 3.7 – 1.10 4.3\[0.5\] 4.9\[1.5\] 5.4\[1.0\] 3.1\[0.2\]
IRAS 04108+2803 04 13 54.72 +28 11 32.9 Taurus 0.62 – 0.90 2.9\[0.4\] $<$3.5 4.3\[1.0\] $<$10
SVS 4-5 18 29 57.59 +01 13 00.6 Serpens 38 3.5 1.26 5.7\[1.1\] 25\[4\] 4.3\[2.0\] 6.1\[1.7\]
----------------- ------------- ------------- --------- --------------------------- --------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------------ -------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
\
$^{\rm a}$@Pontoppidan04, $^{\rm b}$@Hatchell07, $^{\rm c}$@Furlan08, $^{\rm d}$@Boogert08, $^{\rm e}$@Bottinelli10, $^{\rm f}$@Oberg08
Interstellar complex organic molecules or COMs[^2] are the proposed starting point of an even more complex, prebiotic chemistry during star and planet formation, linking interstellar chemistry with the origins of life [@Herbst09]. Determining COM abundance patterns are important to constrain the reservoirs of organic material during the formation of stars and planetary systems, and to elucidate COM formation mechanisms. COMs were first detected in the hot cores associated with high-mass star formation [@Blake87; @Helmich97 e.g.], but during the past decade COMs have been detected in an increasingly diverse set of environments, including pre-stellar cores, protostellar envelopes, outflows and hot cores in low-mass star forming regions [@Cazaux03; @Bottinelli04b; @Bottinelli07; @Arce08; @Oberg10c; @Oberg11b; @Bacmann12; @Cernicharo12]. These detections suggest the existence of robust formation pathways of COMs, and hence that COMs might be common during the formation of low-mass or Solar-type stars.
Based on the observed abundances of COMs and the diversity of their hosts, most complex molecules are proposed to form on the surfaces of interstellar dust grains and in icy grain mantles [@Herbst09]. Atom addition reactions on grains should be efficient at all temperatures, but may be mainly important to form smaller organics such as CH$_3$OH. Ice photodissociation followed by diffusion and radical-radical combination reactions in the ice should result in an efficient formation of complex molecules at slightly elevated temperatures (T$>$30 K) [@Garrod06; @Herbst09]. In this scenario, both the initial ice composition and the level of heating and UV processing should impact on the amount of complex molecules observed in a particular source. This scenario is supported by observations on that the initial ice composition is correlated with protostellar chemistry [@Oberg09a; @Sakai10], and claims of a different COM abundance pattern towards low-mass and high-mass YSOs [@Oberg11c; @Caselli12]. These claims suffer from small-number-statistics, however; there are only $\sim$10 low-mass young stellar objects with reported detections of COMs, and the abundance distributions of COMs during low-mass star formation is therefore poorly constrained.
In this paper we present the result of a six-object pilot survey of COMs toward low-mass protostars using the IRAM 30m telescope. The sample is presented in §1 and the observations and data reduction are described in §2. In §3 we present an overview of the spectral line data. We determine the column densities and, where possible, excitation temperatures of CH$_3$OH and detected COMs. We then use these new results together with existing literature detections and upper limits of representative COMs to obtain a first estimate of the frequency distribution of COMs toward low-mass YSOs. The results are compared with models and massive YSO chemistry in §4.
Source sample \[sample\]
========================
Our sources were selected from the $c2d$ (cores to disk) ice sample [@Boogert08]. The $c2d$ ice sample is a sub-sample of the $c2d$ survey of young stellar objects (YSOs) in nearby star-forming regions, i.e. the Perseus, Taurus, Serpens, and Corona Australis molecular cloud complexes, and a number of nearby isolated dense cores [@Evans03]. The spectral energy distributions of the ice sample span a range of IR spectral indices, $\alpha= (-0.25)-2.70$, where $\alpha$ is defined as the slope between 2 and 24 $\mu$m. In the infrared classification scheme $\alpha>0.3$ defines class 0/I sources [@Wilking01], which are often, but not always, associated with young, embedded YSOs.
From this sample we considered sources on the northern sky with $\alpha>0.3$, a H$_2$O ice column $>2\times10^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$, i.e. young embedded low-mass protostars. From the 19 objects that fulfill these criteria in the $c2d$ ice sample, we selected six sources that sample the observed range of ice abundances, based on CH$_3$OH/NH$_3$ and CH$_3$OH/H$_2$O abundance ratios. Table \[sources\] lists the source coordinates, bolometric luminosities, envelope masses and the IR SED indices, together with the ice abundances. B1-b, which was the target of a previous COM search, is also included in the table [@Oberg10c]. Together these seven sources span H$_2$O ice column densities between 2 and 14$\times10^{18}$, which can be compared with the complete $c2d$ ice sample, where $N_{\rm CH_3OH}=0.4-39\times10^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$. The sources come from three different clouds, Perseus, Taurus and Serpens, and where measured the envelopes are a few solar masses and the luminosities between one and 10s of solar luminosities. $N_{\rm CH_3OH}/N_{\rm H_2O}=2-25\%$, which is similar to the complete sample and so is range of ratios $N_{\rm CH_3OH}/N_{\rm NH_3}=0.5-6\%$.
None of the selected sources have been searched for COMs previously, but several have been detected in CH$_3$OH [@Oberg09a], which is known to correlate with O-bearing COMs in hot cores [@Bisschop07]. In summary this is a small sample, but it has been selected to be as representative as possible from the larger $c2d$ ice sample and should thus provide a first constraint on the prevalence of complex organics during the embedded phases of low-mass star formation.
Observations \[sec:obs\]
========================
IRAS 03235+3004, B1-a, B5 IRS 1, L1489 IRS, IRAS 04108+2803 and SVS 4–5 were observed with the IRAM 30m Telescope on June 12–16, 2013 using the EMIR 90 GHz receiver and the FTS backend. The two sidebands cover 93–101 GHz and 109–117 GHz at a spectral resolution of 200 kHz or $\sim$0.5-0.6 km s$^{-1}$ (Fig. \[fig:sample\]) and with a sideband rejection of -15dB [@Carter12]. This spectral set-up was selected because of the potential large number of complex organic lines at these frequencies, and the presence of the CH$_3$OH 2–1 ladder.
The pointing positions are listed in Table 1 and pointing was checked every 1–2 h and found to be accurate within 2–3$\arcsec$. Focus was checked every 4 h, and generally remained stable through most of the observations, i.e. corrections of $<$0.4 mm. Observations were acquired using both the position switching and wobbler switching modes. The position switching mode was attempted because of possible extended emission, but was found to have severe baseline instabilities. Comparison of the wobbler and position switch spectra revealed no significant absorption in the wobbler off-position in any of the sources, hence we only used the higher-quality wobbler spectra in this paper. The total integration time in the wobbler mode was $\sim$2–5 h for each source, under average to good summer weather conditions ($\tau=0.1-0.4$), resulting in a T$_{\rm a}^*$ rms of 3.5–7 mK in the lower sideband. B5 IRS1 and L1489 IRS were the only two sources with an rms above 5 mK.
The spectra were reduced using CLASS\
(http://www.iram.fr/IRAMFR/GILDAS). A global baseline was fit to each 4 GHz spectral chunk using 4–7 windows. The individual scans were baseline subtracted and averaged. To convert from antenna temperature, T$_{\rm a}^*$, to main beam temperature, T$_{\rm mb}$, forward efficiencies and beam efficiencies of 0.95 and 0.81 were applied. The spectra were converted to rest frequency using literature source velocities, fine-tuned using the frequencies of the CH$_3$OH 2–1 ladder. The absolute calibration of the spectra was also checked by comparing the CH$_3$OH 2–1 ladder with previous observations of some of the same sources, and were found to agree within 10% [@Oberg09a].
Results \[sec:res\]
===================
Spectral analysis
-----------------
Figure \[fig:sample\] shows the complete 16 GHz spectra toward all six sources, ordered in terms of line richness. Two of the YSOs, SVS 4-5 and B1-a, stand out as particularly line rich. Both sources are in the vicinity of two other YSOs, SMM4 and B1-b, that are known hosts of complex molecules. Of the remaining four sources, B5 IRS1 and IRAS 03235+2004 are more line dense compared to the two Taurus sources L1489 IRS and IRAS 04108+2803.
These differences in line density seems correlated with the strength of the CH$_3$OH 2–1 ladder as shown in Fig. \[fig:ch3oh\]. SVS 4-3 and B1-a both display strong CH$_3$OH lines, B5 IRS1 moderate ones, and IRAS 03235, IRAS 04108 and L1489 IRS very weak lines (peak intensities $<0.2$ K). In addition to the 2–1 lines there are a handful of other CH$_3$OH lines throughout the observed frequency range with excitation energies of 6–83 K (as well as higher energy lines which are not detected toward any source). Table \[tab:ch3oh\] lists the integrated line intensities or 3$\sigma$ upper limits of all CH$_3$OH lines detected toward at least one source. The integrated intensities were determined using IDL and MPFIT to fit Gaussians to the expected line positions. The 1$\sigma$ integrated line intensity uncertainties were extracted from the fit procedure and are often larger than the the 1$\sigma$ rms because it includes the fit uncertainty. 3$\sigma$ upper limits were determined using the rms in each 4 GHz chunk and the average CH$_3$OH line FWHM (Table \[fwhm\]) for each source. Table \[tab:ch3oh\] also presents the integrated line intensities of two $^{13}$CH$_3$OH lines detected toward B1-a and SVS 4-5.
Freq QN E$_{\rm up}$ B1-a SVS 4-5 B5 IRS1 IRAS 03235 IRAS 04108 L1489 IRS
--------------- --------------------- -------------- ----------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ----------------
$^{12}CH_3OH$
95.169 $8_{08}-7_{17}$ 83 0.119\[0.012\] 0.297\[0.012\] 0.030\[0.009\] 0.016\[0.011\] $<$ 0.013 $<$ 0.019
95.914 $2_{12}-1_{11} $ 21 0.102\[0.012\] 0.100\[0.017\] 0.033\[0.019\] $<$ 0.011 0.017\[0.012\] $<$ 0.019
96.739 $2_{12}-1_{11} $ 12 2.280\[0.010\] 3.325\[0.019\] 0.293\[0.012\] 0.161\[0.006\] 0.186\[0.009\] 0.092\[0.014\]
96.741 $2_{02}-1_{01}$ 6 3.113\[0.009\] 3.272\[0.015\] 0.514\[0.009\] 0.179\[0.085\] 0.225\[0.014\] 0.116\[0.010\]
96.745 $2_{02}-1_{01}$ 20 0.509\[0.010\] 0.487\[0.015\] 0.057\[0.124\] $<$0.011 0.017\[0.008\] $<$0.019
96.756 $2_{11}-1_{10}$ 28 0.113\[0.010\] 0.138\[0.018\] $<$0.018 $<$0.011 $<$0.013 $<$0.019
97.583 $2_{11}-1_{10}$ 21 0.119\[0.009\] 0.118\[0.015\] $<$ 0.018 $<$0.011 $<$0.013 $<$0.019
108.894 $0_{00}-1_{11}$ 13 0.437\[0.011\] 0.429\[0.018\] 0.080\[0.022\] $<$ 0.012 $<$ 0.013 $<$ 0.021
$^{13}CH_3OH$
94.405 $2_{12}-1_{11}$ 12 0.040\[0.009\] 0.047\[0.012\] $<$0.018 $<$0.011 $<$0.013 $<$0.019
94.407 $2_{02}-1_{01}$ 7 0.052\[0.0012\] 0.043\[0.013\] $<$0.018 $<$0.011 $<$0.013 $<$0.019
Figure \[fig:svs\] shows that in the case of SVS 4-5 (and B1-a) the multitude of weak lines hinted at in Figure \[fig:sample\] are to a large degree associated with the complex organic molecules HNCO, H$_2$CCO, CH$_3$CHO, CH$_3$OCH$_3$ and CH$_3$CN. Line identifications were made using the Splatalogue web tool drawing upon the CDMS and JPL spectral databases [@Pickett98; @Muller01]. Other lines are identified with simple molecules, CH$_3$OH and carbon chains (carbon chain abundances will be the topic of a future publication).
Figure \[fig:com\] shows blow-ups of the spectral regions with the strongest lines of the six complex organics detected toward at least one source. HNCO is detected toward all sources in the sample. CH$_3$CHO and CH$_3$CN are clearly detected toward SVS 4-5 and B1-a, and marginally toward B5 IRS1. CH$_3$OCH$_3$ is only detected toward B1-a. H$_2$CCO is detected toward B1 a, SVS 4-5, IRAS 03235 and IRAS 04108. HCOOCH$_3$ is marginally detected toward SVS 4-5 and B1-a (the reality of these 3$\sigma$ detections are supported by several more marginal detections throughout the spectral range). In general we claim marginal detections for line intensities that exceed the 3$\sigma$ upper limit for that source and sideband. To count as a clear detection we furthermore require that the Gaussian fit is sufficiently well-defined to result in an integrated intensity estimate of 30% or less. Table \[tab:coms\] lists the detected COM line intensities and upper limits, calculated using Gaussian fits as described for CH$_3$OH lines above.
------------ --------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Source FWHM$_{\rm CH_3OH}$
\[km/s\]
B1-a 1.6\[0.4\]
SVS 4-5 3.7\[0.7\]
B5 IRS1 0.8\[0.1\]
IRAS 03235 0.9\[0.5\]
IRAS 04108 1.2\[0.6\]
L1489 IRS 1.6\[1.0\]
------------ --------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
: Line FWHM with standard deviations.\[fwhm\]
Freq E$_{\rm up}$ B1-a SVS 4-5 B5 IRS1 IRAS 03235 IRAS 04108 L1489 IRS
--------------------- -------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- --
[*HNCO*]{}
109.906 15 0.220\[0.009\] 0.200\[0.013\] 0.106\[0.019\] 0.050\[0.008\] 0.031\[0.014\] 0.027\[0.007\]
[*H$_2$CCO*]{}
100.095 27 0.110\[0.008\] 0.099\[0.011\] $<$0.011 0.020\[0.012\] 0.027\[0.010\] $<$0.017
[*CH$_3$CN*]{}
110.375 47 0.018\[0.006\] 0.017\[0.011\] 0.031\[0.011\] $<$ 0.012 $<$ 0.013 $<$ 0.02
110.381 25 0.046\[0.011\] 0.073\[0.015\] 0.024\[0.008\] $<$ 0.012 $<$ 0.013 $<$ 0.021
110.383 18 0.062\[0.011\] 0.085\[0.015\] 0.020\[0.007\] $<$ 0.012 $<$ 0.013 $<$ 0.021
[*CH$_3$CHO*]{}
93.581 15 0.098\[0.008\] 0.115\[0.015\] 0.016\[0.008\] $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.013 $<$ 0.019
93.595 15 0.106\[0.010\] 0.125\[0.014\] $<$0.018 $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.013 $<$ 0.019
95.947 13 0.161\[0.007\] 0.204\[0.014\] $<$0.018 $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.013 $<$ 0.019
95.963 13 0.176\[0.008\] 0.204\[0.014\] $<$0.018 $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.013 $<$ 0.019
96.274 22 0.042\[0.009\] 0.061\[0.014\] $<$0.018 $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.013 $<$ 0.019
96.426 22 0.033\[0.009\] 0.065\[0.013\] $<$0.016 $<$ 0.010 $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.017
96.476 23 0.043\[0.010\] 0.045\[0.014\] $<$0.016 $<$ 0.010 $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.017
96.633 22 0.050\[0.009\] 0.039\[0.013\] $<$0.016 $<$ 0.010 $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.017
98.863 16 0.155\[0.009\] 0.162\[0.014\] 0.021\[0.006\] $<$ 0.010 $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.017
98.901 16 0.138\[0.007\] 0.168\[0.013\] 0.041\[0.015\] $<$ 0.010 $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.017
112.249 21 0.096\[0.010\] 0.131\[0.016\] 0.015\[0.008\] $<$ 0.012 $<$ 0.013 $<$ 0.021
112.255 21 0.107\[0.009\] 0.149\[0.019\] 0.032\[0.021\] $<$ 0.012 $<$ 0.013 $<$ 0.021
[*CH$_3$OCH$_3$*]{}
111.783 25 $<$0.013 0.085\[0.019\] $<$0.019 $<$ 0.012 $<$ 0.013 $<$ 0.021
115.545 14 $<$0.027 0.080\[0.028\] $<$0.032 $<$ 0.019 $<$ 0.024 $<$ 0.035
[*HCOOCH$_3$*]{}
96.071 23 0.019\[0.004\] 0.022\[0.013\] $<$0.018 $<$ 0.010 $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.017
96.077 23 0.018\[0.011\] $<$0.032 $<$0.018 $<$ 0.010 $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.017
100.482 22 0.014\[0.011\] 0.023\[0.010\] $<$0.011 $<$ 0.010 $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.017
100.491 22 0.020\[0.010\] 0.035\[0.015\] $<$0.011 $<$ 0.010 $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.017
100.683 24 0.018\[0.009\] 0.044\[0.013\] $<$0.011 $<$ 0.010 $<$ 0.011 $<$ 0.017
111.674 28 0.022\[0.013\] 0.020\[0.011\] $<$0.019 $<$ 0.012 $<$0.013 $<$ 0.021
111.682 28 0.019\[0.017\] 0.010\[0.011\] $<$0.019 $<$ 0.012 $<$0.013 $<$ 0.021
CH$_3$OH and COM abundances
---------------------------
The CH$_3$OH excitation temperatures and column densities were determined using the rotational diagram method [@Goldsmith99], assuming optically thin lines and LTE at a single temperature – the validity of these assumptions and the constraints on the kinetic temperatures provided by the excitation temperatures are explored further in §\[lvg\]. Figure \[fig:rot\_dia\] shows the results for CH$_3$OH. A single fit to all lines result in excitation temperatures of 15–20 K for the sources with any high energy lines detected.
The observed CH$_3$OH emission does not generally seem to be well described by a single excitation temperature, however, but rather seems to trace a warm and cold component. Too few high energy lines are detected to quantify the warm component, but the cold component excitation temperatures and column densities can be estimated by focusing on the low-energy lines for the fit. This result in excitation temperatures of 6–8 K. The derived column densities should be representative of the protostellar envelopes outside of the core region where thermal evaporation is possible, i.e. at T$<$100 K – because CH$_3$OH is readily sub-thermally excited it is not possible to [*a priori*]{} constrain the emission region any further. For IRAS 03235, too few low energy lines were detected to determine an envelope temperature, and an excitation temperature of 8 K was assumed to constrain the envelope column density.
To estimate the amount of warm CH$_3$OH column (beam-averaged) in each line of sight we use an excitation temperature of 26 K, based on the CH$_3$CN analysis below, and the one high-energy CH$_3$OH line excluded in the cold component fit. Table \[ch3oh\_ab\] reports the excitation temperatures and column densities calculated for the three fits characterizing the total, the cold and the warm protostellar CH$_3$OH column. The cold column densities range between $0.5-10\times10^{13}$ cm$^{-2}$, the warm column densities range between $<0.12-9\times10^{13}$ cm$^{-2}$ and the total column densities range between $0.5-23\times10^{13}$ cm$^{-2}$. The column density uncertainties includes a 10% calibration uncertainty in addition to the fit uncertainty. The listed uncertainties do not incorporate the fact that the cold component will contribute slightly to the high energy line intensity and vice versa, resulting in systematic overestimates of the cold and warm component column densities, and indeed the sum of the cold+warm component column densities is 10–50% higher compared to the column densities derived from the single component fit. The component column densities are thus at best accurate within a factor of 2.
------------ ------------------- --------------------------- -------------------- --------------------------- ------------------------------ --------------------------------- -- --
Source T$_{\rm rot}$ ave N$_{\rm CH_3OH}$ ave T$_{\rm rot}$ cold N$_{\rm CH_3OH}$ cold T$_{\rm rot}$ warm$^{\rm b}$ N$_{\rm CH_3OH}$ warm$^{\rm c}$
\[K\] \[cm$^{-2}$\] \[K\] \[cm$^{-2}$\] \[K\] \[cm$^{-2}$\]
B1-a 14.9\[0.6\] 1.3\[0.2\]$\times10^{14}$ 5.9\[0.3\] 8.4\[1.9\]$\times10^{13}$ (26) 9\[3\]$\times10^{13}$
SVS 4-5 20.2\[0.9\] 2.3\[0.4\]$\times10^{14}$ 5.9\[0.3\] 10\[2\]$\times10^{13}$ (26) 2.2\[0.5\]$\times10^{14}$
B5 IRS1 17\[2\] 4.3\[0.9\]$\times10^{13}$ 8\[1\] 2.1\[0.7\]$\times10^{13}$ (26) 2.3\[1.2\]$\times10^{13}$
IRAS 03235 18\[4\] 2.8\[0.9\]$\times10^{13}$ (8)$^{\rm a}$ 1.1\[0.5\]$\times10^{13}$ (26) 1.2\[1.1\]$\times10^{13}$
IRAS 04108 9\[3\] 1.2\[0.5\]$\times10^{13}$ 9\[3\] 1.2\[0.5\]$\times10^{13}$ (26) $<8\times10^{12}$
L1489 IRS 8\[4\] 5\[5\]$\times10^{12}$ 8\[4\] 5\[5\]$\times10^{12}$ (26) $<1.3\times10^{12}$
------------ ------------------- --------------------------- -------------------- --------------------------- ------------------------------ --------------------------------- -- --
\
$^{\rm a}$No excitation temperature could be independently derived and the sample average of 8 K was assumed.\
$^{\rm b}$26 K is the assumed excitation temperature for the warm CH$_3$OH component.\
$^{\rm c}$Based on the intensity or upper limit of the CH$_3$OH 95.169 GHz line.
------------ ----------------------- --------------------------- ----------------------- --------------------------- ------------------------ --------------------------- --------------------------- --------------------------- ---------------------------
Source ${\rm HNCO}^{\rm b}$ ${\rm H_2CCO^{\rm b}}$ ${\rm CH_3OCH_3^{\rm b}}$
T$_{\rm rot}^{\rm a}$ N T$_{\rm rot}^{\rm a}$ N T$_{\rm rot}^{\rm a}$ N N (T$_{\rm rot}=18\:K$) N (T$_{\rm rot}=8\:K$) N (T$_{\rm rot}=26\:K$)
\[K\] \[cm$^{-2}$\] \[K\] \[cm$^{-2}$\] \[K\] \[cm$^{-2}$\] \[cm$^{-2}$\] \[cm$^{-2}$\] \[cm$^{-2}$\]
B1-a 8\[1\] 6\[2\]$\times10^{12}$ 26\[8\] 1.2\[0.6\]$\times10^{12}$ 7\[7\] 9\[26\]$\times10^{12}$ 2.6\[0.3\]$\times10^{12}$ 6.8\[1.2\]$\times10^{12}$ $<6\times10^{12}$
SVS 4-5 9\[2\] 7\[2\]$\times10^{12}$ 26\[9\] 1.7\[0.9\]$\times10^{12}$ 8\[9\] 1\[3\]$\times10^{13}$ 2.4\[0.4\]$\times10^{12}$ 5.9\[1.3\]$\times10^{12}$ 2.2\[1.0\]$\times10^{13}$
B5 IRS1 (8) 1.9\[0.7\]$\times10^{12}$ (26) 4\[2\]$\times10^{11}$ (8) $<4\times10^{12}$ 1.2\[0.4\]$\times10^{12}$ $<9\times10^{11}$ $<8\times10^{12}$
IRAS 03235 (8) $<7\times10^{11}$ (26) $<3\times10^{11}$ (8) $<2\times10^{12}$ 6.0\[1.6\]$\times10^{11}$ 1.2\[0.8\]$\times10^{12}$ $<5\times10^{12}$
IRAS 04108 (8) $<6\times10^{11}$ (26) $<4\times10^{11}$ (8) $<1\times10^{12}$ $4[2]\times10^{11}$ 1.6\[0.9\]$\times10^{12}$ $8[4]\times10^{12}$
L1489 IRS (8) $<1.0\times10^{12}$ (26) $<6\times10^{11}$ (8) $<2\times10^{12}$ 3.2\[1.1\]$\times10^{11}$ $2.5[1.1]\times10^{12}$ $<8\times10^{12}$
------------ ----------------------- --------------------------- ----------------------- --------------------------- ------------------------ --------------------------- --------------------------- --------------------------- ---------------------------
\
$^{\rm a}$(T) is used to indicate that the sample average excitation temperature was used to derived a column density or upper limit.\
$^{\rm b}$ The average CH$_3$OH, CH$_3$CHO and CH$_3$CN excitation temperatures were used to derive the HNCO, H$_2$CCO and CH$_3$OCH$_3$ column densities, respectively.
Figure \[fig:rot\_dia\_hcooch3\] shows that CH$_3$CHO and CH$_3$CN line intensities can be fit by a single excitation temperature. Based on this analysis, CH$_3$CHO is characterized by a low excitation temperature (8–9 K) consistent with the CH$_3$OH cold component. This does not rule out the existence of a warm CH$_3$CHO component, since upper limits of higher energy lines are inconclusive, but the detected CH$_3$CHO does not originate in a hot core. In contrast the CH$_3$CN excitation temperature of 26 K is suggestive of a warm, possibly a hot core, origin for CH$_3$CN. The HCOOCH$_3$ detections have low SNR and also a small spread in energy levels and the derived excitation temperatures of 7–8 K are therefore highly uncertain. For CH$_3$OH as well as these COMs, the derived excitation temperatures depend on the kinetic temperatures. The two temperatures are rarely identical, however, and the relationship between them depend on the details of the excitation conditions and molecular excitation properties. In the case of CH$_3$CHO, CH$_3$CN and CH$_3$OH, comparable dipole moments, result in that the relative excitation temperatures constrain the relative excitation conditions of the different molecules, i.e. CH$_3$CN is more centrally peaked compared to CH$_3$CHO ([*cf.*]{} §\[lvg\]), even though the specific emission locations of the different molecules are unconstrained.
Table \[com\_ab\] lists the resulting excitation temperatures and beam-averaged column densities, i.e. the reported column densities do not take into account potential beam dilution, which may be substantial for some or all molecules. For the detected complex organic molecules, where it is not possible to determine an excitation temperature we picked a temperature, 8, 18 or 26 K, based on recent observations of spatial and excitation temperature correlations of different molecules around high-mass protostars [@Bisschop07; @Oberg13 Fayolle et al. subm. ApJ]. In these studies H$_2$CCO and CH$_3$CHO are cold and we therefore used the CH$_3$CHO excitation temperature of 8 K to determine the H$_2$CCO column. CH$_3$OCH$_3$ and CH$_3$CN emission were generally associated with only warm material and we used the CH$_3$CN excitation temperature of 26 K to determine the CH$_3$OCH$_3$ column. HNCO, like CH$_3$OH, has been observed to trace both cold and warm material and we therefore used an excitation temperature of 18 K, typical for the CH$_3$OH when fitting a single LTE component to the protostellar data. It is important to note that the excitation temperature choices are based on a small set of high-mass protostellar data and may need to be revised once more spatially resolved observations of complex molecules toward low-mass protostars exist.
We used the derived complex molecule column densities together with the derived CH$_3$OH column densities to calculate the abundances of organic molecules with respect to CH$_3$OH in our source sample. We tested the sensitivity of the derived abundances on the selected CH$_3$OH components for different molecules, and generally found that the choice of excitation temperature and CH$_3$OH reference column density (beam-averaged, cold or warm components) affected the derived abundances with respect to CH$_3$OH by less than a factor of 2. Table \[abund\] shows that the CH$_3$CHO abundances are between 7 and 9% and the upper limits between 5 and 20% with respect to CH$_3$OH. CH$_3$CN and CH$_3$OCH$_3$ abundances or upper limits could only be derived toward the first four sources since no lines associated with warm CH$_3$OH were detected toward two of the sources. The CH$_3$CN abundances are 0.8–1.7% and the CH$_3$OCH$_3$ abundance toward SVS 4-5 is 10%. The HCOOCH$_3$ abundances are $\sim$10%, but abundances up to 40% cannot be excluded. The HNCO abundances vary between 1.0–6.4%, and the H$_2$CCO abundances vary between 1.1–9%. Derived upper limits are typically similar or higher compared to detections.
Source x$_{\rm CH_3CHO}$ x$_{\rm CH_3CN}$ x$_{\rm HNCO}$ x$_{\rm H_2CCO}$ x$_{\rm CH_3OCH_3}$ x$_{\rm HCOOCH_3}$
------------ ------------------- ------------------ ---------------- ------------------ --------------------- -------------------- -- --
B1-a 7\[3\] 1.3\[0.8\] 2.0\[0.4\] 1.4\[0.3\] $<$7 11\[19\]
SVS 4-5 7\[2\] 0.8\[0.4\] 1.0\[0.3\] 1.1\[0.2\] 10\[5\] 10\[30\]
B5 IRS1 9\[4\] 1.7\[1.3\] 2.8\[1.1\] $<$0.8 $<$35 $<$21
IRAS 03235 $<$6 $<$2.5 2.1\[0.9\] 2.0\[1.5\] $<$42 $<$15
IRAS 04108 $<$5 –$^{\rm a}$ 3.3\[2.2\] 2.4\[1.4\] –$^{\rm a}$ $<$12
L1489 IRS $<$20 –$^{\rm a}$ 6.4\[6.7\] 9\[9\] –$^{\rm a}$ $<$46
\
$^{\rm a}$No upper limit could be derived because of lack of detection of warm CH$_3$OH.
Optical depth and LVG modeling \[lvg\]
--------------------------------------
The analysis in the previous section assumes that all observed complex organic emission is optically thin. This is a tenuous assumption for CH$_3$OH, since CH$_3$OH lines are known to sometimes be optically thick toward protostars [e.g. @Bisschop07]. Fortunately, the $^{13}$CH$_3$OH 2–1 ladder falls within the observed frequency range, enabling a direct test of this assumption. Two $^{13}$CH$_3$OH lines are detected toward B1-a and SVS 4-5, but not toward any other sources. The line intensity ratios between corresponding CH$_3$OH and $^{13}$CH$_3$OH lines are 57–60\[15\] and 71–76\[19\] toward B1-a and SVS 4–5 $\sim$, respectively, consistent with the Solar $^{12}$C/$^{13}$C ratio of 77. CH$_3$OH, and by inference all other COM, emission lines thus appear to be optically thin.
A second question is how the excitation temperatures, derived using rotational diagrams, relate to the kinetic temperatures in the emission regions. To explore this, we carried out a Large Velocity Gradient (LVG) radiative transfer analysis using RADEX [@vanderTak07] for the molecules with both sufficient number of lines to constrain the excitation conditions and known collision cross sections, i.e. CH$_3$OH and CH$_3$CN, toward B1-a. B1-a is here taken to be representative of the sample because of the similar emission patterns of CH$_3$OH and CH$_3$CN (when detected) across the sample (Figs. \[fig:rot\_dia\]–\[fig:rot\_dia\_hcooch3\]).
We ran a grid of RADEX models with $n_{\rm H}=[10^5,10^6]$ cm$^{-3}$, T$_{\rm kin}=[10,25,50,100]$ K, and CH$_3$OH and CH$_3$CN column densities ranging between 0.5$\times$ and 2$\times$ those listed in Tables \[tab:ch3oh\]–\[tab:coms\] for B1-a. The models with a factor of 2 lower and higher column densities compared to the rotational diagram values cannot be excluded for all temperatures and densities, but generally fit the data less well. This indicates that the rotational diagram method provides a good estimate of the beam-averaged column densities, but that the real uncertainty in the derived numbers are at least a factor of two rather than the formal uncertainties of 20–50%.
Figure \[fig:lvg\] shows the model results for the best fit column densities (i.e. the ones derived using the rotational diagram method), and a density of 10$^6$ cm$^{-3}$. The best fit temperature to the CH$_3$OH data, assuming a single component, is between 10 and 25 K, consistent with the rotational diagram excitation temperature. If a lower density of 10$^5$ cm$^{-2}$ is assumed, kinetic temperatures up to 50 K fit the data. However, such a low average density is unlikely based on @Jorgensen02, where a detailed envelope modeling shows that the average density toward deeply embedded protostars on 1000 AU scales is $\sim$10$^6$ cm$^{-3}$. In either case, it can be excluded that most of the CH$_3$OH emission originates in a hot core. As in the rotational diagram analysis, no single temperature component fits all the CH$_3$OH lines. The two components derived in Table \[ch3oh\_ab\] reproduces the relative line intensities very well, but over-predicts the line intensities by about 50% as discussed above. In the case of CH$_3$CN, only kinetic temperatures of 25 K and higher are consistent with the data, confirming the rotational diagram results that CH$_3$CN has of a more centrally peaked origin compared to CH$_3$OH.
In summary, the analyzed emission lines are optically thin and the rotational diagram method provides an accurate (within a factor of 2) derivation of the molecular column densities. The excitation temperatures and the kinetic temperatures are not identical, but the observed difference in excitation temperatures for CH$_3$CN and CH$_3$OH corresponds to a real difference in kinetic temperatures for reasonable density assumptions.
Sample statistics
-----------------
In addition to the low-mass young stellar objects presented here, CH$_3$CHO, HCOOCH$_3$, CH$_3$CN, and/or CH$_3$OCH$_3$ have been previously quantified toward B1-b in Perseus [@Oberg09a; @Oberg10a], SMM1, SMM4 and SMM4-W in Serpens [@Oberg11b], L1157 [@Arce08], NGC 1333 IRAS 2A, 4A and 4B in Perseus [@Bottinelli04a; @Bottinelli07], and toward IRAS 16293-2422, both including the binary in one beam, and toward the A and B cores separately [@Cazaux03; @Bisschop08]. The abundance frequency histograms with respect to CH$_3$OH are shown in Fig. \[fig:stat\] for the combined low-mass sample of literature sources and our six YSOs. Complex molecule abundances above 1% are clearly common. The median detected abundances for the four species HCOOCH$_3$, CH$_3$CHO, CH$_3$OCH$_3$ and CH$_3$CN varies between 1% (CH$_3$CN) and 5% (HCOOCH$_3$ and CH$_3$OCH$_3$) with respect to CH$_3$OH. It is important to note that most upper limits seems to be consistent with these values and thus that the lack of complex molecules in half of our sources is most likely due to an overall low CH$_3$OH abundance or a low overall ice desorption rate rather than a significantly different chemistry with respect to CH$_3$OH.
Figure \[fig:stat\] also shows that the COM abundances vary significantly between sources. Disregarding upper limits CH$_3$CN/CH$_3$OH = 0.07–1.7%, HCOOCH$_3$/CH$_3$OH = 0.6–56%, CH$_3$OCH$_3$/CH$_3$OH = 0.8–20% and CH$_3$CHO/CH$_3$OH = 0.1–9%. For all molecules there is thus a one or two order of magnitude variation across the sample.
Discussion \[sec:disc\]
=======================
Abundance %CH$_3$OH LYSOs Hot Cores$^{\rm a}$ MYSOs$^{\rm b}$
--------------------- ------- --------------------- ----------------- -- -- -- -- --
CH$_3$CN 1 7 3
HCOOCH$_3$ 5 12 –
CH$_3$OCH$_3$ 5 16 4
CH$_3$CHO 3 0.1 3
: Median COM abundances in LYSOs and massive YSOs with and without hot cores \[comp\]
\
$^{\rm a}$@Bisschop07, $^{\rm b}$MYSOs without bright Hot Cores from Fayolle et al. (subm)
The median abundances derived from the combined low-mass YSO sample can be compared both with the more well-studied high-mass YSO chemistry and with model predictions. In a sample of seven hot cores observed by @Bisschop07 the median abundances of CH$_3$CN, HCOOCH$_3$, CH$_3$OCH$_3$ and CH$_3$CHO with respect to CH$_3$OH were 7%, 12%, 16% and 0.1%, respectively. That is, all abundances except for CH$_3$CHO are a factor of a few higher toward the high-mass hot cores. This may not be representative of massive YSO chemistry; in a recent sample of three high-mass YSOs without hot cores, the median abundances of CH$_3$CN , CH$_3$OCH$_3$ and CH$_3$CHO with respect to CH$_3$OH were all 3–4% (Fayolle et al. ApJ subm.). These abundances are quite similar to our low-mass sample. There is thus no clear observational evidence for an intrinsic difference between low-mass and high-mass YSO COM chemistry with respect to CH$_3$OH, when averaged over all early stages of star formation. This does not exclude that there are significant differences when comparing low-mass and high-mass objects that are at the same evolutionary stage, i.e. there may still be real differences between high-mass hot cores and their low-mass equivalents because of e.g. different protostellar collapse time scales [@Garrod08]. More spatially resolved studies of low-mass YSOs are required, however, to support or reject that proposition.
This study also shows that there are orders of magnitude differences in COM abundances with respect to CH$_3$OH among low-mass YSOs. Three potential sources of variation are the initial ice composition, temperature and density structures and thus excitation conditions, and the chemical evolutionary stage. A unique feature of this sample is that the ice compositions are known and its relationship to the Com chemistry can thus be evaluated. There is some correlation between CH$_3$OH ice and gas abundances among the 7 ice sources in Table 2, but there are also clear exceptions to this relationship, e.g. B1-a, which has a small CH$_3$OH ice abundance and a fairly high gas-phase abundance with respect to H$_2$O ice. There are no obvious correlations between the ice compositions and COM abundance patterns, in particular there is no correlation between NH$_3$/CH$_3$OH in the ice and N- and O-bearing complex molecules in the gas. This does not rule out that the ice composition is important for the complex chemistry, but in this small sample, ice composition is clearly not the dominant regulator of the observed COM chemistry.
In terms of evolutionary stage, the sample can be coarsely divided into ice sources (our sample + B1 b), embedded protostars without significant ice absorption (SMM 1, 4, and 4-W, NGC 1333 IRAS 2A, 4A and 4B, and IRAS 16293-2422), and an outflow (L1157). B1-b should potentially be in its own grouping since the COM emission seems more associated with the pre-stellar core than with the protostar. There is no significant difference between the ice sources and ice-free protostars in terms of COM emission, i.e. the median abundances within our sample are consistent with those of the ice-free protostars. The difference in envelope structure and/or evolutionary stage between these two source types thus also fails to explain the observed COM abundance variation across the sample.
Finally, assessing the importance of different excitation conditions is complicated by sparse information on the spatial origins of the complex molecule emission in the different sources. In the literature one out of two simplified distributions of COMs toward protostars is typically assumed: either that the CH$_3$OH and COM spatial distributions are the same and characterized by a single CH$_3$OH excitation temperature [e.g. @Oberg11c], or that the COM spatial distribution is more compact compared to CH$_3$OH [e.g. @Bottinelli07]. In the latter case COM/CH$_3$OH abundances are calculated based on modeled CH$_3$OH core abundances and the assumption that all COM emission originates in the core. In this study we use the CH$_3$OH data to estimate the amount of cold CH$_3$OH in the envelope and warm CH$_3$OH in the core and then calculate COM/CH$_3$OH abundances using the cold or warm CH$_3$OH component or the total beam-averaged column density dependent on COM excitation temperatures and/or spatial distribution constraints from previous studies. This is a crude approximation and until spatially resolved observations of both CH$_3$OH and COMs exists toward a sample of low-mass YSOs, the reported abundances are estimated to be accurate only within a factor of a few, i.e. considerably less accurate than the $\sim$30–50% uncertainties reported in Table \[abund\] when only taking into account fit and calibration errors. There is clearly a need both to increase the existing number of sources searched for complex organics and to constrain the spatial distribution of COMs toward a sub-sample of representative sources to elucidate what source characteristics that set the observed COM abundances.
Conclusions \[sec:conc\]
========================
We have carried out a small, pilot survey of complex molecules in a sample of low-mass YSOs, which were selected based on their measured ice abundances in the envelope. The results of this survey have been combined with literature values on complex molecule detections and upper limits to obtain first constraints on the abundance median and variability of complex molecule abundances during low-mass star formation. Based on this we have found:
1. Complex organics (CH$_3$CHO, HCOOCH$_3$, CH$_3$OCH$_3$ and/or CH$_3$CN) are detected toward 2–3/6 embedded protostars at abundances of 0.8–11% with respect to CH$_3$OH (i.e. COMs are clearly detected toward two sources and marginally toward a third). Upper limits in the remaining sources are consistent with the detected abundances with respect to CH$_3$OH, indicative that complex molecule formation at the 1–10% level with respect to CH$_3$OH is common during the early stages of low-mass star formation.
2. Two other slightly less complex organic molecules, HNCO and H$_2$CCO are more common, and are clearly detected in 4–6 sources in the sample.
3. When the pilot survey is combined with 8 deep searches for complex organics in the literature we obtain median values with respect to CH$_3$OH of 1% for CH$_3$CN, 3% for CH$_3$CHO, 5% for CH$_3$OCH$_3$, and 5% for HCOOCH$_3$ for low-mass YSOs.
4. There is at least an order of magnitude variability in abundances with respect to CH$_3$OH for all species, but the current sample is too small and heterogenous to constrain the origin of this variability to initial conditions, chemical evolution, or physical structures, or a combination of all three.
[*Acknowledgements:*]{} We gratefully acknowledge the IRAM staff for help provided during the observations and data reduction.
[36]{} natexlab\#1[\#1]{}
, H. G., [Santiago-Garc[í]{}a]{}, J., [J[ø]{}rgensen]{}, J. K., [Tafalla]{}, M., & [Bachiller]{}, R. 2008, , 681, L21
, A., [Taquet]{}, V., [Faure]{}, A., [Kahane]{}, C., & [Ceccarelli]{}, C. 2012, , 541, L12
, S. E., [J[ø]{}rgensen]{}, J. K., [Bourke]{}, T. L., [Bottinelli]{}, S., & [van Dishoeck]{}, E. F. 2008, , 488, 959
, S. E., [J[ø]{}rgensen]{}, J. K., [van Dishoeck]{}, E. F., & [de Wachter]{}, E. B. M. 2007, , 465, 913
, G. A., [Sutton]{}, E. C., [Masson]{}, C. R., & [Phillips]{}, T. G. 1987, , 315, 621
, A. C. A., [Pontoppidan]{}, K. M., [Knez]{}, C., [et al.]{} 2008, , 678, 985
, S., [Boogert]{}, A. C. A., [Bouwman]{}, J., [et al.]{} 2010, , 718, 1100
, S., [Ceccarelli]{}, C., [Lefloch]{}, B., [et al.]{} 2004, , 615, 354
, S., [Ceccarelli]{}, C., [Neri]{}, R., [et al.]{} 2004, , 617, L69
, S., [Ceccarelli]{}, C., [Williams]{}, J. P., & [Lefloch]{}, B. 2007, , 463, 601
, M., [Lazareff]{}, B., [Maier]{}, D., [et al.]{} 2012, , 538, A89
, P. & [Ceccarelli]{}, C. 2012, , 20, 56
, S., [Tielens]{}, A. G. G. M., [Ceccarelli]{}, C., [et al.]{} 2003, , 593, L51
, J., [Marcelino]{}, N., [Roueff]{}, E., [et al.]{} 2012, , 759, L43
, II, N. J., [Allen]{}, L. E., [Blake]{}, G. A., [et al.]{} 2003, , 115, 965
, E., [McClure]{}, M., [Calvet]{}, N., [et al.]{} 2008, , 176, 184
, R. T. & [Herbst]{}, E. 2006, , 457, 927
, R. T., [Weaver]{}, S. L. W., & [Herbst]{}, E. 2008, , 682, 283
, P. F. & [Langer]{}, W. D. 1999, , 517, 209
, J., [Fuller]{}, G. A., [Richer]{}, J. S., [Harries]{}, T. J., & [Ladd]{}, E. F. 2007, , 468, 1009
, F. P. & [van Dishoeck]{}, E. F. 1997, , 124, 205
, E. & [van Dishoeck]{}, E. F. 2009, , 47, 427
, J. K., [Sch[ö]{}ier]{}, F. L., & [van Dishoeck]{}, E. F. 2002, , 389, 908
, H. S. P., [Thorwirth]{}, S., [Roth]{}, D. A., & [Winnewisser]{}, G. 2001, , 370, L49
, K. I., [Boamah]{}, M. D., [Fayolle]{}, E. C., [et al.]{} 2013, , 771, 95
, K. I., [Boogert]{}, A. C. A., [Pontoppidan]{}, K. M., [et al.]{} 2008, , 678, 1032
, K. I., [Boogert]{}, A. C. A., [Pontoppidan]{}, K. M., [et al.]{} 2011, , 740, 109
, K. I., [Bottinelli]{}, S., [J[ø]{}rgensen]{}, J. K., & [van Dishoeck]{}, E. F. 2010, , 716, 825
, K. I., [Bottinelli]{}, S., & [van Dishoeck]{}, E. F. 2009, , 494, L13
, K. I., [Qi]{}, C., [Fogel]{}, J. K. J., [et al.]{} 2010, , 720, 480
, K. I., [van der Marel]{}, N., [Kristensen]{}, L. E., & [van Dishoeck]{}, E. F. 2011, , 740, 14
, H. M., [Poynter]{}, R. L., [Cohen]{}, E. A., [et al.]{} 1998, , 60, 883
, K. M., [van Dishoeck]{}, E. F., & [Dartois]{}, E. 2004, , 426, 925
, N., [Sakai]{}, T., [Hirota]{}, T., & [Yamamoto]{}, S. 2010, , 722, 1633
, F. F. S., [Black]{}, J. H., [Sch[ö]{}ier]{}, F. L., [Jansen]{}, D. J., & [van Dishoeck]{}, E. F. 2007, , 468, 627
, B. A., [Bontemps]{}, S., [Schuler]{}, R. E., [Greene]{}, T. P., & [Andr[é]{}]{}, P. 2001, , 551, 357
[^1]: Based on observations carried out with the IRAM Plateau de Bure Interferometer. IRAM is supported by INSU/CNRS (France), MPG (Germany) and IGN (Spain).
[^2]: for the purpose of this paper COMs are hydrogen-rich organics containing at least three heavy elements, i.e. the kind of organics typically associated with hot cores
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- |
[^1]\
Department of Astronomy and Theoretical Physics, Lund University, Sölvegatan 14A, SE-223 62 Lund, Sweden\
E-mail:
title: 'Colour Reconnection - Models and Tests'
---
Introduction
============
This conference proceeding is based on work carried out by the author in collaboration with Peter Skands [@Christiansen:2015yqa], Torbj[ö]{}rn Sj[ö]{}strand [@Christiansen:2015yca] and Christian Bierlich [@Bierlich:2015rha], respectively. The respective publications contain more information on each individual topic, and this is mainly intended as a short summary.
The start of the LHC sparked a renewed interest in Colour Reconnection (CR). This is mainly due to two observations: firstly, the $\Lambda$ production rate is observed to be significantly above the expected one [@Aamodt:2011zza; @Khachatryan:2011tm]. Secondly, flow-like effects are observed not only in heavy ion collisions but also in pp collisions [@Ortiz:2013yxa]. Several new models have then been developed [@Christiansen:2015yqa; @Bierlich:2014xba; @Pierog:2013ria]; all capable of describing the $\Lambda$ production. This paper will predominantly focus on a new CR model implemented in <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Pythia</span> 8 [@Sjostrand:2014zea]. The main extension in the new model is the inclusion of junction structures, which naturally leads to a baryon enhancement, which can explain the $\Lambda$ enhancement.
Another important point is not only to suggest new models, but also to consider good observables to test these models. Due to the postulated jet universality between e$^+$e$^-$ and pp colliders, the $\Lambda$ enhancement should be due to physics at pp colliders which can be neglected at e$^+$e$^-$ colliders. The key observation that most models rely on is the increased final state activity present at pp colliders, which then alters the hadronization (either through CR or by directly changing hadronization probabilities). An obvious observable is therefore to consider identified hadron production as a function of the final state activity, which can be related to the charged multiplicity. Exactly this will be presented for several models in section \[sec:pp\].
The major interest has lately been on pp colliders for natural reasons, but CR also affects e$^+$e$^-$ colliders. Even though the effects are much smaller, the cleaner environment may allow potential large constraints on new CR models. It will at least provide another handle to probe CR effects. CR was already studied at LEP, but no final conclusions could be drawn due to limited statistics. With a new e$^+$e$^-$ collider in the future, it will be possible to get significantly more statistics and thereby also a much better handle on CR. It also opens up for observables not considered at LEP, for instance the mass measurement of the W boson in the fully hadronic channel can then be used a measurement of CR. The uncertainty from CR should also be included as soon as the final state contains hadrons, especially given the high expected precision.
The paper is structured as follows: in section \[sec:newModel\] a short overview of the CR model is presented. This is followed by first results at pp colliders (section \[sec:pp\]) and then e$^+$e$^-$ colliders (section \[sec:ee\]). Finally, a summary and outlook is presented in section \[sec:conclusion\].
The new CR model {#sec:newModel}
================
![ \[fig:colrec\] Sketch of how two $q\bar{q}$ dipoles (top) can be reconnected to different colour topologies (left and right). The right connection gives rise to a double junction, which in turn will produce baryons. Notice that the placement of the pairs differs in the junction figure.](fig1.pdf){width="80.00000%"}
The new CR model in <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Pythia</span> is applied just prior to the hadronization. It takes the leading-colour ($N_c \rightarrow \infty$) strings and transform them to a different colour configuration based on three principles: firstly the SU(3) colour rules from QCD determine if two strings are colour compatible (e.g. there is only a $1/9$ probability that the top configuration of fig. \[fig:colrec\] can transform to the left configuration purely from colour considerations). Secondly a simplistic space-time picture to check causal contact between the strings. Finally the $\lambda$ measure (which is a string-length measure) to decide whether a possible reconnection is actually favoured. Since the model relies purely on the outgoing partons, it is applicable to any type of collision. The main extension compared to the other CR models in <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Pythia</span> is the introduction of reconnections that form junction structures (fig. \[fig:colrec\]). From a pure colour consideration the probability to form a junction topology is three times larger than an ordinary reconnection. The junction will introduce additional strings, however, and it is therefore often disfavoured due to a larger $\lambda$ measure. Given the close connection between junctions and baryons, the new model predicts a baryon enhancement. It was shown to be able to simultaneously describe the $\Lambda$ production for both LEP and LHC experiments, which neither of the earlier <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Pythia</span> tunes have been able to do.
Comparison to pp data {#sec:pp}
=====================
The natural first observable to consider is $\Lambda / \mathrm{K}_\mathrm{s}^0$ production (fig. \[fig:lambdapT\]). The new model does a significantly better job at describing this observable, especially in the mid-$p_\perp$ region between $\sim$ $1-3$ GeV. It should be recalled that the new model is tuned to get the overall amount of $\Lambda$ particles correct. The high-$p_\perp$ tail is still not well described and is an area which would be interesting to study in more detail. However, the majority of all the $\Lambda$ particles are produced well below this region.
![\[fig:lambdapT\] The $\Lambda / \mathrm{K}_\mathrm{s}^0$ $p_\perp$-distribution as measured by the CMS experiment [@Khachatryan:2011tm]. All <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Pythia</span> simulations were NSD with a lifetime cut-off ($\tau_\mathrm{max} = 10$ mm/c) and a rapidity cut on 2 ($|y| < 2$). The yellow error band represents the experimental $1\sigma$ deviation.](lambdapTratioData.pdf)
Ratios between different identified particles yields as a function of charged multiplicity are shown in fig. \[fig:ratios\]. As was already hinted in the introduction, these are a great observables to test the new CR models. In addition to the model described, this figure also contains the DIPSY model. The rope extension to the DIPSY model both contains a baryon and a strangeness enhancement. Both the $\Lambda /K$ and $p/\pi$ ratios show a clear increase with multiplicity for the new models. This is exactly what was expected, due to the baryon enhancement. One thing to note is that the baseline is extremely flat, thereby providing an excellent probe for new models. The new CR model in <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Pythia</span> does not contain any strangeness enhancement, which can be seen for the other distributions where no real enhancements are seen. The only exception is the $\Omega$ production. This is due to a very strong suppression in the ordinary production channel, which is not present for production through junctions. The DIPSY rope model shows an enhancement for all observables, due to the strangeness enhancement. The different predictions for strangeness can used to tell which model best describe the data. It should be noted that these observables are not only good to distinguish between exactly these two models, but can provide clear information about both strangeness and baryon enhancement regardless of the model.
![\[fig:ratios\]Ratios of identified hadrons as functions of $N_{ch}^{fwd}$ at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV. The top row shows meson ratios with the numerator having one more strange quark than the denominator. The middle row shows baryon to meson ratios, with same amount of strange quarks. The bottom row shows baryon ratios with the numerator having one more strange quark than the denominator. Note that the vertical axis differs between the figures and that zero is suppressed.](ratios.pdf){width="70.00000%"}
One of the classic observables for radial flow used in heavy ion collisions is to study the $p_\perp$ spectrum of $\Lambda / K$ for different centralities. For smaller centralities, larger multiplicities, the flow effects are larger, thereby pushing the “peak” to larger $p_\perp$ values. A similar measurement can be done in pp, but using multiplicity as the centrality measure (fig. \[fig:ratios\]). The new CR model in <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Pythia</span> shows exactly the same qualitative behaviour. Again this highlight the connection between flow and CR, which is an area, where more studies would be of great interest.
![\[fig:flowlike\] Ratio of $\Lambda/K$ as a function of $p_\perp$ in three bins of $N_{ch}^{fwd}$. In the right column the new colour reconnection models are shown, and in the left column the old ones.](flowlike.pdf){width="70.00000%"}
Comparison to e$^+$e$^-$ data {#sec:ee}
=============================
It has already been well established that CR shifts the mass measurement of the W boson in the fully hadronic channel. This gave a large systematic uncertainty at LEP. This study turns the tables around and use the shift as a probe of CR. The expected statistical precision for the W mass measurement is below 1 MeV, clearly enough to distinguish between the different CR scenarios (tab. \[tab:wMass\]). Another intriguing observation is the large center-of-mass dependency of the shifts. Two competing effects are at play here: larger energies means lower probability for a CR to occur, but a single reconnection has a larger effect. The effects are seen to be largest at intermediate energies.
As is clear from the W mass study above, CR will affect observables at e$^+$e$^-$ colliders. It therefore has to be included as an uncertainty for other observables. One example is the Higgs parity measurement in a fully hadronic decay (i.e. H$^0 \rightarrow$W$^+$W$^- \rightarrow \mathrm{q}\bar{\mathrm{q}}\mathrm{q}\bar{\mathrm{q}}$). This measurement relies heavily on the angles between the observed jets, which are known to be sensitive to CR. To study the size of the effects a simple $\chi^2$ comparison was carried out. Different mixtures of a CP-even and CP-odd Higgs were considered together with different CR models for the fully CP-even Higgs (fig. \[ar3:fig:chi2\]). The effects of CR are seen to be of the order of a few percent, and thus if higher precision is statistically possible, CR needs to be included as an uncertainty. This should not necessarily be seen as a lower limit on the obtainable precision, but rather as the point when CR needs to be considered.
Summary and outlook {#sec:conclusion}
===================
The implementation of a new CR model in <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Pythia</span> is described and its effects at both pp and e$^+$e$^-$ colliders are considered. The new model correctly describe the $\Lambda$ production at pp colliders, due to the baryon enhancement from the junction production mechanism.
It is important to note that this should not be seen as the final step in our understanding of CR, but merely as a step along the way. The new model still has problems describing observables (e.g. $\langle p_\perp \rangle$ vs. mass), and there is thus room for improvement in the model building. Also the experimental data used to constrain these models can be enhanced by including additional observables, for instance some of the observables suggested in this paper. Similarly for e$^+$e$^-$ colliders, the story is not finished and additional more detailed studies, both experimental and phenomenological, will be needed.
[99]{}
J. R. Christiansen and P. Z. Skands, JHEP [**1508**]{} (2015) 003 \[arXiv:1505.01681 \[hep-ph\]\]. J. R. Christiansen and T. Sj[ö]{}strand, Eur. Phys. J. C [**75**]{} (2015) 9, 441 \[arXiv:1506.09085 \[hep-ph\]\]. C. Bierlich and J. R. Christiansen, \[arXiv:1507.02091 \[hep-ph\]\].
K. Aamodt [*et al.*]{} \[ALICE Collaboration\], Eur. Phys. J. C [**71**]{} (2011) 1594 \[arXiv:1012.3257 \[hep-ex\]\]. V. Khachatryan [*et al.*]{} \[CMS Collaboration\], JHEP [**1105**]{} (2011) 064 \[arXiv:1102.4282 \[hep-ex\]\]. A. Ortiz Velasquez [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**111**]{} (2013) 4, 042001 \[arXiv:1303.6326 \[hep-ph\]\]. C. Bierlich [*et al.*]{}, JHEP [**1503**]{} (2015) 148 \[arXiv:1412.6259 \[hep-ph\]\]. T. Pierog [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. C [**92**]{} (2015) 3, 034906 \[arXiv:1306.0121 \[hep-ph\]\]. T. Sj[ö]{}strand [*et al.*]{}, Comput. Phys. Commun. [**191**]{} (2015) 159 \[arXiv:1410.3012 \[hep-ph\]\].
[^1]: Work is supported in part by the MCnetITN FP7 Marie Curie Initial Training Network, contract PITN-GA-2012-315877 and the Swedish Research Council, contract 621-2013-4287.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We present the results of molecular dynamics simulations of the Gay-Berne model of liquid crystals, supercooled from the nematic phase. We find a glass transition to a metastable phase with nematic order and frozen translational and orientational degrees of freedom. For fast quench rates the local structure is nematic-like, while for slower quench rates smectic order is present as well.\
address: ' Department of Physics, Brown University, Providence RI, 02912'
author:
- 'A. M. Smondyrev and Robert A. Pelcovits'
title: 'Glass Formation in the Gay-Berne nematic liquid crystal'
---
The study of nematic glasses [@expt] is richer than the corresponding study of isotropic glasses due to the presence of orientational degrees of freedom in the former systems. Assuming that we supercool a liquid crystal starting from its nematic phase (rather than the isotropic phase) we expect a nematic glass to have long-range orientational order like an equilibrated nematic as well as frozen density and director fluctuations. Orientationally this glassy phase is similar to a mixed magnetic phase where both ferromagnetic and vector spin glass order coexist [@SG]. However, unlike a spin glass the nematic glass is a nonequilibrium phase of matter and the molecular translational degrees of freedom freeze as well at the glass transition.
In this Letter we study the formation of a nematic glass using molecular dynamics (MD). We model the liquid crystal using the Gay-Berne (GB) potential [@GB] which is an anisotropic Lennard-Jones potential. Previous molecular dynamics studies have indicated that the Gay-Berne potential exhibits a rich phase diagram [@deM; @Luck90; @LS93] and the principal dynamical features [@DeRull; @Sarman1; @Sarman2; @Smondyrev] of real liquid crystals. The GB potential is given by, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:U}
U({\bf \hat u}_1, {\bf \hat u}_2, {\bf r})&= & 4\varepsilon ({\bf \hat u}_1,
{\bf \hat u}_2, {\bf r})
\times \biggl[\biggl\{{\sigma_o\over r-\sigma({\bf \hat u}_1, {\bf \hat u}_2,
{\bf r}) +\sigma_o}\biggr\}^{12} \nonumber\\
& &-\biggl\{{\sigma_o\over r-\sigma({\bf \hat u}_1, {\bf \hat u}_2, {\bf
r})+\sigma_o}\biggr\}^6\biggr]\end{aligned}$$ where ${\bf \hat u}_1, {\bf \hat u}_2$ are unit vectors giving the orientations of the two molecules separated by the position vector $\bf r$. The parameters $\varepsilon({\bf \hat u}_1, {\bf \hat u}_2, {\bf r})$ and $\sigma({\bf \hat
u}_1, {\bf \hat u}_2, {\bf r})$ are orientation dependent and give the well depth and the intermolecular separation where $U=0$ respectively. The well depth is written as, $$\label{eq:epsr}
\varepsilon({\bf \hat u}_1, {\bf \hat u}_2, {\bf r})=\varepsilon_o
\varepsilon^\nu ({\bf \hat u}_1, {\bf \hat u}_2)\varepsilon^{\prime\mu} ({\bf
\hat u}_1, {\bf \hat u}_2, {\bf r})$$ where $$\label{eq:epsnor}
\varepsilon({\bf \hat u}_1, {\bf \hat u}_2)=(1-\chi^2 ({\bf \hat u}_1 \cdot{\bf
\hat u}_2)^2)^{-1/2}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:epsprime}
\varepsilon^\prime ({\bf \hat u}_1, {\bf \hat u}_2, {\bf \hat r})&= &
1-{\chi^\prime\over 2}\biggl\{ {({\bf \hat r}\cdot{\bf u}_1
+{\bf \hat r}\cdot{\bf u}_2)^2\over 1+\chi^\prime
({\bf u}_1\cdot {\bf u}_2)} \nonumber\\
& &+ {({\bf \hat r}\cdot {\bf u}_1-{\bf \hat r}\cdot{\bf u}_2)^2\over
1-\chi^\prime({\bf u}_1\cdot{\bf u}_2)}\biggr\}\end{aligned}$$ The range parameter $\sigma({\bf \hat
u}_1, {\bf \hat u}_2, {\bf r})$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma ({\bf \hat u}_1, {\bf \hat u}_2, {\bf \hat r})&= & \sigma_o\Biggl\lbrace
1-{\chi\over 2}\biggl\{ {({\bf \hat r}\cdot{\bf u}_1
+{\bf \hat r}\cdot{\bf u}_2)^2\over 1+\chi
({\bf u}_1\cdot {\bf u}_2)} \nonumber\\
& &+ {({\bf \hat r}\cdot {\bf u}_1-{\bf \hat r}\cdot{\bf u}_2)^2\over
1-\chi({\bf u}_1\cdot{\bf u}_2)}\biggr\}\Biggr\rbrace^{-1/2}\end{aligned}$$ The shape anisotropy parameter $\chi$ is given by $$\label{eq:chi}
\chi=\{(\sigma_e/\sigma_s)^2 -1\}/\{({\sigma_e/\sigma_s})^2+1\}$$ where $\sigma_e$ and $\sigma_s$ are the separation of end-to-end and side-by-side molecules respectively. The parameter $\chi^\prime$ is given by $$\label{eq:chipr}
\chi^\prime
%% FOLLOWING LINE CANNOT BE BROKEN BEFORE 80 CHAR
=\{1-(\varepsilon_e/\varepsilon_s)^{1/\mu}\}/\{1+(\varepsilon_e/\varepsilon_s)^{1/\mu}\}$$ The ratio of the well depths for end-to-end and side-by-side configurations is $\varepsilon_e/\varepsilon_s$.
We investigated glass formation in the Gay-Berne fluid using a constant-pressure, constant-temperature MD method [@NH], which allows the volume to change as a function of the temperature and pressure of the system. The edges of the cell were allowed to vary independently, but the orthogonal shape was maintained. We simulated a system of $N=864$ particles. We chose $ \sigma_{e} / \sigma_{s} = 3, \epsilon_{e} / \epsilon_{s} = 5 $, and $\nu = 1$ and $\mu = 2$ as in the original work of Gay and Berne. The moment of inertia was chosen to be $4 m \sigma_o^2$, as in ref. [@Smondyrev]. We used periodic boundary conditions, and cut off and smoothed the potential at $ 3.8 \sigma_{0} $. The equations of motion were solved using the leap-frog algorithm with an integration time-step $ \Delta t^{*} = 0.001 $ in dimensionless units ($\Delta t^{*} = \Delta t ( m \sigma_{0}^{2} / \epsilon_{0} )
^{-1/2}$, where $m$ is the mass of a molecule ). The initial configuration was chosen in the nematic phase at the dimensionless temperature $T^{*}(\equiv k_B T / \epsilon_0)=1.2$ and pressure $P^{*}(\equiv P \sigma_0^3 / \epsilon_0)=5.8$ [@Pressure]. The nematic order parameter at this point was $S=0.75$. The temperature was then reduced in a sequential fashion allowing the system to relax at each temperature for a number of time steps depending on the quench rate. The quench rate is defined by the ratio of the change in dimensionless temperature to the number of timesteps between two succeeding temperature reductions. Our discussion will focus primarily on simulations where the temperature was lowered in decrements of $\Delta T^{*} = 0.1$ every 100 iterations, corresponding in real units to a quench rate approximately equal to $10^{13}$ K/s. Rates faster and slower than this one will be discussed at the end. After the system was cooled to its final temperature, it was allowed to anneal and various structural and dynamical properties were measured. Fig. \[fig1\] shows the potential energy as a function of the annealing time at four different final temperatures. The breaks in the curves corresponding to temperatures $T^{*}=0.4$ and $T^{*}=0.5$ suggest that crystallization may have occurred. Further proof of crystallization can be found by examining pair distribution functions after the breaks take place. In Fig. \[fig2\] we show parallel, perpendicular (relative to the director) and orientationally–averaged pair distribution functions at $T^{*}=0.4$ after an annealing run of 120,000 iterations. From the plot of the parallel distribution function we see that a smectic density wave has been formed parallel to the director. The peaks of the perpendicular distribution function show the hexagonal crystalline ordering within the layers. The splitting of the second peak of the orientationally–averaged distribution function is typical of a crystalline phase. The nonzero value of the perpendicular distribution function (which is averaged over the layers) at $r=0$ shows the strong correlation between the layers. At $T^{*}=0.3$ and below, a different picture is observed even after annealing. The nematic order parameter reaches a plateau at long times (see Fig. \[fig3\]), with average values lower than the corresponding values in the equilibrium phase at the same temperature ($S=0.878, 0.920$ in the quenched system, $S=0.964, 0.962$ in the equilibrium system for $T^{*}=0.2, 0.3$ respectively). The pair distribution functions for a system quenched to $T^{*}=0.2$ and then annealed for 120,000 iterations are shown in Fig. \[fig4\]. There is no smectic layer formation and no translational order perpendicular to the director, i.e. structurally the quenched system is nematic-like.
We now show that the system is frozen in this nematic state both translationally and orientationally. The dynamical properties of the system are characterized by the translational diffusion coefficients and orientational relaxation times. Diffusion coefficients parallel and perpendicular to the director are evaluated from mean-squared displacements as follows: $$D_{\parallel} = \lim_{t \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{6 t} <(r_{\parallel}(t+t_{0})-r_{\parallel}(t_{0}))^{2}>$$ $$D_{\perp} = \lim_{t \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{6 t} <({\bf r}_{\perp}(t+t_{0})-{\bf r}_{\perp}(t_{0}))^{2}>.$$ Both diffusion constants in the glassy phase are very small, about 100–1000 times smaller than corresponding values in the nematic phase which are of order 0.1 in dimensionless units. However, the mean-squared displacement remains a monotonic function of time, unlike the crystalline phase where the mean-squared displacement oscillates about the equilibrium positions. The ratio of the two diffusion constants $\frac{D_{\parallel}}{D_{\perp}}$ is approximately 4 in the glass phase, comparable to values in the nematic phase, and very different from the equilibrium values in the smectic and crystalline phases where the ratio is less than one and approximately equal to one respectively.
To show that the system freezes orientationally we use the spin-glass analogy and compute an Edwards-Anderson type [@EA] of correlation function: $$C(t) = \frac{1}{N} \sum_{i=1}^N \{ <{\bf u}_{i}(t+t_{0}){\bf u}_{i}(t_{0})> - <{\bf u}_{i}(t+t_{0})><{\bf u}_{i}(t_{0})> \}.
\label{C}$$ The orientational relaxation time is given by the slope of the logarithmic plot of $C(t)$ versus time $t$ and is approximately 2 orders of magnitude larger in the glass phase compared with the nematic phase, as shown in Table \[table1\]. Thus, our evidence suggests that a glass phase has formed at this temperature with simultaneous freezing of translational and orientational degrees of freedom.
Finally we consider the effects of different quench rates. If we quench the system instantaneously from $T^{*} = 1.2$ to $T^{*} =0.2$ we obtain a glass. However, if the glass is then annealed for several thousand time steps crystallization occurs. This shows that the glass becomes more unstable with increasing cooling rate, as seen in simulations of isotropic Lennard-Jones systems [@Nose]. On the other hand, with a “slow”cooling rate corresponding to a temperature reduction of $\Delta T^{*}= 0.1$ every 1000 iterations we find a stable glassy phase. However, the slower quench yields a different structure than the one shown in Fig. \[fig4\] because of the smectic phase that intervenes between the nematic and crystalline phases under equilibrium conditions. At the slower cooling rate the system starts to form layers typical of the smectic phase, but does not crystallize. There are no correlations between the different layers and order within the layers is not perfect. These effects can be seen in Fig. \[fig5\] where we show the positions of the molecules in three adjacent layers of the MD cell when viewed from above for the “slowly” quenched system at $T^{*}= 0.2$. Fig. \[fig6\] shows a similar view in a system which is allowed to reach thermal equilibrium at the same temperature and a crystalline phase is formed.
We are grateful to Dr. George Loriot for helpful discussions. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under grants no. DMR-9217290 and DMR-9528092. Some of the computational work was performed at the Theoretical Physics Computing Facility of Brown University.
For experimental studies see, e.g., J. I. Spielberg and E. Gelerinter, Phys. Rev. B[**32**]{}, 3647 (1984), L. Rosta, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst, [**127**]{}, 195 (1985), V. K. Dolganov, R. Fouret, C. Gors, and M. More, Phys. Rev. E [**49**]{}, 5230 (1994).
See, e.g., J. Villain, Z. Phys. B[**33**]{}, 31, (1979); M. Gabay and G. Toulouse, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**47**]{}, 201 (1981).
J. G. Gay and B. J. Berne, J. Chem. Phys. [**74**]{}, 3316 (1981).
E. DeMiguel, L. F. Rull, M. K. Chalam, and K. E. Gubbins, Mol. Phys. [**74**]{}, 405 (1991).
G. R. Luckhurst, R. A. Stephens, and R. W. Phippen, Liq. Cryst. [**8**]{}, 451 (1990).
G. R. Luckhurst and P. S. J. Simmonds, Mol. Phys. [**80**]{}, 233 (1993).
E. DeMiguel, L. F. Rull, and K. E. Gubbins, Phys. Rev. A[**45**]{}, 3813 (1992).
S. Sarman and D. J. Evans, J. Chem. Phys. [**99**]{}, 620 (1993); S. Sarman, J. Chem. Phys. [**101**]{}, 480 (1994).
S. Sarman and D. J. Evans, J. Chem. Phys. [**99**]{}, 9021 (1993).
A. M. Smondyrev, G. B. Loriot and R. A. Pelcovits, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**75**]{}, 2340 (1995).
S. Nose, Mol. Phys. [**52**]{}, 255 (1984); W. G. Hoover, Phys. Rev. A[**31**]{}, 1695 (1985); S. Nose, Mol. Phys. [**50**]{}, 1055 (1983).
At this dimensionless pressure the Gay-Berne fluid has isotropic, nematic, smectic and crystalline phases; see ref. [@deM].
V. K. Dolganov, N. Kroo, L. Rosta, E. F. Sheka and J. Szabon, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. [**127**]{}, 187 (1985).
S. F. Edwards and P. W. Anderson, J. Phys. F[**5**]{}, 965 (1975).
S. Nose and F. Yonezawa, Sol. State Comm. [**56**]{}, 1005 (1985).
--------------------------------- ---------------- -------------------
$\tau$ $S$
Nematic, $T^{*}=1.0$ $5.1 \pm 0.2$ $0.84 \pm 0.01$
Nematic, $T^{*}=1.1$ $5.2 \pm 0.2 $ $0.79 \pm 0.01$
Glass, slow quench, $T^{*}=0.2$ $394 \pm 6$ $0.888 \pm 0.004$
Glass, slow quench, $T^{*}=0.3$ $152 \pm 1$ $0.904 \pm 0.007$
Glass, slow quench, $T^{*}=0.4$ $48\pm 2$ $0.969 \pm 0.002$
Glass, fast quench, $T^{*}=0.2$ $676 \pm 9$ $0.878 \pm 0.004$
Glass, fast quench, $T^{*}=0.3$ $93 \pm 1$ $0.920 \pm 0.004$
Glass, fast quench, $T^{*}=0.4$ $100 \pm 2$ $0.961 \pm 0.002$
--------------------------------- ---------------- -------------------
: The orientational relaxation time constant $\tau$ and the nematic order parameter $S$ at several representative temperatures for a nematic in thermal equilibrium and a glass quenched at two different rates. The fast quench rate corresponds to a temperature reduction of 0.1 every 100 iterations and the slow rate to the same reduction every 1000 iterations. The glass formed at the faster quench rate has less nematic order and significantly longer relaxation times.
\[table1\]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Attention Model has now become an important concept in neural networks that has been researched within diverse application domains. This survey provides a structured and comprehensive overview of the developments in modeling attention. In particular, we propose a taxonomy which groups existing techniques into coherent categories. We review the different neural architectures in which attention has been incorporated, and also show how attention improves interpretability of neural models. Finally, we discuss some applications in which modeling attention has a significant impact. We hope this survey will provide a succinct introduction to attention models and guide practitioners while developing approaches for their applications.'
author:
- 'Sneha Chaudhari[^1]'
- Gungor Polatkan
- Rohan Ramanath
- |
Varun Mithal AI@LinkedIn\
{snchaudhari, gpolatkan, rramanat, vamithal}@linkedin.com
title: An Attentive Survey of Attention Models
---
Introduction
============
Attention Model(AM), first introduced for Machine Translation [@DBLP:journals/corr/BahdanauCB14] has now become a predominant concept in neural network literature. Attention has become enormously popular within the Artificial Intelligence(AI) community as an essential component of neural architectures for a remarkably large number of applications in Natural Language Processing, Statistical Learning, Speech and Computer Vision.
The intuition behind attention can be best explained using human biological systems. For example, our visual processing system tends to focus selectively on parts of the image, while ignoring other irrelevant information in a manner that can assist in perception [@conf/icml/XuBKCCSZB15]. Similarly, in several problems involving language, speech or vision, some parts of the input can be more relevant compared to others. For instance, in translation and summarization tasks, only certain words in the input sequence may be relevant for predicting the next word. Likewise, in an image captioning problem, some regions of the input image may be more relevant for generating the next word in the caption. AM incorporates this notion of relevance by allowing the model to dynamically *pay attention to* only certain parts of the input that help in performing the task at hand effectively. An example of sentiment classification of Yelp reviews using AM is shown in Figure \[fig:image0\] [@Yang2016HierarchicalAN]. In this example, the AM learns that out of five sentences, the first and third sentences are more relevant. Furthermore, the words *delicious* and *amazing* within those sentences are more meaningful to determine the sentiment of the review.
![Example of attention modeling in sentiment classification of Yelp reviews. Figure from [@Yang2016HierarchicalAN]](document.png){width="6cm" height="2.5cm"}
. \[fig:image0\]
The rapid advancement in modeling attention in neural networks is primarily due to three reasons. First, these models are now the state-of-the-art [@DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1708-02709] for multiple tasks such as Machine Translation, Question Answering, Sentiment Analysis, Part-of-Speech tagging, Constituency Parsing and Dialogue Systems. Second, they offer several other advantages beyond improving performance on the main task. They have been extensively used for improving interpretability of neural networks, which are otherwise considered as black-box models. This is a notable benefit mainly because of growing interest in the fairness, accountability, and transparency of Machine Learning models in applications that influence human lives. Third, they help overcome some challenges with Recurrent Neural Networks(RNNs) such as performance degradation with increase in length of the input (Section \[label:am\]) and the computational inefficiencies resulting from sequential processing of input (Section \[label:wornn\]). Therefore, in this work we aim to provide a brief, yet comprehensive survey on attention modeling.
*Organization*: We briefly explain the AM proposed by [@DBLP:journals/corr/BahdanauCB14] in Section \[label:am\] and describe our taxonomy in Section \[label:taxonomy\]. We then discuss key neural architectures using AM and how attention is facilitating the interpretability of neural networks in Section \[label:architecture\] and \[label:interpretability\] respectively. Finally, we present applications where attention has been widely applied in Section \[label:applications\] and conclude the paper in Section \[label:conclusion\].
*Related surveys*: There have been a few surveys on attention focusing on Computer Vision [@wang2016survey], and graphs [@lee2018attention]. Another similar work is by [@DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1902-02181], but we further incorporate an accessible taxonomy, key architectures and applications, and interpretability aspect of AM. We hope that our contributions will not only foster broader understanding of AM but also help AI developers & engineers to determine the right approach for their application domain.
Attention Model {#label:am}
===============
A sequence-to-sequence model consists of an encoder-decoder architecture [@cho2014learning] as shown in Figure \[fig:image1\](a). The encoder is an RNN that takes an input sequence of tokens $\displaystyle \{x_1, x_2, ..., x_T \} $, where $\displaystyle T $ is the length of input sequence, and encodes it into fixed length vectors $\displaystyle \{h_1, h_2, ..., h_T \} $. The decoder is also an RNN which then takes a single fixed length vector $\displaystyle h_T $ as its input and generates an output sequence $\displaystyle \{y_1, y_2, ..., y_{T'} \} $ token by token, where $\displaystyle T' $ is the length of output sequence. At each position $\displaystyle t $, $\displaystyle h_t $ and $\displaystyle s_t $ denote the hidden states of the encoder and decoder respectively. **Challenges of traditional encoder-decoder**: There are two well known challenges with this traditional encoder-decoder framework. First, the encoder has to compress all the input information into a single fixed length vector $\displaystyle h_T $ that is passed to the decoder. Using a single fixed length vector to compress long and detailed input sequences may lead to loss of information [@cho2014properties]. Second, it is unable to model alignment between input and output sequences, which is an essential aspect of structured output tasks such as translation or summarization [@DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1708-02709]. Intuitively, in sequence-to-sequence tasks, each output token is expected to be more influenced by some specific parts of the input sequence. However, decoder lacks any mechanism to selectively focus on relevant input tokens while generating each output token.
**Key idea**: AM aims at mitigating these challenges by allowing the decoder to access the entire encoded input sequence $\displaystyle \{h_1, h_2, ..., h_T \} $. The central idea is to induce attention weights $\displaystyle \alpha $ over the input sequence to prioritize the set of positions where relevant information is present for generating the next output token.
![Encoder-decoder architecture: (a) traditional (b) with attention model[]{data-label="fig:image1"}](sec2f.pdf){width="9.2cm" height="7cm"}
**Usage of attention**: The corresponding encoder-decoder architecture with attention is shown in Figure \[fig:image1\](b). The attention block in the architecture is responsible for automatically learning the attention weights $\displaystyle \alpha_{ij} $, which capture the relevance between $\displaystyle h_i $ (the encoder hidden state, which we refer to as candidate state) and $\displaystyle s_j $ (the decoder hidden state, which we refer to as query state). These attention weights are then used for building a context vector $\displaystyle c $, which is passed as an input to the decoder. At each decoding position $\displaystyle j $, the context vector $\displaystyle c_j $ is a weighted sum of all hidden states of the encoder and their corresponding attention weights, i.e. $ c_j = \sum_{i=1}^{T} \alpha_{ij}h_i $. This additional context vector is the mechanism by which decoder can access the entire input sequence and also focus on the relevant positions in the input sequence.
**Learning attention weights**: The attention weights are learned by incorporating an additional feed forward neural network within the architecture. This feed forward network learns a particular attention weight $\displaystyle \alpha_{ij} $ as a function of two states, $\displaystyle h_i $ (candidate state) and $\displaystyle s_{j-1} $ (query state) which are taken as input by the neural network. Further, this feed forward network is jointly trained with encoder-decoder components of the architecture.
Taxonomy of Attention {#label:taxonomy}
=====================
We consider attention in four broad categories and elucidate the different types of attention within each category as shown in Table \[tab:term\][^2]. We would like to emphasize that these categories are not mutually exclusive. Attention can be applied as a combination of multiple categories eg. a multi-level, self and soft attention combination has been used by [@Yang2016HierarchicalAN]. Hence, one can think of these categories as dimensions along which attention can be considered while employing it for an application of interest. To make this concept comprehensible, we provide a list of key technical papers and specify the multiple types of attention used within the proposed approaches in Table \[tab:taxonomy\].
Category Type
------------------------------ -------------------------------------------
Number of Sequences distinctive, co-attention, self
Number of Abstraction Levels single-level, multi-level
Number of Positions soft/global, hard, local
Number of Representations multi-representational, multi-dimensional
: Categories and types of attention within each category.[]{data-label="tab:term"}
-------------------------------------- --------------------------- -------------- -------------- ------------------------ -----------
Number of Number of Number of Number of
Sequences Abstraction Representations Positions
Levels
[@DBLP:journals/corr/BahdanauCB14] Machine Translation distinctive single-level - soft
[@conf/icml/XuBKCCSZB15] Image Captioning distinctive single-level - hard
[@DBLP:journals/corr/LuongPM15] Machine Translation distinctive single-level - local
[@Yang2016HierarchicalAN] Document Classification self multi-level - soft
[@44926] Speech Recognition distinctive single-level - soft
[@DBLP:journals/corr/LuYBP16] Visual Question Answering co-attention multi-level - soft
[@Wang2017CoupledMA] Sentiment Classification co-attention multi-level - soft
[@Ying:2018:SRS:3304222.3304315] Recommender Systems self multi-level - soft
[@DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1709-04696] Language Understanding self single-level multi-dimensional soft
[@kiela2018dynamic] Sentence Representation self single-level multi-representational soft
-------------------------------------- --------------------------- -------------- -------------- ------------------------ -----------
Number of sequences
-------------------
Thus far we have only considered the case which involves a single input and corresponding output sequence. This type of attention, which we refer to as **distinctive**, is used when candidate and query states belong to two distinct input and output sequences respectively. Most attention models employed for translation [@DBLP:journals/corr/BahdanauCB14], summarization [@DBLP:journals/corr/RushCW15], image captioning [@conf/icml/XuBKCCSZB15] and speech recognition [@44926] fall within the distinctive type of attention.
A **co-attention** model operates on multiple input sequences at the same time and jointly learns their attention weights, to capture interactions between these inputs. [@DBLP:journals/corr/LuYBP16] use a co-attention model for visual question answering. The authors argue that in addition to modeling visual attention on the input image, it is also important to model question attention because all words in the text of question are not equally important to the answer of the question. Further, attention based image representation is used to guide the question attention and vice versa, which essentially helps to simultaneously detect key phrases in the question and corresponding regions of images relevant to the answer.
In contrast, for tasks such as text classification and recommendation, input is a sequence but the output is not a sequence. In this scenario, attention can be used for learning relevant tokens in the input sequence for every token in the *same* input sequence. In other words, the query and candidate states belong to the same sequence for this type of attention. For this purpose, **self** attention, also known as inner attention has been proposed by [@Yang2016HierarchicalAN].
Number of abstraction levels
----------------------------
In the most general case, attention weights are computed only for the original input sequence. This type of attention can be termed as **single-level**. On the other hand, attention can be applied on multiple levels of abstraction of the input sequence in a *sequential* manner. The output (context vector) of the lower abstraction level becomes the query state for the higher abstraction level. Additionally, models that use **multi-level** attention can be further classified based on whether the weights are learned top-down [@att-via-att] (from higher level of abstraction to lower level) or bottom-up [@Yang2016HierarchicalAN].
We illustrate a key example in this category which uses the attention model at two different levels of abstraction, i.e. at word level and sentence level, for the document classification task [@Yang2016HierarchicalAN]. This model is called a “Hierarchical Attention Model"(HAM) because it captures the natural hierarchical structure of documents i.e. document is made up of sentences and sentences are made up of words. The multi-level attention allows the HAM to extract words that are important in a sentence and sentences that are important in a document as follows. It first builds an attention based representation of sentences with first level attention applied on sequence of word embedding vectors. Then it aggregates these sentence representations using a second level attention to form a representation of document. This final representation of the document is used as a feature vector for the classification task.
Note that the co-attention work [@DBLP:journals/corr/LuYBP16] described in Section 3.1 also belongs to multi-level category where it co-attends to the image and question at three levels: word level, phrase level and question level. This combination of co-attention and multi-level attention is depicted in Figure \[co-multi\].
![The AM proposed by [@DBLP:journals/corr/LuYBP16] for Visual Question Answering task which is a combination of co-attention (visual and text) and multi-level (word level, phrase level and question level) attention.[]{data-label="co-multi"}](co-multi.png){width="8.7cm" height="4.5cm"}
[@att-via-att] propose to use “attention-via-attention”, which also uses multi-level attention (with characters on the lower level and words on the higher level) but learns the attention weights in top-down fashion.
Number of positions
-------------------
In the third category, the differences arise from positions of the input sequence where attention function is calculated. The attention introduced by [@DBLP:journals/corr/BahdanauCB14] is also known as **soft** attention. As the name suggests, it uses a weighted average of all hidden states of the input sequence to build the context vector. The usage of the soft weighing method makes the neural network amenable to efficient learning through backpropagation, but also results in quadratic computational cost.
[@conf/icml/XuBKCCSZB15] propose a **hard** attention model in which the context vector is computed from stochastically sampled hidden states in the input sequence. This is accomplished using a multinoulli distribution parameterized by the attention weights. The hard attention model is beneficial due to decreased computational cost, but making a hard decision at every position of the input renders the resulting framework non-differentiable and difficult to optimize. As a result, variational learning methods and policy gradient methods in reinforcement learning have been proposed in the literature to overcome this limitation.
[@DBLP:journals/corr/LuongPM15] propose two attention models, namely **local** and **global**, in context of machine translation task. The global attention model is similar to the soft attention model. The local attention model, on the other hand, is intermediate between soft and hard attention. The key idea is to first detect an attention point or position within the input sequence and pick a window around that position to create a local soft attention model. The position within input sequence can either be set (monotonic alignment) or learned by a predictive function (predictive alignment). Consequently, the advantage of local attention is to provide a parametric trade-off between soft and hard attention, computational efficiency and differentiability within the window.
Number of representations
-------------------------
Generally a single feature representation of the input sequence is used in most applications. However, in some scenarios, using one feature representation of input may not suffice for the downstream task. In this case, one approach is to capture different aspects of the input through multiple feature representations. Attention can be used to assign importance weights to these different representations which can determine the most relevant aspects, disregarding noise and redundancies in the input. We refer to this model as **multi-representational AM**, as it can determine the relevance of multiple representations of the input for downstream application. The final representation is a weighted combination of these multiple representations and their attention weights. One benefit of attention here is to directly evaluate which embeddings are preferred for which specific downstream tasks, by inspecting the weights.
[@kiela2018dynamic] learns attention weights over different word embeddings of the same input sentence to improve sentence representations. Similarly, [@maharjan2018genre] use attention to dynamically weigh different feature representations of books capturing lexical, syntactic, visual and genre information. Based on similar intuition, in **multi-dimensional** attention, weights are induced for determining the relevance of each dimension of the input embedding vector. The intuition is that computing a score for each feature of the vector can select the features that can best describe the token’s specific meaning in any given context. This is especially useful for natural language applications where word embeddings suffer from the polysemy problem. Examples of this approach are shown in [@DBLP:journals/corr/LinFSYXZB17] for more effective sentence embedding representation and in [@DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1709-04696] for language understanding problem.
Network Architectures with Attention {#label:architecture}
====================================
In this section we describe three salient neural architectures used in conjunction with attention: (1) the encoder-decoder framework, (2) memory networks which extend attention beyond a single input sequence, and (3) architectures which circumvent the sequential processing component of recurrent models with the use of attention.
Encoder-Decoder
---------------
The earliest use of attention was as part of RNN based encoder-decoder framework to encode long input sentences [@DBLP:journals/corr/BahdanauCB14]. Consequently, attention has been most widely used with this architecture. An interesting fact is that AM can take any input representation and reduce it to a single fixed length context vector to be used in the decoding step. Thus, it allows one to decouple the input representation from the output. One could exploit this benefit to introduce hybrid encoder-decoders, the most popular being Convolutional Neural Network(CNN) as an encoder, and RNN or Long Short Term Memory (LSTM) as the decoder. This type of architecture is particularly useful for many multi-modal tasks such as image and video captioning, visual question answering and speech recognition.
However, not all problems where both input and output are sequential data can be solved with the aforementioned formulation (e.g. sorting or travelling salesman problem). *Pointer networks* [@Vinyals:2015:PN:2969442.2969540] are another class of neural models with the following two differences, (1) the output is discrete and points to positions in the input sequence (hence the name pointer network), and (2) the number of target classes at each step of the output depends on the length of the input (and hence variable). This cannot be achieved using the traditional encoder-decoder framework where the output dictionary is known apriori (eg. in case of natural language modeling). The authors achieve this using attention weights to model the probability of choosing the i$^{th}$ input symbol as the selected symbol at each output position. This approach can be applied to discrete optimization problems such as travelling salesperson problem, and sorting.
Memory Networks
---------------
Applications like question answering and chat bots require the ability to learn from information in a database of facts. The input to the network is a knowledge database and a query, where some facts are more relevant to the query than others.
End-to-End Memory Networks [@sukhbaatar2015end] achieve this by using an array of memory blocks to store the database of facts, and using attention to model relevance of each fact in the memory for answering the query. Using attention also provides computational advantage by making the objective continuous and enabling end-to-end training via backpropagation. End-to-End Memory Networks can be considered as a generalization of AM, wherein instead of modeling attention only over a single sequence they model it over a large database of sequences (facts).
[0.3]{} {width="4.5cm" height="4cm"}
[0.31]{} {width="5" height="3.75cm"}
[0.31]{} {width="5" height="3.75cm"}
Networks without RNNs {#label:wornn}
---------------------
Recurrent architectures rely on sequential processing of input at the encoding step which results in computational inefficiency, as the processing cannot be parallelized [@DBLP:journals/corr/VaswaniSPUJGKP17]. To address this, the authors propose *Transformer* architecture where the encoders and decoders are composed of a stack of identical layers with two sub-layers: position-wise Feed Forward Network(FFN) layer and multi-head self attention layer. *Position-wise FFN*: The input is sequential which demands the model to make use of the temporal aspect of the input, yet components that capture this positional information (i.e. RNNs / CNNs) are not used. To account for this, the encoder phase in the Transformer generates content embedding as well as position encoding for each token of the input sequence using position-wise FFN.
*Multi-Head Self-Attention*: The self attention is used within each sub-layer to relate tokens and their positions within the same input sequence. Further, attention is known as multi-head, because several attention layers are stacked in parallel, with different linear transformations of the same input. This helps the model to capture various aspects of the input and improves its expressiveness.
Transformer architecture achieves significant parallel processing, shorter training time and higher accuracy for translation without any recurrent component, which is a notable benefit. However, the position encoding only weakly incorporates position information and might not work for problems that are more sensitive to positional variation. [@DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1709-04696] use temporal convolutions to encode positional information along with the self-attention mechanism of the transformer.
Additionally, there are more straightforward methods to break the sequential processing of input. [@DBLP:journals/corr/RaffelE15] propose *Feed Forward Attention* models where they use AM to collapse the temporal dimension of data and use FFNs instead of RNNs to solve sequential data problems. In this scenario, AM is employed to produce a fixed length context vector from the variable length input sequence, which can be fed as an input to FFN.
Attention for Interpretability {#label:interpretability}
==============================
There is a huge interest in the interpretability of AI models- driven by both performance as well as transparency and fairness of models[^3]. However, neural networks, particularly deep learning architectures have been criticized for their lack of interpretability [@DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1802-01933].
Modeling attention is particularly interesting from the perspective of interpretability because it allows us to directly inspect the internal working of the deep learning architectures. The hypothesis is that the magnitude of attention weights highly correlates with how relevant a specific region of input is, for the prediction of output at each position in a sequence. This can be easily accomplished by visualizing the attention weights for a set of input and output pairs. [@DBLP:journals/corr/LiMJ16a] uphold attention as one of the important ways to explain inner workings of neural models.
As shown in Figure \[fig:image3\](a), [@DBLP:journals/corr/BahdanauCB14] visualize attention weights which clearly show automatic alignment of sentences in French and English, despite the fact that subject-verb-noun locations differ from language to language. In particular, attention model shows non-monotonic alignment by correctly aligning *environnement marin* with *marine environment*. Figure \[fig:image3\](b) shows attention weights can help to recognize user’s interests. User 1 seems to have a preference for “cartoon” videos , while user 2 prefers videos on “animals” [@He2018NAISNA]. Finally, [@conf/icml/XuBKCCSZB15] provide extensive list of visualizations of the relevant image regions (i.e. with high attention weights) which had a significant impact on the generated text in the image captioning task (example shown in Figure \[fig:image3\](c)).
We also summarize a few other interesting findings as follows. [@de2019bias] explore gender bias in occupation classification, and show how the words getting more attention during classification task are often gendered. [@Yang2016HierarchicalAN] note that the importance of words *good* and *bad* is context dependent for determining the sentiment of the review. The authors inspect the attention weight distribution of these words to find that they span from 0 to 1 which means the model captures diverse context and assign context-dependent weight to the words. [@44926] note that in speech recognition, attention between character output and audio signal can correctly identify start position of the first character in audio signal and attention weights are similar for words with acoustic similarities. Finally, [@kiela2018dynamic] find that the multi-representational attention assigns higher weights to GloVe, FastText word embeddings, particularly GloVe for low frequency words.
As another interesting application of attention, [@D17-2021] and [@D18-2007] provide a tool for visualizing attention weights of deep-neural networks. The goal is to interpret and perturb the attention weights so that one can simulate what-if scenarios and observe the changes in predictions interactively.
Applications {#label:applications}
============
Attention models have become an active area of research because of their intuition, versatility and interpretability. Variants of attention models have been used to address unique characteristics of a diverse set of application domains eg. summarization, reading comprehension, language modeling, parsing etc. We discuss attention modeling in three application domains: (i) Natural Language Generation(NLG), (ii) Classification, and (iii) Recommender systems.
**NLG** tasks involve generating natural language text as the output. Some NLG applications that have benefited from incorporating an AM include Machine Translation (MT), Question Answering (QA) and Multimedia Description (MD).
**MT** uses algorithms to translate text or speech from one language to another. Modeling attention in neural techniques for MT allows for better alignment of sentences in different languages, which is a crucial problem in MT. The advantage of the attention model also becomes more apparent while translating longer sentences [@DBLP:journals/corr/BahdanauCB14]. Several studies including [@DBLP:journals/corr/BritzGLL17] and [@DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1808-08946] have shown performance improvements in MT using attention. **QA** problems have made use of attention to (i) better understand questions by focusing on relevant parts of the question [@DBLP:journals/corr/HermannKGEKSB15], (ii) store large amount of information using memory networks to help find answers [@sukhbaatar2015end], and (iii) improve performance in visual QA task by modeling multi-modality in input using co-attention [@DBLP:journals/corr/LuYBP16]. **MD** is the task of generating a natural language text description of a multimedia input sequence which can be speech, image and video [@DBLP:journals/corr/ChoCB15]. Similar to QA, here attention performs the function of finding relevant acoustic signals in speech input [@Chorowski:2015:AMS:2969239.2969304] or relevant parts of the input image [@conf/icml/XuBKCCSZB15] to predict the next word in caption. Further, [@Li2017MAMRNNMA] exploit the temporal and spatial structures of videos using multi-level attention for video captioning task. The lower abstraction level extracts specific regions within a frame and higher abstraction level focuses on small subset of frames selectively.
**Document Classification:** As mentioned earlier in Section \[label:taxonomy\], classification problems mainly make use of self attention to build more effective document representations. [@Yang2016HierarchicalAN] use a multi-level self attention, whereas [@DBLP:journals/corr/LinFSYXZB17] propose a multi-dimensional and [@kiela2018dynamic] propose a multi-representational self attention model.
**Sentiment Analysis:** Similarly, in the sentiment analysis task, self attention helps to focus on the words that are important for determining the sentiment of input. A couple of approaches for aspect based sentiment classification by [@D16-1058] and [@Ma2018TargetedAS] incorporate additional knowledge of aspect related concepts into the model and use attention to appropriately weigh the concepts apart from the content itself. Sentiment analysis application has also seen multiple architectures being used with attention such as memory networks [@DBLP:journals/corr/TangQL16] and Transformer [@DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1812-07860; @DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1902-09314]. **Recommender Systems:** AMs have also been extensively used in recommender systems for user profiling, i.e., assigning attention weights to interacted items of a user to capture long and short term interests in a more effective manner. This is intuitive because all interactions of a user are not relevant for the recommendation of an item and user’s interests are transient as well as varied in the long and short time span. Multiple papers use self attention mechanism for finding the most relevant items in user’s history to improve item recommendations either with collaborative filtering framework [@He2018NAISNA; @NAIRS], or within an encoder-decoder architecture for sequential recommendations [@DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1808-09781; @DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1711-06632]. Recently attention has been used in novel ways which has opened new avenues for research. Some interesting directions include smoother incorporation of external knowledge bases, pre-training embeddings and multi-task learning, unsupervised representational learning, sparsity learning and prototypical learning i.e. sample selection.
Conclusion {#label:conclusion}
==========
In this survey we have discussed different ways in which attention has been formulated in the literature, and have attempted to provide an overview of various techniques by discussing a taxonomy of attention, key neural network architectures using attention, and application domains that have seen significant impact. We discussed how the incorporation of attention in neural networks has led to significant gains in performance, provided greater insight into neural network’s inner working by facilitating interpretability, and also improved computational efficiency by eliminating sequential processing of input. We hope that this survey will provide a better understanding of the different directions in which research has been done on this topic, and how techniques developed in one area can be applied to other domains.
[^1]: Corresponding Author
[^2]: Given the space constraints, we cannot cite all relevant papers, so we aim to cover a representative sample that outlines the scope of the field.
[^3]: https://fatconference.org
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- 'D. V. Ahluwalia'
title: 'CP violatingTri-bimaximal-Cabibbo mixing'
---
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The precise form of the neutrino mixing matrix, $U$, that defines the relationship between the flavour and mass eigenstates, $\vert\nu_\ell\rangle$ and $\vert\nu_j\rangle$ respectively [@Chau:1984fp; @Beringer:2012bj], reads $$\vert\nu_\ell\rangle = \sum_j U^\ast_{\ell j} \vert\nu_j\rangle, \quad\ell = e,\mu,\tau,\quad j=1,2,3,$$ and the knowledge of the masses for the underlying mass eigenstates, arise from yet unknown physics. Nevertheless, once the parameters that determine the mixing matrix and the mass-squared differences are deciphered from the data one can derive their phenomenological consequences on supernova explosions [@Ahluwalia:2004dv; @Lunardini:2007vn; @Duan:2006an; @Duan:2007sh], on the synthesis of elements [@Yoshida:2006sk], on the cosmic microwave background and the distribution of large-scale structure [@Lesgourgues:2006nd]. In particular, if the neutrino mixing angle $\theta_{13} \ne 0$ then one can obtain CP violation in the neutrino sector with many interesting physical consequences [@Khlopov:1981nq; @Frampton:2002qc; @Balantekin:2007es].
The T2K, MINOS, and Double CHOOZ indications that the smallest neutrino mixing angle $\theta_{13}$ may be non-zero [@Abe:2011ph; @Adamson:2011qu; @Abe:2011fz] has now been confirmed by the results of the Daya Bay and RENO collaborations [@An:2012eh; @Ahn:2012nd]. King has made the observation [@King:2012vj] that the smallest neutrino mixing angle $\theta_{13}$, seems to be related to the largest quark mixing angle, the Cabibbo angle $\theta_C$ [@Cabibbo:1963yz], or equivalently to the Wolfenstein parameter, $\lambda = 0.2253\pm0.0007$ [@Wolfenstein:1983yz; @Beringer:2012bj]:[^1] $$\theta_{13} ~ \mbox{(or, } \theta_{reac}\mbox{)} = \arcsin\left(\frac{\sin\theta_C}{\sqrt{2}}\right) = \arcsin\left(\frac{\lambda}{\sqrt{2}}\right).$$ To this observation we now add that the $L/E$ where $L$ is the neutrino source-detector distance and $E$ is the neutrino energy flatness of the $e$-like event ratio observed for atmospheric neutrinos [@Fukuda:1998mi] requires that $$\theta_{23}~ \mbox{(or, } \theta_{atm}\mbox{)} = \frac{\pi}{4}, \quad \delta= \pm \frac{\pi}{2}.\label{eq:2}$$ This observation was first made in reference [@Ahluwalia:2002tr]. The $\delta$ obtained in [@Ahluwalia:2002tr] was also introduced recently as an Ansatz in Ref. [@Zhang:2012ys].
Global analysis of neutrino oscillation data by two independent groups shows: (a) $\delta$ to be $\left(0.83^{+0.54}_{-0.64}\right)\pi$ for the normal mass hierarchy while allowing for the full $[0,2 \pi]$ range for the inverted mass hierarchy [@Tortola:2012te], (b) $\delta \approx \pi$ with no significant difference between the normal and inverted mass hierarchies [@Fogli:2012ua]. A detailed study of these two papers reveals that there is no statistically significant indication which disfavours $\delta = \pm \pi/2$. Regarding $\theta_{23}$: (a) the first of the mentioned groups obtains $\sin^2\theta_{23} = 0.49^{+0.08}_{-0.05}$ for the normal mass hierarchy, and $\sin^2\theta_{23} = 0.53^{+0.05}_{-0.07}$ for the inverted mass hierarchy (these values are consistent with $\theta_{23}=\pi/4$), while (b) the second group finds a slight preference for $\theta_{23} < \pi/4$.
Both groups agree with the tri-bimaximal mixing value for the remaining angle [@Tortola:2012te; @Fogli:2012ua] $$\theta_{12}~ \mbox{(or, } \theta_{\odot}\mbox{)} = \arcsin\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\right).$$ With all the angles and phases thus fixed, the neutrino mixing matrix for the choice $\delta = \pi/2$ in equation (\[eq:2\]) takes the form
$$U^+ = \begin{pmatrix}
\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}
\left(1-\frac{\lambda^2}{2}\right)^{1/2} &
\sqrt{\frac{1}{3}} \left(1-\frac{\lambda^2}{2}\right)^{1/2} & i \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\lambda\\
-\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}} \left(1- i \lambda\right) &
\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(1 + i \frac{1}{2}\lambda\right) &
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( 1-\frac{\lambda^2}{2} \right)^{1/2}\\
\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}} \left(1+ i \lambda\right) &
-\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(1 - i \frac{1}{2}\lambda\right) &
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left( 1-\frac{\lambda^2}{2} \right)^{1/2}
\end{pmatrix}.$$
Its counterpart, $U^-$, for $\delta = - \pi/2$ is obtained by letting $i\to -i$ in $U^+$. As a measure of CP violation, following [@Beringer:2012bj], we define the asymmetries $$A_{CP}^{(\ell^\prime\ell)}{\colonequals}P(\nu_\ell \to \nu_{\ell^\prime}) -
P(\bar\nu_\ell \to \bar\nu_{\ell^\prime}),$$ and find $$\begin{aligned}
A_{CP}^{(\mu e)} = - A^{(\tau e)}_{CP} = A_{CP}^{(\tau\mu)} & = \mp\frac{1}{3} \lambda\left(2 - \lambda^2\right) \left(
\sin \frac{\Delta m^2_{32}}{ 2 p} L
+ \sin \frac{\Delta m^2_{21}}{ 2 p} L
+ \sin \frac{\Delta m^2_{13}}{ 2 p} L
\right)\nonumber\\
&\approx \mp0.146 \left(
\sin \frac{\Delta m^2_{32}}{ 2 p} L
+ \sin \frac{\Delta m^2_{21}}{ 2 p} L
+ \sin \frac{\Delta m^2_{13}}{ 2 p} L
\right),\label{eq:cpv}\end{aligned}$$ where all symbols have their usual meaning. The $\mp$ sign holds for $\delta =\pm \frac{\pi}{2}$. For $\lambda = 0$, or equivalently $\theta_{13}=0$, the $U^\pm$ reduce to the standard tri-bimaximal mixing matrix [@Harrison:2002er].[^2]
The result (\[eq:cpv\]) is modified by matter effects [@Wolfenstein:1977ue; @Mikheev:1986gs]. Its general features are studied in detail by various authors [@Gava:2008rp; @Balantekin:2007es; @Kneller:2009vd; @Kisslinger:2012se]. In gravitational environments the following argument suggests that one must expect a significant modification to the result (\[eq:cpv\]). Neutrino oscillations provide us with a set of flavour oscillation clocks. These clocks must redshift according to the general expectations of the theory of general relativity. In gravitational environments of neutron stars the dimensionless gravitational potential is $\Phi^{NS}_{grav}\approx 0.2$ (cf. for Earth, $\Phi^{\oplus}_{grav}\approx 6.95 \times 10^{-10}$). For a given source-detector distance, and a given energy, the asymmetries $A_{CP}$ for supernovae modeling must be accordingly modified [@Ahluwalia:1996ev; @Ahluwalia:1998jx; @Konno:1998kq; @Wudka:2000rf; @Mukhopadhyay:2005gb; @Singh:2003sp] at the $20\%$ level, or thereabouts.
An examination of the $U^\pm$ immediately shows that the expectation values of the $\nu_\mu$ and $\nu_\tau$ masses are identical. To $\mathcal{O}(\lambda^2)$ the $U^-$ obtained above reproduces to King’s result [@King:2012vj Eq. (8)] for $\delta = \pi/2$. The presented $U^\pm$ not only accommodate the implications of the Daya Bay and RENO collaborations, but also the L/E flatness of the $e$-like event ratio seen in the atmospheric neutrino data while respecting all other known data on neutrino oscillations.
The result presented here was obtained on 10 May 2012, and was presented the next day at a MatScience Seminar. The author thanks Institute of Mathematical Sciences (“MatScience”, Chennai, India) for its hospitality and for its vibrant scholarly environment.
[10]{}
L.-L. Chau and W.-Y. Keung, [*[Comments on the Parametrization of the Kobayashi-Maskawa Matrix]{}*]{}, [*Phys.Rev.Lett.*]{} [**53**]{} (1984) 1802.
Collaboration, J. Beringer et al., [*[The review of particle physics]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D86**]{} (2012) 010001.
D. V. Ahluwalia-Khalilova, [*[Addendum to: Gen. Rel. Grav. 28 (1996) 1161, First Prize Essay for 1996: Neutrino Oscillations and Supernovae]{}*]{}, [ *Gen. Rel. Grav.*]{} [**36**]{} (2004) 2183–2187.
C. Lunardini, B. Muller, and H.-T. Janka, [*[Neutrino oscillation signatures of oxygen-neon-magnesium supernovae]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D78**]{} (2008) 023016, \[[[arXiv:0712.3000]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/0712.3000)\].
H. Duan, G. M. Fuller, J. Carlson, and Y.-Z. Qian, [*[Simulation of Coherent Non-Linear Neutrino Flavor Transformation in the Supernova Environment. 1. Correlated Neutrino Trajectories]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D74**]{} (2006) 105014, \[[[ astro-ph/0606616]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0606616)\].
H. Duan, G. M. Fuller, J. Carlson, and Y.-Z. Qian, [*[Flavor Evolution of the Neutronization Neutrino Burst from an O-Ne-Mg Core-Collapse Supernova]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**100**]{} (2008) 021101, \[[[arXiv:0710.1271]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/0710.1271)\].
T. Yoshida, T. Kajino, H. Yokomakura, K. Kimura, A. Takamura, et al., [ *[Neutrino Oscillation Effects on Supernova Light Element Synthesis]{}*]{}, [ *Astrophys. J.*]{} [**649**]{} (2006) 319–331, \[[[astro-ph/0606042]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0606042)\].
J. Lesgourgues and S. Pastor, [*[Massive neutrinos and cosmology]{}*]{}, [ *Phys. Rept.*]{} [**429**]{} (2006) 307–379, \[[[astro-ph/0603494]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0603494)\].
M. Y. Khlopov and S. Petcov, [*[Possible cosmological effect of CP violation in neutrino oscillations]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B99**]{} (1981) 117.
P. Frampton, S. Glashow, and T. Yanagida, [*[Cosmological sign of neutrino CP violation]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B548**]{} (2002) 119–121, \[[[hep-ph/0208157]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0208157)\].
A. B. Balantekin, J. Gava, and C. Volpe, [*[Possible CP-Violation effects in core-collapse Supernovae]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B662**]{} (2008) 396–404, \[[[arXiv:0710.3112]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/0710.3112)\].
Collaboration, K. Abe et al., [*[Search for Differences in Oscillation Parameters for Atmospheric Neutrinos and Antineutrinos at Super-Kamiokande]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**107**]{} (2011) 241801, \[[[arXiv:1109.1621]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1109.1621)\].
Collaboration, P. Adamson et al., [*[Improved search for muon-neutrino to electron-neutrino oscillations in MINOS]{}*]{}, [ *Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**107**]{} (2011) 181802, \[[[arXiv:1108.0015]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1108.0015)\].
Collaboration, Y. Abe et al., [*[Indication for the disappearance of reactor electron antineutrinos in the Double Chooz experiment]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**108**]{} (2012) 131801, \[[[arXiv:1112.6353]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1112.6353)\].
Collaboration, F. An et al., [*[Observation of electron-antineutrino disappearance at Daya Bay]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**108**]{} (2012) 171803, \[[[ arXiv:1203.1669]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1203.1669)\].
Collaboration, J. Ahn et al., [*[Observation of Reactor Electron Antineutrino Disappearance in the RENO Experiment]{}*]{}, [ *Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**108**]{} (2012) 191802, \[[[arXiv:1204.0626]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1204.0626)\].
S. King, [*[Tri-bimaximal-Cabibbo Mixing]{}*]{}, [[arXiv:1205.0506]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1205.0506).
N. Cabibbo, [*[Unitary Symmetry and Leptonic Decays]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**10**]{} (1963) 531–533.
L. Wolfenstein, [*[Parametrization of the Kobayashi-Maskawa Matrix]{}*]{}, [ *Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**51**]{} (1983) 1945.
R. Mohapatra and A. Smirnov, [*[Neutrino Mass and New Physics]{}*]{}, [*Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.*]{} [**56**]{} (2006) 569–628, \[[[hep-ph/0603118]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0603118)\].
Collaboration, Y. Fukuda et al., [ *[Evidence for oscillation of atmospheric neutrinos]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Rev. Lett.*]{} [**81**]{} (1998) 1562–1567, \[[[hep-ex/9807003]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ex/9807003)\].
D. V. Ahluwalia, Y. Liu, and I. Stancu, [*[CP-violation in neutrino oscillations and $L/E$ flatness of the E-like event ratio at Super-Kamiokande]{}*]{}, [*Mod. Phys. Lett.*]{} [**A17**]{} (2002) 13–21.
X. Zhang and B.-Q. Ma, [*[A Prediction of neutrino mixing matrix with CP violating phase]{}*]{}, [[ arXiv:1203.2906]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1203.2906).
M. Tortola, J. Valle, and D. Vanegas, [*[Global status of neutrino oscillation parameters after recent reactor measurements]{}*]{}, [[arXiv:1205.4018]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1205.4018).
G. Fogli, E. Lisi, A. Marrone, D. Montanino, A. Palazzo, et al., [*[Global analysis of neutrino masses, mixings and phases: entering the era of leptonic CP violation searches]{}*]{}, [[ arXiv:1205.5254]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1205.5254).
P. Harrison, D. Perkins, and W. Scott, [*[Tri-bimaximal mixing and the neutrino oscillation data]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B530**]{} (2002) 167, \[[[hep-ph/0202074]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/0202074)\].
I. Stancu and D. V. Ahluwalia, [*[L / E flatness of the electron - like event ratio in Super-Kamiokande and a degeneracy in neutrino masses]{}*]{}, [ *Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B460**]{} (1999) 431–436, \[[[hep-ph/9903408]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9903408)\].
F. Vissani, [*[A Study of the scenario with nearly degenerate Majorana neutrinos]{}*]{}, [[ hep-ph/9708483]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9708483).
D. V. Ahluwalia, [*[Reconciling Super-Kamiokande, LSND, and home-stake neutrino oscillation data]{}*]{}, [*Mod. Phys. Lett.*]{} [**A13**]{} (1998) 2249–2264, \[[[ hep-ph/9807267]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9807267)\].
V. D. Barger, S. Pakvasa, T. J. Weiler, and K. Whisnant, [*[Bimaximal mixing of three neutrinos]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Lett.*]{} [**B437**]{} (1998) 107–116, \[[[hep-ph/9806387]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-ph/9806387)\].
L. Wolfenstein, [*[Neutrino Oscillations in Matter]{}*]{}, [*Phys.Rev.*]{} [ **D17**]{} (1978) 2369–2374.
S. Mikheev and A. Y. Smirnov, [*[Resonance Amplification of Oscillations in Matter and Spectroscopy of Solar Neutrinos]{}*]{}, [*Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.*]{} [ **42**]{} (1985) 913–917.
J. Gava and C. Volpe, [*[Collective neutrinos oscillation in matter and CP-violation]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D78**]{} (2008) 083007, \[[[arXiv:0807.3418]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/0807.3418)\].
J. P. Kneller and G. C. McLaughlin, [*[Three Flavor Neutrino Oscillations in Matter: Flavor Diagonal Potentials, the Adiabatic Basis and the CP phase]{}*]{}, [*Phys.Rev.*]{} [**D80**]{} (2009) 053002, \[[[arXiv:0904.3823]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/0904.3823)\].
L. S. Kisslinger, E. M. Henley, and M. B. Johnson, [*[Neutrino Oscillation in Matter and Parameters $s_{13},\delta_{CP}$]{}*]{}, [[arXiv:1203.6613]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1203.6613).
D. V. Ahluwalia and C. Burgard, [*[Gravitationally induced quantum mechanical phases and neutrino oscillations in astrophysical environments]{}*]{}, [*Gen. Rel. Grav.*]{} [**28**]{} (1996) 1161–1170, \[[[gr-qc/9603008]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9603008)\].
D. V. Ahluwalia and C. Burgard, [*[Interplay of gravitation and linear superposition of different mass eigenstates]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D57**]{} (1998) 4724–4727, \[[[ gr-qc/9803013]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9803013)\].
K. Konno and M. Kasai, [*[General relativistic effects of gravity in quantum mechanics: A Case of ultrarelativistic, spin 1/2 particles]{}*]{}, [*Prog. Theor. Phys.*]{} [**100**]{} (1998) 1145–1157, \[[[gr-qc/0603035]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0603035)\].
J. Wudka, [*[Mass dependence of the gravitationally induced wave function phase]{}*]{}, [*Phys. Rev.*]{} [**D64**]{} (2001) 065009, \[[[gr-qc/0010077]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0010077)\].
B. Mukhopadhyay, [*[Neutrino asymmetry around black holes: Neutrinos interact with gravity]{}*]{}, [*Mod. Phys. Lett.*]{} [**A20**]{} (2005) 2145–2156, \[[[astro-ph/0505460]{}](http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0505460)\].
P. Singh and B. Mukhopadhyay, [*[Gravitationally induced neutrino asymmetry]{}*]{}, [*Mod. Phys. Lett.*]{} [**A18**]{} (2003) 779–785.
[^1]: It is worth noting that Mohapatra and Smirnov had earlier conjectured King’s observation [@Mohapatra:2006gs Sec. 3.1].
[^2]: This may be compared with [@Stancu:1999ct Eq. (26)] that gives an interpolating matrix with $\theta_\odot$ as a variable. In one limit the interpolating matrix gives the bimaximal mixing [@Vissani:1997pa; @Ahluwalia:1998xb; @Barger:1998ta] and in another it yields tri-bimaximal mixing [@Harrison:2002er].
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We present an optical model (OM) analysis of the elastic scattering data of the reactions $^6$He+ and $^6$He+ at incident energies around the Coulomb barrier. The bare part of the optical potential is constructed microscopically by means of a double folding procedure, using the São Paulo prescription without any renormalization. This bare interaction is supplemented with a Coulomb dipole polarization (CDP) potential, which takes into account the effect of the dipole Coulomb interaction. For this CDP potential, we use an analytical formula derived from the semiclassical theory of Coulomb excitation. The rest of the optical potential is parametrized in terms of Woods-Saxon shapes. In the + case, the analysis confirms the presence of long range components, in agreement with previous works. Four-body Continuum-Discretized Coupled-Channels calculations have been performed in order to better understand the features of the optical potentials found in the OM analysis. This study searches to elucidate some aspects of the optical potential of weakly bound systems, such as the dispersion relation and the long range (attractive and absorptive) mechanisms.'
address:
- 'Depto. FAMN, Universidad de Sevilla, Apartado 1065, 41080 Sevilla, Spain.'
- 'Centro Nacional de Aceleradores, Universidad de Sevilla, 41092 Sevilla, Spain.'
- 'Instituto de Estructura de la Materia, CSIC, Serrano 123, 28006 Madrid, Spain.'
author:
- 'J. P. Fernández-García'
- 'M. Rodríguez-Gallardo'
- 'M. A. G. Alvarez'
- 'A. M. Moro'
bibliography:
- './BTA6He.bib'
title: 'Long range effects on the optical model of $^{6}$He around the Coulomb barrier.'
---
,
,
,
Nuclear reaction $^{208}$Pb($^{6}$He,$^{6}$He), halo nucleus, Coulomb dipole polarizability, Coulomb barrier, optical potential, threshold anomaly. 25.60.Dz,25.60.Gc,25.60.Bx,21.10.Gv,27.20.+n.
Introduction
============
Previous optical model (OM) analyses of elastic scattering data for many heavy-ion systems have shown a rapid and localized variation of the optical potential at energies in the vicinity of the Coulomb barrier, known as the “threshold anomaly” [@Sat91]. This effect is characterized by a rapid increase of the surface strength of the imaginary part of the potential with increasing energy, up to an approximately constant value, accompanied by a bell-shaped peak in the surface strength of the real part. These energy-dependent surface strengths are linked by a dispersion relation [@Nag85]. Physically, this variation can be understood in terms of a dynamic polarization potential arising from channel coupling effects [@Sat91; @Nag85; @Lil85; @Kee96; @Kee98]. As the bombarding energy increases, the absorption of flux tends to be constant and the energy dependence of the real potential is found to be mainly connected with non-local effects [@Can97]. A realistic non-local model for the heavy-ion real potential developed in Refs. [@Can97; @Cha97; @Cha98; @Gal98; @Cha02] has shown to be a powerful tool for studying elastic scattering. In Ref. [@Cha02], a simple local approximation to this non-local model was derived. This potential factorizes in a fundamental energy-dependent term and an energy-independent double folded potential $V_{F}(r)$, as following: $$\label{eq:VN}
V_{SPP}(r)=V_{F}(r)\exp{\left(-\frac{4v^{2}}{c^{2}}\right)} ,$$ where $c$ is the speed of the light and $v$ is the relative velocity between the two nuclei. This microscopic model, called São Paulo Potential (SPP), has been tested for a large number of systems [@Can97; @Cha97; @Cha98; @Gal98; @Cha02; @Alv03; @Alv99; @Sil02; @Ros02], demonstrating its validity at low (sub-Coulomb) and intermediate energies. In particular, it has been applied to the scattering of $^{6}$He on $^{12}$C and $^{58}$Ni targets, at different energies [@Alv05; @Gas03], without the need of any renormalization of the real bare potential. The use of this microscopic potential tends to reduce the ambiguities in the real part of the bare potential [@Sat83]. Previous works, e.g. Refs. [@Kee96; @Tho89], have shown that the “threshold anomaly” behaviour of the interaction potential involving stable heavy-ion projectiles can be explained by coupled-channels calculations employing double folded real potentials without renormalizations, provided that the physically significant couplings are explicitly included. These calculations usually employ an interior imaginary potential of Woods-Saxon (WS) form to simulate the in-going wave boundary condition for fusion, all surface absorption being provided by the channels that are explicitly included in the coupling scheme. Although the appearance of the threshold anomaly has been studied extensively in the scattering of light weakly bound $^{6,7}$Li [@Kee94; @Mar98; @Mac99; @Pak03; @Pak04; @Gom05; @Fer07], there are very few works done with $^{6}$He [@Dip03; @So05]. The $^{6}$He nucleus has a weakly bound three-body n-n-$\alpha$ Borromean structure and it is known to have an extended two neutron distribution. This peculiar structure affects the dynamics of the collision, making these processes very interesting, as demonstrated by recent experimental campaigns. The data from these experiments show a sizable sensitivity to this underlying exotic structure [@So05; @Ver97; @Dav00; @Esc07]. Reactions induced by $^{6}$He on several targets, at energies around the Coulomb barrier, exhibit some common features, such as a remarkably large cross section for the production of $\alpha$ particles. This effect is clearly associated with the weak binding of the halo neutrons ($S_\mathrm{2n}=0.975$ MeV), that favours the dissociation of the $^{6}$He projectile in the nuclear and Coulomb fields of the target.
Moreover, we have recently learned that simple preconceptions based on the experience of the OM on stable nuclei, such as the role of the strong absorption radius, cannot be simply extrapolated to the scattering of exotic nuclei. We have also learned about the long range reaction mechanisms which occur when $^{6}$He is scattered on a heavy target, such as $^{208}$Pb [@Esc07; @San08; @Kak06]. These recent results confirm that the elastic scattering induced by exotic nuclei on heavy targets can be qualitatively different from the scattering of stable nuclei. It is observed that the elastic data are sensitive to the values of the real and the imaginary potentials in different radial ranges. In general, the sensitivity to the real potential corresponds to the region of the strong absorption radius, which is $R_{sa}=12.5$ fm for the $^{6}$He+ reaction [@Esc07]. However, it is found that the long range absorption present in the $^{6}$He scattering data can only be reproduced using large values for the diffuseness of the imaginary part of the phenomenological potential, and the sensitivity to the imaginary potential occurs at much larger radii [@Kak06]. Again, we are able to assess that these data can not be well reproduced by short range potentials.
In the present OM analysis, we try to understand the distinctive features of the $^6$He optical potential, for both light and heavy targets. For this purpose, we consider the targets $^{27}$Al and $^{208}$Pb. In order to keep the underlying ingredients as fundamental as possible, trying to avoid any kind of ambiguities in the real part of the bare interaction, we adopt the double-folding potential of Eq. (\[eq:VN\]), without any renormalization. This bare interaction is supplemented with the analytical Coulomb dipole polarization (CDP) potential of Ref. [@And94], which describes the effect of the dipole Coulomb interaction on the elastic scattering. This CDP potential is entirely determined by the $B(E1)$ distribution and does not contain any free adjustable parameter. The remaining part of the interaction is described by a complex WS potential, whose parameters are determined by a best fit procedure of the elastic data. In order to obtain good fits of the $^6$He+$^{208}$Pb data, both the real and imaginary parts of the WS potential require a large value of the diffuseness parameter. In order to get further insight of this result, four-body Continuum-Discretized Coupled-Channels (CDCC) calculations [@Rod09] have been also performed. The trivially equivalent local polarization potential derived from these calculations show long range attractive and absorptive tails for the real and imaginary components, respectively. This result justifies the need of long-range WS potentials in the phenomenological OM analysis of this system. Under this interesting scenario, we checked the consistency of the resulting optical potential prescription with the dispersion relation.
This paper is structured as follows. In section 2, we first present a brief summary of previous $^6$He,$^6$Li+$^{27}$Al and $^6$He,$^6$Li+$^{208}$Pb OM analyses, pointing out some differences between these systems. Afterwards, we present a conventional OM analysis based on a complex optical potential, whose real bare potential is described by the microscopic SPP potential of Eq. (\[eq:VN\]). This double-folding potential is eventually supplemented with an analytical parameter-free, complex CDP potential which takes into account the effect of dipole Coulomb couplings. Unlike the $^{6}$He+$^{27}$Al case, in order to reproduce satisfactorily the $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb data one needs to include real and imaginary long range components in the optical potential. In section 3, we present four-body CDCC calculations. The local equivalent polarization potential, derived from these calculations, is compared with the phenomenological potentials extracted in the OM analysis. Finally, in section 4 we present the summary and conclusions of this paper.
Optical Model analysis
======================
Previous Optical Model analyses for $^{6}$He reactions
------------------------------------------------------
Within the optical model (OM) framework one must determine appropriate values for the geometry of the optical potential. Here we review some previous OM analyses of $^6$He,$^6$Li+$^{27}$Al,$^{208}$Pb systems, with the aim of pointing out some common and different features of these systems, besides defining our starting point.
It is well known that the $^{6}$Li and $^{6}$He systems have similar structures. They are both weakly bound, with separation energies of 1.475 MeV and 0.975 MeV, respectively. The main qualitative difference between them is that the dipole Coulomb force can break up $^{6}$He into $^{4}$He+2n, but it cannot break up $^{6}$Li into $^{4}$He+$^{2}$H. The dipole Coulomb operator, in a $N = Z$ nucleus, is an isospin 1 operator. Since $^{6}$Li, $^{4}$He and $^{2}$H, have isospin 0 in their ground states, it is not possible that the dipole Coulomb force breaks up $^{6}$Li into $^{4}$He+$^{2}$H. Therefore, the mechanisms of $^{6}$Li and $^{6}$He break up in an intense electric field are very different. Breakup of $^{6}$Li is governed by the nuclear interaction while breakup of $^{6}$He is governed by both the nuclear and Coulomb couplings to the continuum [@Esc07].
Kakuee et al. [@Kak06] showed that OM potentials with parameters adjusted to fit the $^{6}$Li+$^{208}$Pb elastic scattering data are not able to reproduce the $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb data at 27 MeV. By contrast, Benjamim et al. [@Ben07] have shown that OM calculations based on the double folding potential of Eq. (\[eq:VN\]) describe satisfactory $^6$He+$^{27}$Al and $^6$Li+$^{27}$Al elastic data at laboratory energies from $E_\mathrm{lab}$=7.0 to 13.4 MeV.
Sánchez-Ben[í]{}tez et al. [@San08] and Kakuee et al. [@Kak06] have performed phenomenological OM calculations for $^{6}$He on $^{208}$Pb at $E_\mathrm{lab}$=14, 16, 18, 22, and 27 MeV, using a standard Woods-Saxon (WS) shape. The most remarkable feature of the derived potentials is the large value of the imaginary diffuseness parameter required to reproduce the data ($a_i \approx 2$ fm). This result was interpreted as an evidence of the presence of long-range reaction mechanisms. This is in contrast to the $^{6}$Li+$^{208}$Pb case, where this phenomenon has not been observed.
System $v$ (MeV) $w$ (MeV) $a_i$ (fm) $\chi^2$/point Ref.
------------------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ---------------- ----------
$^6$He+$^{208}$Pb 81.0 7.0 1.75 1.5 [@Dav00]
$^6$He+$^{208}$Pb 22.0 5.5(3) 1.89 1.9 [@San08]
$^6$Li+$^{208}$Pb 109.5 22.4 0.88 - [@Coo82]
: Real and imaginary WS potential parameters used to fit $^6$He+$^{208}$Pb elastic scattering cross section at 27 MeV from Refs. [@San08; @Dav00] and $^6$Li+$^{208}$Pb elastic scattering from Ref. [@Coo82] are shown. The rest of parameters are fixed at $a_{r}=0.811$ fm and $R_{0}=R_{0i}=7.856$ fm.[]{data-label="tab1"}
Optical model analysis for + and +
----------------------------------
We start with a conventional OM analysis, using a complex optical potential, based on the microscopic São Paulo potential (SPP), given by Eq. (1). We have considered the experimental data from Refs. [@San08; @Kak06] for + and Ref. [@Ben07] for +. The energy-independent part of the bare nuclear interaction, $V_F(r)$, was calculated with a double folding procedure using the effective nucleon-nucleon interaction of Ref. [@Cha02], and the matter densities of the $^{6}$He and $^{208}$Pb, taken from [@Gas03] and [@Cha02], respectively. Both densities are parametrized in terms of Fermi-Dirac distributions. For the imaginary part, we take the same geometry as the real part, with a normalization factor of $N_{I}=0.78$. This is the model OM 1. In the past, this prescription has been able to describe a large variety of systems in a very wide range of energies (see Ref. [@Alv03] for details).
In Figs. \[he6al\_elManu\] and \[he6pb\_el\], we compare these OM calculations (solid lines) with the experimental data (open circles) for $^{6}$He+$^{27}$Al and $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb systems, respectively, at several bombarding energies. It can be readily noted that these calculations reproduce very well the + data, in agreement with the results reported by Benjamim et al. [@Ben07], but they clearly fail to reproduce the $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb data. For the higher energies, the calculation shows a rainbow peak that is not present in the data. Moreover, the elastic scattering cross section is overestimated by the calculations, mainly at backward angles, suggesting that the flux removed from the elastic scattering due to the reaction channels is underestimated.
![Elastic scattering angular distribution in the center of mass frame for the reaction $^{6}$He+$^{27}$Al at different bombarding energies ($E_{\rm lab}$=9.5, 11, 12, and 13.4 MeV). The circles are the experimental data from Ref. [@Ben07]. The OM calculation, using double-folding real and imaginary components (OM 1), are displayed by solid lines. The dot-dashed lines are the four-body CDCC calculations. By dashed lines are shown the OM calculations using the OM 1 model plus the CDP potential.[]{data-label="he6al_elManu"}](he6al_elManu.eps){width="100.00000%"}
![Elastic scattering angular distribution in the center of mass frame for the reaction $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb at different bombarding energies ($E_{\rm lab}$=14, 16, 18, 22, and 27 MeV). The circles are the experimental data from Refs. [@Kak06; @San08]. The different OM model analyses are presented by solid (OM 1), dashed (OM 2) and dotted (OM 3) lines. The four-body CDCC calculations are shown by dot-dashed lines.[]{data-label="he6pb_el"}](he6pb_el.eps){width="\textwidth"}
$E_{\rm lab}$ (MeV) $w_L$ (MeV) $\chi^2$/point
--------------------- ------------- ----------------
14 1.5 0.5
16 3.2 0.4
18 4.1 1.1
22 5.0 9.2
27 5.4 4.2
: Results of the OM analysis for the reaction $^6$He+$^{208}$Pb using an energy-independent geometry. For all the fits, the only free parameter is the depth of the imaginary potential, $w_L$. The radius and the diffuseness of the imaginary potential were fixed to $R_{i0}=7.856$ fm and $a_{i}=1.9$ fm, respectively. There is no renormalization in the bare potential.[]{data-label="tab2"}
$E_{\rm lab}$ (MeV) $w_L$ (MeV) $a_i$ (fm) $\chi^2$/point
--------------------- ------------- ------------ ----------------
14 1.0 2.0 0.5
16 2.70 2.0 0.4
18 1.63 2.6 0.8
22 0.30 2.5 3.2
27 10.28 1.6 3.9
: Results of the OM analysis for $^6$He+$^{208}$Pb at energies from 14 to 27 MeV, using an energy-dependent geometry for the phenomenological imaginary potential. The only free parameters are the depth and diffuseness of the imaginary potential. The radius of the imaginary potential was kept fixed to $R_{i0}=7.856$ fm. There is no renormalization in the bare potential.[]{data-label="tab3"}
To improve the agreement with the data, we have performed a second analysis, in which we keep the double-folding SPP for the real part of the nuclear interaction, but we describe the imaginary part by means of a standard Woods-Saxon (WS) shape, with adjustable parameters. We also include an interior imaginary potential with a WS shape to simulate the in-going boundary condition for fusion. So, in this new analysis the projectile-target potential is parametrized as: $$\label{VsppW}
U(r)= V_\mathrm{SPP}(r) + i W_S(r) + i W_L(r) ,$$ with $$\label{EQWS}
W_{S}(r)=-\frac{w_S}{1+\exp{\left(\frac{r-R_s}{a_s}\right)}} \quad \quad
W_{L}(r)=-\frac{w_L}{1+\exp{\left(\frac{r-R_{i0}}{a_i}\right)}} \, .$$ The parameters of the interior WS potential ($W_{S}(r)$) are kept fixed at all energies to the values: $w_S=50$ MeV, $R_s=3.87$ fm, and $a_s=0.2$ fm.
The parameters of the external WS potential ($W_{L}(r)$) are adjusted for each energy to fit the elastic data. With the aim of checking consistency, we assumed the same geometry of the imaginary WS potential obtained by Sánchez-Ben[í]{}tez et al. [@San08] (Table \[tab1\]) for the $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb system, obtained at 22 and 27 MeV, where we expect the elastic scattering to be most sensitive to the geometry of the nuclear potential. Thus, the reduced radius and the diffuseness of the imaginary potential were fixed to $R_{i0}=7.856$ fm and $a_{i}=1.9$ fm, respectively.
With the optical potential geometry fixed, we allowed the imaginary depth ($w_L$) to vary in order to reproduce the elastic scattering data at laboratory energies of 14, 16, 18, 22, and 27 MeV. These OM fits have been performed with the routine [SFRESCO]{}, which is part of the [FRESCO]{} code [@Tho88]. This is the model OM 2. The extracted values of the depths are summarized in Table \[tab2\] and the corresponding angular distributions are compared with the data in Fig. \[he6pb\_el\] (dashed lines). The fits reproduce very well the experimental angular distributions, but with some limitations at 27 MeV and backward angles at 22 MeV.
As a third step, and in order to study the sensitivity of the data to the geometry, we have allowed the diffuseness of the imaginary potential to vary, along with the depth. The diffuseness value remained around 1.9 fm (1.6 - 2.6 fm). The extracted parameters are summarized in Table \[tab3\]. This is model OM 3. The new fits, shown in Fig. \[he6pb\_el\] by dotted lines, provide a better agreement with data. However, at 22 MeV, this calculation shows a pronounced rainbow, which does not follow the trend of the data with the energy at the measured angles. These large values of the imaginary diffuseness parameter are consistent with the prescription of Bonaccorso and Carstoiu [@Bon02]. Using a semiclassical approach, and assuming that the imaginary part of the optical potential is well represented by an exponential form, they estimated that the diffuseness of the imaginary potential is approximately given by $a_i \approx (2 \gamma_i)^{-1}$, with $\gamma_i=\sqrt{2 \mu |\varepsilon_b|}$, where $\varepsilon_b =\hbar^2 \gamma_i^2/2\mu$ is the binding energy. If this formula is applied to $^{6}$He, one gets $a_i \approx 2$ fm, which is in very good agreement with the results of the present work.
The importance of this diffuse imaginary potential is better seen in Fig. \[rd\_allgraph\], where we plot the strength of the imaginary WS component as a function of the interacting distance, for different values of the diffuseness parameter $a_i$. The values of $a_i$ chosen for this plot are close to the $\chi^2$ minimum ($a_i=1.5 - 3$ fm). Despite the well known ambiguity in the choice of the diffuseness parameter [@Sat83] we find that, in order to reproduce satisfactorily the data set, one has to use a large value of the diffuseness parameter $a_i$. In addition, for each energy, the radius of sensitivity of this potential, defined at the distance at which the different potentials cross, is well beyond the strong absorption radius, meaning that the elastic scattering will be affected by the details of this potential at large distances.
Optical Model analysis including a Coulomb dipole polarization potential
------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is well known that the elastic scattering of weakly bound nuclei on heavy targets is strongly affected by the polarization induced by the dipole part of the Coulomb interaction. In particular, it has been found that this dipole polarizability effect gives rise to a significant reduction of the elastic scattering cross sections, which is particularly important for the collision of weakly bound nuclei on heavy targets. This effect has been shown to account for part of the long range behaviour found in phenomenological OM analyses of these systems [@San08; @Kak06].
Here, we investigate how this effect varies for two extreme cases of the charge of the target, and in which case we identify long range Coulomb polarization as a distinctive feature of the scattering of $^{6}$He, at energies around the barrier. Within the OM framework, the effect of the dipole polarizability on the elastic observables can be included by means of a Coulomb dipole polarization (CDP) potential. A simple analytical expression for this CDP potential was derived in [@And94; @And95]. The form of the polarization potential is obtained in a semiclassical framework requiring that the second order amplitude for the dipole excitation-deexcitation process and the first order amplitude associated with the polarization potential are equal for all classical trajectories corresponding to a given scattering energy. This leads to an analytic formula for the polarization potential for a single excited state [@And94]. The expression so obtained can be generalized for the case of excitation to a continuum of breakup states [@And95] giving rise to the following formula: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Upol}
U_{pol}(r)&=&-\frac{4\pi }{9}\frac{Z_t^{2}e^{2}}{\hbar v}\frac{1}{(r-a_{o})^{2}r} \\
&\times&\int ^{\infty }_{\varepsilon _{b}}d\varepsilon \frac{dB(E1,\varepsilon )}{d\varepsilon }
\left[ g\left(\frac{r}{a_{o}}-1,\xi \right)+if\left(\frac{r}{a_{o}}-1,\xi \right) \right] , \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $a_0$ is the distance of closest approach in a head-on collision, $v$ is the projectile velocity and *g* and *f* are analytic functions defined as $$\begin{aligned}
f(z,\xi ) &=& 4\xi ^{2}z^{2}\exp{(-\pi \xi )}K_{2i\xi }''\left(2\xi z\right), \\
g(z,\xi ) &=& \frac{P}{\pi }\int _{-\infty }^{\infty }\frac{f(z,\xi ')}{\xi -\xi '}d\xi ',\end{aligned}$$ and $ \xi =\frac{\varepsilon a_{o}}{\hbar v} $ is the Coulomb adiabaticity parameter corresponding to the excitation energy $ \varepsilon $ of the nucleus. An important feature of this potential is that when the breakup energy $ \varepsilon _{b} $ is large enough, the purely real adiabatic dipole potential is re-obtained. In the opposite limit, for small breakup energies $ f\left(\frac{r}{a_{o}}-1,\xi \right)\rightarrow 1 $ and $ g\left(\frac{r}{a_{o}}-1,\xi \right)\rightarrow 0 $, and the polarization potential becomes purely imaginary, depending on $r$ as $ \frac{1}{(r-a_{o})^{2}r}. $ For our analysis we take theoretical values of the $B(E1)$ distribution of $^{6}$He [@Dan98; @Tho00]. This determines completely the CDP potential at different energies without using free parameters.
In this section, we reanalyze the $^{6}$He+$^{27}$Al and $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb elastic data, including explicitly the effect of dipole polarizability by means of the CDP potential described above. In the $^{6}$He+$^{27}$Al case, the optical potential contains the double folding SPP potential, an imaginary part with the same geometry, and the CDP potential. The real and imaginary parts of the double-folding potential were renormalized by $N_{R}=1.0$ and $N_{I}=0.78$, respectively. The results of these calculations are represented in Fig. \[he6al\_elManu\] by dashed lines. As expected, we find a negligible effect of the CDP potential in the elastic scattering angular distributions.
![Elastic scattering angular distribution in the center of mass frame for the reaction $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb at different bombarding energies ($E_{\rm lab}$=14, 16, 18, 22, and 27 MeV). The circles are the experimental data from Ref. [@Kak06; @San08]. The different OM model analyses, using the prescription of Eq. (\[VsppUpolW\]), are presented by solid (OM 4) and dashed (OM 5) lines.[]{data-label="spp_dpp"}](he6pb_cdp.eps){width="\textwidth"}
$E_{\rm lab}$ (MeV) $w_L$ (MeV) $\chi^2$/point
--------------------- ------------- ---------------- --
14 9.8 0.6
16 37.0 0.4
18 26.6 1.0
22 20.0 9.9
27 24.5 4.1
: Best-fit optical potential parameters for the system $^6$He+$^{208}$Pb, including explicitly the CDP potential and using energy-independent geometries for the optical potential. For all the fits, the only free parameter is the depth of the imaginary potential. The radius and diffuseness parameter of the imaginary potential were fixed to $R_{i0}=7.856$ fm and $a_i=1.1$ fm, respectively.[]{data-label="tab4"}
For the $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb reaction, the optical potential contains the real double-folding SPP potential (with $N_R=1$), the CDP potential, and WS imaginary components, i.e.: $$\label{VsppUpolW}
U(r)= V_\mathrm{SPP}(r) + U_\mathrm{CDP}(r) + i W_S(r) + i W_L(r) .$$ The long range component $W_L(r)$ will account for the effect of other peripheral reaction channels not included in the CDP potential. As before, we have divided our procedure into two steps. In the first search, we allowed the imaginary geometry to vary for each energy. In a second search, we try to keep fixed the optical potential geometry with the energy, searching for the $\chi^{2}$ minimum. The results of these calculations are shown in Fig. \[spp\_dpp\]. The solid lines (OM 4) correspond to the calculations keeping fixed the geometry of the WS potential, whereas the dashed lines (OM 5) are the calculations allowing the diffuseness parameter $a_i$ to vary. In both cases, we observe a similar agreement with data. The depths for the optical potentials extracted with the energy-independent geometry are listed in Table \[tab4\]. Comparing these results with those of the previous subsection, we see that the inclusion of the CDP potential produces a similar quality of data fits, but leads to a reduction of the imaginary diffuseness from 1.9 fm to about 1.1 fm. We can conclude that the long range tail found in the OM analysis of the $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb data is partially due to the effect of dipole Coulomb breakup. Although the overall agreement with the data is good, it seems that some ingredient is missing, since we still have some limitations to reproduce the data at energies above the Coulomb barrier (Fig. \[spp\_dpp\] at 22 and 27 MeV).
Optical Model analysis with a long range real potential
-------------------------------------------------------
Given the impossibility to reproduce the data above the barrier, we propose in this subsection a more general prescription in which, besides the phenomenological imaginary part, we introduce also a phenomenological real part of WS shape. In these new serial of calculations, we keep the complex analytical CDP potential to include Coulomb breakup effects. Consequently, this analysis was performed using the following parametrization for the optical potential: $$U(r)= V_\mathrm{SPP}(r) + U_\mathrm{CDP}(r) + i W_S(r) + V_L(r) + i W_L(r) ,$$ where $W_S(r)$ and $W_L(r)$ describe, as before, the short range and long range components of the imaginary nuclear polarization potential, and $V_L(r)$ is a real phenomenological polarization potential, $$V_L(r)= -\frac{v_L}{1+\exp\left(\frac{r-R_0}{a_r}\right)} .$$ As in our previous calculations, we do not renormalize the bare potential. The strengths $v_L$ and $w_L$, as well as the diffuseness parameters of the WS potentials ($a_r$ and $a_i$) have been allowed to vary (OM 7). Afterwards, we searched the values of $a_r$ and $a_i$ that best fit the angular distributions at all energies, and we fixed them (OM 6). The best data fits are obtained using the values $a_r=1.1$ fm and $a_i=1.0$ fm. The extracted parameters are summarized in Table \[tab6\] and the corresponding angular distributions are presented in Fig. \[sppdppvl\], OM 6 by solid lines and OM 7 by dashed lines. It can be seen that these calculations reproduce very well the data in the whole angular and energy range, with no significant differences between the two calculations. This analysis suggests that, besides the inelastic couplings produced by the dipole Coulomb force, there are other long range mechanisms that give rise to a diffuse tail in the phenomenological optical potential.
![Elastic scattering angular distribution in the center of mass frame for the reaction $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb at different bombarding energies ($E_{\rm lab}$=14, 16, 18, 22, and 27 MeV). The circles are the experimental data from Ref. [@Kak06; @San08]. The different OM model analyses are presented by solid (OM 6) and dashed (OM 7) lines.[]{data-label="sppdppvl"}](he6pb_cdp_VL.eps){width="\textwidth"}
These calculations show a complex scenario from where we could expect important changes in the dispersion relation of this system as compared to normal systems. In Fig. \[rdVL\], we plot the strength of the energy-independent geometry optical potential (as a total sum of the real and imaginary OM components), as a function of the collision energy for the $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb system, and for different values of the projectile-target distance. The results seem to show certain correlation in the variation of the real and imaginary parts, almost independent on the interacting distance, which is qualitatively consistent with dispersion relations [@Nag85]. However, the errors bars limit our conclusions. These errors bars correspond to a variation on the complex long range potential around the $\chi^{2}_{min}$ that results on an increase of the total $\chi^{2}$ by an amount $\chi^{2}_{min}/N$. This analysis claim for better precision experiments in order to infer about the existence of a threshold anomaly in reactions involving the weakly bound $^{6}$He nucleus.
The variation of the real and imaginary potentials with the energy has been studied also in terms of their volume integrals. For this purpose, in Table \[tab6\] we include also the values of the real and imaginary volume integrals ($J_v$ and $J_w$) per interacting nucleon pair, defined as: $$\label{eq:jv}
J_{v,w}=\frac{4 \pi}{A_p A_t}\int_{0}^{\infty} U_{v,w}(r) r^2 dr
%J_{v}=\frac{4 \pi}{A_p A_t}\int_{0}^{\infty} (V_\mathrm{SPP}(r) + r^2 dr
%J_{w}=\frac{4 \pi}{A_p A_t}\int_{0}^{\infty} U_{v,w}(r) r^2 dr$$ where $A_p$, $A_t$ are the projectile and target masses. $U_v$ and $U_w$ are, respectively, the total real part (excluding the monopole Coulomb contribution) and the total imaginary part (excluding the interior Woods-Saxon potential) of the optical potential. For the real part, the volume integral remains roughly constant, slightly decreasing with increasing incident energy. This energy dependence is consistent with existing parametrizations (see eg. [@Arn79; @Nad02; @Nad03]) and is a consequence of Passatore’s [@Pas67; @Pas75] application of Feshbach dispersion relation. Within the energy interval considered in the present work, the energy variation of $J_v$ is small, remaining around the value 360 MeV fm$^3$, which is consistent with the value found by Mohr [@Moh00] in the analysis of the + reaction at energies around the Coulomb barrier. By contrast, the values of the imaginary volume integrals show a more pronounced variation with the bombarding energy. According to the dispersion relations [@Atz96], the decrease of $J_v$ should be accompanied by an increase of $J_w$. In the present case, there is not a clear trend in the energy dependence of the extracted values of $J_w$. Nevertheless, one has to keep in mind that this energy dependence comes mainly from the Woods-Saxon potentials $V_L$ and $W_L$ and, as we have shown above, the strengths extracted for these potentials have large error bars.
The large errors bars shown in Fig. \[rdVL\] for the real and imaginary strengths of the phenomenological potentials might lead to the conclusion that the features found by these potentials could be just a consequence of the ambiguities of the real and imaginary parts. However, in the next section, we show that these features, namely, the long range behaviour of the real and imaginary components, arise from physical effects due to specific reaction mechanisms present in the collision.
$E_{\rm lab}$ (MeV) $v_{L}$ (MeV) $w_L$ (MeV) $J_v$(MeV fm$^3$) $J_w$(MeV fm$^3$) $\chi^2$/point
--------------------- --------------- ------------- ------------------- ------------------- ---------------- --
14 20.01 14.23 365 27 0.6
16 0.01 80.12 364 152 0.4
18 -2.77 54.67 363 103 1.0
22 -36.84 97.97 362 185 0.7
27 -19.45 47.96 360 92 2.9
: Best-fit parameters for the reaction $^6$He+$^{208}$Pb, including explicitly the CDP potential and the real and imaginary WS potentials $V_L(r)$ and $W_L(r)$. For all the fits, we considered an energy-independent geometry, with $R_0=R_{i0}=7.856$ fm, $a_{r}=1.1$ fm, and $a_{i}=1.0$ fm, which provide the best overall fit. For each energy, the free parameters are the depths $v_L$ and $w_L$. The columns $J_v$ and $J_w$ refer to the real and imaginary volume integrals, as described in the text.[]{data-label="tab6"}
![Real and imaginary strengths ($V$, $W$) of the optical potential as a function of the bombarding energy, for the system $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb. The strengths are evaluated at the distance indicated by the labels. The real potential strength is the sum of the double folding potential Eq. (\[eq:VN\]), the real part of the CDP potential and the phenomenological component $V_L(r)$. The strength of the imaginary potential is the sum of the WS potentials of Eq. (\[EQWS\]) and the imaginary part of the dynamic polarization potential.[]{data-label="rdVL"}](rdVL_2.eps){width="90.00000%"}
Microscopic analysis within a few-body approach
===============================================
Continuum-Discretized Coupled-Channels calculations
---------------------------------------------------
Theoretically, the treatment of the reactions induced by the Borromean nucleus $^6$He requires a four-body formalism (three-body projectile plus a target). For three-body problems (two-body projectile plus a target) the Continuum-Discretized Coupled-Channels (CDCC) framework [@Yah82; @Aus87] has been successfully used for many cases [@Rus04; @Tak03]. Recently this method has been extended to four-body problems [@Mat04; @Mat06; @Rod07; @Rod08]. In particular it has been tested for the reaction $^6$He on $^{208}$Pb at 22 MeV [@Rod09]. Consequently, in this work we use this four-body CDCC framework for performing theoretical calculations for the reactions under study, $^6$He+$^{208}$Pb and $^6$He+$^{27}$Al at different energies around the Coulomb barrier. We have used the binning procedure [@Rod09] for discretizing the three-body continuum of the projectile. This procedure has been developed very recently as an extension of the same method used traditionally in standard three-body CDCC calculations. For this purpose, the three-body continuum representation uses the eigenchannel expansion of the multi-channel S-matrix [@Rod09].
Here we use the same structure model for the three-body system $^6$He($\alpha$+n+n), as in Refs. [@Rod09; @Rod08]. The Hamiltonian includes two-body potentials plus an effective three-body potential. Continuum states with angular momentum and parity $j^\pi=0^+$,$1^-$, and $2^+$ were considered. The wavefunctions for these states were generated using the codes [FaCE]{} [@face] and [sturmxx]{} [@sturm]. The maximum hypermomentum used was $K_\mathrm{max}=8$. The parameters of the three-body interaction are adjusted to reproduce the ground-state separation energy and matter radius (for $j=0^+$ states) and the resonance energy (for $j=1^-$ and $2^+$ states). The calculated ground state energy was 0.953 MeV and the root mean squared (rms) radius was 2.46 fm (assuming a rms radius of 1.47 fm for the $\alpha$ particle). Both Coulomb and nuclear potentials are included. The fragment-target interactions were represented by optical potentials which reproduce the elastic scattering at the appropriate energy. The $n+^{208}$Pb and $n+^{27}$Al potentials were from [@Kon03], the $\alpha+^{208}$Pb was from from [@Bar74], and for $\alpha+^{27}$Al we used the code by S. Kailas [@kailas], which provides optical model parameters for $\alpha$ particles using real potential volume integrals of Atzrott et al. [@Atz96], geometry systematics, and dispersion relation.
The coupled-channels equations were solved using the code [FRESCO]{} [@Tho88], that reads the coupling potentials externally. We included in the calculation the projectile-target interaction multipole couplings with order $Q=0,1,2$. In order to get convergence, the number of eigenchannels included was 4 for both systems. However, the maximum energy value $\varepsilon_{\rm max}$, the number of bins $n_{\rm bin}$ for each $j^{\pi}$, the maximum total angular momentum $J_\mathrm{max}$ and the matching radius $R_m$ depended on the target and on the energy. These values are presented in Table \[CDCC\_par\].
System $E_{\rm lab}$ (MeV) $\varepsilon_{\rm max}$ (MeV) $n_{\rm bin}$ ($0^+,1^-,2^+$) $J_\mathrm{max}$ $R_m$ (fm)
------------------- --------------------- ------------------------------- ------------------------------- ------------------ ------------ --
$^6$He+$^{208}$Pb 14.0 5.0 (6,9,6) 150 200
$^6$He+$^{208}$Pb 16.0 6.0 (9,12,9) 150 200
$^6$He+$^{208}$Pb 18.0 7.0 (9,12,9) 150 200
$^6$He+$^{208}$Pb 22.0 8.0 (6,9,6) 150 200
$^6$He+$^{208}$Pb 27.0 8.0 (6,9,6) 150 200
$^6$He+$^{27}$Al 9.5 5.0 (6,9,6) 30 80
$^6$He+$^{27}$Al 11.0 6.0 (6,9,6) 30 80
$^6$He+$^{27}$Al 12.0 7.0 (6,9,6) 30 80
$^6$He+$^{27}$Al 13.4 8.0 (6,9,6) 30 80
: Parameters for the four-body CDCC calculations. See text for details.[]{data-label="CDCC_par"}
Figs. \[he6al\_elManu\] and \[he6pb\_el\] show the four-body CDCC calculations for the $^6$He+$^{27}$Al and $^6$He+$^{208}$Pb systems, at different energies around the Coulomb barrier (dash-dotted lines). For the $^6$He+$^{27}$Al case, the calculations reproduce well the trend of the data, although some underestimation is observed. For the $^6$He+$^{208}$Pb case, these calculations reproduce very well the forward angular region. However, as the energy decreases the calculation tends to underestimate the data at larger angles. For this reaction, we have used a second set of optical potentials for the fragment-target interactions. These were generated by the SPP using Eq. (\[eq:VN\]). The calculations with these potentials yield very similar results, although there are small differences at backward angles. However the magnitude of these differences cannot explain the underestimation of the data at these large angles.
Local equivalent polarization potential from CDCC calculations
--------------------------------------------------------------
In order to link the results of this section with those found in the OM analysis, we have extracted from the four-body CDCC calculations the so called trivially equivalent local polarization (TELP) potential [@Tho89]. This is a local and $L$-independent potential which represents the overall effect of the breakup channels on the elastic scattering. This potential is constructed in such a way that the one-channel calculation performed with the potential $U_\mathrm{bare}(r)+ U_\mathrm{TELP}(r)$ gives the same elastic scattering as the full CDCC calculation. The bare potential, $U_\mathrm{bare}(r)$ is just the sum of the fragment-target interactions convoluted with the ground state density of the nucleus. Figure \[he6pol\] shows these polarization potentials (due to Coulomb and nuclear interaction) calculated for the different systems at different energies.
![$^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb (left) and $^{6}$He+$^{27}$Al (right) TELP potentials extracted from the four-body CDCC calculations.[]{data-label="he6pol"}](he6pb_pol.eps "fig:"){width="45.00000%"} ![$^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb (left) and $^{6}$He+$^{27}$Al (right) TELP potentials extracted from the four-body CDCC calculations.[]{data-label="he6pol"}](he6al_pol.eps "fig:"){width="45.00000%"}
For the $^{6}$He+$^{27}$Al system (right panel in Fig. \[he6pol\]), we observe a very uniform behavior of the dynamic polarization potential (real and imaginary parts) as a function of the interacting distance. The real part of the dynamic polarization potential is repulsive (except at very short distances where the details of this potential are probably not meaningful). Moreover, this potential shows a weak dependence with the incident energy. This result explains why the use of a double folding bare potential and an imaginary part with the same geometry is able to reproduce satisfactorily the data.
On the contrary, for the $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb system (left panel in Fig. \[he6pol\]), such uniform behavior is not observed. The real part is repulsive at distances close to the strong absorption radius and becomes attractive at larger distances. The imaginary part is mostly absorptive, although for the lowest energies it becomes emissive at short distances.[^1] Both the real and imaginary parts extend to large distances, well beyond the strong absorption radius. These features are consistent with the findings of Mackintosh and Keeley [@Mac09] and Rusek [@Rus09] for the same reaction. Clearly, this complicated behaviour cannot be simply simulated by a renormalization of the double-folding potential.
To get a deeper understanding on the relationship between the features of the TELP and the phenomenological potentials extracted in the OM analysis of the + reaction we show in Fig. \[he6pol\_C\] the separate contributions of the TELP potentials arising from either Coulomb (left) or nuclear (right) couplings. It can be seen that the Coulomb couplings are responsible for the long range attractive tail in the real part of the TELP potential. Also, these couplings produce a long range absorptive tail. Within the phenomenological OM analysis, this behaviour is expected to be at least partially taken into account by means of the analytical CDP potential. Also from Fig. \[he6pol\_C\] one sees that nuclear couplings are responsible for the strong repulsive part of the polarization potential. Although they are of shorter range than the Coulomb polarization potential, it is noticeable that both the real and imaginary components of the nuclear polarization potential extend also to distances well beyond the strong absorption radius. Therefore, besides long range Coulomb couplings, the $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb reaction is characterized by long range nuclear couplings. In particular, the long range absorptive tail explains why the OM calculations using the double-folding potential for the imaginary part do not reproduce the data (even after inclusion of the CDP potential), and supports the need of a long range complex component in the OM potential. This long range part of the real polarization potential cannot be well accounted for by a mere renormalization of the double-folding potential.
It is worth to note that the conclusions extracted from the TELP have to be analysed with caution, since this potential is just a local $L$-independent approximation of a very complicated non-local and $L$-dependent object. In particular, the oscillations of the TELP at short distances arise from the radial solution of the elastic equation, which appears in the denominator in the expression of the TELP. To support the conclusions extracted from this potential, we have extracted another polarization potential fitting the elastic angular distribution obtained with the CDCC method with a local optical potential. This potential contains the double-folding SPP potential and Woods-Saxon real and imaginary components, with fixed radius $R$=7.86 fm. The parameters obtained from this fit ($v_L$=-32.1 MeV, $a_r$=0.98 fm, $w_L$=10.2 MeV, $a_i$=1.7 fm) confirm that, in order to reproduce the effect of the continuum couplings using a single-channel optical potential, the real and imaginary parts need a long-range absorptive tail.
![$^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb Coulomb (left) and nuclear (right) TELP potentials extracted from the four-body CDCC calculation.[]{data-label="he6pol_C"}](he6pb_pol_coul.eps "fig:"){width="45.00000%"} ![$^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb Coulomb (left) and nuclear (right) TELP potentials extracted from the four-body CDCC calculation.[]{data-label="he6pol_C"}](he6pb_pol_nuc.eps "fig:"){width="45.00000%"}
It is illustrative to compare these results with those of previous works. The effect of the breakup channels on the optical potential has been subject of many studies in the past. Although it is not the aim of this paper to make an extensive review of these works, we cite some previous results which are closely related to ours. In the eighties, the Kyushu group studied in detail the effect of the continuum in the elastic and transfer of deuterons using the CDCC method [@Yah82; @Aus87]. By extracting the polarization potential from the CDCC calculations, they concluded that the breakup induces a surface complex polarization potential with a real repulsive part and an imaginary absorptive part. This is consistent with our results for the light target. However, for the lead target, we have a significant long-range attractive component and the imaginary part is of much longer range than that found in the cited work. As we have already pointed out, this is a consequence of the strong Coulomb couplings. These couplings where omitted in these pioneering calculations by the Kyushu work and, in addition, the effect is expected to be much smaller for the deuteron case due to its larger binding energy.
Similar conclusions where achieved in the comprehensive work of Sakuragi [@Sak87] for $^6$Li scattering. He found that the breakup channels produce a strong repulsive term and an absorptive part. The values of these potentials in the strong absorption radius were consistent with the renormalization required to reproduce the elastic data using double-folding potentials. His conclusions can not be readily extrapolated to the present case because (i) only nuclear breakup was included and (ii) in any case the effect of dipole couplings are very much suppressed in $^6$Li with respect to $^6$He. Nevertheless, his results are consistent with our calculations when Coulomb breakup is switched off.
Finally, we cite the work of Matsumoto [@Mat06] where they study the elastic scattering of on at Coulomb barrier energies within a pseudo-state version of the four-body CDCC method. They find the real part of the equivalent local polarization potential, extracted from their CDCC calculations, is repulsive at short distances and becomes attractive for distances beyond $\approx$15 fm, whereas the imaginary part is absorptive and of long range. These results are in total agreement with ours, as expected given the similitude between both reactions.
Summary and conclusions
=======================
Detailed optical model (OM) analyses of the $^{6}$He on $^{27}$Al and $^{208}$Pb data, at laboratory energies around the Coulomb barrier ($E_{\rm lab}$=9.5, 11.0, 12.0, and 13.4 MeV and $E_{\rm lab}$=14, 16, 18, 22, and 27 MeV, respectively), have been performed.
In the case of the light system, $^{6}$He+$^{27}$Al, we cannot recognize breakup effects on the optical potential analysis. Thus, a conventional optical potential, with the same form factor for the real and imaginary parts, based on the double-folding potential given by Eq. (\[eq:VN\]), have been successfully applied to describe the data of this light weakly bound system. The inclusion of a complex Coulomb dipole polarization (CDP) potential, which takes into account the effect of the dipole Coulomb interaction, had no significant effect on the data fits. Four-body Continuum-Discretized Coupled-Channels (CDCC) calculations corroborate the conclusions of the OM analysis.
In the case of the heavy system, $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb, breakup effects (Coulomb and nuclear) are very relevant and play an important role in the dynamics of the reaction around the Coulomb barrier. These couplings give rise to long range attractive and absorptive components in the optical potential required to reproduce the data. Despite this complex scenario, we tried to develop an optical potential, with an energy-independent geometry, consistent with the dispersion relation and suitable for studying reaction mechanisms.
For the analysis of the $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb data, we adopt the microscopic real nuclear São Paulo potential given by Eq. (\[eq:VN\]), with its energy-independent geometry calculated as a double-folding of the effective nucleon-nucleon interaction [@Cha02] with the $^{6}$He and matter densities. We performed calculations with and without including explicitly the analytical CDP potential. Both the double-folding and the CDP components have no adjustable parameters. The fact that, even after the inclusion of the CDP potential, one still requires relatively intense values of the optical potential at large distances, means that there are other relevant long range mechanisms, besides the dipole Coulomb polarizability. To obtain a satisfactory agreement with the data above the barrier, a repulsive long range Woods-Saxon (WS) potential (with real and imaginary parts) had also to be included in the OM analysis. In this approach, the optimal values for the diffuseness parameters were $a_r=1.1$ fm and $a_i=1.0$ fm. These values are to be compared, respectively, with the diffuseness value of the nuclear densities of the double-folding potential, which is $a_r=0.56$ fm, using a Fermi-Dirac representation, and with the mean imaginary diffuseness obtained to fit the data set, without using the CDP potential, $a_i=1.9$ fm. In particular, this reduction of the imaginary diffuseness when including the CDP potential confirms that Coulomb breakup accounts for a considerable part of the long range behavior found in the OM analysis.
The existence of sizable long range effects in the $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb interaction, suggests the presence of reaction mechanisms that remove flux from the elastic channel at distances well beyond the strong absorption radius ($R_{sa}=12.5$ fm) and even well below the Coulomb barrier. These results can easily be understood since, as it has been discussed in this work and in previous ones (see, e.g. Ref. [@Esc07]), in the case of $^{6}$He+$^{208}$Pb reaction, the breakup cross section has its maximum at 18 MeV and decreases for energies around (below and above) this value, but it remains very large for these energies. It evidences the presence of a strong dynamic polarization potential, which has shown to be consistent with the trivially equivalent local polarization (TELP) potential derived from four-body CDCC calculations (Figs. \[he6pol\] and \[he6pol\_C\]). For projectile-target separations around the strong absorption radius, the real part of the TELP potential is very repulsive (Fig. \[he6pol\]), while it becomes attractive at large distances (Figs. \[he6pol\] and \[he6pol\_C\]). The repulsive part has been identified as coming from nuclear couplings, whereas the attractive part arises from Coulomb couplings. The presence of the repulsive part in the polarization potential justifies the inclusion of the real WS potential in the optical model analysis. Both nuclear and Coulomb couplings produce also a long range absorptive component in the TELP potential, which again justifies the inclusion of the imaginary WS component in the optical model calculations. Moreover, the complicate behaviour of the TELP potential as a function of the distance, as well as its strong energy dependence, suggest that this complicated behaviour cannot be simply accounted for by a renormalization of the double folding potential.
Therefore, our analysis suggests a new and complex scenario for the optical potential involving the scattering of the weakly bound $^{6}$He nucleus on heavy targets. The attractive and absorptive effects, produced by the couplings to the continuum breakup states, tend to produce significant changes in the strength of the real and imaginary parts of the optical potential with the energy, at the different interacting distances. Consequently, any OM analysis involving this nucleus as well as the application of the dispersion relation to the study of threshold anomaly, must be made with caution. With the aim of assessing the consistency with the dispersion relation, depending mainly on the dynamic polarization potential effects, we have studied the energy dependence of the real and imaginary parts of the potential evaluated at different values of the interacting distance. The results, presented in Fig. \[rdVL\], show a certain correlation in the variation of the real and imaginary parts with the energy, almost independent on the interacting distance, which is consistent with the dispersion relation [@Nag85]. However, our conclusions are limited by the errors bars and so, in order to allow us to infer about the dispersion relation and threshold anomaly in the $^{6}$He reactions, more accurate data would be required.
For the future, couplings between the transfer/breakup channels and the elastic channel must be incorporated beyond the first order, thus performing a coupled-reaction channel calculation. This calculation could allow an assessment on whether the explicit inclusion of these channels can account for the remaining part of the long range absorption effects.
This work has been supported by the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación under project FPA2006-13807-C02-01, the local government of Junta de Andalucía under the excellence project P07-FQM-02894 and the Spanish Consolider-Ingenio 2010 Programme CPAN (CSD2007-00042). We are grateful to M.V. Andrés for providing us the Coulomb polarization potentials.
[^1]: It has been pointed out [@Mac09] that this emissive imaginary part is a consequence of representing a strongly non-local object, namely, the dynamic polarization potential arising from the coupled-channels couplings, by a simple local potential. This effect, nevertheless, does not lead to unitary breaking.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'A large-$N_{\rm c}$ expansion is combined with the Kubo formalism to study the shear viscosity $\eta$ of strongly interacting matter in the two-flavor NJL model. We discuss analytical and numerical approaches to $\eta$ and investigate systematically its strong dependence on the spectral width and the momentum-space cutoff. Thermal effects on the constituent quark mass from spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking are included. The ratio $\eta/s$ and its thermal dependence are derived for different parameterizations of the spectral width and for an explicit one-loop calculation including mesonic modes within the NJL model.'
author:
- Robert Lang
- Wolfram Weise
date: 'March 26, 2014'
title: 'Shear viscosity from Kubo formalism: NJL-model study'
---
Introduction
============
Heavy-ion collisions at RHIC [@BRAHMSatRHIC05; @PHENIXatRHIC05; @STARatRHIC05; @PHOBOSatRHIC05] and at the LHC [@AamodtALICE10; @AamodtALICE11; @CaffarriALICE12] explore strongly interacting matter under extreme conditions. The quark-gluon matter created in such collisions at temperatures exceeding $T_{\rm c}\approx 0.2$ GeV leaves its indirect signatures in the produced particles at lower temperatures long after thermalization. Transport properties such as the shear viscosity $\eta$ of the highly excited matter are of prime interest in this context. Inertial anisotropies in the collision plane translate into non-trivial particle flow patterns [@DerendarzATLAS2013; @RoyMohantyChaudhuri2013; @DuslingTeaney2008; @LuzumGombeaudOllitrault2010]. In particular the elliptic-flow parameter, $v_2$, features a strong dependence on the ratio of shear viscosity to entropy density, $\eta/s$, of the dissipative quark-gluon matter formed in the collision. It is known that the temperature dependence of $\eta/s$ is crucial in order to describe the elliptic flow of hadrons in ultrarelativistic heavy-ion collisions at RHIC and LHC [@Niemi2011]. At the very high LHC energies, the temperature dependence of $\eta/s$ for $T>T_{\rm c}$ becomes dominant for the elliptic flow.
Two basic approaches are commonly used to deal with non-equilibrium systems and transport properties: the Boltzmann equation [@HuiDefuLic2006; @SasakiRedlich2010; @KhvorostukhinToneevVoskresensky2011] (most frequently applied in relaxation-time approximation) and the Kubo formalism using retarded correlators of the energy-momentum tensor [@Alberico2008; @HidakaKunihiro2011; @HidakaKunihiro2011NJL; @NamKao2013]. When examined in comparison, the kinetic approach seems generally to underestimate the shear viscosity [@PlumariEtAl2012; @PlumariEtAl2013]. The calculation in relaxation-time approximation makes use of the thermal cross sections of the colliding particles, whereas the Kubo formalism asks for the spectral functions of the basic degrees of freedom. These two approaches are connected via the optical theorem. In the present paper we choose the Kubo formalism, realizing at the same time that, in this approach, a perturbative treatment of transport coefficients is insufficient [@JeonSkeleton1995; @JeonYaffeSkeleton1996] and requires resummation techniques even in a weak-coupling situation.
We use the Nambu–Jona-Lasinio (NJL) model [@Nambu1961tp; @Nambu1961; @Klevansky1992; @KLVW1990; @KLVW1990:2; @VoglWeise1991; @BuballaHabil2005] as a schematic, non-perturbative approach to the thermodynamics of quark matter. Gluonic degrees of freedom are integrated out and hidden in point vertices of the effective interaction between quarks, while all relevant chiral and flavor symmetries and symmetry-breaking patterns of QCD are taken properly into account. The applicability of such a model is supposed to cover a temperature range $T_{\rm c} \lesssim T < \Lambda$, where $T_{\rm c}\approx 0.2$ GeV is the transition temperature from the hadronic to the quark phase and $\Lambda\approx 0.6\;{\rm GeV}$ is the characteristic NJL cutoff scale. We combine the NJL model with a large-${N_{\rm c}}$ expansion [@tHooft1974; @QuackKlevansky94; @BuballaMuellerWambach2010] to study the shear viscosity of quark matter.
In Section \[Sec:EtaLO\] the shear viscosity $\eta$ in leading order is deduced. We follow mainly the developments in [@Fukutome2006; @Fukutome2008Nucl; @Fukutome2008Prog] but do not restrict ourselves to the chiral limit and arrive at results under more general assumptions. Taking only the dominant scalar and pseudoscalar channels into account, an infinite number of ring diagrams reduces to just one single generic diagram. Corrections to correlation functions by ladder diagrams are suppressed in a large-${N_{\rm c}}$ expansion. However, for the shear viscosity itself a resummation of these subleading diagrams is potentially important, depending on the ${N_{\rm c}}$ scaling of the spectral width [@HidakaKunihiro2011; @HidakaKunihiro2011NJL]. This effect has been studied first in [@JeonSkeleton1995] for a bosonic field theory. In the present work resummations in the Kubo sector will not be included. A discussion concerning the conditions under which such resummations are necessary will however be given.
The general derivation is followed by a detailed parameter study in Section \[Sec:ParStud\]: for $\eta[\Gamma]$ as a functional of the quasiparticle spectral width $\Gamma(p)$ of the quarks. First an analytical result is derived assuming a constant spectral width to start with. Furthermore, the implementation of different parameterizations for $\Gamma(p)$ teaches us about the general dependence of the shear viscosity on the spectral width for a variety of examples. A strong dependence on the pertinent momentum-space cutoff, $\Lambda$, is found, reflecting the sensitivity to physical scales: the characteristic cutoff fixed by the NJL gap equation excludes up to $90\%$ of the mathematically accessible high-momentum contributions to $\eta$, a feature that actually turns out to be a prerequisite for achieving physically meaningful results within this framework. We also investigate to what extent the functional $\eta[\Gamma(p)]$ can be treated perturbatively by expanding in a Laurent series for a “small” spectral width and comparing with the full result. The impact of thermal constituent quark masses on the shear viscosity is investigated in Section \[Sec:ThermoMass\]. The thermal quark masses are generated dynamically by the spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking mechanism through the NJL gap equation. Not surprisingly, we find that thermal effects are crucial to obtain physically relevant results for the shear viscosity.
In Section \[Sec:GammaNJL\] an explicit calculation of the spectral width is performed within the NJL model, using the one-loop mesonic contributions to the quark self-energy at next-to-leading order in the large-${N_{\rm c}}$ expansion. Two different physical effects contribute to this width: Landau damping and mesonic recombination. For temperatures well above the critical/crossover temperature the resulting spectral width decreases, implying an increasing shear viscosity $\eta(T)$ in this temperature range.
Shear viscosity at leading order {#Sec:EtaLO}
================================
In this work we model quark matter starting from the two-flavor NJL Lagrangian $$\label{NJL2}
\mathcal{L}={\bar{\psi}}\left({{\rm i}}{\slashed{\partial}}-\hat{m}\right)\psi+\frac G2\left[({\bar{\psi}}\psi)^2+({\bar{\psi}}{{\rm i}}\gamma_5{\mbox{\boldmath $\tau$}}\psi)^2\right],$$ where $\psi = (u,d)^{\rm T}$ is the isospin doublet quark field, $\hat{m} = {\rm diag}(m_{\rm u},m_{\rm d})$ is the current quark mass matrix (we work in the isospin limit, $m_{\rm u}= m_{\rm d} \equiv m$), $G$ denotes the scalar/pseudoscalar coupling, and ${\mbox{\boldmath $\tau$}}$ collects the three Pauli isospin matrices. Vector or axialvector terms are not considered in this work. The large masses of the corresponding quark-antiquark modes make their contributions to the relevant correlation functions far less important than those of pseudoscalar and scalar modes.
In the Kubo formalism [@Kubo57] transport coefficients are related to retarded correlators of energy-momentum tensors, i.e. to four-point functions in Matsubara space. The energy momentum tensor of the NJL model is simply $$\label{Tmunu}
T_{\mu\nu}={{\rm i}}{\bar{\psi}}\gamma_\mu\partial_\nu\psi-g_{\mu\nu}\mathcal{L}$$ in terms of the quark fields $\psi$. The Kubo formula for the shear viscosity reads $$\begin{aligned}
\label{KuboEta}
\eta(\omega) =
\frac{\beta}{15}\int_0^\infty{\text{d}}t\;{{\rm e}}^{{{\rm i}}\omega t}\int{\text{d}}^3r\; (T_{\mu\nu}({\mbox{\boldmath $r$}},t),T^{\mu\nu}(0))\;,
\end{aligned}$$ with $\beta = 1/T$ the inverse temperature. The correlator $(X,Y)$ is defined by[^1] $$(X,Y)=T\int_0^\beta{\text{d}}\xi\;\langle{{\rm e}}^{\xi H}X{{\rm e}}^{-\xi H}Y\rangle\;,$$ where $H$ is the NJL Hamiltonian and $\langle\mathcal{\cdot}\rangle={{\rm Tr}}\left(\cdot\,{{\rm e}}^{-\beta H}\right)$ denotes the thermal expectation value. An equivalent reduced expression for the shear viscosity is also frequently used in the literature [@Alberico2008]: $$\label{KuboEtaAlternative}
\eta(\omega)=\beta\int_0^\infty{\text{d}}t\;{{\rm e}}^{{{\rm i}}\omega t}\int{\text{d}}^3r\; (T_{21}({\mbox{\boldmath $r$}},t),T_{21}(0))\;,$$ written in terms of only one component of the energy-momentum tensor. The relative factor $15$ in comparison with Eq. results from the following identity ($i,j\in\{1,2,3\}$ with $i\neq j$): $$\int{\text{d}}^3x\; x_i^2\,x_j^2\,f(x^2)=\frac{1}{15}\int{\text{d}}^3x\;x^4f(x^2)\;.$$ The (classical) components of the energy-momentum tensor are real quantities, $T_{\mu\nu}\in\mathds{R}$. It follows that the *static* shear viscosity $\eta(\omega = 0)$ is also real: $$\eta(\omega)^*=\eta(-\omega)\;\;\;\Rightarrow\;\;\;\eta:=\eta(0)\in\mathds{R}\;.$$ Neglecting surface terms at infinite time, one derives $$\label{DefRetGreenFctFromDifference}
\eta(\omega)=\frac{{{\rm i}}}{\omega}\left[\Pi^{\rm R}(\omega)-\Pi^{\rm R}(0)\right],$$ with the retarded correlation function $$\label{DefPiROmega}
\Pi^{\rm R}(\omega)=-{{\rm i}}\int_0^\infty{\text{d}}t\;{{\rm e}}^{{{\rm i}}\omega t}\int{\text{d}}^3r\,\langle[T_{21}({\mbox{\boldmath $r$}},t),T_{21}(0)]\rangle\;.$$ The static shear viscosity ($\omega\to 0$) follows as $$\eta=-\left.\frac{{\text{d}}}{{\text{d}}\omega}\,{{\rm Im}\,}\Pi^{\rm R}(\omega)\right|_{\omega=0}\;.$$ The calculation of the retarded correlator can be performed switching to the Matsubara formalism and calculating $$\Pi(\omega_n)=\int_0^\beta{\text{d}}\tau\;{{\rm e}}^{{{\rm i}}\omega_n\tau}\int{\text{d}}^3 r\; \langle \mathcal{T}_\tau
\big(T_{21}({\mbox{\boldmath $r$}},\tau)T_{21}(0)\big)\rangle\;,$$ where have applied a Wick rotation $\tau={{\rm i}}t$ and introduced the time-ordering symbol in imaginary time, $\mathcal{T}_\tau$. Note that whereas the underlying (quark) degrees of freedom are fermionic, the Matsubara frequencies relevant for the correlator $\Pi$ are bosonic, $\omega_n=2\pi n T$, since the fermion fields under the integral group together to form quantities of bosonic character: ${\bar{\psi}}(\cdot)\psi$. The global sign of $\Pi(\omega_n)$ is fixed by the sign convention for analytical continuations: $$\left.\Pi(\omega_n)\right|_{i\omega_n=\omega\pm{{\rm i}}{\varepsilon}}= -\,\Pi^{\rm R/A}(\omega)\;,$$ where the upper and lower sign in $\pm{{\rm i}}{\varepsilon}$ corresponds to the retarded and advanced correlation function, respectively. The correlator $\Pi(\omega_n)$ is governed by non-perturbative physics resulting from the underlying interactions of the NJL model. We now apply a large-${N_{\rm c}}$ expansion and organize this correlator in ring diagrams, ladder diagrams and higher-order terms: $$\label{KuboNcExpansionFourPointFunction}
\begin{minipage}{0.08\textwidth} \mbox{$\Pi(\omega_n)=$} \end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.15\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{NJLsk4pointfctFull.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\hspace{-0.2cm} \begin{minipage}{0.2\textwidth}
\mbox{$= \mathcal{O}(N_{\rm c}^1)+\mathcal{O}(N_{\rm c}^0)+ \ldots $}
\end{minipage}$$ The four-point coupling of the NJL Lagrangian effectively incorporates gluonic degrees of freedom resulting in the scaling $G\sim 1/{N_{\rm c}}$. At leading order $\mathcal{O}(N_{\rm c}^1)$ there is just a one-loop diagram contributing to the four-point correlator, given that the NJL Lagrangian in its simplest form takes into account only scalar and pseudoscalar interactions: $\Gamma\in\{{{\mathds 1}},{{\rm i}}\gamma_5\}$. Iterating these interaction kernels in ring diagrams at leading order in $1/{N_{\rm c}}$ to $\Pi(\omega_n)$ does not affect the correlator: $$\label{Chain}
\hspace{0.5cm} \begin{minipage}{0.04\textwidth}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.3\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{NJLsk4pointfctABsnd.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.05\textwidth} \!=\;0\;, \end{minipage}$$ because the trace (in momentum and Dirac space) in the first ring vanishes due to the orthogonal operator structure involving the combination of $\gamma_2$ and $\Gamma$: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{KuboRingAZero1}
&{T\sum_{n\in\mathds{Z}}\int\frac{{\text{d}}^3 p}{(2\pi)^3}}\; {{\rm Tr}}\left[\gamma_2\, G_\beta({\mbox{\boldmath $p$}},\nu_n)\, \Gamma\, G_\beta({\mbox{\boldmath $p$}},\nu_n)\right] =\\
& ={T\sum_{n\in\mathds{Z}}\int\frac{{\text{d}}^3 p}{(2\pi)^3}}\; \frac{1}{(\nu_n^2+{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}}^2+M^2)^2}\; \\
&\hspace{0.5cm} \times\, {{\rm Tr}}\left[\gamma_2\Gamma M^2 +\gamma_2\slashed{p}\Gamma\slashed{p}+\gamma_2\slashed{p}\Gamma M+\gamma_2\Gamma\slashed{p} M\right]=0\;,
\end{aligned}$$ where we have used the notation $\slashed{p}=\nu_n\gamma_4-{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}}\cdot{\mbox{\boldmath $\gamma$}}$ and the full Matsubara propagator $$G_\beta({\mbox{\boldmath $p$}},\nu_n)=\frac{\slashed{p}+M}{\nu_n^2+{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}}^2+M^2}\;,$$ with frequencies $\nu_n=(2n+1)\pi T-{{\rm i}}\mu$. Exchange (ladder diagram) corrections to the chain in Eq. are non-vanishing but of subleading order in $1/{N_{\rm c}}$, because each rank in the ladder gives rise to a suppression factor $G^2{N_{\rm c}}\sim 1/{N_{\rm c}}$. Note that adding one rank introduces two additional momentum integrations but only one additional color trace.
The shear viscosity in the NJL model has been deduced previously in Refs. [@Fukutome2006; @Fukutome2008Nucl; @Fukutome2008Prog] using the Kubo formula, but assuming the quarks to be in the chiral limit, $m=0$. We point out that this result can in fact be derived without assuming to work in the chiral limit. Setting the current quark masses to zero is *not necessary* to ensure the absence of iterated ring-diagram contributions when taking only scalar and pseudoscalar interactions of the NJL model into account. Iterated ring diagrams involving these interactions vanish naturally. (Note that even in the chiral limit and the Nambu-Goldstone phase, the second term of the trace in Eq. , ${{\rm Tr}}\left[\gamma_2\slashed{p}\Gamma\slashed{p}\right]$ would survive in the presence of vector interactions, but their contribution to the correlators would be small as mentioned before).
Collecting all arguments, we can summarize in general: for purely fermionic theories $\mathcal{L}=\mathcal{L}_{\rm kin}+\mathcal{L}_{\rm int}$ with momentum-independent pseudoscalar/scalar interactions and $2n$-vertices that scale as $G_{2n}\sim 1/{N_{\rm c}}^{n-1}$, the dominant contribution to the correlation function $\Pi^{\rm R}(\omega)$ in Matsubara space is: $$\label{PiRingLO}
\begin{minipage}{0.08\textwidth} \mbox{$\Pi(\omega_n)=$} \end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.125\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{NJLsk4pointfctA0snd.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.1\textwidth} \mbox{$\;+\;\mathcal{O}({N_{\rm c}}^0)\;.$} \end{minipage}$$ With the definition of the spectral function, $$\rho(\omega,{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}})=-\frac{1}{\pi}{{\rm Im}\,}G^{\rm R}(\omega,{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}})=\frac{1}{2\pi{{\rm i}}}\left(G^{\rm A}(\omega,{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}})-G^{\rm R}(\omega,{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}})\right),$$ and using residue calculus one derives: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{EtaLeadingNcAsTwoSpectralDensityPap}
\eta &={\pi\over T} \int_{-\infty}^\infty {\text{d}}{\varepsilon}\int\frac{{\text{d}}^3 p}{(2\pi)^3}\;p_x^2\, n_{\rm F}^+({\varepsilon})\big(1-n_{\rm F}^+({\varepsilon})\big) \\
&\hspace{2.5cm} \times\,{{\rm Tr}}\left[\gamma_2\,\rho({\varepsilon},{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}})\,\gamma_2\,\rho({\varepsilon},{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}})\right],
\end{aligned}$$ with the Fermi-Dirac distribution $$n_{\rm F}^+(E)=\frac{1}{1+{{\rm e}}^{\beta (E-\mu)}}\;.$$ As in [@Fukutome2006] the dressed quark propagator is written as $$\label{KuboQuasiPartApprQuarkProp}
G^{\rm R/A}(p_0,{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}})=\frac{1}{\slashed{p}-M\pm{{\rm i}}\,{\rm sgn}(p_0)\Gamma(p)}\;,$$ with the quasiparticle mass $M$ and width $\Gamma(p)$. The next step is to relate this spectral width to the shear viscosity $\eta$. Even in the chiral limit the dynamical NJL mechanism of spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking generates a large constituent quark mass in the vacuum: $M\approx 0.3\;{\rm GeV}$, see the brief discussion in Section \[Sec:ThermoMass\]. Apart from this mechanism, the thermal environment at temperature $T$ and baryo-chemical potential $\mu$ of the quarks affects parameterically both the dynamical quark mass $M(T,\mu)$ and the spectral width $\Gamma(p;T,\mu)$.
The spectral function $\rho$ is represented in the standard form of a generalized Breit-Wigner shape, to be inserted in Eq.: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{EtaLeadingNcAsSpectralWidth}
\eta[\Gamma(p)] &=\frac{16{N_{\rm c}}{N_{\rm f}}}{15\pi^3 T}\int_{-\infty}^\infty{\text{d}}{\varepsilon}\int_0^\infty{\text{d}}p\,p^6 \\
&\times\,\frac{M^2\,\Gamma^2(p)\,n_{\rm F}^+({\varepsilon})(1-n_{\rm F}^+({\varepsilon}))}{\left[({\varepsilon}^2-p^2-M^2+\Gamma^2(p))^2+4M^2\Gamma^2(p)\right]^2}\;.
\end{aligned}$$ Even though we started from the NJL model in our derivation, the expression is generic for a system of strongly interacting Fermions, with real and imaginary parts of their self-energies encoded in $M$ and $\Gamma$, respectively. In general, the non-perturbative origin of $\Gamma(p)$ does not permit expanding the functional $\eta[\Gamma]$ in a Laurent series. In perturbative approaches (e.g. in chiral perturbation theory at low temperatures) such a treatment is possible: $\eta[\Gamma]\sim 1/\Gamma$ [@LangKaiserWeise2012].
In this context we comment briefly on the issue of ladder resummation and its correction to Eq. . If one assumes the spectral width $\Gamma\sim 1/{N_{\rm c}}$ to be suppressed for large ${N_{\rm c}}$ as suggested by hot-QCD calculations, then the superficial ${N_{\rm c}}$ counting of Eqs. and , $\eta\sim{N_{\rm c}}$, is spoiled: in this case, the integrand becomes highly singular in the large-${N_{\rm c}}$ limit (“pinch poles” as described in [@JeonSkeleton1995; @HidakaKunihiro2011]), resulting in an additional factor ${N_{\rm c}}$, therefore $\eta\sim{N_{\rm c}}^2$. We find in the limit ${N_{\rm c}}\to\infty$, i.e. $\Gamma\to 0$: $$\label{EtaSmallGamma}
\eta[\Gamma]\to\frac{2{N_{\rm c}}{N_{\rm f}}}{15\pi^2 T}\int_{|{\varepsilon}|>M}{\text{d}}{\varepsilon}\,\frac{({\varepsilon}^2-M^2)^{5/2}\,n_{\rm F}^+({\varepsilon})(1-n_{\rm F}^+({\varepsilon}))}{M\,\Gamma(\sqrt{{\varepsilon}^2-M^2})}\;.$$ In contrast to the non-perturbative result in Eq. the ${\varepsilon}$-integration excludes the region $|{\varepsilon}|<M$. This is due to the delta functions appearing in the limit of small $\Gamma$. The momentum integration of the integrand involving $\delta({\varepsilon}^2-p^2-M^2)$ is readily carried out.
Exploratory studies of the shear viscosity {#Sec:ParStud}
==========================================
Analytical results
------------------
Consider now first the case of a constant spectral width, $\Gamma={\rm const}$. This rough schematic approximation allows for an analytical treatment of the momentum integral in Eq. and one is left with the numerical ${\varepsilon}$-integration only. For the momentum integral we use the following identity: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{KuboAnalyitcalPIntegral}
\int_0^\infty &{\text{d}}p\;\frac{p^6}{[(A-p^2)^2+B^2]^2}= \\
&\hspace{-0.5cm}=\frac{\pi}{8\sqrt{2}}\frac{\sqrt{\sqrt{A^2+B^2}-A}}{B^4} \left[(2A^2+3B^2)\sqrt{A^2+B^2} \right.\\
&\hspace{3.7cm} \left. +2A(A^2+2B^2)\right],
\end{aligned}$$ where we have introduced $A={\varepsilon}^2-M^2+\Gamma^2$ and $B=2M\Gamma$. This result is found by extending the integration region to negative $p$ (the integrand is an even function of $p$) and using residue calculus. Having performed the $p$-integration analytically reduces the computation time by roughly one order of magnitude. Furthermore, it helps finding an appropriate approximation scheme for the whole $({\varepsilon},p)$-integration when the spectral width is momentum dependent.
Fig. \[Fig1\] shows the results for $\eta$ assuming $\Gamma={\rm const.}$ For $\Gamma\to 0$ the shear viscosity diverges, as it follows from Eq. . This limit describes a system of free quarks for which the mean free path is infinite. With increasing temperature and chemical potential, the shear viscosity increases, but the dependence on temperature is more pronounced. Compare these figures to those in Ref. [@Fukutome2006], where $\eta(\Gamma)$ has been evaluated numerically without a momentum-space cutoff, equivalent to our analytical approach based on Eq. .
Inspecting the detailed behavior of the integrand in Eq. , a convergence criterion for the shear viscosity in the absence of a momentum-space cutoff can be derived:
> In order for the shear viscosity $\eta[\Gamma]$ as functional of $\Gamma(p)$ to be convergent, the asymptotic $\Gamma(p)$ should not converge too rapidly to zero: $$\label{CriterionEtaGamma}
> \eta[\Gamma(p)]<\infty \;\;\; \Leftrightarrow \;\;\; p^3{{\rm e}}^{-\beta p/2}\in {\rm o}(\Gamma(p))\;,$$
where ${\rm o}(\cdot)$ denotes the little Landau symbol[^2]. Possible parameterizations of $\Gamma(p)$ satisfying this constraint are: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ModelsMomentumDepGamma}
{\rm constant:}~~~~~\Gamma_{\rm const} &= 100\;{\rm MeV}\;,\\
{\rm exponential:}~~~\Gamma_{\rm exp}(p) &= \Gamma_{\rm const}\,{{\rm e}}^{-\beta p/8}\;,\\
{\rm Lorentzian:}~~~\Gamma_{\rm Lor}(p) &= \Gamma_{\rm const}\,\frac{\beta p}{1+(\beta p)^2}\;,\\
{\rm divergent:}~~~\Gamma_{\rm div}(p) &= \Gamma_{\rm const}\,\sqrt{\beta p}\;.
\end{aligned}$$ Note that all these parameterizations lead to a finite shear viscosity and no mathematical regularization must be applied, compare the cutoff discussion in Section \[SectionCutOff\]. The particular shapes of these prototype widths have been chosen because of their different behavior at small and large momenta: vanishing or non-vanishing $\Gamma(p=0)$, convergent or divergent $\Gamma(p)$ for $p\to\infty$. These prototypes represent physical spectral widths in several theories [@LangKaiserWeise2012]: $\Gamma(p)$ in $\phi^4$ theory, for instance, is a monotonous function and converges to zero for large momenta. This can be described by the Lorentz parameterization for large momenta: $\lim_{p\to\infty}\Gamma_{\rm Lor}(p)\sim T/p$. In contrast, the spectral width of an interacting pion gas diverges for $p\to\infty$.
Numerical approximation scheme
------------------------------
Our numerical approximation of
![Accuracy of the numerical approximation scheme for the ${\varepsilon}$-integral, Eq. : to reach an accuracy of $10^{-4}$ it is sufficient to restrict its range to $|{\varepsilon}(p)|<1.3\,{\varepsilon}^*(p)$, see Eq. .[]{data-label="Fig2"}](Fig2.pdf){width="45.00000%"}
$\eta[\Gamma(p)]$ is based on the observation that its integrand typically ranges over many orders of magnitude. For every momentum $p$ there is a maximum of the integrand in Eq. , located at the denominator’s minimizer $$\label{EpsStarMaximizer}
{\varepsilon}^*(p)=\sqrt{p^2+M^2(T,\mu)-\Gamma^2(p;T,\mu)}\;.$$ Adaptive methods do not work when facing a sharp peak structure: either the step size becomes too small for fast convergence (or convergence at all), or the most important contribution in the vicinity of the peak is not sampled by a step size that is too coarse. We overcome this numerical issue by cutting the ${\varepsilon}$-integration and allowing only $|{\varepsilon}(p)|<x{\varepsilon}^*(p)$ for some $x\gtrsim 1$. In comparison with the analytical result for $\Gamma(p)={\rm const.}$ we find that $x=1.3$ is sufficient to produce accurate results within a relative error of $10^{-4}$, see Fig. \[Fig2\].
For the momentum-dependent parameterizations of $\Gamma(p)$ the integrands for $\eta$ in Eq. look qualitatively the same as for a constant spectral width. We therefore expect the described numerical scheme to work well also in these and more physical cases, where full momentum dependence and effects from the thermal environment are (parameterically) taken into account.
Cutoff dependence {#SectionCutOff}
-----------------
Generally, the shear viscosity increases when the spectral width decreases, compare Eq. . This behavior is also visible in Fig. \[Fig3\](a) when comparing our different parameterizations of $\Gamma(p)$: the “more divergent” the spectral width as $p\rightarrow \infty$, the smaller the corresponding shear viscosity: $$\eta_{\rm Lor}>\eta_{\rm exp}>\eta_{\rm const}>\eta_{\rm div}\,,$$ using notations as in Eq. . This sequence is implied by the corresponding (inverse) order for the spectral widths. These arguments hold also for non-vanishing chemical potentials. Assuming the spectral width to be independent of the chemical potential as in our parameterizations of $\Gamma(p)$ in Eq. , the shear viscosity increases for increasing $\mu$, but the qualitative shape of $\eta(T)$ does not change. We note that the results in Fig. \[Fig3\] have been derived using a constant constituent quark mass $M=325\;{\rm MeV}$, see the brief discussion in Section \[Sec:ThermoMass\].
The integrand of $\eta[\Gamma(p)]$, Eq. , is sizable for unphysically large momenta, so we expect a strong cutoff dependence. In the NJL model the quasiparticle interactions are restricted to quark momenta $p\le\Lambda=650\;{\rm MeV}$. Quarks with momenta $p>\Lambda$ do not interact and have infinite mean free paths. Retricting the momentum integration to the interval $p \le \Lambda$, we find a shear viscosity as shown in Fig. \[Fig3\](b). Excluding $p>\Lambda$ reduces the shear viscosity by one order of magnitude at low temperatures and even by two orders of magnitude at high $T$. As expected, this expresses a very strong cutoff dependence. In addition to these quantitative differences, the qualitative behavior of the shear viscosity also changes strongly and flattens for high temperatures.
This strong cutoff dependence is investigated in more detail in Fig. \[Fig4\]: the contributions taken into account (compared to the analytical result for $\eta$) depend strongly on temperature and just weakly on the chemical potential. At $T=200\,{\rm MeV}$ the momentum cutoff excludes about $90\%$ of the full integral extended to infinity, see Fig. \[Fig4\](a). As shown in Fig. \[Fig4\](b), varying the cutoff by up to $\pm 20\%$ implies for $\eta$ a change of up to $100\%$.
To assess the order of magnitude of the NJL shear viscosity, a comparison with $\eta(T)$ for other systems is instructive. For example, an interacting pion gas treated within the framework of chiral perturbation theory [@LangKaiserWeise2012] has a typical shear viscosity of order $\eta(T)\approx 40\,{\rm MeV}/{\rm fm}^2 \approx 1.6\cdot 10^{-3}\,{\rm GeV}^3$ at $T\approx 100\;{\rm MeV}$. This is a similar order of magnitude as the results shown in Fig. \[Fig3\](b) when applying the NJL cutoff $\Lambda=650\,{\rm MeV}$. We recall that this cutoff is fixed by reproducing physical observables such as the pion decay constant in vacuum. A physically meaningful order of magnitude for $\eta$ then follows naturally.
Perturbative aspects of [$\eta[\Gamma]$]{} {#Sec:PertEta}
------------------------------------------
![Scaling of $\eta\cdot\Gamma$ for different $T$ and $\mu$ as function of the inverse width expressed in units of the pion mass $m_\pi$. Solid horizontal lines correspond to the residues $A_{-1}$ of $\eta[\Gamma]$ in Eq. . A constituent quark mass $M=100\;{\rm MeV}$ has been used for convenience.[]{data-label="Fig5"}](Fig5.pdf){width="46.00000%"}
We have already mentioned that the shear viscosity $\eta$ diverges for non-interacting systems, i.e. for a vanishing spectral width, corresponding to infinite mean free path. Close to this limit $\eta$ can be expanded in a Laurent series (as realized for example analytically in ChPT and $\lambda\phi^4$ theory [@LangKaiserWeise2012]): $$\label{LaurentExpEtaGamma}
\eta[\Gamma]=\frac{A_{-1}}{\Gamma}+A_0+A_1\Gamma+A_2\Gamma^2+\ldots$$ For small $\Gamma$, the combination $\eta\cdot\Gamma$ is just the residue $A_{-1}$. What does “small” mean in this context? In contrast to $\lambda\phi^4$ theory where $\Gamma\sim\lambda^2$, the NJL model is generically non-perturbative in its coupling, even though the scaling $G\sim 1/{N_{\rm c}}$ applies. The spectral width is therefore not expected to be sufficiently small in order to permit an expansion as in Eq. . Fig. \[Fig5\] shows results of the fully non-perturbative calculation of $\eta\cdot\Gamma$ as a function of the inverse width, conveniently written as $x=m_\pi/\Gamma$, at different $T$ and $\mu$ in comparison with the residue $A_{-1}$. As it can be seen from the figure, corrections to the leading term of the Laurent series are small for $x>1.5$ (demanding $10\%$ accuracy or better). From these considerations we conclude that a perturbative approach is justified only for spectral widths $\Gamma\ll\,m_\pi=140\;{\rm MeV}$.
The discussion of a perturbative treatment of $\eta[\Gamma(p)]$ is closely related to the resummation of ladder diagrams: if in the large-${N_{\rm c}}$ limit the spectral width decreases, i.e. $\Gamma\sim 1/{N_{\rm c}}$ as suggested by hot-QCD calcuations where the coupling $\alpha_{\rm s}\sim 1/{N_{\rm c}}$ becomes small, then the perturbative regime is reached in this limit and the Laurent series expansion in can be restricted to its leading-order term. As seen from Eq. , for a constant but small spectral width $\Gamma$ the residue $A_{-1}$ can be identified with the remaining ${\varepsilon}$-integral. While only this residue term of $\eta[\Gamma(p)]$ is relevant in this case, ladder diagrams now become sizable corrections and contribute also at leading order. Furthermore, the shear viscosity now scales as $\eta\sim{N_{\rm c}}^2$ and no longer linearly with ${N_{\rm c}}$ as Eqs. and do for ${N_{\rm c}}$-independent spectral function $\
rho$ and width $\Gamma$, respectively.
We conclude that ladder diagram resummations are necessary in the perturbative regime of $\eta[\Gamma(p)]$ in Eq. , i.e. when the spectral width is small, $\Gamma\ll m_\pi$. In the NJL model with its genuine non-perturbative structure, the physical spectral width is large and outside the perturbative regime. Ladder diagram resummations are subleading corrections, while the shear viscosity functional is valid also for large spectral width when including all orders of the Laurent series expansion .
Effects of thermal quark masses and the ratio [$\eta/\lowercase{s}$]{} {#Sec:ThermoMass}
======================================================================
The constituent quark mass has so far been treated as a constant. We now proceed to incorporate its explicit $T$ and $\mu$ dependence. One of the key features of the NJL model is the spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry: ${\rm SU}(2)_{\rm L}\times{\rm SU}(2)_{\rm R}\to{\rm SU}(2)_{\rm V}$. In addition, chiral symmetry is explicitly broken by the non-zero current quark mass $m$. Solving the NJL gap equation results in a dynamically generated constituent quark mass [@Nambu1961tp; @Nambu1961; @VoglWeise1991]: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ThermalGapEquation}
&M(T,\mu)=m-G\langle\bar{\psi}\psi\rangle =\,\\
&\!\!=m+\frac{2G{N_{\rm c}}M(T,\mu)} {\pi^2}\int_0^\Lambda{\text{d}}p\,\frac{p^2}{E_p}\,\big[1-n_{\rm F}^+(E_p)-n_{\rm F}^-(E_p)\big],
\end{aligned}$$ with $E_p(T,\mu)=\sqrt{p^2 + M^2(T,\mu)}$ and the Fermi-Dirac distribution for quarks and antiquarks $$\label{DefFermiDistrMuT}
n_{\rm F}^\pm(E)=n_{\rm F}(E\mp\mu)=\frac{1}{{{\rm e}}^{\beta (E\mp\mu)}+1}\;.$$ In the vacuum, $(T,\mu)=(0,0)$, the mass is determined to be about one third of the nucleon mass, $M=325\;{\rm MeV}$, where the input parameters of the NJL Lagrangian are chosen as $G=10.08\;{\rm GeV^{-2}}$, $m=5.5\;{\rm MeV}$ and $\Lambda=650\;{\rm MeV}$. This parameter set produces physical (vacuum) values of the pion mass, $m_\pi=140\;{\rm MeV}$, the pion decay constant, $f_\pi=94\;{\rm MeV}$, and the chiral condensate $\langle{\bar{\psi}}\psi\rangle=-(316.4\;{\rm MeV})^3$.
Fig. \[Fig6\](a) shows the shear viscosity $\eta$ for varying constituent quark mass $M$ treated as a parameter, assuming a constant spectral width $\Gamma_{\rm const}=100\;{\rm MeV}$. For $M\to 0$ the shear viscosity becomes divergent, again due to “pinch poles” appearing in Eq. in this limit. In fact, the origin of this divergence is the same as for $\Gamma\to 0$, since $M$ and $\Gamma$ are formally (almost) interchangeable in the integrand of Eq. . For large constituent quark masses, two effects occur: first, the maximizer ${\varepsilon}^*(p)\sim M$ in Eq. moves to larger values, and second, the integrand scales as $M^{-6}$. Both features result in a decreasing function $\eta(M)$.
Taking the full thermal dependence of the constituent quark mass into account has an essential influence on the shear viscosity, see Fig. \[Fig6\](b): for small $T$, a constant mass $M=325\;{\rm MeV}$ approximates the thermal constituent quark mass. In contrast, at large $T$, with a melting chiral condensate, the dropping dynamical quark mass implies a strongly increasing shear viscosity, qualitatively different from the case with constant quark mass. (We have chosen to compare thermal and non-thermal results for constant and exponential parameterizations of the spectral width. For $\Gamma_{\rm Lor}$ and $\Gamma_{\rm div}$ the results are qualitatively similar and therefore not shown.)
The shear viscosity itself is a dimensionful quantity. One usually compares $\eta$ to the entropy density $s$, in terms of the dimensionless ratio $\eta/s$. The corresponding ratio extracted from heavy-ion collisions is the smallest value of $\eta/s$ found so far in nature [@HeinzShenSong2012]. The entropy density of quark matter is given by [@Kapusta]: $$\begin{aligned}
s(T,\mu)=\frac{{N_{\rm c}}{N_{\rm f}}}{\pi^2}\int_0^\infty{\text{d}}p\,p^2\, &\left[\ln\left(1+{{\rm e}}^{-\beta E_p^+}\right) \right.\\
& \left. \hspace{-4cm}+\ln\left(1+{{\rm e}}^{-\beta E_p^-}\right)+\frac{\beta E_p^+}{1+{{\rm e}}^{\beta E_p^+}}+\frac{\beta E_p^-}{1+{{\rm e}}^{\beta E_p^-}}\right],
\end{aligned}$$ with $E_p^\pm=E_p\mp\mu$. The momentum integration ranges up to infinity. It can be performed without regularization. In the NJL model the thermal constituent quark mass, for momenta above the cutoff scale $\Lambda=650\;{\rm MeV}$, reduces to the bare current quark mass, $M\rightarrow m=5.5\;{\rm MeV}$. At low temperatures, $T\lesssim 150$ MeV, confinement implies that quarks are not the relevant physical degrees of freedom any more and the NJL model cannot be expected to give a realistic description of transport properties.
The evaluation of the ratio $\eta/s$ is shown in Fig. \[Fig7\] for ${N_{\rm f}}=2$ and ${N_{\rm c}}=3$, for the cases of a constant and an exponentially damped spectral width. The comparison between the panels (a) and (b) clearly demonstrates that implementing thermal masses is crucial in order to avoid an unphysical, continuously decreasing ratio $\eta/s(T)$. From experimental data [@Lacey07] and lattice calculations [@Nakamura05; @Meyer07] it is in fact suggested that this ratio increases for $T> 200\;{\rm MeV}$. We also compare to the benchmark $\eta/s=1/4\pi$ from AdS/CFT correspondence [@Maldacena99; @Kovtun05]. This value is known not to be a universal bound; it can be undershot in some field theories [@Cohen07; @Rebhan12; @Mamo12]. This is also found in Fig. \[Fig7\](a), additionally to the unphysical evolution of $\eta/s$ with increasing temperature. A constant quark mass $M=100\;{\rm MeV}$ has been chosen there for convenience. Its vacuum value, $M=325\;{\rm MeV}$, would reduce the scale of the $\eta/s$ ratio even more, compare Fig. \[Fig6\](a). However, taking the thermal constituent quark masses into account leads to an increasing function $\eta/s(T)$, see Fig. \[Fig7\](b). Despite the fact that $\eta$ itself rapidly increases at high $T$, the ratio $\eta/s$ flattens in that region. This flattening is expected to be shifted to higher temperatures for more realistic forms of the width $\Gamma(p)$ such the Lorentzian. In the considered temperature range $\eta/s$ stays above the AdS/CFT benchmark for all parameterizations of the width $\Gamma$.
Spectral width at one-loop level {#Sec:GammaNJL}
================================
So far we have discussed the impact of the shape of the spectral width on the shear viscosity of quark matter, its strong sensitivity to the NJL cutoff and to the thermal constituent quark masses. In this section an explicit calculation is performed including one-loop mesonic contributions at next-to-leading order in the large-${N_{\rm c}}$ expansion [@BuballaMuellerWambach2010]. The leading-order gap equation is modified by the mesonic insertions $$\label{NJLMesonInsertion}
\Sigma^{\rm S/P}_\beta({\mbox{\boldmath $p$}},\nu_n) = \includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{NJLMesonInsertion.pdf}\;,$$ where $\nu_n=(2n+1)\pi T-{{\rm i}}\mu$ are the Matsubara frequencies for quarks. The corresponding expression for antiquarks is easily obtained by inserting $\bar{\nu}_n=\nu_n^*$. The spectral width is extracted from the imaginary part of this self-energy[^3]: $$\Gamma^{\rm S/P}_{\rm q}(p_0,{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}})=-\lim_{{\varepsilon}\to 0}\,{\rm Im}\,\Sigma^{\rm S/P}_\beta({\mbox{\boldmath $p$}},-{{\rm i}}p_0+{\varepsilon})\;.$$ It is of next-to-leading order using the mesonic modes generated by the Bethe-Salpeter equation (BSE) in the pertinent quark-antiquark channels (e.g. [@HatsudaKunihiro87; @KLVW1990; @BuballaMuellerWambach2010]). Whereas the gap equation is of leading order, $\mathcal{O}(1)$ in $N_c$, the BSE is of order $\mathcal{O}(1/{N_{\rm c}})$. In the two-flavor case the mesonic loop involves the three pions and the sigma mode which contribute with positive and negative signs, respectively, to the spectral width $\Gamma(p)$. This “antiscreening” by the sigma mode [@QuackKlevansky94] cancels roughly one of the three pionic contributions to the spectral width, as seen in Fig. \[Fig9\]a. The effective spectral width (for $N_f = 2$) reads: $$\label{QuarkSpectralWidthOneLoopAllMesons}
\Gamma(p)=3\Gamma_{\rm q}^{\rm P}(p)+\Gamma_{\rm q}^{\rm S}(p)\;,$$ with the scalar and pseudoscalar contributions, $\widetilde{N}^{\rm S}=-2$ and $\widetilde{N}^{\rm P}=2$, respectively:
$$\label{QuarkSpectralWidthOneLoop}
\Gamma^{\rm S/P}_{\rm q}(p)=\frac{M{g_{\rm Mqq}}^2 \widetilde{N}^{\rm S/P}}{4\pi |{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}}|}\int_{E_{\rm min}}^{E_{\rm max}} {\text{d}}E_f \left[n_{\rm B}(E_b)+n_{\rm F}^-(E_f)\right],$$
involving the Fermi distribution for antiquarks, $n_{\rm F}^{-}$ in Eq. , and the Bose distribution for mesons at zero (quark-)chemical potential: $$\label{BoseDistribution}
n_{\rm B}(E)=\frac{1}{{{\rm e}}^{\beta E}-1}\;.$$ Energy-momentum conservation implies $E_b=E_f+p_0$ in Eq. and leads to the restricted range of integration: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{QuarkSpectralWidthEminEmax}
E_{{\rm min},{\rm max}}(p)&=\frac{1}{2M^2}\left[\left(m_{\rm M}^2-2M^2\right)\sqrt{M^2+p^2}\right. \\
&\hspace{2cm}\left.\mp\, p\,m_{\rm M}\sqrt{m_{\rm M}^2-4M^2}\right].
\end{aligned}$$ Here $m_{\rm M}$ denotes the $T$- and $\mu$-dependent (pseuodoscalar or scalar) meson mass and $M(T,\mu)$ is the dynamical quark mass in the thermal medium, c.f. Eq. . The quark-meson vertex is of Yukawa type with a (thermal) coupling constant $g_{\rm Mqq}(T,\mu)$ arising from the renormalized meson propagator $D_{\rm M}(p_0,{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}})$ at $(p_0,{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}})=(m_{\rm M},{\mbox{\boldmath $0$}})$: $$g_{\rm Mqq}=\left({\rm Res}\, D_{\rm M}\right)^{-1/2}\;.$$ The details of the derivation of Eqs. and are presented in the Appendix \[Sec:App\]. The spectral width is a function of the energy $p_0$ and the momentum $p=|{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}}|$ of the quark propagating in the (isotropic) thermal medium. In the on-shell case, $p_0=\sqrt{p^2+M^2}$, the width $\Gamma$ becomes a function of $p$ only.
Taking the imaginary part of the mesonic insertion means cutting the loop diagram and forcing it on-shell. Two different dissipative mechanisms contribute to the width, as sketched in Fig. \[Fig8\]. The term involving the Bose distribution describes Landau damping, a process also known from high-$T$ QCD calculations [@Boyanovsky1998], and recently applied to the calculation of the shear viscosity from kinetic theory [@Ghosh2013]. In the NJL model Landau damping arises from the scattering of quarks on the mesonic collective modes in the thermal medium. This scattering process dissipates energy from the quark sector and contributes to the shear viscosity. The second mechanism is a recombination process: a collective mesonic mode is created by quark-antiquark rescattering. This is described by the term involving the Fermi distribution of thermal antiquarks in Eq. .
Results for the calculated on-shell spectral width including all mesons, $\Gamma(p)$ in Eq. , are shown in Fig. \[Fig9\]b. Due to the “antiscreening” caused by the sigma mode, the total $\Gamma(p)$ is rougly twice the single pion contribution, c.f. Fig. \[Fig9\]a. For small quark momenta the spectral width can become quite large. At $p\approx 200\;{\rm MeV}$ it is of the order of $100\;{\rm MeV}$, roughly as large as the dynamical (constituent) quark mass. We recall from Fig. \[Fig5\] that the shear viscosity $\eta[\Gamma]$ can be treated perturbatively only if $\Gamma\ll m_\pi$. Hence for the one-loop spectral width calculated in the NJL model, the perturbative regime is not reached, given the large values of $\Gamma(p)$. With rising temperature the spectral width decreases leading to an increasing shear viscosity $\eta(T)$, as explored parametrically in Fig. \[Fig1\]. One important reason for this behavior is the range of integration, $E_f(p)\in[E_{\rm
min}(p),E_{\rm max}(p)]$, which has its support for $m_\pi>2M$, the kinematic threshold condition for a pion to decay on-shell into two constituent quarks. As the temperature increases this range of integration is shifted to higher values of $E_f$ and $p$, but these are exponentially suppressed by the Bose and Fermi distributions in Eq. . For more details, see also Fig. \[Fig11\] in the Appendix.
![Shear viscosity per entropy density at zero chemical potential from the two-flavor NJL model at one-loop level in a large-${N_{\rm c}}$ expansion (solid line). Shown for comparison are results using the kinetic approach (open circles and triangles), those of a related calculation using the Kubo formalism (solid triangles) and pure-gauge lattice data (solid squares). The dashed horizontal line is the AdS/CFT benchmark $1/4\pi$.[]{data-label="Fig10"}](Fig10.pdf){width="49.00000%"}
Finally the resulting shear viscosity $\eta(T,\mu = 0)$ (its ratio $\eta/s$) is shown in Fig. \[Fig10\]. Only temperatures large enough to satisfy $m_\pi>2M$ give rise to a finite shear viscosity. Therefore the one-loop results are restricted to $T\gtrsim 210\;{\rm MeV}$. We compare our results to those from a kinetic approach using the two-favor NJL model [@SasakiRedlich2010] (open circles) and [@Ghosh2013] (open triangles). Our values based on the Kubo formalism are larger but feature the same order of magnitude and the same qualitative behavior. These findings are consistent with the general observation that the kinetic approach seems to underestimate the shear viscosity as pointed out in Refs. [@PlumariEtAl2012; @PlumariEtAl2013]. Their calculations have also been performed using the Kubo formalism (c.f. Fig. 8 in [@PlumariEtAl2012]) and lie slightly above our result for $\eta/s$ as shown in Fig. \[Fig10\] (filled triangles). A flattening of $\eta/s$ is observed at higher temperatures around $T\approx 300\;{\rm MeV}$, indicating that the shear viscosity scales roughly as $T^3$ in this range. The same behavior has been found in our preceding parameter study, c.f. Fig. \[Fig6\]. All results for $\eta/s$, both from kinetic and Kubo approaches, exceed those from pure-gauge lattice QCD [@Nakamura05; @Meyer07] that are close to the AdS/CFT bound as shown by the solid squares in Fig. \[Fig10\].
Summary and Conclusions
=======================
In the present work we have used the Kubo formalism to derive a general functional $\eta[\Gamma(p)]$ for a class of fermionic theories, in particular the two-flavor NJL model with scalar and pseudoscalar interactions. At leading order in $1/{N_{\rm c}}$ the retarded correlation function $\Pi^{\rm R}(\omega)$ reduces to a single generic diagram at $\mathcal{O}({N_{\rm c}}^1)$. We have found that it is not necessary to work in the chiral limit to obtain this result derived previously in [@Fukutome2006; @Fukutome2008Nucl; @Fukutome2008Prog] using stronger assumptions.
The detailed study of the functional $\eta[\Gamma(p)]$ leads to a convergence criterion, Eq. , to be fulfilled by the spectral width $\Gamma(p)$ in order for the shear viscosity $\eta$ to be finite without regularization. Four different schematic parameterizations have been chosen for $\Gamma(p)$ and a numerical approximation scheme suitable for arbitrary, momentum-dependent spectral widths has been introduced. The results for $\eta$ show a strong cutoff dependence: restricting the momentum integration to the typical NJL cutoff, $p<\Lambda=650\;{\rm MeV}$, changes the shear viscosity drastically as shown in Fig. \[Fig3\]. Such a cutoff places $\eta$ at physically meaningful values by excluding up to $90\%$ of the numerically accessible high-momentum region, as demonstrated in Fig. \[Fig4\].
An exploration has been performed determining the range of $\Gamma(p)$ for which a perturbative treatment of the (generally non-perturbative) shear viscosity is adequate. The functional $\eta[\Gamma(p)]$ as given in Eq. is valid in particular for a large spectral width as it is expected in the NJL model. For a small spectral width, $\Gamma\ll m_\pi$, a Laurent series expansion of $\eta$ with restriction to the leading term $\eta \sim 1/\Gamma$ is justified. In this limit, subleading effects from resummations of ladder diagrams are expected to become non-negligible as known from studies in bosonic field theories [@JeonSkeleton1995; @HidakaKunihiro2011]. On the other hand, for the NJL model with its comparatively large spectral width, it is consistent to omit ladder diagram resummations while taking all orders of the Laurent expansion in the width $\Gamma(p)$ into account.
Including thermal quasiparticle masses (the temperature and density dependence of the dynamically generated constituent quark masses in NJL-like models) is of crucial importance. As experimental data indicate, the ratio $\eta/s$ is expected to increase for high temperatures $T > T_{\rm c}$ where $T_{\rm c}\approx 180-200\;{\rm MeV}$ is the typical temperature interval of the chiral crossover. A constant quark mass would instead lead to a continuously decreasing ratio $\eta/s$ with increasing temperature, as seen in Fig. \[Fig7\]. In comparison with other approaches to the shear viscosity using NJL-type models, such as the Boltzmann equation in relaxation time approximation, one can find different results: an increasing ratio $\eta/s(T)$ for two flavors and restricting to scalar and pseudoscalar interactions [@SasakiRedlich2010], but also a decreasing behavior [@MartyFrankfurt2013; @HidakaKunihiro2011NJL].
From AdS/CFT correspondence, the scaling of the ratio $\eta/s$ is expected to be of $\mathcal{O}({N_{\rm c}}^0)$ in the large-${N_{\rm c}}$ limit. With the entropy density of quarks and the functional $\eta[\Gamma(p)]\sim{N_{\rm c}}$ in Eq. , we find indeed $\eta/s\sim \mathcal{O}(1)$ in the NJL model. Its applicability is, however, limited to the temperature range $T_{\rm c} \lesssim T < \Lambda$. At much higher temperatures gluonic degrees of freedom are dominant and contribute to the entropy density as $s_{\rm gluon}\sim{N_{\rm c}}^2$ due to their adjoint representation instead of the fundamental representation for fermions. At the same time the spectral width is expected to became small ($\Gamma\to 0$) and scales as $1/N_c$, leading to “pinch poles” and a scaling of the shear viscosity as $\eta \sim N_c^2$, as seen from Eq. . Consequently the ratio still scales as $\eta/s\sim\mathcal{O}(1)$ at large $T$ in the limit ${N_{\rm c}}\to\infty$.
From the systematic parameter study the conclusion can be drawn that the momentum dependence of the spectral width $\Gamma(p)$ determines primarily the overall scale of the ratio $\eta/s$. Its actual behavior as a function of temperature is largely governed by the thermal properties of the quark propagator. A consistent one-loop NJL model calculation of the quark self-energy in the thermal medium has been performed at next-to-leading order in the large-${N_{\rm c}}$ expansion. At this order the gap equation for the thermal constituent quark mass is corrected by the mesonic insertions . Two generic dissipative contributions to the shear viscosity emerge: Landau damping and a quark-antiquark recombination process, resulting in the spectral width $\Gamma(p)$ given in Eq.. The restricted range of the energy integration leads to a decreasing function $\Gamma(T)$ as the temperature increases, which implies an increasing shear viscosity for high temperatures as seen in Fig. \[Fig10\].
Additional contributions to $\Gamma$ from quark-quark scattering via exchange of mesonic quark-antiquark modes still have to be included. Such processes appear at order ${N_{\rm c}}^{-1}$ in the large-${N_{\rm c}}$ expansion and are calculated in ongoing work. Results will be reported elsewhere.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
This work is partially supported by BMBF and by the DFG Cluster of Excellence “Origin and Structure of the Universe”. R. L. thanks the ECT\* for kind hospitality. Valuable discussions with Y. Hidaka and T. Hatsuda are acknowledged. Thanks go to N. Kaiser for useful advices and reading of the manuscript. R.L. has been supported by the TUM Graduate School (TUM-GS), by the RIKEN IPA and the RIKEN iTHES projects.
Derivation of the NJL spectral width {#Sec:App}
====================================
In this appendix we focus on the analytical treatment of the mesonic insertion $\Sigma_\beta^{\rm S/P}$ in Eq. and the extraction of the spectral width $\Gamma(p)$ as given in Eqs. and . The Matsubara frequencies for a thermal quark are $\nu_n=(2n+1)\pi T-{{\rm i}}\mu$, whereas they read for an antiquark: $\bar{\nu}_n=(2n+1)\pi T+{{\rm i}}\mu=\nu_n^*$. The diagram for the mesonic insertion represents both pions (pseudoscalar channel) and the sigma meson (scalar channel) contributing the quark spectral width: $$\begin{aligned}
\Sigma^{\rm S/P}_\beta({\mbox{\boldmath $p$}},\nu_n)\; &=-4M g_{\rm Mqq}^2 \widetilde{N}^{\rm S/P} \\
& \hspace{-1.5cm}\times{T\sum_{m\in\mathds{Z}}\int\frac{{\text{d}}^3 q}{(2\pi)^3}}\,\frac{1}{\nu_m^2+E_f^2}\,\,\frac{1}{(\nu_m-\nu_n)^2+E_b^2}\;,
\end{aligned}$$
with $E_f^2={\mbox{\boldmath $q$}}^2+M^2$ and $E_b^2=({\mbox{\boldmath $q$}}-{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}})^2+m_{\rm M}^2$. We have introduced $\widetilde{N}^{\rm P}=2$ and $\widetilde{N}^{\rm S}=-{N_{\rm f}}=-2$ reflecting the opposite parities of pion and sigma boson, leading to screening and antiscreening of the quark mass, respectively. Carrying out the Matsubara sum introduces combinations of Fermi and Bose distribution functions, Eq. and , respectively: $$\begin{aligned}
Z_1 &=1+n_{\rm B}(E_b)-\frac 12\left(n_{\rm F}^+(E_f)+n_{\rm F}^-(E_f)\right), \\
Z_2 &= n_{\rm B}(E_b)+\frac 12\left(n_{\rm F}^+(E_f)+n_{\rm F}^-(E_f)\right), \\
Z_3 &=n_{\rm F}^+(E_f)-n_{\rm F}^-(E_f)\;.
\end{aligned}$$ The thermal self-energy of the quark is given by:
$$\label{WidthFirstItThermalSelfEnergy}
\Sigma^{\rm S/P}_\beta\!=\!-4Mg_{\rm Mqq}^2\widetilde{N}^{\rm S/P}\!\!\int\frac{{\text{d}}^3q}{(2\pi)^3}\left[\frac{1}{2E_bE_f}\left[\frac{(E_f+E_b)Z_1}{(E_f+E_b)^2+\nu_n^2}+\frac{(E_f-E_b)Z_2}{(E_f-E_b)^2+\nu_n^2}\right]+\frac{{{\rm i}}\nu_n Z_3}{[(E_f+E_b)^2+\nu_n^2][(E_f-E_b)^2+\nu_n^2]} \right].$$
The analytical continuation of the thermal self-energy to the retarded self-energy in Minkowskian spacetime, $$\Sigma^{\rm S/P}_{\rm R}(p_0,{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}}):=\Sigma^{\rm S/P}_\beta({\mbox{\boldmath $p$}},-{{\rm i}}p_0+{\varepsilon})\;,$$ leads to the spectral width $$\label{IterationOneSpectralWidthPart1}
\Gamma^{\rm S/P}_{\rm q}(p_0,{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}}) :=-\lim_{{\varepsilon}\to 0}{{\rm Im}\,}\Sigma^{\rm S/P}_{\rm R}(p_0,{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}})\;.$$ The non-vanishing spectral width is induced by the pole structure of the propagators: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{DeltaFctArrImPart}
\lim_{{\varepsilon}\to 0}{{\rm Im}\,}\left.\frac{Z}{x^2+\nu_n^2}\right|_{\nu_n\mapsto -{{\rm i}}p_0+{\varepsilon}} &= Z\pi\delta(x^2-(p_0)^2) \\ & \hspace{-1.5cm}=\frac{\pi Z}{2p_0}\left[\delta(x-p_0)+\delta(x+p_0)\right].
\end{aligned}$$ This means for the $Z_1$ term: $E_f+E_b\pm p_0=0$, where only the minus sign can be realized. For the $Z_2$ term, $E_f-E_b\pm p_0=0$, both signs can be realized for the time being. We will see that only the plus sign contributes to the (on-shell) spectral width, so there is just one contribution from $Z_2$. The $Z_3$ term is considered later.
From the identity in Eq. the following structure is found for the $Z_1$ and $Z_2$ terms: $$\label{CalcZ1Z2PhaseSpace}
\begin{aligned}
&\int\frac{{\text{d}}^3q}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{\pi Z}{2p_0}\frac{1}{2E_bE_f}\,\delta(E_b-(*))= \\
&=\int\frac{{\text{d}}^3q}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{\pi Z}{2p_0E_f}\,\delta(E_b^2-(*)^2)= \\
\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
&=2\pi\int_{-1}^1{\text{d}}\xi\int_0^\infty \frac{{\text{d}}q\, q^2}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{\pi Z}{2p_0E_f }\delta(E_b^2(\xi)-(*)^2)=\\
&=2\pi\int_{M}^\infty\frac{{\text{d}}E_f}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{\pi Z}{4p_0p}\,\Theta(1-\xi^2)\;,
\end{aligned}$$ with $\xi =\cos\theta$. In order to carry out this integral over the delta function we have used $$E_b^2 =m_{\rm M}^2+({\mbox{\boldmath $p$}}-{\mbox{\boldmath $q$}})^2=m_{\rm M}^2+p^2+q^2-2pq\xi\;,$$ from which follows $$\left|\frac{\partial E_b^2}{\partial\xi}\right|=2pq\;.$$ In addition the integral over momentum has been translated into an energy integral using $q\,{\text{d}}q=E_f\,{\text{d}}E_f$. The ill-conditioned $\Theta$ term can be removed by the following consideration: The condition $|\xi|\leq 1$ is equivalent to $$\begin{aligned}
\label{DefCapitalFfunctionPhaseSpace}
-1\leq & \frac{E_b^2-m_{\rm M}^2-p^2-q^2}{2pq}\leq 1 \\
& \Leftrightarrow F(E_f,p)\geq 0\;,
\end{aligned}$$ where we have defined $$F(E_f,p):=4p^2(E_f^2-M^2)-\left[E_b^2-m_{\rm M}^2-p^2+M^2-E_f^2\right]^2.$$
![Range of integration for $E_f\in[E_{\rm min},E_{\rm max}]$ as function of absolute momentum $p=|{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}}|$ for different temperatures. The solid line displays the orbit of minimal values.[]{data-label="Fig11"}](Fig11.pdf){width="49.00000%"}
At given momentum $p$ the roots of $F(\,\cdot\, ,p)$ read, for the plus-sign case of both the $Z_1$ and $Z_2$ terms, where $E_b^2=(E_f+p_0)^2$: $$\begin{aligned}
E_{{\rm max},{\rm min}} &=\frac{1}{2M^2}\left[\left(m_{\rm M}^2-2M^2\right)\sqrt{M^2+p^2}\right. \\
& \hspace{1.5cm} \left.\pm pm_{\rm M}\sqrt{m_{\rm M}^2-4M^2}\right].
\end{aligned}$$ From this we find $$\label{EmaxEminDifferenceZeroValue}
\begin{aligned}
& E_{{\rm max}}-E_{{\rm min}}=\frac{p\,m_{\rm M}}{M^2}\sqrt{m_{\rm M}^2-4M^2}\sim p\;, \\
& E_{{\rm max},{\rm min}}(p=0)=\frac{m_{\rm M}^2}{2M}-M>M\;.
\end{aligned}$$ The momentum-dependent phase space for $E_f$ is shown in Fig. \[Fig11\] for different temperatures. Due to the larger meson mass at large $T$, the curves $E_{\rm min,max}$ are shifted to higher energies and momenta when increasing the temperature. There is an exact linear dependence of the integration range, $E_{\rm max}-E_{\rm min}$, on the incoming momentum $p$. At zero momentum the phase space collapses to one single point. Under the condition $m_{\rm M}>2M$ the phase space is always non-empty and compact with $M$ as minimal value of $E_{\rm min}$: $\emptyset\neq [E_{\rm min},E_{\rm max}]\subseteq [M,\infty)$. We also have derived the following substitution rule $$\int_{M}^\infty\frac{{\text{d}}E_f}{(2\pi)^3} \big(\cdot\big) \Theta(1-\xi^2) = \int_{E_{\rm min}}^{E_{\rm max}} \frac{{\text{d}}E_f}{(2\pi)^3} \big(\cdot\big)\;,$$ which leads finally to a well-conditioned one-dimensional numerical integral.
Inserting the minus-sign case into Eq., $E_b^2=(E_f-p_0)^2$, the phase space vanishes for any incoming momentum, since both the minimal and maximal energy of the loop fermion need to be negative: $$E_{\rm min}'=-E_{\rm max}\, ,\;\;\; E_{\rm max}'=-E_{\rm min}\;.$$ We conclude that only the case $E_b=E_f+p_0$ leads to an on-shell contribution to the mesonic insertion. With this in mind the third term, involving $Z_3$, in Eq. becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
\lim_{{\varepsilon}\to 0} &\;{{\rm Im}\,}\left.\frac{{{\rm i}}\nu_n Z_3}{[(E_f+E_b)^2+\nu_n^2][(E_f-E_b)^2+\nu_n^2]}\right|_{{{\rm i}}\nu_n\mapsto p_0+{{\rm i}}{\varepsilon}}= \\
&=\frac{p_0\pi Z_3}{2p_0}\,\delta\big(\underbrace{[(E_f+E_b)^2-p_0^2]}_{=4E_fE_b}[E_b-E_f-p_0]\big)=\\
&=\frac{\pi Z_3}{4E_f}\,\delta\left(E_b^2-(E_f+p_0)^2\right).
\end{aligned}$$ Note that due to the ${{\rm i}}\nu_n$ factor in the first line, the $p_0$ terms cancel in the final result. As done in the calculation the momentum integral can be performed: $$\begin{aligned}
\int\frac{{\text{d}}^3q}{(2\pi)^3} \frac{\pi Z_3}{4E_f}\, &\delta(E_b^2-(E_f+p_0)^2)= \\
&=2\pi\int_{M}^\infty\frac{{\text{d}}E_f}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{\pi Z_3}{8p}\,\Theta(1-\xi^2)\;.
\end{aligned}$$ Combining all contributions, we find for the spectral width of an incoming quark: $$\begin{aligned}
&\Gamma^{\rm S/P}_{\rm q}(p) = \\
&=-8\pi Mg_{\rm Mqq}^2\widetilde{N}^{\rm S/P}\!\int_{E_{\rm min}}^{E_{\rm max}}\frac{{\text{d}}E_f}{(2\pi)^3}\frac{\pi}{4|{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}}|}\left(\frac{E_f-E_b}{p_0}Z_2+\frac{Z_3}{2}\right)=\\
&=\frac{Mg_{\rm Mqq}^2\widetilde{N}^{\rm S/P}}{4\pi|{\mbox{\boldmath $p$}}|}\int_{E_{\rm min}}^{E_{\rm max}}{\text{d}}E_f\left[n_{\rm B}(E_b)+n_{\rm F}^-(E_f)\right],
\end{aligned}$$ using $E_b=E_f+p_0$. The effective spectral width in Eq. is determined by summing the pseudoscalar (pion) and scalar (sigma boson) channels weighted by their respective multiplicities, $3=N_{\rm f}^2-1$ and $1$.
[9]{} I. Arsene et al. (BRAHMS Collaboration), Nucl. Phys. A [**757**]{}, 1 (2005). K. Adcox et al. (PHENIX Collaboration), Nucl. Phys. A [**757**]{}, 184 (2005). B. B. Back et al. (PHOBOS Collaboration), Nucl. Phys. A [**757**]{}, 28 (2005). J. Adams et al. (STAR Collaboration), Nucl. Phys. A [**757**]{}, 102 (2005). K. Aamodt et al. (ALICE Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. [**108**]{}, 252302 (2010). K. Aamodt et al. (ALICE Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B [**696**]{}, 30 (2011). D. Caffarri et al. (ALICE Collaboration), Nucl. Phys. A [**904–905**]{}, 643c (2013). D. Derendarz et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Nucl. Phys. A [**904–905**]{}, 373c (2013). V. Roy, B. Mohanty, and A.K. Chaudhuri, J. Phys. G [**40**]{}, 065103 (2013). K. Dusling, and D. Teaney, Phys. Rev. C [**77**]{}, 034905 (2008). M. Luzum, C. Gombeaud, and J.Y. Ollitrault, Phys. Rev. C [**81**]{}, 054910 (2010). H. Niemi, G.S. Denicol, P. Huovinen, E. Molnár, and D.H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**106**]{}, 212302 (2011). H. Liu, D. Hou, and J. Li, Eur. Phys. J. C [**45**]{}, 459 (2006). Ch. Sasaki and K. Redlich, Nucl. Phys. A [**832**]{}, 62 (2010). A.S. Khvorostukhin, V.D. Toneev, and D.N. Voskresensky, Phys. Rev. C [**84**]{}, 9 (2011).
W.M. Alberico, S. Chiacchiera, H. Hansen, A. Molinari, and M. Nardi, Eur. Phys. J. A [**38**]{}, 97 (2008). Y. Hidaka and T. Kunihiro, Phys. Rev. D [**83**]{}, 076004 (2011). Y. Hidaka and T. Kunihiro, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. [**270**]{}, 012050 (2011). S.-I. Nam and C.-W. Kao, Phys. Rev. D [**87**]{}, 114003 (2013). S. Plumari et al., Phys. Rev. C [**86**]{} 054902, (2012).
S. Plumari et al., J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. [**420**]{}, 012029 (2013). S. Jeon, Phys. Rev. D [**52**]{}, 3591 (1995). S. Jeon and L.G. Yaffe, Phys. Rev. D [**53**]{}, 5799 (1996). Y. Nambu, G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev. [**122**]{}, 345 (1961). Y. Nambu, G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev. [**124**]{}, 246 (1961). S.P. Klevansky, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**64**]{}, 649 (1992). S. Klimt, M. Lutz, U. Vogl, and W. Weise, Nucl. Phys. A [**516**]{}, 429 (1990). S. Klimt, M. Lutz, U. Vogl, and W. Weise, Nucl. Phys. A [**516**]{}, 469 (1990). U. Vogl and W. Weise, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. [**27**]{}, 195 (1991). M. Buballa, Phys. Rept. [**407**]{}, 205 (2005).
G. ’t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B [**72**]{}, 461 (1974). E. Quack and S.P. Klevansky, Phys. Rev. C [**49**]{}(6) 3283 (1994). D. Müller, M. Buballa, and J. Wambach, Phys. Rev. D [**81**]{}, 1 (2010). M. Iwasaki, and H. Ohnishi, and T. Fukutome, arXiv:hep-ph/0606192 (2006). T. Fukutome and M. Iwasaki, Prog. Theor. Phys. [**119**]{}, 991 (2008). M. Iwasaki, H. Ohnishi, and T. Fukutome, arXiv:hep-ph/0703271 (2007). R. Kubo, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. [**12**]{}, 570 (1957). R. Lang, N. Kaiser, and W. Weise, Eur. Phys. J. A [**48**]{}, 109 (2012). U. Heinz, Ch. Shen, and H. Song, AIP. Conf. Proc. [**1441**]{}, 766 (2012). J.I. Kapusta and Ch. Gale, *Finite-Temperature Field Theory* (Cambridge, 2006). R.A. Lacey et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. [**98**]{}, 092301 (2007). A. Nakamura and S. Sakai, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**94**]{} 072305 (2005).
H.B. Meyer., Phys. Rev. D [**76**]{}, 101701(R) (2007). J. Maldacena, Int. J. Theor. Phys. [**38**]{}, 1113 (1999). P.K. Kovtun, D.T. Son, and A.O. Starinets, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**94**]{}, 111601 (2005). T.D. Cohen, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**99**]{}, 021602 (2007). A. Rebhan and D. Steineder, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**108**]{}, 021601 (2012). K.A. Mamo, JHEP [**1210**]{}, 070 (2012).
T. Hatsuda and T.Kunihiro, Prog. Theor. Phys. [**91**]{}, 284 (1987). D. Boyanovsky et al., Phys. Rev. D [**58**]{} 125009 (1998). S. Ghosh et al., Phys. Rev. C [**88**]{}(6) 068201 (2013). R. Marty, E. Bratkovskaya, W. Cassing, J Aichelin, and H. Berrehrah, Phys. Rev. C [**88**]{}(4) 045204 (2013).
[^1]: Due to ${{\rm e}}^{-\beta H}X(t){{\rm e}}^{\beta H}=X(t+{{\rm i}}\beta)$, which implies $\langle X(t)Y(t'+{{\rm i}}\beta)\rangle=\langle Y(t')X(t)\rangle$, it follows that this correlator is symmetric in its arguments: $(X,Y)=(Y,X)$.
[^2]: The notation $f\in{\rm o}(g)$ is used to express accurately that “$f$ is growing less fast than $g$”, meaning that $f(x)/g(x)\to 0$ for $x\to\infty$. More intuitively, this also means that “$g$ grows much faster than $f$”.
[^3]: Note that in this definition as well as in previous expressions the spectral width $\Gamma$ corresponds to half the FWHM (full width at half maximum) of the resulting quark spectral function, $\pi\rho(p)=-{{\rm Im}\,}\,G^{\rm R}(p)$, where the retarded quark propagator has been defined in Eq. .
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Process mining techniques focus on extracting insight in processes from event logs. In many cases, events recorded in the event log are too fine-grained, causing process discovery algorithms to discover incomprehensible process models or process models that are not representative of the event log. We show that when process discovery algorithms are only able to discover an unrepresentative process model from a low-level event log, structure in the process can in some cases still be discovered by first abstracting the event log to a higher level of granularity. This gives rise to the challenge to bridge the gap between an original low-level event log and a desired high-level perspective on this log, such that a more structured or more comprehensible process model can be discovered. We show that supervised learning can be leveraged for the event abstraction task when annotations with high-level interpretations of the low-level events are available for a subset of the sequences (i.e., traces). We present a method to generate feature vector representations of events based on XES extensions, and describe an approach to abstract events in an event log with Condition Random Fields using these event features. Furthermore, we propose a sequence-focused metric to evaluate supervised event abstraction results that fits closely to the tasks of process discovery and conformance checking. We conclude this paper by demonstrating the usefulness of supervised event abstraction for obtaining more structured and/or more comprehensible process models using both real life event data and synthetic event data.'
author:
- '\'
- '\'
bibliography:
- 'IEEEabrv.bib'
- 'bibliography.bib'
title: Event Abstraction for Process Mining using Supervised Learning Techniques
---
Process Mining, Event Abstraction, Probabilistic Graphical Models
Introduction
============
Process mining is a fast growing discipline that combines knowledge and techniques from computational intelligence, data mining, process modeling and process analysis [@Aalst2011]. Process mining focuses on the analysis of event logs, which consists of sequences of real-life events observed from process executions, originating e.g. from logs from ERP systems. An important subfield of process mining is process discovery, which is concerned with the task of finding a process model that is representative of the behavior seen in an event log. Many different process discovery algorithms exist ([@Aalst2004; @Gunther2007; @Werf2008; @Weijters2011; @Leemans2013]), and many different types of process models can be discovered by process discovery methods, including BPMN models, Petri nets, process trees, and statecharts.
![An excerpt of a “spaghetti”-like process model.[]{data-label="fig:spaghetti"}](spaghetti){width="48.00000%"}
As event logs are often not generated specifically for the application of process mining, events granularity of the event log at hand might be too low level. It is vital for successful application of process discovery techniques to have event logs at an appropriate level of abstraction. Process discovery techniques when the input event log is too low level might result in process model with one or more undesired properties. First of all, the resulting process model might be “spaghetti”-like, as shown in Figure \[fig:spaghetti\], containing of an uninterpretable mess of nodes and connections. The aim of process discovery is to discover a structured, “lasagna”-like, process model as shown in Figure \[fig:lasagna\], which is much more interpretable than a “spaghetti”-like model. Secondly, the activities in the process model might have too specific, non-meaningful, names. Third, as we show in section \[sec:motivating\_example\], process discovery algorithms are sometimes not able to discover a process model that represents the low-level event log well, while being able to discover to discover a representative process model from a corresponding high-level event log. The problems mentioned illustrate the need for a method to abstract too low-level event logs into higher level event logs.
![A structured, or “lasagna”-like, process model.[]{data-label="fig:lasagna"}](lasagna){width="25.00000%"}
Several methods have been explored within the process mining field that address the challenge of abstracting low-level events to higher level events ([@Bose2009; @Gunther2010; @Dongen2010]). Existing event abstraction methods rely on unsupervised learning techniques to abstract low-level into high-level events by clustering together groups of low-level events into one high-level event. However, using unsupervised learning introduces two new problems. First, it is unclear how to label high-level events that are obtained by clustering low-level events. Current techniques require the user / process analyst to provide high-level event labels themselves based on domain knowledge, or generate long labels by concatenating the labels of all low-level events incorporated in the cluster. However, long concatenated labels quickly become unreadable for larger clusters, and it is far from trivial for a user to come up with sensible labels manually. In addition, unsupervised learning approaches for event abstraction give no guidance with respect to the desired level of abstraction. Many existing event abstraction methods contain one or more parameters to control the degree in which events are clustered into higher level events. Finding the right level of abstraction providing meaningful results is often a matter of trial-and-error.
In some cases, training data with high-level target labels of low-level events are available, or can be obtained, for a subset of the traces. In many settings, obtaining high-level annotations for all traces in an event log is infeasible or too expensive. Learning a supervised learning model on the set of traces where high-level target labels are available, and applying that model to other low-level traces where no high-level labels are available, allows us to build a high-level interpretation of a low-level event log, which can then be used as input for process mining techniques.
In this paper we describe a method for supervised event abstraction that enables process discovery from too fine-grained event logs. This method can be applied to any event log where higher level training labels of low level events are available for a subset of the traces in the event log. We start by giving an overview of related work from the activity recognition field in Section \[sec:related\]. In Section \[sec:preliminaries\] we introduce basic concepts and definitions used throughout the rest of the paper. Section \[sec:motivating\_example\] explains the problem of not being able to mine representative process models from low-level data in more detail. In Section \[sec:features\] we describe a method to automatically retrieve a feature vector representation of an event that can be used with supervised learning techniques, making use of certain aspects of the XES standard definition for event logs [@Gunther2014]. In the same section we describe a supervised learning method to map low-level events into target high-level events. Sections \[sec:case\_1\] and \[sec:case\_2\] respectively show the added value of the described supervised event abstraction method for process mining on a real life event log from a smart home environment and on a synthetic log from a digital photocopier respectively. Section \[sec:conclusion\] concludes the paper.
Related Work {#sec:related}
============
Supervised event abstraction is an unexplored problem in process mining. A related field is activity recognition within the field of ubiquitous computing. Activity recognition focuses on the task of detecting human activity from either passive sensors [@Kasteren2008; @Tapia2004], wearable sensors [@Bao2004; @Kwapisz2011], or cameras [@Poppe2010]. Activity recognition methods generally work on discrete time windows over the time series of sensor values and aim to map each time window onto the correct type of human activity, e.g. *eating* or *sleeping*. Activity recognition methods can be classified into probabilistic approaches [@Kasteren2008; @Tapia2004; @Bao2004; @Kwapisz2011] and approaches based on ontology reasoning [@Chen2009; @Riboni2011]. The strength of probabilistic system based approaches compared to methods based on ontology reasoning is their ability to handle noise, uncertainty and incomplete in sensor data [@Chen2009].
Tapia [@Tapia2004] was the first to explore supervised learning methods to infer human activity from passive sensors, using a naive Bayes classifier. More recently, probabilistic graphical models started to play an important role in the activity recognition field [@Kasteren2008; @Kasteren2007]. Van Kasteren et al. [@Kasteren2008] explored the use Conditional Random Fields [@Lafferty2001] and Hidden Markov Models [@Rabiner1986]. Van Kasteren and Kr[ö]{}se [@Kasteren2007] applied Bayesian Networks [@Friedman1997] on the activity recognition task. Kim et al. [@Kim2010] found Hidden Markov Models to be incapable of capturing long-range or transitive dependencies between observations, which results in difficulties recognizing multiple interacting activities (concurrent or interwoven). Conditional Random Fields do not posses these limitations.
The main differences between existing work in activity recognition and the approach presented in this paper are the input data on which they can be applied and the generality of the approach. Activity recognition techniques consider the input data to be a multidimensional time series of the sensor values over time based on which time windows are mapped onto human activities. An appropriate time window size is determined based on domain knowledge of the data set. In supervised event abstraction we aim for a generic method that works for all XES event logs in general. A time window based approach contrasts with our aim for generality, as no single time window size will be appropriate for all event logs. Furthermore, the durations of the events within a single event log might differ drastically (e.g. one event might take seconds, while another event takes months), in which case time window based approaches will either miss short events in case of larger time windows or resort to very large numbers of time windows resulting in very long computational time. Therefore, we map each individual low-level event to a high-level event and do not use time windows. In a smart home environment context with passive sensors, each change in a binary sensor value can be considered to be a low-level event.
Preliminaries {#sec:preliminaries}
=============
In this section we introduce basic concepts used throughout the paper.
We use the usual sequence definition, and denote a sequence by listing its elements, e.g. we write $\langle a_1,a_2,\dots,a_{n} \rangle$ for a (finite) sequence $s:\{1,\dots,n\}\to S$ of elements from some alphabet $S$, where $s(i)=a_i$ for any $i \in \{1,\dots,n\}$.
XES Event Logs
--------------
We use the XES standard definition of event logs, an overview of which is shown in Figure \[fig:XES\_metamodel\]. XES defines an event *log* as a set of *traces*, which in itself is a sequence of *event*s. The log, traces and events can all contain one or more *attribute*s, which consist of a *key* and a *value* of a certain type. Event or trace attributes may be *global*, which indicates that the attribute needs to be defined for each event or trace respectively. A log contains one or more *classifier*s, which can be seen as labeling functions on the events of a log, defined on global event attributes. *Extension*s define a set of attributes on log, trace, or event level, in such a way that the semantics of these attributes are clearly defined. One can view XES extensions as a specification of attributes that events, traces, or event logs themselves frequently contain. XES defines the following standard extensions:
Concept
: [Specifies the generally understood name of the event/trace/log (attribute ’Concept:name’).]{}
Lifecycle
: [Specifies the lifecycle phase (attribute ’Lifecycle:transition’) that the event represents in a transactional model of their generating activity. The *Lifecycle* extension also specifies a standard transactional model for activities.]{}
Organizational
: [Specifies three attributes for events, which identify the actor having caused the event (attribute ’Organizational:resource’), his role in the organization (attribute ’Organizational:role’), and the group or department within the organization where he is located (attribute ’Organizational:group’).]{}
Time
: [Specifies the date and time at which an event occurred (attribute ’Time:timestamp’).]{}
Semantic
: [Allows definition of an activity meta-model that specifies higher-level aggregate views on events (attribute ’Semantic:modelReference’).]{}
![XES event log meta-model, as defined in [@Gunther2014].[]{data-label="fig:XES_metamodel"}](XES_metamodel){width="0.95\linewidth"}
We introduce a special attribute of type *String* with key *label*, which represents a high-level version of the generally understood name of an event. The *concept* name of a event is then considered to be a low-level name of an event. The *Semantic* extension closely resembles the *label* attribute, however, by specifying relations between low-level and high-level events in a meta-model, the *Semantic* extension assumes that all instances of a low-level event type belong to the same high-level event type. The *label* attribute specifies the high-level label for each event individually, allowing for example one low-level event of low-level type *Dishes & cups cabinet* to be of high-level type *Taking medicine*, and another low-level event of the same type to be of high-level type *Eating*. Note that for some traces high-level annotations might be available, in which case its events contain the *label* attribute, while other traces might not be annotated. High-level interpretations of unannotated traces, by inferring the *label* attribute based on information that is present in the annotated traces, allow the use of unannotated traces for process discovery and conformance checking on a high level.
Petri nets
----------
A process modeling notation frequently used as output of process discovery techniques is the Petri net. Petri nets are directed bipartite graphs consisting of transitions and places, connected by arcs. Transitions represent activities, while places represent the status of the system before and after execution of a transition. Labels are assigned to transitions to indicate the type of activity that they represent. A special label $\tau$ is used to represent invisible transitions, which are only used for routing purposes and do not represent any real activity.
\[def:lpn\] A labeled Petri net is a tuple $N=(P,T,F,R,\ell)$ where $P$ is a finite set of places, $T$ is a *finite set* of transitions such that $P \cap T = \emptyset$, and $F \subseteq (P \times T) \cup (T \times P)$ is a set of directed arcs, called the flow relation, $R$ is a finite set of labels representing event types, with $\tau \notin R$ is a label representing an invisible action, and $\ell:T\rightarrow R\cup {\tau}$ is a labeling function that assigns a label to each transition.
The state of a Petri net is defined w.r.t. the state that a process instance can be in during its execution. A state of a Petri net is captured by the marking of its places with tokens. In a given state, each place is either empty, or it contains a certain number of tokens. A transition is enabled in a given marking if all places with an outgoing arc to this transitions contain at least one token. Once a transition fires (i.e. is executed), a token is removed from all places with outgoing arcs to the firing transition and a token is put to all places with incoming arcs from the firing transition, leading to a new state.
A marked Petri net is a pair $(N,M)$, where $N=(P,T,F,L,\ell)$ is a labeled Petri net and where $M \in \mathbb{B}(P)$ denotes the marking of $N$. For $n \in (P \cup T)$ we use $\bullet n$ and $n \bullet$ to denote the set of inputs and outputs of n respectively. Let $C(s,e)$ indicate the number of occurrences (count) of element $e$ in multiset $s$. A transition $t\in T$ is enabled in a marking $M$ of net $N$ if $\forall p \in \bullet t : C(M,p)>0$. An enabled transition $t$ may fire, removing one token from each of the input places $\bullet t$ and producing one token for each of the output places $t\bullet$.
Figure \[fig:double\_flower\] shows three Petri nets, with the circles representing places, the squares representing transitions. The black squares represent invisible transitions, or, $\tau$ transitions. Places annotated with an **f** belong to the final marking, indicating that the process execution can terminate in this marking.
The topmost Petri net in Figure \[fig:double\_flower\] initially has one token in the place $p1$, indicated by the dot. Firing of silent transition $t1$ takes the token from $p1$ and puts a token in both $p2$ and $p3$, enabling both $t2$ and $t3$. When $t2$ fires, it takes the token from $p2$ and puts a token in $p4$. When $t3$ fires, it takes the token from $p3$ and puts a token in $p5$. After $t2$ and $t3$ have both fired, resulting in a token in both $p4$ and $p5$, $t4$ is enabled. Executing $t4$ takes the token from both $p4$ and $p5$, and puts a token in $p6$. The **f** indicates that the process execution can stop in the marking consisting of this place. Alternatively, it can fire $t5$, taking the token from $p6$ and placing a token in $p2$ and $p5$, which allows for execution of $MC$ and $W$ to reach the marking consisting of $p6$ again. We refer the interested reader to [@Reisig2012] for an extensive review of Petri nets.
Conditional Random Field {#sec:crf}
------------------------
We view the recognition of high-level event labels as a sequence labeling task in which each event is classified as one of the higher-level events from a high-level event alphabet. Conditional Random Fields (CRFs) [@Lafferty2001] are a type of probabilistic graphical model which has become popular in the fields of language processing and computer vision for the task of sequence labeling. A Conditional Random Field models the conditional probability distribution of the label sequence given an observation sequence using a log-linear model. We use Linear-chain Conditional Random Fields, a subclass of Conditional Random Fields that has been widely used for sequence labeling tasks, which takes the following form:\
$p(y|x) = \frac{1}{Z(x)}exp(\sum_{t=1}\sum_k\lambda_k f_k(t,y_{t-1},y_t,x))$\
where $Z(x)$ is the normalization factor, $X=\langle x_1,\dots,x_n\rangle$ is an observation sequence, $Y=\langle y_1,\dots,y_n\rangle$ is the associated label sequence, $f_k$ and $\lambda_k$ respectively are feature functions and their weights. Feature functions, which can be binary or real valued, are defined on the observations and are used to compute label probabilities. In contrast to Hidden Markov Models [@Rabiner1986], feature functions are not assumed to be mutually independent.
Motivating Example {#sec:motivating_example}
==================
[0.5]{}
\[node distance=1.4cm, on grid,>=stealth’, bend angle=20, auto, every place/.style= [minimum size=6mm]{}, every transition/.style = [minimum size = 6mm]{} \] (p2) \[label=below:p1\]; (2) \[fill=black, right = of p2, label=below:t1\] edge \[pre\] node\[auto\] (p2); (p3) \[above right = of 2, label=below:p2\] edge\[pre\] node\[auto\] (2); (p4) \[below right = of 2, label=below:p3\] edge\[pre\] node\[auto\] (2); (3) \[label=center:, label=below:t2, right = of p3\] edge\[pre\] node\[auto\] (p3); (4) \[label=center:, label=below:t3, right = of p4\] edge\[pre\] node\[auto\] (p4); (p5) \[right = of 3, label=below:p4\] edge\[pre\] node\[auto\] (3); (p6) \[right = of 4, label=below:p5\] edge\[pre\] node\[auto\] (4); (5) \[label=center:, label=above:t4, above right = of p6\] edge\[pre\] node\[auto\] (p5) edge\[pre\] node\[auto\] (p6); (p8) \[right = of 5, label=below right:**f**, label=below:p6\] edge\[pre\] node\[auto\] (5); (6) \[fill=black,above = of p8, label=above:t5\] edge\[pre\] node\[auto\] (p8) edge\[post,bend left\] node\[auto\] (p6) edge\[post,bend right\] node\[auto\] (p3);
[0.22]{}
\[node distance=1.3cm, on grid,>=stealth’, bend angle=20, auto, every place/.style= [minimum size=6mm]{}, every transition/.style = [minimum size = 6mm]{} \] (p1); (0) \[right = of p1,fill=black\] edge \[pre\] node\[auto\] (p1); (p2)\[above right = of 0, label=below right:**f**\] edge \[pre\] node\[auto\] (0); (2) \[label=center:, above right = of p2\] edge \[pre, bend left\] node\[auto\] (p2) edge \[post, bend right\] node\[auto\] (p2); (1) \[label=center:, above left = of p2\] edge \[pre, bend left\] node\[auto\] (p2) edge \[post, bend right\] node\[auto\] (p2); (p3)\[below right = of 0\] edge\[pre\] node\[auto\] (0);
\(3) \[label=center:, right = of p3\] edge \[pre\] node\[auto\] (p3);
[0.22]{}
\[node distance=1.3cm, on grid,>=stealth’, bend angle=20, auto, every place/.style= [minimum size=6mm]{}, every transition/.style = [minimum size = 6mm]{} \] (p1); edge \[pre, bend left\] node\[auto\] (p1) edge \[post, bend right\] node\[auto\] (p1); (t1) \[label=above:, above right = of p1\] edge \[pre\] node\[auto\] (p1); (t2) \[label=below:, below right = of p1\] edge \[post\] node\[auto\] (p1); (p2)\[below right = of t1, label=below right:**f**\] edge \[pre\] node\[auto\] (t1) edge \[post\] node\[auto\] (t2);
Figure \[fig:double\_flower\] shows on a simple example how a process can be structured at a high level while this structure is not discoverable from a low-level log of this process. The bottom right Petri net shows the example process at a high-level. The high-level process model allows for any finite length alternating sequence of *Taking medicine* and *Eating* activities. The *Taking medicine* high-level activity is defined as a subprocess, corresponding to the topmost Petri net, which consists of low-level events *Medicine cabinet (MC)*, *Dishes & cups cabinet (DCC)*, and *Water (W)*. The *Eating* high-level event is also defined as a subprocess, shown in the bottom left Petri net, which consists of low-level events *Dishes & cups cabinet (DCC)* and *Cutlery drawer (CD)* that can occur an arbitrary number of times in any order and low-level event *Dishwasher (D)* which occurs exactly once, but at an arbitrary point in the *Eating* process.
When we apply the Inductive Miner process discovery algorithm [@Leemans2013] to low-level traces generated by the hierarchical process of Figure \[fig:double\_flower\], we obtain the process model shown in Figure \[fig:merged\_flower\]. The obtained process model allows for almost all possible sequences over the alphabet $\{CD,D,DCC,MC,W\}$, as the only constraint introduced by the model is that *DCC* and *D* are required to be executed starting from the initial marking to end up with the same marking. Firing of all other transitions in the model can be skipped. Behaviorally this model is very close to the so called “flower” model [@Aalst2011], the model that allows for all behavior over its alphabet. The alternating structure between *Taking medicine* and *Eating* that was present in the high-level process in Figure \[fig:double\_flower\] cannot be observed in the process model in Figure \[fig:merged\_flower\]. This is caused by high variance in start and end events of the high-level event subprocesses of *Taking medicine* and *Eating* as well as by the overlap in event types between these two subprocesses.
{width="75.00000%"}
When the event log would have consisted of the high-level *Eating* and *Taking medicine* events, process discovery techniques have no problems to discover the alternating structure in the bottom right Petri net of Figure \[fig:double\_flower\]. To discover the high-level alternating structure from a low-level event log it is necessary to first abstract the events in the event log. Through supervised learning techniques the mapping from low-level events to high-level events can be learned from examples, without requiring a hand-made ontology. Similar approaches have been explored in activity recognition in the field of ubiquitous computing, where low-level sensor signals are mapped to high-level activities from a human behavior perspective. The input data in this setting are continuous time series from sensors. Change points in these time series are triggered by low-level activities like *opening/closing the fridge door*, and the annotations of the higher level events (e.g. *cooking*) are often obtained through manual activity diaries. In contrast to unsupervised event abstraction, the annotations in supervised event abstraction provide guidance on how to label higher level events and guidance for the target level of abstraction.
Event Abstraction as a Sequence Labeling Task {#sec:features}
=============================================
In this section we describe an approach to supervised abstraction of events based on Conditional Random Fields. Additionally, we describe feature functions on XES event logs in a general way by using XES extensions. Figure \[fig:overview\] provides a conceptual overview of the supervised event abstraction method. The approach takes two inputs, 1) a set of annotated traces, which are traces where the high-level event that a low-level event belongs to (the *label* attribute of the low-level event) is known for all low-level events in the trace, and 2) a set of unannotated traces, which are traces where the low-level events are not mapped to high-level events. Conditional Random Fields are trained of the annotated traces to create a probabilistic mapping from low-level events to high-level events. This mapping, once obtained, can be applied to the unannotated traces in order to estimate the corresponding high-level event for each low-level event (its *label* attribute). Often sequences of low-level events in the traces with high-level annotations will have the same *label* attribute. We make the working assumption that multiple high-level events are executed in parallel. This enables us to interpret a sequence of identical *label* attribute values as a single instance of a high-level event. To obtain a true high-level log, we *collapse* sequences of events with the same value for the *label* attribute into two events with this value as *concept* name, where the first event has a *lifecycle* ’start’ and the second has the *lifecycle* ’complete’. Table \[tab:collapse\] illustrates this collapsing procedure through an input and output event log.
[0.48]{}
Case Time:timestamp Concept:name label
------ --------------------- ----------------------- -----------------
1 03/11/2015 08:45:23 Medicine cabinet Taking medicine
1 03/11/2015 08:46:11 Dishes & cups cabinet Taking medicine
1 03/11/2015 08:46:45 Water Taking medicine
1 03/11/2015 08:47:59 Dishes & cups cabinet Eating
1 03/11/2015 08:47:89 Dishwasher Eating
1 03/11/2015 17:10:58 Dishes & cups cabinet Taking medicine
1 03/11/2015 17:10:69 Medicine cabinet Taking medicine
1 03/11/2015 17:11:18 Water Taking medicine
[0.48]{}
Case Time:timestamp Concept:name Lifecycle:transition
------ --------------------- ----------------- ----------------------
1 03/11/2015 08:45:23 Taking medicine Start
1 03/11/2015 08:46:45 Taking medicine Complete
1 03/11/2015 08:47:59 Eating Start
1 03/11/2015 08:47:89 Eating Complete
1 03/11/2015 17:10:58 Taking medicine Start
1 03/11/2015 17:11:18 Taking medicine Complete
\[tab:collapse\]
The method described in this section is implemented and available for use as a plugin for the ProM 6 [@Verbeek2010] process mining toolkit and is based on the GRMM [@Sutton2006] implementation of Conditional Random Fields.
We now show for each XES extension how it can be translated into useful feature functions for event abstraction. Note that we do not limit ourselves to XES logs that contain all XES extensions; when a log contains a subset of the extensions, a subset of the feature functions will be available for the supervised learning step. This approach leads to a feature space of unknown size, potentially causing problems related to the curse of dimensionality, therefore we use L1-regularized Conditional Random Fields. L1 regularization causes the vector of feature weights to be sparse, meaning that only a small fraction of the features have a non-zero weight and are actually used by the prediction model. Since the L1-norm is non-differentiable, we use OWL-QN [@Andrew2007] to optimize the model.
![Conceptual overview of Supervised Event Abstraction.[]{data-label="fig:overview"}](overview_method){width="50.00000%"}
From a XES Log to a Feature Space
---------------------------------
### Concept extension
The low-level labels of the preceding events in a trace can contain useful contextual information for high-level label classification. Based on the n-gram of $n$ last-seen events in a trace, we can calculate the probability that the current event has a label $l$. A multinoulli distribution is estimated for each n-gram of $n$ consecutive events, based on the training data. The Conditional Random Field model requires feature functions with numerical range. A concept extension based feature function with two parameters, $n$ and $l$, is valued with the multinoulli-estimated probability of the current event having high-level label $l$ given the n-gram of the last $n$ low-level event labels.
### Organizational extension
Similar to the concept extension feature functions, multinoulli distributions can be estimated on the training set for n-grams of *resource*, *role*, or *group* attributes of the last $n$ events. Likewise, an organizational extension based feature function with three parameters, n-gram size $n$, $o\in\{resource,role,group\}$, and label $l$, is valued with the multinoulli-estimated probability of label $l$ given the n-gram of the last $n$ event resources/roles/groups.
### Time extension
In terms of time, there are several potentially existing patterns. A certain high-level event might for example be concentrated in a certain parts of a day, of a week, or of a month. This concentration can however not be modeled with a single Gaussian distribution, as it might be the case that a high-level event has high probability to occur in the morning or in the evening, but low probability to occur in the afternoon in-between. Therefore we use a Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM) to model the probability of a high-level label $l$ given the timestamp. Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) [@Schwarz1978] is used to determine the number of components of the GMM, which gives the model an incentive to not combine more Gaussians in the mixture than needed. A GMM is estimated on training data, modeling the probabilities of each label based on the time passed since the start of the day, week or month. A time extension based feature function with two parameters, $t\in\{day,week,month,\dots\}$ and label $l$, is valued with the GMM-estimated probability of label $l$ given the $t$ view on the event timestamp.
### Lifecycle extension & Time extension
The XES standard [@Gunther2014] defines several lifecycle stages of a process. When an event log possesses both the lifecycle extension and the time extension, time differences can be calculated between different stages of the life cycle of a single activity. For a *complete* event for example, one could calculate the time difference with the associated *start* event of the same activity. Finding the associated *start* event becomes nontrivial when multiple instances of the same activity are in parallel, as it is then unknown which *complete* event belongs to which *start* event. We assume consecutive lifecycle steps of activities running in parallel to occur in the same order as the preceding lifecycle step. For example, when we observe two *start* events of an activity of type *A* in a row, followed by two *complete* events of type *A*, we assume the first *complete* to belong to the first *start*, and the second *complete* to belong to the second *start*.
We estimate a Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM) for each tuple of two lifecycle steps for a certain activity on the time differences between those two lifecycle steps for this activity. A feature based on both the lifecycle and the time extension, with a label parameter $l$ and lifecycle $c$, is valued with the GMM-estimated probability of label $l$ given the time between the current event and lifecycle $c$. Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) [@Schwarz1978] is again used to determine the number of components of the GMM.
Evaluating High-level Event Predictions for Process Mining Applications
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing approaches in the field of activity recognition take as input time windows where each time window is represented by a feature vector that describes the sensor activity or status during that time window. Hence, evaluation methods in the activity recognition field are window-based, using evaluation metrics like the percentage of correctly classified time slices [@Tapia2004; @Kasteren2007; @Kasteren2008]. There are two reasons to deviate from this evaluation methodology in a process mining setting. First, our method operates on events instead of time windows. Second, the accuracy of the resulting high level sequences is much more important for many process mining techniques (e.g. process discovery, conformance checking) than the accuracy of predicting each individual minute of the day.
We use *Levenshtein similarity* that expresses the degree in which two traces are similar using a metric based on the Levenshtein distance (also known as edit distance) [@Levenshtein1966], which is defined as $Levenshtein\_similarity(a,b)=1-\frac{Levenshtein\_distance(a,b)}{max(|a|,|b|)}$. The division of the Levenshtein distance by $max(|a|,|b|)$, which is the worst case number of edit operations needed to transform any sequence of length $|a|$ into any sequence of length $|b|$, causes the result to be a number between $0$ (completely different traces) and $1$ (identical traces).
Case Study 1: Smart Home Environment {#sec:case_1}
====================================
[0.92]{} {width="92.00000%"}
[0.8]{} {width="80.00000%"}
We use the smart home environment log described by Van Kasteren et al. [@Kasteren2008] to evaluate our supervised event log abstraction method. The Van Kasteren log consists of multidimensional time series data with all dimensions binary, where each binary dimension represents the state of an in-home sensor. These sensors include motion sensors, open/close sensors, and power sensors (discretized to $0$/$1$ states).
Experimental setup
------------------
We transform the multidimensional time series data from sensors into events by regarding each sensor change point as an event. Cases are created by grouping events together that occurred in the same day, with a cut-off point at midnight. High-level labels are provided for the Van Kasteren data set.
The generated event log based on the Van Kasteren data set has the following XES extensions:
Concept
: [The sensor that generated the event.]{}
Time
: [The time stamp of the sensor change point.]{}
Lifecycle
: [*Start* when the event represents a sensor value change from $0$ to $1$ and *Complete* when it represents a sensor value change from $1$ to $0$.]{}
Note that annotations are provided for all traces in the obtained event log. To evaluate how well the supervised event abstraction method generalized to unannotated traces, we artificially use a part of the traces to train the abstraction model and apply them on a test set where we regard the annotations to be non-existent. We evaluate the obtained high-level labels against the ground truth labels. We use a variation on Leave-One-Out-Cross-Validation where we leave out one trace to evaluate how well this mapping generalizes to unseen events and cases.
Results
-------
Figure \[fig:kasteren\_no\_abstraction\] shows the result of the Inductive Miner [@Leemans2013] for the low-level events in the Van Kasteren data set. The resulting process model starts with many parallel activities that can be executed in any order and contains many unobservable transitions back. This closely resembles the flower model, which allows for any behavior in any arbitrary order. From the process model we can learn that *toilet flush* and *cups cupboard* frequently co-exists. Furthermore, the process model indicates that *groceries cupboard* is often followed by *dishwasher*. There seems to be very little structure on this level of event granularity.
The average Levenshtein similarity between the predicted high-level traces in the Leave-One-Trace-Out-Cross-Validation experimental setup and the ground truth high-level traces is $0.7042$, which shows that the supervised event abstraction method produces traces which are fairly similar to the ground truth.
Figure \[fig:kasteren\_abstraction\] shows the result of the Inductive Miner on the aggregated set of predicted test traces. Figure \[fig:kasteren\_abstraction\] shows that the process discovered at the high level of granularity is more structured than the process discovered at the original level of granularity (Figure \[fig:kasteren\_no\_abstraction\]). In Figure \[fig:kasteren\_abstraction\], we can see that the main daily routine starts with breakfast, followed by a shower, after which the subject leaves the house to go to work. After work the subject prepares dinner and has a drink. The subject mainstream behavior is to go to the toilet before going to bed, but he can then wake up later to go to the toilet and then continue sleeping. Note that the day can also start with going to bed. This is related to the case cut-off point of a trace at midnight. Days when the subject went to bed after midnight result in a case where going to bed occurs at the start of the trace. On these days, the subject might have breakfast and then perform the activity sequence use toilet, take shower, and leave house, possibly multiple times. Another possibility on days when the subject went to bed after midnight is that he starts by using the toilet, then has breakfast, then has the possibility to leave the house, then takes a shower, after which he always leaves the house. Prepare dinner activity is not performed on these days.
This case study shows that we can find a structured high-level process from a low-level event log where the low-level process is unstructured, using supervised event abstraction and process discovery.
Case Study 2: Artificial Digital Photocopier {#sec:case_2}
============================================
[0.8]{} {width="85.00000%"}
[0.8]{} {width="85.00000%"}
Bose et al. [@Bose2012; @Bose2012b] created a synthetic event log based on a digital photocopier to evaluate his unsupervised methods of event abstraction. In this case study we show that the described supervised event abstraction method can accurately abstract to high-level labels.
Experimental setup
------------------
We annotated each low-level event with the correct high-level event using domain knowledge from the actual process model as described by Bose et al. [@Bose2012; @Bose2012b]. This event log is generated by a hierarchical process, where high-level events *Capture Image*, *Rasterize Image*, *Image Processing* and *Print Image* are defined in terms of a process model. The *Print Image* subprocess amongst others contains the events *Writing*, *Developing* and *Fusing*, which are themselves defined as a subprocess. In this case study we set the task to transform the log such that subprocesses *Capture Image*, *Rasterize Image* and *Image Processing*, *Writing*, *Fusing* and *Developing*. Subprocesses *Writing* and *Developing* both contain the low-level event types *Drum Spin Start* and *Drum Spin Stop*. In this case study we focus in particular on the *Drum Spin Start* and *Drum Spin Stop* events, as they make the abstraction task non-trivial in the sense that no one-to-one mapping from low-level to high-level events exists.
The artificial digital photocopier data set has the concept, time and lifecycle XES extensions. On this event log annotations are available for all traces. On this data set we use a 10-Fold Cross-Validation setting on the traces to evaluate how well the supervised event abstraction method abstracts low-level events to high-level events on unannotated traces, as this data set is larger than the Van Kasteren data set and Leave-One-Out-Cross Validation would take too much time.
Results
-------
The confusion matrix in Table \[tab:conf\_mat\_adp\] shows the aggregated results of the mapping of low-level events *Drum Spin Start* and *Drum Spin Stop* to high-level events *Developing* and *Writing*. The results show that the supervised event abstraction method is capable of detecting the many-to-many mappings between the low-level and high-level labels, as it maps these low-level events to the correct high-level event without making errors. The Levenshtein similarity between the aggregated set of test fold high-level traces and the ground truth high-level traces is close to perfect: 0.9667.
------------ ------------ ---------
Developing Writing
Developing 6653 0
Writing 0 917
------------ ------------ ---------
: Confusion matrix for classification of *Drum Spin Start* and *Drum Spin Stop* low-level events into high-level events *Writing* and *Developing*.[]{data-label="tab:conf_mat_adp"}
Figure \[adp\_no\_abstraction\] shows the process model obtained with the Inductive Miner on the low-level events in the artificial digital photocopier dataset. The two sections in the process model that are surrounded by dashed lines are examples of high-level events within the low-level process model. Even though the low-level process contains structure, the size of the process model makes it hard to comprehend. Figure \[adp\_abstraction\] shows the process model obtained with the same process discovery algorithm on the aggregated high-level test traces of the 10-fold cross validation setting. This model is in line with the official artificial digital photocopier model specification, with the *Print Image* subprocess unfolded, as provided in [@Bose2012; @Bose2012b]. In contrast to the event abstraction method described by Bose et al. [@Bose2012b] which found the high-level events that match specification, supervised event abstraction is also able to find suitable event labels for the generated high-level events. This allows us to discover human-readable process models on the abstracted events without performing manual labeling, which can be a tedious task and requires domain knowledge.
Instead of event abstraction on the level of the event log, unsupervised abstraction methods that work on the level of a model (e.g. [@Vanhatalo2009]) can also be applied to make large complex models more comprehensible. Note that such methods also do not give guidance on how to label resulting transitions in the process model. Furthermore, such methods do not help in cases where the process on a low-level is unstructured, like in the case study as described in Section \[sec:case\_1\].
This case study shows that supervised event abstraction can help generating a comprehensible high-level process model from a low-level event log, when a low-level process model would be too large to be understandable.
Conclusion {#sec:conclusion}
==========
In this paper we described a method to abstract events in a XES event log that is too low-level, based on supervised learning. The method consists of an approach to generate a feature representation of a XES event, and of a Conditional Random Field based learning step. An implementation of the method described has been made available as a plugin to the ProM 6 process mining toolkit. We introduced an evaluation metric for predicted high-level traces that is closer to process mining than time-window based methods that are often used in the sequence labeling field. Using a real life event log from a smart home domain, we showed that supervised event abstraction can be used to enable process discovery techniques to generate high-level process insights even when process models discovered by process mining techniques on the original low-level events are unstructured. Finally, we showed on a synthetic event log that supervised event abstraction can be used to discover smaller, more comprehensible, high-level process models when the process model discovered on low level events is too large to be interpretable.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
bibliography:
- 'FWunderlich\_2016.bib'
---
$\mbox{ }$
[ [[ **Arguing on entropic and enthalpic first-order phase transitions in strongly interacting matter** ]{}]{}\
[**F. Wunderlich$^{1,2}$, R. Yaresko$^{1,2}$, B. Kämpfer$^{1,2}$**]{}]{}\
[ $^1$Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Inst. für Strahlenphysik, PF 510119, D-01314 Dresden, Germany\
$^2$Institut für Theoretische Physik, TU Dresden, D-01062 Dresden, Germany]{}
[[ **Abstract**]{}[**\
**]{}]{}\
[[ **Keywords**]{}[**\
Entropic and enthalpic phase transitions, chiral phase transition, isentropes, quark-meson model, linear sigma model with linearized fluctuations** ]{}]{}
The beam energy scan at RHIC [@Adare:2012uk; @Adare:2012wf; @Adamczyk:2013gw; @Adamczyk:2014mzf; @Soltz:2014dja; @Das:2014oca; @McDonald:2015tza] is aimed at searching for a critical end point (CEP) in the phase diagram of strongly interacting matter, which is related to confinement-deconfinement effects. At a CEP [@Rischke:2003mt; @Stephanov:2004wx; @Fukushima:2010bq; @Friman:2011zz], a line of a first-order phase transitions (FOPT) is conjectured to set in. Still, the hypothetical CEP could not (yet) be localized by ab initio QCD calculations. Therefore, details of the FOPT curve and details of the equation of state in its vicinity are unsettled to a large extent.
The utmost importance of the search for a CEP is also manifested by the fact that further ongoing relativistic heavy-ion collision experiments, such as NA61/SHINE [@Gazdzicki:2008pu; @Czopowicz:2015mfa; @Aduszkiewicz:2015jna; @MajaMackowiak-PawlowskafortheNA61/SHINE:2016vzn], have it on the their priority list, and planned experiments at FAIR, e.g. CBM [@Chattopadhyay:2014mha], at NICA, e.g. by the MPD group [@Kekelidze:2015yza], and at J-PARC, e.g. by the J-PARC heavy-ion collaboration [@Sako:2015cqa], are primarily motivated by it. The proceedings of the CPOD conferences [@LawrenceBerkeleyLab.:2013uoa; @Proceedings:2015exj] document well the theoretical expectations and experimental achievements in this field.
The CEP itself (which may occur also as a tricritical point [@Ding:2015ona]) is interesting, as it is expected to show up in specific fluctuation observables [@Stephanov:1999zu; @Gupta:2009mu; @Mohanty:2009vb; @Adamczyk:2013dal; @Adamczyk:2014fia; @Almasi:2016hhx], related to critical exponents, however, also the emerging FOPT curve can give rise to interesting physics phenomena. If the hypothetical FOPT curve continues to small or even zero temperatures, astrophysical consequences for neutron stars [@Kampfer_neutronstars; @Schertler:1997za; @Schertler:1999xn; @Schertler:2000xq; @Macher:2004vw; @Dexheimer:2008ax; @Pagliara:2009dg; @Kurkela:2010yk; @Fischer:2010wp; @Alford:2013aca; @Yasutake:2014oxa; @Zacchi:2015lwa; @Hempel:2015vlg; @Alvarez-Castillo:2015xfa] proto-neutron star formation and core-collapse supernova explosions [@Dexheimer:2008ax; @Sagert:2008ka; @Fischer:2010wp; @Nishimura:2011yb; @Pan:2015sga] are directly related to the physics of heavy-ion collisions, supposed the FOPT curve is accessible in such experiments (cf. [@Bugaev:2014bua] for searches for two-phase mixture effects related to the deconfinement FOPT).
From the theory side, the famous Columbia plot (cf.[@Ding:2015ona] for an update) unravels the following qualitative features: (i) At zero chemical potential, three-flavor QCD in the chiral limit displays a first-order confinement-deconfinement transition which extends to non-zero strange-quark masses $m_s < m_s^\text{tri}$ and light-quark masses $m_{u,d} \to 0$; the delineation curve to the region $m_{u,d,s,} > 0$ is related to a 2nd order transition with $Z(2)$ symmetry, beyond which the transition turns into a cross over; for $m_s > m_s^\text{tri}$ and $m_{u,d} \to 0$, the 2nd order transition line is related to $O(4)$ symmetry. The physical point $m_{u,d,s} > 0$ is in the cross over region. (ii) For $m_s > m_s^\text{tri}$ and $m_{u,d} \to 0$, the phase structure in the temperature-chemical potential plane is determined by a 2nd order transition curve of presumably negative slope (with the above mentioned universal $O(4)$ scaling properties) which ends in a tri-critical point, where the 1st order transition sets in, expected to continue to zero temperature. (iii) Upon enlarging $m_{u,d}$ toward the physical values and keeping the conjectured $m_s > m_s^\text{tri} > 0$, the 2nd oder transition curve turns into the pseudo-critical (cross over) curve which ends at non-zero chemical potential in a CEP. The latter one can be thought to arise from the previous tri-critical point along a 2nd order $Z(2)$ curve when enlarging $m_{u,d}$. Therefore, the expectation for 2+1 flavor QCD with physical quark masses is the existence of a CEP at a temperature below the pseudo-critical temperature of $(154 \pm 9)$ MeV and non-zero chemical potential and an emerging 1st oder transition curve going to zero temperature [@Ding:2015ona]. Present day lattice QCD evaluations attempt to quantify these features, cf. [@Bellwied:2015rza], for example.
In a recent series of papers [@Hempel:2013tfa; @Steinheimer:2013xxa; @Iosilevskiy:2015sia], the authors promote a useful sub-classification of FOPTs by attributing the confinement–deconfinement transition to an entropic one, while the established gas-liquid transition in nuclear matter [@Rischke:2003mt; @Stephanov:2004wx; @Fukushima:2010bq; @Friman:2011zz] is classified as enthalpic one. The key is the Clausius-Clapeyron equation $$\frac{d p_c (T)}{d T} = \frac{s_1 /n_1 - s_2 / n_2}{1/n_1 - 1/n_2} \label{clausius_1}$$ which relates the slope of the critical pressure, $p_c$, along the FOPT w.r.t.temperature, $T$, to entropy densities $s_{1,2}$ and baryon densities $n_{1,2}$. Denoting by the label “1” the dilute (confined/hadron) phase and by “2” the dense (deconfined/quark-gluon) phase, the slope of the critical pressure curve is positive, $d p_c / dT > 0$, for larger entropy per baryon in phase “1”, meaning an enthalpic FOPT. In contrast, for larger entropy per baryon in phase “2” the critical curve has a negative slope, $d p_c / dT < 0$ meaning an entropic FOPT.
Some guidance for the trajectories of fluid elements is given by the isentropic curves, determined by $s/n = const$, when having in mind the adiabatic expansion of matter created in the course of a heavy-ion collision as long as the respective fluid element is in a pure phase, “2” or “1”. The details of the transit through the two-phase coexistence region depend on the latent heat and other details of the equation of state. With respect to investigations of the heavy-ion dynamics (cf. [@Steinheimer:2007iy]) seeking for imprints of the conjectured QCD FOPT and CEP signatures, it seems tempting to clarify in a clear-cut picture the different patterns of isentropes being related to a FOPT.
Our note is organized as follows. In section \[sec:patterns\] we discuss obvious types of isentropic patterns which may accompany a FOPT in strongly interacting matter. The pattern classification is put in relation to the entropic and enthalpic sub-classes. We see enthalpic transitions either with incoming-only or incoming+outgoing isentropes, thus qualifying also the latter one for modeling the QCD deconfinement-confinement transition. Examples based on transparent models are presented in section \[sec:examples\] and appendix \[apdx:HQ\]. In section \[sec:summary\], we summarize.
\[sec:patterns\]
We restrict our discussion to the grand canonical description of matter by an equation of state $p(T, \mu)$ with one conserved charge, e.g. baryon number, related to the chemical potential $\mu$. Entropy density and baryon density are given by $s(T, \mu) = \partial p / \partial T$ and $n(T, \mu) = \partial p / \partial \mu$ and the Gibbs -Duhem relation $e + p = sT + n \mu$ holds ($e$ is the energy density). Considering the region $s > 0$ and $n > 0$, the isobars $ p = const$ have negative slopes in the diagram upon $d T / d \mu \vert_{dp = 0} = - n/s$. We assume locally a FOPT which is signaled by a kinky behavior of $p(T, \,u)$ over the plane, both in $T$ and $\mu$ directions. $p(T, \mu)$ refers here to stable states; if multi-valued regions emerge, the branch with maximum pressure is the stable one. We further assume, for the sake of definiteness, the FOPT curve has a negative slope, $d T_c (\mu) / d \mu < 0$. In fact, $d (p_1(T, \mu) - p_2(T, \mu) = 0$ on the FOPT curve delivers $d T_c / d \mu = -(n_1 - n_2)/(s_1 - s_2)$, where we suppose $n_1 < n_2$ and $s_1 < s_2$.
We also recall from the equilibrium conditions $T_1 = T_2$, $\mu_1 = \mu_2$ and $p_1 = p_2$ on the FOPT curve the relation $$\frac{d p_c(\mu) }{d \mu} = \frac{n_1 /s_1 - n_2/s_2}{1/s_1 -1/s_2} \label{clausius_2}$$ which is another form of the Clausius-Clapeyron equation .
[rccc]{} &type IA & type IB & type II\
(0,40)[$T$]{} (370,-15)[$\mu$]{} (10,-5)[(0,1)[70]{}]{} (10,-5)[(1,0)[125]{}]{}
(135.5,-5)[( 1, 2)[3]{}]{} (135.5,-5)[(-1,-2)[3]{}]{} (138.5,-5)[( 1, 2)[3]{}]{} (138.5,-5)[(-1,-2)[3]{}]{}
(138.5,-5)[(1,0)[126.5]{}]{}
(265.5,-5)[( 1, 2)[3]{}]{} (265.5,-5)[(-1,-2)[3]{}]{} (268.5,-5)[( 1, 2)[3]{}]{} (268.5,-5)[(-1,-2)[3]{}]{}
(268.5,-5)[(1,0)[130]{}]{}&
&![Schematic representation of isentropes (lines with arrows indicating the expansion path) for the FOPT types IA (left panels, $s/n =const$), IB (middle panels, $s/n = const$) and Typ II (right panels, $s_1/n_1 > s_2/n_2$) in the plane (upper row) and the plane (lower row). States in “1” (see text) are left/below the phase border line (fat curves in the upper row), while states in “2” are right/above. The green areas in the lower row depict a part of the two-phase coexistence regions for the respective types. Note that the coexistence regions (green areas) can appear in quite different shapes. \[fig:0\]](Typ_2.pdf "fig:"){height="15.00000%"} & ![Schematic representation of isentropes (lines with arrows indicating the expansion path) for the FOPT types IA (left panels, $s/n =const$), IB (middle panels, $s/n = const$) and Typ II (right panels, $s_1/n_1 > s_2/n_2$) in the plane (upper row) and the plane (lower row). States in “1” (see text) are left/below the phase border line (fat curves in the upper row), while states in “2” are right/above. The green areas in the lower row depict a part of the two-phase coexistence regions for the respective types. Note that the coexistence regions (green areas) can appear in quite different shapes. \[fig:0\]](Typ_3.pdf "fig:"){height="15.00000%"}\
(0,40)[$T$]{} (370,-15)[$n$]{} (10,-5)[(0,1)[70]{}]{} (10,-5)[(1,0)[125]{}]{}
(135.5,-5)[( 1, 2)[3]{}]{} (135.5,-5)[(-1,-2)[3]{}]{} (138.5,-5)[( 1,2 )[3]{}]{} (138.5,-5)[(-1,-2)[3]{}]{}
(138.5,-5)[(1,0)[126.5]{}]{}
(265.5,-5)[( 1, 2)[3]{}]{} (265.5,-5)[(-1,-2)[3]{}]{} (268.5,-5)[( 1, 2)[3]{}]{} (268.5,-5)[(-1,-2)[3]{}]{}
(268.5,-5)[(1,0)[130]{}]{}&
![Schematic representation of isentropes (lines with arrows indicating the expansion path) for the FOPT types IA (left panels, $s/n =const$), IB (middle panels, $s/n = const$) and Typ II (right panels, $s_1/n_1 > s_2/n_2$) in the plane (upper row) and the plane (lower row). States in “1” (see text) are left/below the phase border line (fat curves in the upper row), while states in “2” are right/above. The green areas in the lower row depict a part of the two-phase coexistence regions for the respective types. Note that the coexistence regions (green areas) can appear in quite different shapes. \[fig:0\]](Typ_1_Tn.pdf "fig:"){width="25.00000%"} &![Schematic representation of isentropes (lines with arrows indicating the expansion path) for the FOPT types IA (left panels, $s/n =const$), IB (middle panels, $s/n = const$) and Typ II (right panels, $s_1/n_1 > s_2/n_2$) in the plane (upper row) and the plane (lower row). States in “1” (see text) are left/below the phase border line (fat curves in the upper row), while states in “2” are right/above. The green areas in the lower row depict a part of the two-phase coexistence regions for the respective types. Note that the coexistence regions (green areas) can appear in quite different shapes. \[fig:0\]](Typ_2_Tn.pdf "fig:"){width="25.00000%"} &
From selected examples we can infer three different patterns of isentropes in the plane:\
Type IA: Isentropes come in from the phase “2”, enter the critical curve $T_c(\mu)$ and leave it toward the phase “1” at [*lower*]{} temperature, see Fig. \[fig:0\], left top panel. According to Clausius-Clapeyron one has $d p_c(T) / dT > 0$, i.e.a gas-liquid or enthalpic transition in the nomenclature of [@Iosilevskiy:2015sia].\
Type IB: Isentropes come in from the phase “2”, enter the critical curve $T_c(\mu)$ and evolve toward phase “1” at [*higher*]{} temperature, see Fig. \[fig:0\] middle top panel. Clausius-Clapeyron tells us for that case $dp_c (T) / dT < 0$, i.e. a QCD type or entropic FOPT in the nomenclature of [@Iosilevskiy:2015sia].\
Type II: Isentropes come in from both sides, i.e. phases “1” and “2”, enter the critical curve $T_c (\mu)$ and run down on it, see Fig. \[fig:0\], right top panel. According to our experience with a number of models, $s_2/n_2 < s_1/n_1$ in a point on the critical curve, i.e. also a gas-liquid type or enthalpic FOPT with $dp_c(T) /dT > 0$.
The direction of isentropes is such to describe expansion, i.e. both temperature and density drop in pure phases. Type I is related to in-out (or going-through) isentropes, while type II has incoming-only. A prominent example for type II is the van der Waals equation of state, cf. [@johnston2014] and figure 1 in [@yuen2015]. We emphasize the local character of our consideration, that is the restriction to the vicinity of a point on the presumed phase boundary. These patterns translate directly into the plane, see bottom row of Fig. \[fig:0\], where one verifies that dropping temperatures along isentropes in pure phases imply in fact dropping densities too, i.e. proper expansion. Types IA and IB are delineated by $s_1/n_1 = s_2/n_2$, resulting in $p_c(T) = const$. Types IA and II share as common feature flatter isobars than the critical curve $T_c(\mu)$; for type IB, the critical curve is flatter than the isobars.
For the moment being we do not see the need to study further fine details, e.g. slopes and relative slopes of isentropes near the critical curve.
We would like to emphasize that also models of type IA could serve as an illustration of the possible structure of the phase diagram, despite they belong to the gas-liquid transition type: Suppose $n_1^c (T \to 0) > n_0$, where $n_0$ is the nuclear saturation density and $n_1^c$ denotes the density of phase “1” at the critical curve, then nothing seems to speak against the scenario with an expanding and cooling fluid element initially in phase “2”, which traverses the confinement transition region (two-phase coexistence) and arrives in the hadronic world of phase “1”. That means, if “2” is a deconfined state, then both IA and IB allow for a graceful exit into the pure (hadronic) phase “1”, while II ends locally in a two-phase mixture of “1+2” for adiabatic expansion dynamics, i.e. some part of matter remains in the deconfined state “2”, e.g.as quark nuggets, contrary to our present expectations and in agreement with the failure of previous searches for them [@Schaffner:1991qg; @Schaffner:1993nn; @Adams:2005cu; @Madsen:2006yw; @Adriani:2015epa], (see however [@Gorham:2012hy; @Atreya:2014sca] for considering them as candidates of dark matter). Whether realistic models can be designed to do so (cf. [@Benic:2015pia] for a recent attempt), in agreement with serving for two-solar mass neutron stars, is a question beyond the schematic phenomenological approaches. Anyhow, type IA supplements the considerations favored in [@Iosilevskiy:2015sia; @Steinheimer:2013xxa].
\[sec:examples\]
We are going to present a few examples for the above discussed transition types. For that, we select the quark-meson model[^1] (cf. [@Wunderlich:2015rwa] for a description of the setting used here[^2]) with linearized meson field fluctuations[^3] and show that only shifting the nucleon/quark vacuum mass parameter $m_{q,ß}$ relative to the critical chemical potential at zero temperature $\mu_c^0$ is sufficient to switch from IA to II. The latter one is to a large extent determined by the product of the sigma mass parameter $m_\sigma$ and the (classical) vacuum expectation value of the sigma field $\langle \sigma\rangle_0$. We are fully aware of the shortcomings of such a model w.r.t. proper account of nuclear matter properties at low temperatures and QCD thermodynamics at high temperatures, as discussed in [@Steinheimer:2013xxa]. But in view of the pertinent complexity of the QCD degrees of freedom in the strong coupling regime such a model with chiral symmetry breaking and restoration may give some glimpses of what is conceivable, in principle.
Also our model for the type IB (cf. appendix \[apdx:HQ\]) has, at best, illustrative character: It is a two-phase construction with states in “2” modeled by the extrapolation of weakly interacting quarks and gluons, supplemented by an effective bag constant to account for some non-perturbative aspects, and states in “1” referring to thermal light-meson (pion) excitations and nucleons in some mean field approximation including a realistic incompressibility modulus.
[![Contour plots of scaled pressure $p/p_{CEP}$ (i.e. isobars, top row) and entropy per baryon $s/n$ (i.e. isentropes, bottom row) for FOPTs of type IA (left column) and type II (right column) over the plane. Equation of state from the quark-meson model with linearized fluctuations applying the parameters $\langle \sigma \rangle_0 = 90$ MeV (expectation value of the sigma field in vacuum, as indicated by the label $0$), $m_{\pi,0} = 138$ MeV (pion mass) as well as either $m_{\sigma,0} = 1284.4$ MeV (sigma mass), $m_{q,0} = 390$ MeV (quark mass) (left column) or $m_{\sigma,0} = 700$ MeV, $m_{q,0} = 360$ MeV (right column). The pressure is scaled by the pressure at the critical end point, i.e. with $p_{CEP}=2.38\times10^8 {\rm MeV^4}$ (left) and $p_{CEP}=8.59\times10^8 {\rm MeV^4}$ (right), respectively. The arrow in the bottom left plot points to a state where the density at $T=0$ is equal to $n_0=0.17\,\text{fm}^{-3}$. On the bottom right plot this point is located at the phase boundary. \[fig:1\]](Druck_skal_color.pdf "fig:"){width="48.00000%"}]{} [![Contour plots of scaled pressure $p/p_{CEP}$ (i.e. isobars, top row) and entropy per baryon $s/n$ (i.e. isentropes, bottom row) for FOPTs of type IA (left column) and type II (right column) over the plane. Equation of state from the quark-meson model with linearized fluctuations applying the parameters $\langle \sigma \rangle_0 = 90$ MeV (expectation value of the sigma field in vacuum, as indicated by the label $0$), $m_{\pi,0} = 138$ MeV (pion mass) as well as either $m_{\sigma,0} = 1284.4$ MeV (sigma mass), $m_{q,0} = 390$ MeV (quark mass) (left column) or $m_{\sigma,0} = 700$ MeV, $m_{q,0} = 360$ MeV (right column). The pressure is scaled by the pressure at the critical end point, i.e. with $p_{CEP}=2.38\times10^8 {\rm MeV^4}$ (left) and $p_{CEP}=8.59\times10^8 {\rm MeV^4}$ (right), respectively. The arrow in the bottom left plot points to a state where the density at $T=0$ is equal to $n_0=0.17\,\text{fm}^{-3}$. On the bottom right plot this point is located at the phase boundary. \[fig:1\]](Druck_skal_colorSL.pdf "fig:"){width="48.00000%"}]{}\
[![Contour plots of scaled pressure $p/p_{CEP}$ (i.e. isobars, top row) and entropy per baryon $s/n$ (i.e. isentropes, bottom row) for FOPTs of type IA (left column) and type II (right column) over the plane. Equation of state from the quark-meson model with linearized fluctuations applying the parameters $\langle \sigma \rangle_0 = 90$ MeV (expectation value of the sigma field in vacuum, as indicated by the label $0$), $m_{\pi,0} = 138$ MeV (pion mass) as well as either $m_{\sigma,0} = 1284.4$ MeV (sigma mass), $m_{q,0} = 390$ MeV (quark mass) (left column) or $m_{\sigma,0} = 700$ MeV, $m_{q,0} = 360$ MeV (right column). The pressure is scaled by the pressure at the critical end point, i.e. with $p_{CEP}=2.38\times10^8 {\rm MeV^4}$ (left) and $p_{CEP}=8.59\times10^8 {\rm MeV^4}$ (right), respectively. The arrow in the bottom left plot points to a state where the density at $T=0$ is equal to $n_0=0.17\,\text{fm}^{-3}$. On the bottom right plot this point is located at the phase boundary. \[fig:1\]](Isentropen.pdf "fig:"){width="48.00000%"}]{} [![Contour plots of scaled pressure $p/p_{CEP}$ (i.e. isobars, top row) and entropy per baryon $s/n$ (i.e. isentropes, bottom row) for FOPTs of type IA (left column) and type II (right column) over the plane. Equation of state from the quark-meson model with linearized fluctuations applying the parameters $\langle \sigma \rangle_0 = 90$ MeV (expectation value of the sigma field in vacuum, as indicated by the label $0$), $m_{\pi,0} = 138$ MeV (pion mass) as well as either $m_{\sigma,0} = 1284.4$ MeV (sigma mass), $m_{q,0} = 390$ MeV (quark mass) (left column) or $m_{\sigma,0} = 700$ MeV, $m_{q,0} = 360$ MeV (right column). The pressure is scaled by the pressure at the critical end point, i.e. with $p_{CEP}=2.38\times10^8 {\rm MeV^4}$ (left) and $p_{CEP}=8.59\times10^8 {\rm MeV^4}$ (right), respectively. The arrow in the bottom left plot points to a state where the density at $T=0$ is equal to $n_0=0.17\,\text{fm}^{-3}$. On the bottom right plot this point is located at the phase boundary. \[fig:1\]](IsentropenSL.pdf "fig:"){width="48.00000%"}]{}
Figure \[fig:1\] exhibits the isobars $p = const$ over the plane for two parameter sets (see figure caption for the values) of the quark-meson model in linearized fluctuations approximation [@Mocsy:2004ab; @Bowman:2008kc; @Ferroni:2010ct; @Wunderlich:2015rwa]. These patterns look fairly similar at a first glance. The isobars are flatter than the phase border line (fat white curve). The CEP coordinates are $(T_{CEP}, \mu_{CEP}) = ({\cal O}(97 {\rm MeV}), {\cal O} (377.5 {\rm MeV}))$ for the parameter set depicted on the left panels and $({\cal O}(98 {\rm MeV}), {\cal O} (216.5 {\rm MeV}))$ on the right ones. (Note that we use actually quark chemical potential $\mu_q$ and net quark density $n_q$.) One must not consider these values as predictions of the CEP location since the proper account of fluctuations can significantly change them. Furthermore, the inclusion of some gluon dynamics, e.g. via a coupling to the Polyakov loop, thermal gluon fluctuations as well as extending the invoked hadron species can also cause substantial changes of the CEP coordinates.
Despite of the apparently marginal differences of the isobar patterns, the isentropes are drastically different. In the left bottom panel of Fig. \[fig:1\], type IA isentropes are seen which mean incoming from phase “2” and outgoing into phase “1” whenever they meet the critical curve. In contrast, the right bottom panel in Fig. \[fig:1\] displays a type II FOPT with incoming-only isentropes into the critical curve.
[![As Fig. [\[fig:1\]]{} but for the isentropes in the plane for pure phases only. The difference in $s/n$ between two adjacent isentropes is 0.2 and the thick blue isentropes are labeled with their respective $s/n$. The two-phase coexistence regions are depicted as green areas with the CEP (black bullet) on top. The dashed grey curves enclose the regions in space displayed in Fig. \[fig:1\], i.e. the gray regions correspond to regions outside. The densities are scaled by the nuclear saturation density $n_0 = 0.17\,\rm fm^{-3}$. \[fig:2\]](Phasendiagramm_T_n.pdf "fig:"){width="48.00000%"}]{} [![As Fig. [\[fig:1\]]{} but for the isentropes in the plane for pure phases only. The difference in $s/n$ between two adjacent isentropes is 0.2 and the thick blue isentropes are labeled with their respective $s/n$. The two-phase coexistence regions are depicted as green areas with the CEP (black bullet) on top. The dashed grey curves enclose the regions in space displayed in Fig. \[fig:1\], i.e. the gray regions correspond to regions outside. The densities are scaled by the nuclear saturation density $n_0 = 0.17\,\rm fm^{-3}$. \[fig:2\]](Phasendiagramm_T_nSL.pdf "fig:"){width="48.00000%"}]{}
Figure \[fig:2\] exhibits the isentropes in pure phases “2” and “1” over the plane. This presentation verifies that both the temperature and the density drop along the isentropes in pure phases. One can infer directly from the bottom panels of Fig. \[fig:1\] the above claim w.r.t. outgoing isentropes from the low-density phase border curve $n_1 (T)$ for type IA, see left panel of Fig. \[fig:2\], while for type II (right panel) only incoming isentropes appear (isentropes with $s/n>5$ enter the two-phase region at smaller densities which are not displayed).
![The critical pressure $p_c(T)$ as a function of temperature for FOPTs of type IA (left panel) and II (right panel). The numbers on the upper axis are the critical chemical potentials (in MeV) corresponding to the temperatures on the lower axis. Equation of state and critical pressures $p_{CEP}$ as described in the caption of Fig. [\[fig:1\]]{}. \[fig:3\]](krit_Druck.pdf "fig:"){width="48.00000%"} ![The critical pressure $p_c(T)$ as a function of temperature for FOPTs of type IA (left panel) and II (right panel). The numbers on the upper axis are the critical chemical potentials (in MeV) corresponding to the temperatures on the lower axis. Equation of state and critical pressures $p_{CEP}$ as described in the caption of Fig. [\[fig:1\]]{}. \[fig:3\]](krit_DruckSL.pdf "fig:"){width="48.00000%"}
Consistent to the Clausius-Clapeyron equation , the critical pressure as a function of the temperature is increasing, see Fig. \[fig:3\]. The inclined numbers at the top axis depict the (critical) chemical potential values corresponding to the temperature given at the lower axis thus highlighting the shape of $p_c(\mu)$ which is actually decreasing in agreement with .
We mention that the employed minimum set-up of the quark-meson model does not allow for type IB transitions since thermal gluon fluctuations are not included, i.e. the number of effective degrees of freedom accounting for thermal fluctuations is too small. One may, however, easily construct two-phase models with a high-temperature quark-gluon phase and a low-temperature hadron phase. Figure \[fig:4\] in the appendix \[apdx:HQ\] presents such an example. Without fine tuning, such models do not display a CEP at $\mu > 0$, instead the constructed phase border curve continues form the $T$ axis down to the $\mu$ axis. Reference [@Steinheimer:2012gc] provides an example of enforcing a CEP at $\mu > 0$ to obtain also a type IB transition.
The focus of the present note is on the isentropes relevant for the expansion dynamics in relativistic heavy-ion collisions. As emphasized, e.g. in [@Hempel:2015vlg] and references therein, analog considerations are useful for discussing the impact of peculiarities of the QCD phase diagram in core-collapse supernova explosions. There, one has to consider adiabatic paths along compression with proper leptonic contributions including also trapped neutrinos. Tor a first orientation, the pressure as a function of the energy density at suitable values of the entropy per baryon is to be analyzed to figure out whether the FOPT effects in iso-spin symmetric matter translate into modifications of neutron star configurations (with $\beta$ stability, no trapped neutrinos) such as the occurrence of a third stable island (cf. [@Kampfer_neutronstars]), nowadays often refered to as twin configurations [@Schertler:1997za; @Schertler:1999xn; @Schertler:2000xq; @Alford:2013aca; @Drago:2015dea; @Zdunik:2012dj; @Chamel:2013efa; @Alvarez-Castillo:2014dva; @Blaschke:2013ana; @Benic:2014jia], or modify the core collapse dynamics (with trapped neutrinos) toward proto-neutron stars or even black holes such as discussed in [@Hempel:2015vlg; @Sagert:2008ka] and references therein. We leave according investigations to separate dedicated analyses.
\[sec:summary\]
In summary we discuss options for modeling a hypothetical first-order phase transition which is related to a critical end point in a strongly interacting medium. Guided by the expectation that the QCD cross-over (as remnant of the transition of massless 2+1 flavor QCD, cf. [@Ding:2015ona]) at a temperature of about 150 MeV at small chemical potential turns, at the critical point at large chemical potential, into a first-order transition we consider scenarios where initially deconfined matter can evolve completely into confined (hadronic) matter. We emphasize that both enthalpic and entropic phase transitions are consistent with such an expectation provided a graceful exit from the deconfined state into pure hadron matter is possible upon adiabatic expansion. At low temperature, the low density part of the two-phase coexistence region must be at larger densities than nuclear matter at saturation (for isospin symmetric nuclear matter). This implies that the pattern of isentropes must “go through” the phase border curve to be conform with the envisaged scenario. In contrast, the van der Waals type transition is of a different kind as it has locally incoming isentropes only. Obviously, more complicated phase border curves may allow for mixtures of the mentioned types. Our discussion also completely ignores flavor-locked color superconducting phases which are expected at larger densities.
Our discussion is based on equilibrium thermodynamics, and the medium is assumed to obey one conserved charge - the baryon density. Accounting for more conserved charges, e.g.related to isospin, strangeness, electric charge etc., complicates the picture. Transient states related to under saturated or over saturated gluons [@Peshier:2015kco] or under saturated quark state occupation [@Stoecker:2015zea] give rise to many interesting phenomena beyond our discussion.
The lacking of ab intio information from first-principle calculations of QCD thermodynamics lets many options still be conceivable. This makes the concerted experimental hunt for signals of the critical end point and the related first-order transition so important.
\[apdx:HQ\]
\
[![Isobars (left top panel) and the critical pressure $p_c$ as a function of temperature (right top panel) as well as isentropes, both over the plane (left bottom) and over the plane (right bottom) for the two-phase model of type IB FOPT, based on . As in Fig. \[fig:2\], the coexistence region is depicted as green area. Our calculations do not map out completely the plane, thus leaving some uncharted regions in white in the left column and the bottom right panel. []{data-label="fig:4"}](isentropen_HQ.pdf "fig:"){width="48.00000%"}]{}
The constructed FOPT is based on the extrapolation of a hadron equation of state with pressure $$p_1 = n_b^2 \frac{\partial W}{\partial n_b}\Bigg|_{\hat s}\label{HQ_01}$$ to be calculated from $$W = e/n_B = W_c + W_T \label{HQ_02}$$ with $$\begin{aligned}
W_c =&\frac{K}{18}\left(\frac{n_B-n_0}{n_B}\right)^2 + W_\text{bind} + m_N,\notag\\
W_T =&\frac32 T + \frac{\pi^2}{18}\frac{T^4}{n_B},\notag\\
\hat s =& \frac{s}{n_B} = \hat s_N + \hat s_\pi,\label{HQ_03}\\
\hat s_N =& 2.5-\ln\left(\frac{n_B}{4}\left(\frac{2\pi}{Tm_N}\right)^{3/2}\right),\notag\\
\hat s_\pi =& \frac{4}{3}\frac{\pi^2}{10}\frac{T^3}{n_B}.\notag\end{aligned}$$ The temperature $T(n_B,\hat s)$ follows self consistently from $$T=\frac{\partial W(n_B, \hat s)}{\partial \hat s}\label{HQ_04}$$ and the baryo-chemical potential is then $\mu_B = W + p/n_B - T\hat s$. We utilize the nucleon mass $m_N=938$ MeV, the nucleon binding energy , nuclear incompressibility coefficient $K= 235$ MeV and saturation density $n_0=0.17$ fm$^{-3}$.[^4] The equation of state in the high temperature phase is defined by the extrapolation of a quark-gluon equation of state from leading-order weak-coupling (cf. [@Kurkela:2016was] for advanced calculations) supplemented by a bag constant B $$p_2 = 16\frac{\pi^2}{90}T^4 + f_q\Big(\frac78\frac{\pi^2}{90}T^4 +\frac{1}{24}T^2\mu_B^2 + \frac{1}{48\pi^2}\mu_B^4\Big)-B,\label{HQ_05}$$ where we employ for the number of effective quark degrees of freedom $f_q=2.5\times3\times2\times2=30$ and $B = (235$ MeV$)^4$. These branches are matched by the above mentioned Gibbs criteria for equilibrium, $p_1=p_2$, $T_1=T_2$, $\mu_1 = \mu_2$. The resulting isobars, the critical pressure $p_c(T)$ as well as isentropes, both over the and the -planes are exhibited in Fig. \[fig:4\].
**Acknowledgments**
[ We tank J. Randrup, V. Koch, F. Karsch, K. Redlich, M.I. Gorenstein, S. Schramm, H. Stöcker and B. Friman for enlightening discussions of phase transitions in nuclear matter. The work is supported by BMBF grant 05P12CRGH. ]{}
[^1]: We chose this since in the chiral limit it obeys the same symmetries (an $O(4)\simeq SU(2)\times SU(2)$[@Tetradis:2003qa]) as QCD [@Pisarski:1983ms] putting both into the same universality class and thus rendering the model a good prototype for studying the properties of the QCD chiral transition
[^2]: In a nutshell, the employed model, also coined linear sigma model, is based on a doublett of quark degrees of freedom, an iso-scalar sigma field and an iso-triplett pion field with standard coupling among these fields.
[^3]: According to our experience with numerical evaluations, the account of linearized meson field fluctuations modifies significantly the results of the mean field approximation. (For the inclusion of the complete fluctuations spectrum within the functional renormalization group approach, see [@Tripolt:2013jra].) In particular, the fluctuating meson degrees of freedom deliver explicit contributions to the pressure
[^4]: This is a model in the spirit of [@Buchwald:1981hu] for nuclear matter and pions.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We construct a Banach space $\mathcal X_\varepsilon$ with an uncountable $\varepsilon$-biorthogonal system but no uncountable $\tau$-biorthogonal system for $\tau<\varepsilon(1+\varepsilon)^{-1}$. In particular the space have no uncountable biorthogonal system. We also construct a Banach space $\mathcal X_K$ with an uncountable $K$-basic sequence but no uncountable $K''$-basic sequence, for $1\leq K''<K$. A common feature of these examples is that they are both constructed by recursive amalgamations using a single construction scheme.'
address: |
Department of Mathematics\
University of Toronto\
Bahen Center 40 St. George St.\
Toronto, Ontario M5S 2E4, Canada.
author:
- Fulgencio Lopez
title: Banach spaces from a construction scheme
---
Introduction
============
The class of nonseparable Banach spaces exhibit phenomena which are not present in the more studied class of separable Banach spaces. Some of the most striking differences were discovered recently by J. Lopez-Abad and S. Todorcevic [@LAT] when they were developing forcing constructions of Banach spaces via finite-dimensional approximations. For example, it is shown in [@LAT] that for every $\varepsilon>0$ rational, there is a forcing notion ${\mathbb P}_\varepsilon$ which forces a Banach space ${\mathcal Y_\varepsilon}$ with an uncountable $\varepsilon$-biorthogonal system and such that for every $0\leq\tau<\frac{\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}$, ${\mathcal Y_\varepsilon}$ has no uncountable $\tau$-biorthogonal system. They also showed ([@LAT Theorem 6.4]) that for every constant $K>1$ there is a forcing notion ${\mathbb P}_K$ which forces a Banach space ${\mathcal Y_K}$ with an uncountable $K$-basis yet for every $1\leq K'<K$, ${\mathcal Y_K}$ has no uncountable $K'$-basic sequences. Recall that none of these two phenomena can happen in the class of separable Banach spaces when, of course, we replace ‘uncountable’ by ‘infinite’.
In [@todor], S. Todorcevic introduced a notion of construction scheme of uncountable mathematical objects via finite approximation and simultaneous multiple amagamations. While the construction scheme $\mathcal{F}$ can be described relying only on ordinary axioms of set theory, their crucial properties of ‘capturing’ (see the definition below) can only be provided using Jensen’s combinatorial principle $\Diamond$: there are sets $A_\alpha\subset\alpha$ for every $\alpha<\omega_1$ such that for every $A$ subset of $\omega_1$ there are stationarily many $\alpha$’s with $A\cap\alpha=A_\alpha$.
The purpose of this note is to apply this construction scheme to the theory of nonseparable Banach spaces inspired by the forcing constructions of [@LAT]. In particular, we prove the following two results
\[theorem.1\] Assume $\Diamond$. Then for every $\varepsilon\in (0,1)\cap\mathbb Q$, there is a Banach space ${\mathcal X_\varepsilon}$ with an uncountable $\varepsilon$-biorthogonal system but no uncountable $\tau$-biorthogonal system for every $0\leq\tau<\frac{\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}$.
\[theorem.2\] Assume $\Diamond$. Then for every constant $K> 1$, there is a Banach space ${\mathcal X_K}$ with a $K$-basis of length $\omega_1$ but no uncountable $K'$-basic sequence for every $1\leq K'<K$.
In each case the construction is based on a single rule of multiple amalgamation of a family of finite-dimensional Banach spaces indexed by $\mathcal{F}.$ This adds not only to the clarity over the corresponding forcing constructions but it also gives us Banach spaces that could be further easily analyzed. In fact neither the construction nor the analysis of the corresponding examples require any expertise outside the Banach space geometry.
It is interesting to compare our examples with the corresponding examples in [@LAT]. Given an uncountable sequence of forcing conditions, take an uncountable $\Delta$-subsequence where all conditions are isomorphic and find a condition which amalgamates finitely many of these forcing the desired inequality. Thus, the use of forcing allows us to amalgamate a posteriori since the generic filter $G$ takes care of all the possible $\Delta$-systems whose roots belong to $G$ . However in our recursive construction the amalgamations must be done a priori which limits the class of possible amalgamations. In fact since we do a single amalgamation at any given level of $\mathcal{F},$ our spaces tend to be considerably more homogeneous and therefore much easier to analyze.
In Section \[e.bior\] we give a proof of Theorem \[theorem.1\] and in Section \[k.basis\] we prove Theorem \[theorem.2\].
Preliminaries
=============
We use standard notation for set theory. For $\alpha\in\omega_1$ we denote the $\alpha^{th}$ ordinal and the set $\{\beta: \beta<\alpha\}$. If $A,B\subset\omega_1$ we say $A<B$ if for all $a\in A$ and $b\in B$, $a<b$.
We follow standard notation for Banach spaces (see, for example, [@LTz] and [@HMVZ]). In particular $c_{00}(\omega_1)$ is the vector space of functions $x:\omega_1\rightarrow\mathbb R$ with finite support (we use $\operatorname{supp}(x)$ for the support of $x$) If $F$ is a finite subset of $\omega_1$ and $h:F\rightarrow\mathbb R$, we consider the extension of $h$ in $c_{00}(\omega_1)$ to be zero outside of $F$ and still refer to it as $h$ without risk of confusion. By $e_\alpha$ we denote the function on $\omega_1$ that takes $\alpha$ to 1 and every other $\beta\in\omega_1$ to zero. For approximation purposes we work most of the time on $c_{00}(\omega_1,\mathbb Q)$, meaning we consider functions in $c_{00}(\omega_1)$ that only take values in $\mathbb Q$.
If $h,x\in c_{00}(\omega_1)$ we denote $$\langle h,x\rangle=\sum_{\alpha<\omega_1} h(\alpha)x(\alpha)$$ which is well defined because $x$ and $h$ have finite support.
We recall some notions of Banach space theory relevant for the results.
Let ${\mathcal X}$ be a Banach space and $(y_\alpha,y_\alpha^*)_{\alpha<\omega_1}$ a sequence in ${\mathcal X}\times{\mathcal X}^*$. For $\varepsilon\geq 0$, we say that $(y_\alpha,y_\alpha^*)_{\alpha<\omega_1}$ forms an $\varepsilon$-*biorthogonal system* if $y_\alpha^*(y_\alpha)=1$ for every $\alpha<\omega_1$, and $|y_\alpha^*(y_\beta)|\leq\varepsilon$ for every $\alpha\neq\beta$. If $\varepsilon=0$ we say $(y_\alpha)_{\alpha<\omega_1}$ forms a *biorthogonal system*.
A Banach space ${\mathcal X}$ have the *Mazur intersenction property* (MIP) if every closed convex subset of ${\mathcal X}$ is the intersection of closed balls.
The following relates the two previous concepts.
Let ${\mathcal X}$ be a Banach space.
1. If $(y_\alpha,y_\alpha^*)_{\alpha<\kappa}$ forms a biorthogonal system with $\langle y_\alpha^*:\alpha<\kappa\rangle$ dense in ${\mathcal X}^*$ then ${\mathcal X}$ admits an equivalent norm with the [(MIP)]{}.
2. If ${\mathcal X}$ is nonseparable and has an equivalent norm with the [(MIP)]{}, then ${\mathcal X}$ has an uncountable $\varepsilon$-biorthogonal system for some $0\leq\varepsilon<1$.
In [@Tbaire] it is shown using $\mbox{MA}_{\omega_1}$ plus PID that every uncountable Banach space has an uncountable biorthogonal system. Recall that here $\mbox{MA}_{\omega_1}$ is the standard Baire category principle for the class of compact spaces satisfying the countable chain condition and PID is the P-ideal dichotomy stating that for any P-ideal $\mathcal{I}$ of countable subsets of some index set $S$, either $S$ can be partitioned into countably many subsets orthogonal to $\mathcal{I}$ or there is an uncountable subset of $S$ all of whose countable subsets belong to $\mathcal{I}$. For more about this sort of dichotomies the reader is referred to [@T2011].
We say that a sequence $(y_\alpha)_{\alpha<\omega_1}$ in a Banach space ${\mathcal X}$ is an uncountable $K$-basic sequence, for $K\geq 1$, if for every $\lambda<\omega_1$ and every sequence of reals $(a_\alpha)_{\alpha<\omega_1}$ we have $$\left\Vert\sum_{\alpha<\lambda}a_\alpha y_\alpha\right\Vert\leq K \left\Vert\sum_{\alpha<\omega_1} a_\alpha y_\alpha\right\Vert$$
If a Banach space has an uncountable $K$-basic sequence for some $K\geq 1$ it also contains an uncountable biorthogonal system.
We introduce the main tool of this paper.
Capturing Construction Schemes
------------------------------
Capturing construction schemes where introduced by Stevo Todorčević in [@todor], where they were used to construct a compact space with the same properties as the space of [@BGT], a perfect non-metrizable compact convex set and an Asplund space of the form $C(K)$. In section 8 of [@todor] a general framework to construct Banach spaces using construction schemes is introduced. This framework, together with the forcing amalgamations of [@LAT], constitute the technology behind the proofs of Theorem \[theorem.1\] and Theorem \[theorem.2\].
Let $(m_k,n_k,r_k)_{k<\omega}$ be three sequences of natural numbers. We say that $(m_k,n_k,r_k)_{k<\omega}$ form a *type* if $m_0=1$, $m_{k-1}>r_k$ and $n_k>k$ for every $k>0$, for every $r<\omega$ there are infinitely many $k$’s with $r_k=r$ and for every $k>0$ we have $$m_k=n_k(m_{k-1}-r_k)+r_k$$
Let ${\mathcal F}\subset[\omega_1]^{<\omega}$, a family of finite subsets of $\omega_1$. We say that ${\mathcal F}$ is a *construction scheme of type* $(m_k,n_k,r_k)_{k}$ if we can partition ${\mathcal F}=\bigcup_{k<\omega}{\mathcal F}_k$ and for every $F\in{\mathcal F}$ there is $R(F)$ initial segment of $F$ with the following properties:
1. For every $A\subset\omega_1$ finite, there is $F\in{\mathcal F}$ such that $A\subset F$.
2. $\forall F\in{\mathcal F}_k$, $|F|=m_k$ and $|R(F)|=r_k$.
3. For all $F,E\in{\mathcal F}_k$, $E\cap F$ is an initial segment of $F$ and $E$.
4. $\forall F\in{\mathcal F}_k$, there are unique $F_0,\ldots, F_{n-1}\in{\mathcal F}_{k-1}$ with $$\label{canon.dec} F=\bigcup_{i<n} F_i$$
Furthermore $n=n_k$ and $(F_i)_{i<n_k}$ forms an increasing $\Delta$-system with root $R(F)$, i.e., $$R(F)< F_0\setminus R(F) <\ldots < F_{n_k-1}\setminus R(F)$$ we call this the *canonical decomposition* of $F$.
For $F\in{\mathcal F}$ we call the *rank* of $F$ the natural $k$ such that $F\in{\mathcal F}_k$. We assume also that ${\mathcal F}_0$ are all singletones in $\omega_1$. We use the elements $F$ of ${\mathcal F}$ to “approximate” an uncountable structure in $\omega_1$ and use in the recursive construction. For this we want all approximations of the same rank $k$ to be “isomorphic”.
Given a type $(m_k,n_k,r_k)_{k<\omega}$ there is a construction scheme ${\mathcal F}$ of this type (see proof of Theorem 4.8 of [@todor]).
Throughout the rest of the paper we use $k$ for the rank of $F\in{\mathcal F}$ and $m_k, n_k$ and $r_k$ as above and omit reference to the type of a construction scheme.
If $(D_\alpha:\alpha<\omega_1)$ is a sequence of finite subsets of $\omega_1$, we say it is a $\Delta$-system with root $R$ if for every $\alpha<\beta<\omega_1$ we have $R=D_\alpha\cap D_\beta$ and $R<D_\alpha\setminus R< D_\beta\setminus R$.
Let $F\in{\mathcal F}$ and $F=\bigcup_{i<n_k}F_i$ be the canonical decomposition of $F$. Then, all $F_i$’s have the same size, and we denote $\varphi_i:F_0\rightarrow F_i$ the unique increasing bijection between $F_0$ and $F_i$. If $f$ is a map on $F_0$, we define the map $\varphi_i(f)$ on $F_i$ as $f\circ\varphi_i^{-1}$.
A construction scheme ${\mathcal F}$ is *capturing* if for every $n<\omega$ and every uncountable $\Delta$-System $(D_\alpha:\alpha<\omega_1)$ with root $R$, we can find $F\in{\mathcal F}$ and $\alpha_0<\ldots<\alpha_{n-1}$ such that $$\begin{gathered}
R\subset R(F)\\
D_{\alpha_i} \subset F_i \quad\mbox{for all }i<n.\\
\varphi_i(D_0)=D_i\quad\mbox{for all }i<n.\end{gathered}$$ where $(F_i)_{i<n_k}$ is the canonical decomposition of $F$. In particular $n>n_k$.
The existence of capturing construction schemes follows from $\diamondsuit$ (Theorem 4.8 of [@todor]) By Theorem \[theorem.1\] and a result of [@Tbaire] we obtain the following
There are no capturing construction schemes.
It is shown in [@LT] that there is a Souslin tree if there is a 3-capturing construction scheme.
There are no 3-capturing construction schemes.
We give an overview of the proof of Theorem \[theorem.1\] and Theorem \[theorem.2\] (see also Section 8 of [@todor]).
Overview of proof
-----------------
The construction of the Banach spaces ${\mathcal X_\varepsilon}$ and ${\mathcal X_K}$ will follow an abstract approach for producing nonseparable Banach structures.
We start with a capturing construction scheme ${\mathcal F}$. First, we construct (recursively) a family ${\mathcal H}=\bigcup_{F\in{\mathcal F}}{\mathcal H}_F$ where ${\mathcal H}_F$ are functions $f:F\rightarrow [0,1]\cap\mathbb Q$. For ${\mathcal X_\varepsilon}$ we will have ${\mathcal H}_F=\{h_\alpha^F:\alpha\in F\}$. To guarantee nonseparability we want to have the following condition $$\label{nonseparability}
h_\alpha^F\restriction\alpha=0\qquad h_\alpha^F(\alpha)=1$$
The role of ${\mathcal H}$ is to be a norming set, for that we need the following coherence conditions $$\begin{gathered}
\label{coherence.1}
\forall F,E\in{\mathcal F}\quad\mbox{if $E\subset F$ then}\quad h_\alpha^F\restriction E=h_\alpha^F\quad\forall\alpha\in E \\
\label{coherence.2} \forall F,E\in{\mathcal F}\quad\mbox{if $E\subset F$ then}\quad f\restriction E\in\operatorname{conv}(\pm{\mathcal H}_E)\quad\forall f\in{\mathcal H}_F\end{gathered}$$ Let ${\mathcal H}_k=\bigcup_{i<k,F\in{\mathcal F}_i}{\mathcal H}_F$. Suppose ${\mathcal H}_k$ has been defined and $F\in{\mathcal F}$ has rank $k$. Let $F=\bigcup_{i<n_k}F_i$ the the canonical decomposition of F. We will define ${\mathcal H}_F$ by amalgamating the elements of ${\mathcal H}_{F_i} (i<n_k)$ in such a way that , and holds for ${\mathcal X_\varepsilon}$ and for ${\mathcal X_K}$.
This concludes the construction of ${\mathcal H}$. Next, we will define $\Vert\cdot\Vert$ in $c_{00}(\omega_1)$ $$\label{norm}
\Vert x\Vert=\max\{|\langle f, x\rangle|: f\in{\mathcal H}\}$$
Note that $\Vert\cdot\Vert$ is well defined by and and by we have $\Vert x\Vert =0$ if and only if $x=0$ (this for the construction of ${\mathcal X_\varepsilon}$, for ${\mathcal X_K}$ the vectors $e_\alpha\in{\mathcal H}$ for every $\alpha<\omega_1$) so it defines a norm on $c_{00}(\omega_1)$. The respective Banach space ${\mathcal X}$ will be the completion of $(c_{00}(\omega_1),\Vert\cdot\Vert)$.
To prove that ${\mathcal X}$ has indeed the properties that we want we will use the capturing of ${\mathcal F}$. Arguing by contradiction we take an uncountable sequence $(y_\alpha)_{\alpha<\omega_1}$ in ${\mathcal X}$ with a certain property. We show (following [@LAT]) that there is an inequality that uncountably many $y_\alpha$’s satisfy.
Take $(x_\alpha)_{\alpha<\omega_1}$ in $c_{00}(\omega_1,\mathbb Q)$ approximating the $y_\alpha$’s and apply the $\Delta$-System lemma and a counting argument (this is why we take $\mathbb Q$ instead of $\mathbb R$) to obtain $\Gamma\subset\omega_1$ uncountable such that
1. $(\operatorname{supp}(x_\alpha): \alpha\in\Gamma)$ forms a $\Delta$-System and
2. the $x_\alpha$’s are “isomorphic” in some manner.
Finding $F\in{\mathcal F}$ capturing enough $x_\alpha$’s we can construct vectors that contradict the inequality.
Proof of Theorem \[theorem.1\] {#e.bior}
==============================
Let ${\mathcal F}$ be a capturing construction scheme and $0<\varepsilon<1$ rational. ${\mathcal H}_1$ is form by $h_\alpha^{\{\alpha\}}$ taking values in $\{\alpha\}$ and sending $\alpha\mapsto 1$.
Suppose ${\mathcal H}_k$ has been built satisfying , and . Let $F\in{\mathcal F}_k$ and $F=\bigcup_{i<n_k}F_i$ the canonical decomposition of $F$. Then, we let ${\mathcal H}_F=\{h_\alpha^F:\alpha\in F\}$ where $h_\alpha^F$ is define in the following way
1. For $\alpha\in R$, define $h_\alpha^F := h_0^{F_0}+\sum_{0<i<n_k}\varphi_i(h_\alpha^{F_0})\restriction (F_i\setminus F_0) $.
2. For $\alpha\in F_0\setminus R$, define $$h_\alpha^F := h_\alpha^{F_0}+
\varepsilon\sum_{2\leq i<n_k}(-1)^i\varphi_i(h_\alpha^{F_0})\restriction (F_i\setminus F_0).$$
3. For $\delta\in F_1\setminus R$, and $\alpha\in F_0\setminus R$ with $\varphi_1(\alpha)=\delta$, define $$h_\delta^F :=\varphi_1(h_\alpha^{F_0})+
\varepsilon\sum_{2\leq i<n_k}(-1)^{i+1}\varphi_{i}(h_\alpha^{F_0})\restriction (F_i\setminus F_0).$$
4. For $\alpha\in F_j\setminus R$ with $2\leq j<n_k$, define $h_\alpha^F=h_\alpha^{F_j}$.
It is clear that ${\mathcal H}_{k+1}$ satisfies and . Note that if $E\in{\mathcal F}$ is contained in $F$ and $\alpha\in F$, there is $f\in{\mathcal H}_E$ such that $h_\alpha^F(\gamma)$ equals either $f(\gamma)$ or $\varepsilon f(\gamma)$ for every $\gamma\in E$. This shows that holds for ${\mathcal H}_{k+1}$. The same observation shows $$\label{ebiorthogonal}
|h_\alpha^F(e_\beta)|\leq\varepsilon$$ for all $\alpha\neq\beta$ in $F$.
This finishes the construction of ${\mathcal H}$.
Define the norm $\Vert\cdot\Vert_\varepsilon$ as in and let ${\mathcal X_\varepsilon}$ be the completion of $(c_{00}(\omega_1),\Vert\cdot\Vert_\varepsilon)$.
We check that ${\mathcal X_\varepsilon}$ is as we wanted. Define $h_\alpha$ to be the union of all $(h_\alpha^F:F\in{\mathcal F})$ which is well defined by . By the sequence $(e_\alpha,h_\alpha)_{\alpha<\omega_1}$ forms an un uncountable $\varepsilon$-biorthogonal system.
Suppose $(y_\alpha,y^*_\alpha)_{\alpha<\omega_1}$ is a $\tau$-biorthogonal system for $0\leq\tau<\frac{\varepsilon}{1+\varepsilon}$. We can assume that the $y_\alpha$’s are normalized.
\[lem1\] There is $\Gamma\subset\omega_1$ uncountable and $\delta>0$ such that, for every $n,m<\omega$ with $\frac{m}{2n}=\varepsilon$ and every $\alpha_0<\ldots<\alpha_{2n+1}$ we have, $$\label{condition}
\left\Vert (y_{\alpha_0}-y_{\alpha_1})-\frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^n(y_{\alpha_{2i}}-y_{\alpha_{2i+1}})\right\Vert_\varepsilon\geq\delta$$
Let $N<\omega$ and $\Gamma\subset\omega_1$ uncountable such that $$\sup_{\alpha\in\Gamma}\Vert y^*_\alpha\Vert\leq N$$ Then [$$\begin{aligned}
\left\Vert (y_{\alpha_0}-y_{\alpha_1})-\frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^n(y_{\alpha_{2i}}-y_{\alpha_{2i+1}})\right\Vert_\varepsilon
&\geq\left|\frac{f_{\alpha_1}}{N}\left((y_{\alpha_0}-y_{\alpha_1})
-\frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^n(y_{\alpha_{2i}}-y_{\alpha_{2i+1}})\right)\right| \\
&\geq\frac{1}{N}\Bigl(1-\tau-\frac{1}{m}(2n\tau)\Bigr)=\frac{1}{N}\Bigl(1-\tau(1+\frac{2n}{m})\Bigr)\end{aligned}$$]{} Taking $\delta=\frac{1}{N}(1-\tau(1+\frac{2n}{m}))=\frac{1}{N}(1-\tau\frac{1+\varepsilon}{\varepsilon})>0$ we obtain the result.
Theorem \[theorem.1\] follows if we show that
\[lem2\] For every normalized $(y_\alpha)_{\alpha\in\Gamma}$ in ${\mathcal X_\varepsilon}$, there is $m,n<\omega$ with $\frac{m}{2n}=\varepsilon$ and $\alpha_0<\ldots<\alpha_{2n+1}$ such that $$\left\Vert (y_{\alpha_0}-y_{\alpha_1})-\frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^n(y_{\alpha_{2i}}-y_{\alpha_{2i+1}})\right\Vert_\varepsilon<\delta$$
Let $m$ and $n$, big enough so that $1/m<\delta/2$ and $m/2n=\varepsilon$.
Let $x_\alpha\in c_{00}(\omega_1,\mathbb Q)$ for $\alpha\in\Gamma$ normalized such that $$\Vert y_\alpha-x_\alpha\Vert_\varepsilon<\frac{\delta}{4(n+1)}\quad\mbox{for every }\alpha\in\Gamma.$$
Note that $$\begin{aligned}
\left\Vert (y_{\alpha_0}-y_{\alpha_1})-\frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^n (y_{\alpha_{2i}}-y_{\alpha_{2i+1}})\right\Vert_\varepsilon
\leq\qquad\qquad\qquad& \\
\leq\left\Vert (x_{\alpha_0}-x_{\alpha_1})-\frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^n(x_{\alpha_{2i}}-x_{\alpha_{2i+1}})\right\Vert_\varepsilon
&+\sum_{i=0}^{2n+1}\Vert y_\alpha-x_\alpha\Vert_\varepsilon \\
\leq \left\Vert (x_{\alpha_0}-x_{\alpha_1})-\frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^n(x_{\alpha_{2i}}-x_{\alpha_{2i+1}})\right\Vert_\varepsilon
&+\frac{\delta}{2}\end{aligned}$$ thus, it is enough to find $\alpha_0<\alpha_1<\ldots<\alpha_{2n+1}$ in $\Gamma$ such that
$$\label{eq.1}
\left\Vert (x_{\alpha_0}-x_{\alpha_1})-\frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^n(x_{\alpha_{2i}}-x_{\alpha_{2i+1}})\right\Vert_\varepsilon<\frac{\delta}{2}$$
Apply the $\Delta$-System lemma and a counting argument to find $\Gamma_0\subset\Gamma$ uncountable such that
1. Let $D_\alpha=\operatorname{supp}(x_\alpha)$, then the collection $(D_\alpha:\alpha\in\Gamma_0)$ form a $\Delta$-System with $|D_\alpha|=|D_\beta|=d$ for every $\alpha,\beta\in\Gamma_0$.
2. For $\alpha,\beta\in\Gamma_0$ and $\varphi_{\alpha,\beta}:D_\alpha\rightarrow D_\beta$ an increasing bijection then $x_\beta=\varphi_{\alpha,\beta}(x_\alpha)$.
Since ${\mathcal F}$ is capturing there is $F\in{\mathcal F}$ and some $\alpha_0<\ldots<\alpha_{2n+1}$ in $\Gamma_0$, such that $F$ captures $(D_{\alpha_i}: i\leq 2n+1)$. Let
$$w= (x_{\alpha_0}-x_{\alpha_1})-\frac{1}{m}\sum_{i=1}^n(x_{\alpha_{2i}}-x_{\alpha_{2i+1}})$$
Note that $w\restriction R(F)$ is identically zero. We show that $\Vert w\Vert <\delta/2$. Let $f\in{\mathcal H}_F$.
If $f$ is of the form (1) it is clear that $\langle f,w\rangle =0$.
If $f$ is of the form (2) then $f=h_\alpha^F$ for some $\alpha\in F$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\langle f,w\rangle=h_\alpha^{F_0}(x_{\alpha_0})-\frac{\varepsilon}{m}\sum_{i=2}^n(h_\alpha^{F_0}(x_{\alpha_0})+h_\alpha^{F_0}(x_{\alpha_0}))
=h_\alpha^{F_0}(x_{\alpha_0})\Bigl(1-\varepsilon\frac{2n}{m}\Bigr) =0\end{aligned}$$ because the amalgamation for $f$ nullifies the term in $\alpha_1$ and changes the sign of the other odd terms.
If $f$ is of the form (3) then $$\begin{aligned}
\langle f,w\rangle=-h_\alpha^{F_1}(x_{\alpha_1})+\frac{\varepsilon}{m}\sum_{i=2}^n(h_\alpha^{F_1}(x_{\alpha_1})+h_\alpha^{F_1}(x_{\alpha_1}))= h_\alpha^{F_1}(x_{\alpha_1})\Bigl(\varepsilon\frac{2n}{m}-1\Bigr) =0\end{aligned}$$ because the amalgamation for $f$ nullifies the term in $\alpha_0$ and changes the sign the other even terms
Finally if $f$ is of the form (4) then $|\langle f,w\rangle|=|\frac{1}{m}\langle h_\alpha^{F_j},\varphi_{\alpha_j}(z)\rangle|\leq\frac{1}{m}<\delta/2$ as we wanted to show. Thus, $w$ witnesses contradicting Lemma \[lem1\] and finishing the proof.
Proof of Theorem \[theorem.2\] {#k.basis}
==============================
We construct ${\mathcal H}$ by recursion. For ${\mathcal X_K}$ the collection ${\mathcal H}_F$ will have the following *closure property*: $$\label{closureprop}
\forall f\in{\mathcal H}_F,\ \delta\in F\quad \lambda^{-1}(f\restriction\delta)\in{\mathcal H}_F$$
Let ${\mathcal F}$ be a capturing construction scheme and let $K>1$. ${\mathcal H}_1$ is form of functions of the form $K^{-n}e_\alpha$ for every $\alpha<\omega_1$ and $n<\omega$.
Suppose ${\mathcal H}_k$ has been constructed satisfying and . Let $F\in{\mathcal F}_k$ and $F=\bigcup_{i<n_k}F_i$ be the canonical decomposition of $F$. Then, we let ${\mathcal H}_F$ be the collection of functions of the following type:
1. $e_\alpha$, for $\alpha\in F$.
2. $\sum_{i<n_k}\varphi_i(f)\restriction (F_i\setminus F_0)$ for every $f\in {\mathcal H}_{F_0}$.
3. $\frac{1}{K^n}\left(\sum_{i<n_k}\varphi_i(f)\restriction (F_i\setminus F_0)\right)\restriction\delta$ for every $f\in{\mathcal H}_{F_0}$, every $\delta\in F$ and $n=1,2\ldots$
It is clear that and holds for ${\mathcal H}_{k+1}$. This finishes the construction of ${\mathcal H}$.
Define $\Vert\cdot\Vert_K$ as in and let ${\mathcal X_K}$ be the completion of $(c_{00}(\omega_1),\Vert\cdot\Vert_K)$.
We see that ${\mathcal X_K}$ is as we wanted. We first show that ${\mathcal X_K}$ has an uncountable $K$-basic sequence. Let $(e_\alpha)_{\alpha<\omega_1}$ be the canonical unit vector basis.
The vectors $(e_\alpha)_{\alpha<\omega_1}$ form a normalized $K$-basis of ${\mathcal X_K}$. In particular ${\mathcal X_K}$ is not separable.
It is clear that the $e_\alpha$’s are normalized. To see they are a $K$-basic sequence let $n<m<\omega$, $\alpha_1<\ldots<\alpha_m<\omega_1$ and $(a_i)_{i=1}^m\in\mathbb R^m$. Let $F\in{\mathcal F}$ such that $\alpha_i\in F$ for $i=1,\ldots,m$. Take $\delta=\alpha_{n+1}$ and $f\in{\mathcal H}_F$ such that $\sum_{i=1}^na_ie_{\alpha_i}$ attains the norm at $f$.
If $f$ is of the form (1) then $f\restriction\delta=Kg$ for some $g\in{\mathcal H}_F$ and if $f$ is of the form (2) then $f=g$ for some $g\in{\mathcal H}_F$. Thus, $$\begin{aligned}
\left\Vert\sum_{i=1}^n a_ie_{\alpha_i}\right\Vert_K&=\left|\left\langle f,\sum_{i=1}^na_ie_{\alpha_i}\right\rangle\right|
=\left|\left\langle f\restriction\delta,\sum_{i=1}^ma_ie_{\alpha_i}\right\rangle\right| \\
&\leq K\left|\left\langle g,\sum_{i=1}^na_ie_{\alpha_i}\right\rangle\right|\leq K\left\Vert\sum_{i=1}^m a_ie_{\alpha_i}\right\Vert_K\end{aligned}$$ as we wanted to show.
We proceed by contradiction. Suppose now that $(y_\alpha)_{\alpha<\omega_1}$ is a $K'$-basic sequence with $1\leq K'<K$. Fix $K'<L<K$ and let $n<\omega$ such that $$\label{condi.1}
\frac{1}{K}+\frac{1}{n}<\frac{1}{L}$$ Take a normalized sequence $(x_\alpha)_{\alpha<\omega_1}$ in $c_{00}(\omega_1,\mathbb Q)$ such that $$\Vert x_\alpha-y_\alpha\Vert_K <\min\Bigl\{\frac{1}{4K'n},\frac{L-K'}{8(K')^2n}\Bigr\} \quad\mbox{ for every }\alpha<\omega_1.$$ The following lemma plays the same role of Lemma \[lem1\] in Theorem \[theorem.1\]
\[lemma1\] For every $\alpha_1<\ldots<\alpha_{2n}<\omega_1$ $$\left\Vert \sum_{i=1}^n x_{\alpha_i}\right\Vert_K \leq L\left\Vert\sum_{i=1}^n x_{\alpha_i} -\sum_{i=n+1}^{2n} x_{\alpha_i}\right\Vert_K$$
Note first that $\Vert\sum_{i=1}^n x_{\alpha_i} -\sum_{i=n+1}^{2n} x_{\alpha_i}\Vert_K\geq 1/2K'$. Indeed, suppose otherwise then $$\begin{aligned}
1=\Vert y_{\alpha_1}\Vert_K&\leq K'\left\Vert\sum_{i=1}^ny_{\alpha_i}-\sum_{i=n+1}^{2n}y_{\alpha_i}\right\Vert_K \\
&\leq K'\left\Vert\sum_{i=1}^n x_{\alpha_i} -\sum_{i=n+1}^{2n} x_{\alpha_i}\right\Vert_K+K'\sum_{i=1}^{2n}\Vert y_{\alpha_i}-x_{\alpha_i}\Vert_K\\ &< K'\left(\frac{1}{2K'}+\frac{2n}{4K'n}\right)=1\end{aligned}$$
Now $$\begin{aligned}
\left\Vert\sum_{i=1}^n x_{\alpha_i}\right\Vert_K&\leq\left\Vert\sum_{i=1}^n y_{\alpha_i}\right\Vert_K+\sum_{i=1}^n \Vert x_{\alpha_i}-y_{\alpha_i}\Vert_K \\
&\leq K'\left\Vert\sum_{i=1}^ny_{\alpha_i}-\sum_{i=n+1}^{2n}y_{\alpha_i}\right\Vert_K +\sum_{i=1}^{n}\Vert x_{\alpha_i}-y_{\alpha_i}\Vert_K\\
&\leq K'\left\Vert\sum_{i=1}^n x_{\alpha_i} -\sum_{i=n+1}^{2n} x_{\alpha_i}\right\Vert_K+2K'\sum_{i=1}^{2n}\Vert x_{\alpha_i}-y_{\alpha_i}\Vert_K\\
&\leq K'\left\Vert\sum_{i=1}^n x_{\alpha_i} -\sum_{i=n+1}^{2n} x_{\alpha_i}\right\Vert_K+4K'n\frac{L-K'}{8(K')^2n}\\
&\leq K'\left\Vert\sum_{i=1}^n x_{\alpha_i} -\sum_{i=n+1}^{2n} x_{\alpha_i}\right\Vert_K+
(L-K')\left\Vert\sum_{i=1}^n x_{\alpha_i} -\sum_{i=n+1}^{2n} x_{\alpha_i}\right\Vert_K\end{aligned}$$ which is what we wanted to prove.
We want to use the capturing of ${\mathcal F}$ to contradict the lemma above.
We proceed as before and find $\Gamma\subset\omega_1$ uncountable such that
1. If $D_\alpha=\operatorname{supp}(x_\alpha)$, then the collection $(D_\alpha:\alpha\in\Gamma)$ form a $\Delta$-System with $|D_\alpha|=|D_\beta|=d$ for every $\alpha,\beta\in\Gamma$.
2. There is a function $z:d\rightarrow\mathbb Q$ such that, if $\varphi_\alpha:d\rightarrow D_\alpha$ is the unique order increasing bijection, then $x_\alpha=\varphi_\alpha(z)$
Since ${\mathcal F}$ is capturing, there is $F\in{\mathcal F}$ and $\alpha_1<\ldots<\alpha_{2n}<\omega_1$ in $\Gamma$ such that $F$ captures $(D_{\alpha_i}:i=1,\ldots,2n)$.
Let $$v=\sum_{i=1}^n x_{\alpha_i}\quad\mbox{and}\quad w=\sum_{i=1}^n x_{\alpha_i}-\sum_{i=n+1}^{2n}x_{\alpha_i}$$
We show that $\Vert v\Vert_K>L\Vert w\Vert_K$. Let $F=\bigcup_{i<n_k}F_i$ be the canonical decomposition of $F$. Since the $x_{\alpha_i}$’s are normalized there is $h\in{\mathcal H}_{F_0}$ such that $|\langle h,x_{\alpha_1}\rangle|=1$. Taking $f=\sum_{i<n_k}\varphi_i(h)$ we get $|\langle f,v\rangle|=n$. Thus $\Vert v\Vert_K\geq n$.
Take now $f\in{\mathcal H}_F$.
If $f$ is of the form (1) then, $|\langle f, w\rangle|=0$
If $f$ is of the form (2) then, $f=(1/K)\sum_{i<n_k}\varphi_i(h)\restriction\delta$ for some $\delta\in F$ and $h\in{\mathcal H}_{F_0}$. If $\delta\in R(F)$ then $|\langle f, w\rangle|=0$. Suppose $\delta\in F_j\setminus R(F)$ and $\eta\in F_{0}$ is such that $\varphi_j(\eta)=\delta$
Suppose $j<n$ then $$\begin{aligned}
|\langle f, w\rangle| &\leq \left|\frac{1}{K}\langle \sum_{i<j}\varphi_i(h),w\rangle\right|+
\frac{1}{K}|\langle h\restriction\eta, x_{\alpha_1}\rangle| \\
&\leq \frac{n-1}{K}+\Vert x_{\alpha_0}\Vert_K=\frac{n-1}{K}+1<\frac{n}{L}\leq\frac{1}{L}\Vert v\Vert_K\end{aligned}$$ by .
Suppose now $j\geq n$. Then [$$\begin{aligned}
|\langle f,w\rangle|&\leq\frac{1}{K}\left|\sum_{i<n-1}\langle\varphi_i(h),x_{\alpha_i}\rangle+ \langle\varphi_{n-1}(h),x_{\alpha_{n-1}}\rangle-\sum_{n\geq i<j}\langle\varphi_i(h),x_{\alpha_i}\rangle - \langle\varphi_{j}(h)\restriction\delta,x_{\alpha_{j}}\rangle\right|\\
&\leq \frac{1}{K}|(n-1)+\langle h,x_{\alpha_0}\rangle-(j-n)-\langle h\restriction\eta,x_{\alpha_0}\rangle\\
&\leq \frac{n-1}{K}+\frac{\Vert x_{\alpha_0}\Vert_K+\Vert x_{\alpha_0}\restriction\eta\Vert_K}{K}
\leq\frac{n}{K}+1<\frac{n}{L}\leq \frac{1}{L}\Vert v\Vert_K\end{aligned}$$]{}
If $f$ is of the form (3) then $|\langle f, w\rangle|\leq 1\leq\frac{n}{K}+1<\frac{n}{L}\leq\frac{1}{L}\Vert v\Vert_K$.
We conclude that $\Vert w\Vert_K<\frac{1}{L}\Vert v\Vert_K$ but this contradicts Lemma \[lemma1\] and thus ${\mathcal X_K}$ is as we wanted.
[10]{}
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The Function-as-a-Service (FaaS) paradigm has a lot of potential as a computing model for fog environments comprising both cloud and edge nodes. When the request rate exceeds capacity limits at the edge, some functions need to be offloaded from the edge towards the cloud. In this position paper, we propose an auction-based approach in which application developers bid on resources. This allows fog nodes to make a local decision about which functions to offload while maximizing revenue. For a first evaluation of our approach, we use simulation.'
author:
-
bibliography:
- 'cites.bib'
title: 'Towards Auction-Based Function Placement in Serverless Fog Platforms'
---
Serverless Computing, Function-as-a-Service, Fog Computing
Introduction\[sec:intro\]
=========================
Background\[sec:background\]
============================
Auction-Based Function Placement\[sec:approach\]
================================================
Model and Simulation Approach\[sec:simulation\]
===============================================
Insights from Simulation\[sec:eval\]
====================================
Discussion and Future Work\[sec:discussion\]
============================================
Related Work\[sec:relwork\]
===========================
Conclusion\[sec:concl\]
=======================
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We report results of inelastic neutron scattering measurements of phonon dispersions on a detwinned sample of YBa$_{\text{2}}$Cu$_{\text{3}}%
$O$_{\text{7}}$ and compare them with model calculations. Plane oxygen bond stretching phonon branches disperse steeply downwards from the zone center in both the **a** and the **b** direction indicating a strong electron-phonon coupling. Half way to the zone boundary, the phonon peaks become ill-defined but we see no need to invoke unit cell doubling or charge stripe formation: lattice dynamical shell model calculations predict such behavior as a result of branch anticrossings. There were no observable superconductivity-related temperature effects on selected plane oxygen bond stretching modes measured on a twinned sample.
PACS numbers: 78.70.Nx , 74.72.Bk, 74.25.Kc.
address: |
$^{1}$Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Institut für Festkörperphysik,\
Postfach 3640, D-76021 Karlsruhe, Germany\
$^{2}$Laboratoire Leon Brillouin, C.E.A./C.N.R.S., F-91191-Gif-sur-Yvette\
CEDEX, France\
$^{3}$Institute for Material Research, Tohoku University, Katahira, Aoba-ku,\
Sendai, 9808577, Japan\
$^{4}$Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory,\
Upton, NY 11973\
$^{5}$Superconductivity Research Laboratory, ISTEC, Shinonome, Koutu-ku,\
Tokyo, 135-0062, Japan
author:
- |
D. Reznik$^{1,2}$, L. Pintschovius$^{1}$, W. Reichardt$^{1}$, Y. Endoh$^{3}$,\
H. Hiraka$^{3}$, J. M. Tranquada$^{4}$, S. Tajima$^{5}$, H. Uchiyama$^{5}$, and T. Masui$^{5}$
title: |
Oxygen Phonon Branches in Detwinned YBa$_{\text{2}}$Cu$_{\text{3}}%
$O$_{\text{7}}$
---
Charge degrees of freedom associated with lattice vibrations and/or distortions may be important to our understanding of many physical properties of cuprate superconductors.[@1] Longitudinal vibrations of planar oxygens soften strongly with doping away from the zone center in all cuprates investigated so far[@2; @3], which has been interpreted as a signature of strong electron-phonon coupling. Up to now twinning has made it difficult to obtain a clear experimental picture of this behavior in the middle of the zone, where phonon dispersions are steep. To clear up twinning-related ambiguities, we measured phonon dispersions by inelastic neutron scattering on an untwined sample of YBa$_{\text{2}}$Cu$_{\text{3}}$O$_{\text{7}}$. High-resolution measurements on a large twinned sample confirmed these results.
\[ptb\]
[mos2002fig1.ps]{}
The untwinned sample consisted of close to 30 detwinned single crystals with the mosaic spread of 3$^{\circ}$ and the total volume of 0.8cm$^{3}$. The twinned sample consisted of 3 single crystals of combined volume of 1.5cm$^{3}$ with the mosaic spread of 2.2$^{\circ}$. The experiments were performed on the triple-axis spectrometer 1T at the Orphee reactor using doubly focusing monochromator (Cu111 and Cu220) and analyzer (PG002) crystals. **a**-axis and **b**-axis atomic vibrations of the $\Delta$1 symmetry were measured in the Brillouin zone adjacent to wavevectors, **Q**, of (4,1,0) and (-1,4,0) respectively. The data were fit with gaussian lineshapes on top of a background assumed to be linear in energy, $\omega,$ and independent of **Q**.
The starting point for our calculations was the common interaction potential model[@4], which is quite successful in describing the phonon dispersions of a number of cuprates. YBa$_{\text{2}}$Cu$_{\text{3}}$O$_{\text{7}}$ is treated as an ionic compound and the interatomic interactions are modelled as a sum of Coulomb forces and short range repulsive forces. The polarizability of the atoms is treated using the shell model formalism. For a metallic compound like YBa$_{\text{2}}$Cu$_{\text{3}}$O$_{\text{7}}$ a term accounting for screening by free carriers is added. This model gives a decent description of the available data, which was further improved by tuning the parameters. Further tuning was done to account for the new data.
\[ptb\]
[MOS2002Fig2.ps]{}
Such a simple model cannot reproduce the anomalous softening of the bond-stretching phonons, and thus would not realistically simulate the experiment. In particular, it would miss the effect of the anomalous softening of the bond-stretching modes on other phonons: it leads to anti-crossings with branches of the same symmetry, which originally have a different polarization, but hybridize with the bond-stretching branches if they are close in energy. Special terms were added in order to model such effects: 1) A negative breathing deformability lowers the energy of the planar breathing mode; 2) A term lowers the energies of the ’half-breathing’ modes at the zone boundary of the (100) and - with a different parameter - of the (010) direction; 3) Similar terms produce maximum softening half way to the zone boundary in the 100 and 010 directions, but have no effect both at the zone center and at the zone boundary. The physical meaning of the special terms (especially the last two) is not completely clear. We think that they mimic the effects of a strong electron-phonon coupling. The calculations also included a resolution correction in **Q** and $\omega$. The longitudinal plane oxygen vibrations with atomic displacements in the **a** and **b** directions have the zone center energies of 74 and 68 meV respectively (Figs. 1, 2). Their zone boundary energies are 58 and 55 meV respectively. As the **a**-axis polarized longitudinal phonon disperses downward from the zone center, the peak disappears almost entirely at **q**$_{a}$=0.15 and 0.2 and then reappears at higher q and lower energy (55meV). Along the **b**-axis, the peak similarly disappears and reappears somewhat closer to the zone center. The difference between the energies of the **a** and the **b**-axis vibrations is entirely accounted for by the difference in the bond lengths.
\[h!\]
[MOS2002Fig3.ps]{}
These data seem to imply that the dispersions of the longitudinal oxygen vibrations are discontinuous and one may be tempted to conclude that the lattice dynamics in YBa$_{\text{2}}$Cu$_{\text{3}}$O$_{\text{7}}$ are highly unconventional. Similar data have been explained by unit cell doubling or charge stripe formation[@3; @5].
Inspection of the figures shows that the final model reproduces both the experimental frequencies and the observed intensities quite well (Figs. 1b and 2b). It predicts that an almost flat apical oxygen branch should cross the downward-dispersing longitudinal plane oxygen branch. The apical oxygen branch does not show up in figures 1 and 2 because of its small structure factor in the measured Brillouin zones (in fact, zero at $\Gamma$). Since the apical and plane oxygen branches have the same symmetry, they do not actually cross, but mix and repel each other lifting the degeneracy at the crossing point. This is the branch anticrossing phenomenon described above. In the process, the lower branch acquires plane oxygen character on the higher **q** side of the crossing point and becomes visible in the measured Brillouin zones. Simultaneously, the upper branch acquires mostly apical oxygen character and becomes much weaker.
Figure 3 shows that there is a good agreement between the experimentally observed phonon peak positions and the calculated dispersion curves. Furthermore, the shell model predicts the structure factors that at least qualitatively account for experimentally observed phonon intensities (Figs. 1, 2). Thus we see no need to invoke unconventional theories such as charge stripes or unit cell doubling[@5] to describe lattice dynamics of YBa$_{\text{2}}$Cu$_{\text{3}}$O$_{\text{7}}$.
Finally, we found no appreciable temperature dependence of longitudinal oxygen vibrations measured on a twinned sample other than slight softening with increasing temperature consistent with increasing anharmonicity.
This work was partially supported by the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO) as Collaborative Research and Development of Fundamental Technologies for Superconductivity Applications. JMT is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science under Contract No. DE-AC02-98CH10886
[9]{}
see for example J.M. Tranquada et al., *Phys. Rev. Lett.* **88**, 075505 (2002) and references therein.
L. Pintschovius et al., *Physica C* (Amsterdam) **185-189**, 156 (1991); W. Reichardt et al. Physica C (Amsterdam) **162-164**, 464 (1989).
R.J. McQueeny et al., *Phys. Rev. Lett.* **82**, 156 (1991).
S. L. Chaplot et al., *Phys. Rev. B* **52**, 7230 (1995).
R.J. McQueeny et al., cond-mat/0105593
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We present the first systematic study of the stellar populations of ultra-diffuse galaxies (UDGs) in the field, integrating the large area search and characterization of UDGs by the SMUDGes survey with the twelve-band optical photometry of the S-PLUS survey. Based on Bayesian modeling of the optical colors of UDGs, we determine the ages, metallicities and stellar masses of 100 UDGs distributed in an area of $\sim 330$ deg$^2$ in the Stripe 82 region. We find that the stellar masses and metallicities of field UDGs are similar to those observed in clusters and follow the trends previously defined in studies of dwarf and giant galaxies. However, field UDGs have younger luminosity-weighted ages than do UDGs in clusters. We interpret this result to mean that field UDGs have more extended star formation histories, including some that continue to form stars at low levels to the present time. Finally, we examine stellar population scaling relations that show that UDGs are, as a population, similar to other low-surface brightness galaxies.'
author:
- 'C. E. Barbosa'
- 'D. Zaritsky'
- 'R. Donnerstein'
- 'H. Zhang'
- 'A. Dey'
- 'C. Mendes de Oliveira'
- 'L. Sampedro'
- 'A. Molino'
- 'M. V. Costa-Duarte'
- 'P. Coelho'
- 'A. Cortesi'
- 'F. R. Herpich'
- 'J. A. Hernandez-Jimenez'
- 'T. Santos-Silva'
- 'E. Pereira'
- 'A. Werle'
- 'R. A. Overzier'
- 'R. Cid Fernandes'
- 'A. V. Smith Castelli'
- 'T. Ribeiro'
- 'W. Schoenell'
- 'A. Kanaan'
bibliography:
- 'smudges-splus.bib'
title: 'One hundred SMUDGes in S-PLUS: ultra-diffuse galaxies flourish in the field'
---
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
are a recently defined class of galaxy initially found in large numbers in the Coma Cluster [@2015ApJ...798L..45V]. Their unusually large half-light radii, $R_e\ge 1.5$ kpc, for galaxies with such low central surface brightness, $\mu_{0,g}\ge 24$ mag arcsec$^{-2}$, are striking. Although large LSB galaxies have been known for quite some time [@1976Natur.263..573D; @1984AJ.....89..919S; @1988ApJ...330..634I; @1988AJ.....95.1389S; @1995MNRAS.275..121S; @1997AJ....114..635D; @1997ApJ...482..104S], the current excitement originates from indications, either from kinematic measures of the unresolved light or globular clusters in these galaxies [@2016ApJ...819L..20B; @2018ApJ...856L..31T; @2019ApJ...880...91V], or from the numbers of globular clusters alone [@2016ApJ...822L..31P; @2016ApJ...830...23B; @2017ApJ...844L..11V; @2018ApJ...856L..30V], that at least some lie in massive $(>10^{11}$ M$_\odot$) halos.
The detection of populations of in galaxy clusters led to the exploration of a possible evolutionary link between these galaxies and their harsh environment [@2017ApJ...850...99S; @2018RNAAS...2...43C; @2018MNRAS.480L.106O; @2018ApJ...866L..11B; @2019MNRAS.485..382C]. However, were also found in less dense environments, such as filaments [e.g.. @2016AJ....151...96M], groups , the field [e.g. @2017ApJ...842..133L; @2018ApJ...866..112G] and even voids [@2019MNRAS.486..823R]. Moreover, observational studies [e.g. @2015MNRAS.452..937Y; @2017MNRAS.464L.110Z; @2018MNRAS.473.3747S; @2018MNRAS.475.4235A] and theoretical ones [e.g. @2016MNRAS.459L..51A; @2017MNRAS.466L...1D; @2017MNRAS.470.4231R; @2018MNRAS.478..906C; @2019MNRAS.tmp.2566L; @2019MNRAS.487.5272J] found that span a wide range of physical properties, and perhaps a correspondingly large range of origin stories.
A key challenge in developing a unified understanding of and their relation to other galaxies is that the data so far come from disparate studies, with different selection criteria, and mostly focus on high density environments. These deficits are exacerbated by the difficulties posed in observing such low surface brightness galaxies. Photometric information, such as broadband colors [e.g. @2019MNRAS.488.2143P], are available for many but are of limited value in determining the properties of the stellar populations, while spectroscopy, which can provide the necessary information, is only available for a small number of galaxies [e.g. @2016AJ....151...96M; @2017ApJ...838L..21K; @2018MNRAS.478.2034R; @2018MNRAS.479.4891F; @2018ApJ...859...37G].
Recently, @2019ApJS..240....1Z presented the initial results from the survey, a systematic study to detect and characterize the photometric properties of over a large area of the sky ($\sim$14000 deg$^2$) using data from the Legacy survey [@2019AJ....157..168D]. In its initial release, provided a catalog containing 275 UDG candidates, including most of the galaxies previously reported within 10$^{\circ}$ of the Coma cluster by @2015ApJ...798L..45V and @2016ApJS..225...11Y, using a relatively small area of the total survey ($334$ deg$^2$). SMUDGes has now analyzed the SDSS Stripe 82 region and identified 172 candidate in this region, which is a much more typical region of the sky than that around the Coma cluster (Zaritsky et al. in prep.).
The limited passbands of the Legacy survey preclude stellar population modeling and spectroscopic observations of the SMUDGes candidates will always be highly limited [@2017ApJ...838L..21K Kadowaki et al., in prep]. Interestingly, the requirement of large , multi-passband imaging in the study of intersects with the interest of several ongoing cosmological surveys, such as the [, @2014arXiv1403.5237B], the and the [, @2019MNRAS.489..241M]. Here we explore the synergy between ands to perform the first statistical study of the stellar populations of UDG candidates over an area of sky that is not dominated by high density environments. Despite limited overlap within Stripe 82 between the two surveys, we were able to study a sample of 100 UDG candidates and perform the largest detailed population study of these galaxies to date.
This paper is structured as follows. In §\[sec:data\], we describe the two datasets used in this work. In §\[sec:photometry\], we describe the photometry of the UDG candidates in the context of S-PLUS, and in §\[sec:sedfitting\], we present the method developed to determine their stellar populations using a Bayesian framework. In §\[sec:discussion\], we present our results and discuss the main implications of our work for our understanding of the nature of UDGs. We conclude and summarize this work in §\[sec:conclusion\]. Throughout, we assume a standard $\Lambda$CDM cosmology whenever necessary, assuming $H_0=70$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$. All magnitudes use the AB system [@1964ApJ...140..689O; @1983ApJ...266..713O].
Data {#sec:data}
====
SMUDGes sample
--------------
Our ability to locate galaxies have been limited both by the lack of sensibility and instrumental constraints, and various attempts have been made to optimize observations at low surface brightness [e.g. @2001ApJS..137..117G; @2015ApJ...809L..21M; @2014PASP..126...55A]. However, there have been no systematic attempt to use current, large volume archival data to search for galaxies, which have not been identified before because standard pipelines are not optimized to find such systems. The project [@2019ApJS..240....1Z] was conceived to develop an automatized way to search for galaxies over a large area of the sky using data from the Legacy imaging survey [@2019AJ....157..168D], a deep three-band observational campaign that supports the project [@2011arXiv1106.1706S; @2016arXiv161100036D; @2016arXiv161100037D].
Most of what is known about as a population is based on observations of the Coma cluster [@2015ApJ...798L..45V; @2016ApJS..225...11Y]. In this initial stage of the project, the detection algorithm has been constrained to search similar to those found in Coma, and thus is focused on systems with angular sizes $R_e \gtrsim 5$ arcsec, which are easier to classify than smaller objects in the absence of redshift information. The methodology used to identify is described in detail in @2019ApJS..240....1Z and Zaritsky et al. (in prep.), and here we summarize the main steps of the process. First, bright, saturated sources are detected, modeled and replaced in the images by background noise, whereas fainter background and foreground sources are carefully modeled and subtracted. Then, wavelet filtering is used to detect sources according to size and surface brightness criteria, defined to have $\mu_{0,g} \ge 24$ mag arcsec$^{-2}$ and $R_e > 5.3$. Finally, all UDG candidates are modeled with a single Sérsic component using <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">GALFIT</span> [@2002AJ....124..266P; @2010AJ....139.2097P].
In this work, we use a sample of 172 UDG candidates in the Stripe 82 area. From SMUDGes we adopt the values of $m_g, m_r, m_z,$ Sérsic index $n$, and $R_e$ in arcsec, position angle and axis ratio. Without distance estimates, we cannot determine whether these systems pass the common defining criteria for UDGs, $R_e \ge 1.5$ kpc, and some of these galaxies may actually be dwarf galaxies at small distances. The redshift by association (defining high density regions in terms of normal galaxies and assigning SMUDGes to the redshift of that overdensity) worked for 25 candidates in Stripe 82 and all 25 satisfy the $R_e > 1.5$ kpc criterion at the assigned distance. Only 1 has $R_e > 6$ kpc, which seems to be about the upper limit on size - it has $R_e = 8.6$ kpc - which suggests that this one may have the wrong redshift. In this particular case, the UDG candidate is close in projection to a nearby bright galaxy and so it may instead be a satellite of that galaxy (Zaritsky et al., in prep). Therefore, we work under the hypothesis that we have a sample of UDGs with low contamination by dwarf galaxies, but we examine this issue again further below.
S-PLUS DR1 data
---------------
We use data from the first data release (DR1), which covers an area of 336 deg$^{\text{2}}$ in the Stripe 82 equatorial field, observed with the T80S, a 0.8m robotic telescope with a wide of $\sim 1.8$ deg$^{\text{2}}$, located in Cerro Tololo, Chile. The DR1 data are already reduced and are publicly available in the NSF’s National Optical-Infrared Astronomy Research Laboratory archive[^1]. Details about the survey strategy and data reduction process are described by @2019MNRAS.489..241M while the photometric calibration is described in Sampedro et al. (in prep.).
The main survey strategy is aimed at obtaining large coverage of the Southern sky ($\sim 9000$ deg$^{\text{2}}$) for astronomical and cosmological studies in the local universe. The S-PLUS uses the same photometric system of the J-PLUS survey [@2012SPIE.8450E..3SM], which consists of twelve optical bands, including 5 broad-bands similar to those used by the $ugriz$ system, and a set of seven narrow-band ($\Delta\lambda= 100-200$) filters placed at various rest-frame optical features, including \[OII\] ($\lambda_{\text{eff}}=3771$ ), Ca H+K ($\lambda_{\text{eff}}=3941$ ), H$\delta$ ($\lambda_{\text{eff}}=4094$ ), G-band ($\lambda_{\text{eff}}=4292$ ), Mg $b$ triplet ($\lambda_{\text{eff}}=5133$ ), H$\alpha$ ($\lambda_{\text{eff}}=6614$ ) and the Ca triplet ($\lambda_{\text{eff}}=8611$ ). Considering a threshold of 3, the survey is complete in the broad bands to magnitudes of $u=21.07$, $g=21.79$, $r=21.6$, $i=21.22$ and $z=20.64$, whereas it is complete to magnitudes of $\sim20.4$ in all narrow bands [@2019MNRAS.489..241M].
The S-PLUS DR1 data cover Stripe 82 using a pair of exposures at each right ascension, limiting the declination to the range $-1.4^\circ\leq\text{dec}\leq+1.4^\circ$. Moreover, the SPLUS DR1 data did not use dithering, causing occasional gaps between exposures, resulting in a few UDGs that are not observed despite being within the footprint of the survey. In total, we have observations for only 100 SMUDGes from the initial sample of 172. Figure \[fig:footprint\] shows the spatial distribution of the SMUDGes Stripe 82 sample overlapped with the S-PLUS DR1 footprint.
Photometry of UDGs from the S-PLUS data {#sec:photometry}
=======================================
are not easily detected given the surface brightness limits of the S-PLUS survey, and only one UDG was previously detected in the DR1 catalog of photometric redshifts [@2019arXiv190706315M]. Therefore, we had to obtain our own photometry of the from the S-PLUS images leveraging the information from the deeper SMUDGes photometry.
Regarding the data quality of S-PLUS, all images in the S-PLUS Main Survey, which includes Stripe 82, are obtained during photometric nights with seeing $\le$ 2. Among the 61 different tiles used in this work, the mean over all bands is 1.4. Moreover, because each field is imaged in all bands consecutively in a given observational block, there are only small seeing variations among all bands for each tile (mean standard deviation among bands of 0.14). We conclude that there is no need to homogenize the seeing across the images for our photometry.
For each UDG, we perform aperture photometry in each of the 12 bands from S-PLUS using the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">photutils</span> package [@Bradley_2019_2533376]. To ensure consistent photometry, for each UDG we define an elliptical aperture with a semi-major axis length of $R_e$, and location, position angle and ellipticity determined from the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">GALFIT</span> Sérsic profile fitting from the SMUDGes analysis. We subtract local sky using an elliptical annulus with inner and outer radii of $2.5R_e$ and $4R_e$, respectively. Presuming that the Sérsic profile is a good approximation to the surface brightness profile of the UDGs, this annulus is large enough to avoid contamination of the sky region by the galaxy itself [see @2005PASA...22..118G]. We use sigma-clipping to remove the contribution of other sources when we estimate the median background. All observed magnitudes are corrected for the foreground Galactic extinction using the dust maps from @1998ApJ...500..525S recalibrated by @2011ApJ...737..103S assuming that $R_V=3.1$ for the Milky Way .
The aperture photometry method described above has the advantage of allowing the detection of most in individual bands despite their low . However, in most cases (87 galaxies), at least one band was not detected, as the measured flux inside the galaxy is smaller than the flux in the sky annulus. In these cases, we are only able to set an upper limit on the source flux. There are missing detections in most of the bands, but the blue bands are the most affected, in particular the narrow bands F378 and F395, for which there are flux detections in only $\sim 60$% of the galaxies. Nevertheless, in the majority of the cases (97 galaxies), we have flux detections in at least 6 bands, which already provides better spectral coverage in the optical than do the SDSS bands, and 80% of the galaxies have detected flux in at least 9 bands.
In Figure \[fig:detection\_images\], we show a sample of detection images of SMUDGes UDGs, produced by stacking all 12 S-PLUS bands, ordered in decreasing central surface brightness in the $g$ band, $\mu_{0,g}$, and highlight the photometric apertures.
Stellar populations from multi-band observations {#sec:sedfitting}
================================================
We quantify the properties of the stellar populations of our sample by performing fitting of the galaxies in all detected bands of the data. Considering that the star formation history (SFH) of galaxies is difficult to determine from photometric data alone, and that simulations indicate that UDGs may have bursty SFHs [@2017MNRAS.466L...1D; @2018MNRAS.478..906C], we assume that s may be described by a , such that
$$f_\lambda(\lambda) = f_0 \cdot \text{SSP}(\text{[Fe/H]}, \text{Age}, z)10^{{-0.4 A_\lambda}}$$
where $f_0$ is a scale factor for the spectral flux density of the galaxy, $\text{SSP}$ represents a single stellar population model that depends of the metallicity (\[Fe/H\]) and age, and the redshift $z$ of the galaxy, and $A_\lambda$ represents a dust-screen attenuation model. One important cautionary point about the use of to represent a potentially more complicated SFH is that the derived properties are luminosity weighted. As appreciated previously [cf. @2007MNRAS.374..769S], luminosity-weighted ages are expected to be biased toward the youngest populations, in contrast to the luminosity-weighted metallicity, which reflects more closely the mass-weighted average.
Considering both the low of the observations and the low spectral resolution of the photometric system, we expect that derived parameters may be correlated, as is the case in the well-known age-metallicity degeneracy problem [@1994ApJS...95..107W], and that some parameters will not be properly estimated. Therefore, we use a Bayesian statistical model to fit the of the galaxies and to estimate the stellar population parameters. Using this approach, we can identify possible parameter correlations and provide uncertainties that are marginalized over the distribution of all the other parameters in the model.
Bayes’ theorem allows for the inference of the probability distribution of a set of parameters $\theta$ in a statistical model based on a dataset $D$ using the relation
$$p(\theta | D) \propto p(\theta) p(D|\theta)\text{,}$$
where $p(\theta|D)$ represents the posterior probability distribution of the parameters $\theta$ given the data $D$, $p(\theta)$ represents the prior distribution of the parameters, and $p(D|\theta)$ is the likelihood distribution [see, e.g. @gelmanbda04]. Below we describe the priors for all of the parameters in our model.
Prior and likelihood distributions
----------------------------------
The flux scale factor $f_0$ can vary by orders of magnitude depending on the brightness of the source. Therefore, it is more convenient to model its logarithm, which can be described by the prior
$$\log f_0 \sim \textrm{Normal}(\mu_{0}, \sigma_{0}^2)\text{,}$$
where $\mu_{0}$ and $\sigma_{0}^2$ indicate the mean and the variance of the distribution respectively. In practice, we estimate $\mu_{0}$ using the data, and we assume $\sigma_{0}=3$ to allow a large range of magnitudes.
Our modeling is parameterized in terms of two stellar population parameters, the age and metallicity, whose priors are set by the limits of the model ranges. In this work, we use the E-MILES models [@2016MNRAS.463.3409V], assuming prior distributions given by
$$\begin{aligned}
\text{[Fe/H]}(\text{dex}) \sim \textrm{Uniform}(-1.79, 0.4)\\
\text{Age} (\text{Gyr}) \sim \textrm{Uniform}(0.4, 14)\text{.}\end{aligned}$$
The main reason to set the limits above is to ensure that the models have good quality in the ultra-violet according to the classification of @2010MNRAS.404.1639V, resulting in the exclusion of SSP models with \[Fe/H\]$=-2.27$, which may not be appropriate for metallicity estimation. Additionally, we also require a regular grid in the parameter space to perform linear interpolation of the SSP models, allowing a continuous coverage of ages and metallicities. As a consequence, we had to restrict the models to ages greater than 0.4 Gyr because part of the young SSP models are not extended to the near-infrared, which is necessary to cover the $z$ band properly. In particular, we adopt models with bimodal , a piecewise function defined by @1996ApJS..106..307V that matches the Salpeter for masses $>0.8M_\odot$ but is flattened at lower masses similarly to the Milky Way [e.g. @2003PASP..115..763C]. Given that the current version of the E-MILES stellar population models do not include the abundance of individual or alpha elements yet, we are restricted to the base models, which assume that \[M/H\]=\[Fe/H\] at solar metallicity. However, this assumption does not hold at low metallicities because the Milky Way stars used in the computation of the models are themselves alpha-enhanced [see @2010MNRAS.404.1639V]. The consequences of possible offsets resulting from non-solar abundance ratios are discussed further below.
The redshifts of our galaxies are of great interest because they set the distances to the galaxies and their physical parameters, and allow a proper classification of the candidates as UDGs. Without additional spectroscopic or redshift-by-association for our sample, we consider a prior that takes into consideration a few assumptions. galaxies with angular sizes $R_e\gtrsim 5$ have only been associated to environments with distances smaller than 100 Mpc , thus we can assume all UDG candidates are nearby. Moreover, all UDG candidates were selected with a minimum effective radius of $R_e=5.3$, which implies a physical radius of $R_e=2.5$ kpc at the distance of Coma, $100$ Mpc, or a redshift of $z\approx 0.023$. At a distance as low as $200$ Mpc, or $z\approx 0.046$, these UDGs would all already have an effective radius of $R_e \ge 5$ kpc, which is larger than most UDGs found so far . We conclude that it is very unlikely that many of our candidates lie at $z > 0.04$. Based on these considerations, we use the prior
$$z\sim \textrm{HalfNormal}(0.03^2)\text{,}$$
where we adopt the half-normal distribution to restrict the redshifts to positive values, and we assume a variance of $0.03^2$. In practice, this prior implies a median redshift $z\approx 0.02$, similar to Coma, with peak probability at $z=0$.
Regarding the dust attenuation, our data include only wavelengths $\lambda > 3000$ for low redshift galaxies, avoiding the 2175 bump [@1965ApJ...142.1683S]. For these wavelengths, most of the extinction laws, such as those obtained for the Milky Way [@1976asqu.book.....A; @1986ApJ...307..286F], the Large Magellanic Cloud [@1986ApJ...307..286F], the Small Magellanic Cloud , and starburst galaxies [@2000ApJ...533..682C], agree [see @2019MNRAS.483.2382W]. We adopt a parametrized extinction law from @1989ApJ...345..245C, which depends on two parameters, the total extinction in the $V$-band, $A_V$, and the total-to-selective extinction, $R_V$. The total extinction is modeled according to the prior
$$A_V \sim \textrm{Exponential}(0.2)\text{,}$$
where $0.2$ represents the mean value of the exponential distribution. This prior restricts the value of the extinction to positive values and also favors smaller extinction values rather than large. We also allow $R_V$ to vary in our models using the prior
$$R_V \sim \textrm{Normal}^+(3.1, 1.)\mbox{,}$$
which assumes that the total-to-selective extinction is similar to that measured generally within the Milky Way . The plus signal indicates that we restrict $R_V$ to positive values.
Finally, it is necessary to define a log-likelihood for the use of the Bayes’ theorem. The widely common assumption is that the observed consists of independent, normal random variables, and thus the log-likelihood can be simply described as a $\chi^2$-distribution. However, the accuracy of the model determined using the normal assumption may be compromised if the observations contain outliers [see @Vanhatalo2009]. In observational settings, the causes of outliers may be either external to the source, such as contamination by cosmic rays or the incomplete removal of sky, or internal to the source, as is the case when the model is incomplete, for example when it does not account for emission lines.
Emission lines have been directly observed in optical observations of at least one cluster UDG [@2017ApJ...838L..21K], and may be common in field UDGs [@2017ApJ...842..133L]. Observationally, emission lines systematically inflate the observed fluxes in passbands in which they appear, an effect that is likely to be most noticeable in the bluer, narrow bands. However, the modeling of emission lines requires the inclusion of secondary stellar population with young ages ($<0.01$ Gyr) and/or post-asymptotic giant branch stars [@2017ApJ...840...44B] plus a prescription for nebular emission [e.g. @1999astro.ph.12179F; @1999ApJS..123....3L]. To simplify the modeling, we instead adopt a robust fitting approach that may deal with outliers, including possibly emission lines, adopting a Student’s $t$-distribution log-likelihood.
Similar to the normal distribution, the Student’s $t$-distribution is a symmetric and bell-shaped distribution, but with long tails that allow for a non-negligible probability far from the center of the distribution [see @gelmanbda04]. Assuming that we are modeling $N$ discrete bands in a given SED, the log-likelihood that we map is given by
$$\begin{aligned}
\ln p(D | \theta ) &=&
N\log \left [ \frac{\Gamma\left (\frac{\nu + 1}{2}\right )}{\sqrt{\pi (\nu-2)}\Gamma\left (\frac{\nu}{2} \right )}\right ] \nonumber \\
&-& \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{N}\log \sigma_{i}^2 \nonumber \\
&-&\frac{\nu+1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^N \log \left [ 1 + \frac{\mu_{i}^2}{\sigma_{i}^2 (\nu-2)} \right ]\mbox{,}
\label{eq:llf}\end{aligned}$$
where $\Gamma(x)$ represents the gamma function of variable $x$, $\nu$ represents the degrees of freedom of the Student’s $t$-distribution, $\sigma_{i}$ represents the uncertainties of a given for the $i$-th band, and the mean $\mu_{i}$ represents the difference between the observed and the model SED. The Student’s $t$-distribution log-likelihood does not depend solely on the data and its uncertainties, but also on the value of another variable, $\nu$, which controls the amount of weight on the tails of the Student’s $t$-distribution. For instance, if $\nu\rightarrow2$, the tails of the distribution have more weight in the distribution, whereas if $\nu\rightarrow + \infty$, the distribution tends to a normal distribution. We also model the value of $\nu$ during the log-likelihood mapping assuming a non-informative prior for the degrees-of-freedom given by
$$\nu\sim \textrm{Uniform}(2,50)\mbox{,}$$
which is required to be open-ended only in the lower bounds to avoid the undefined likelihood that occurs if $\nu=2$.
Sampling and results
--------------------
To deploy the above SED fitting modeling in the context of the project, we developed a Bayesian SED fitter (<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">BSF</span>, Barbosa, in prep.) as a general tool to model either SEDs or spectra of galaxies. <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">BSF</span> is written in the Python programming language based on the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">pymc3</span> statistical package [@Salvatier2016], which allows for the construction of general Bayesian models while abstracting the complex issues related to the actual modeling and sampling. An attractive feature of the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">pymc3</span> package, not found in other commonly adopted packages such as the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">emcee</span> [@2013PASP..125..306F], is the implementation of the [, @2011arXiv1111.4246H], a Hamiltonian Monte Carlo sampler that has been shown to perform well in complex, multidimensional problems without the need of manual tuning. This sampler works better than other traditional samplers, such as the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm [@1970Bimka..57...97H] and the Gibbs sampler [@Gelfand1990], in problems with highly-correlated variables in a space parameter with hundreds of dimensions [see @2011arXiv1111.4246H].
As discussed in §\[sec:photometry\], there are a number of non-detections in our photometry. To simplify our modeling, we only included detected bands in the SED fitting for each UDG, and we leave the modeling including non-detections for forthcoming work. The samples from the posterior distributions were generated with <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">BSF</span> in four chains with 500 burn-in interactions and 500 draws. Figure \[fig:fitting\_images\] shows the comparison between the observations and the models for the sample of galaxies previously shown in Fig. \[fig:detection\_images\].
To illustrate the process of obtaining representative values and uncertainties for the model parameters, Fig. \[fig:corner\] shows the posterior samples determined with <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">BSF</span> for two of the presented in Fig. \[fig:detection\_images\]: SMDG0123079-002109, representing a relatively faint galaxy and SMDG0238220-011927 representing a relatively bright galaxy. Throughout our analysis, we use the median to determine the representative value of all parameters, and we use the percentile values of 16% and 84% to estimate the $1\sigma$ confidence intervals of the parameters, always using the marginalized posterior distribution, shown in the histograms. In Table \[tab:results\], we present the results of this analysis for the first ten entries of the SMUDGes sample. The full table is available online in machine-readable format.
[lccccc]{} SMDG0006543-000029 & $0.07_{-0.05}^{+0.12}$ & $-1.3_{-0.34}^{+0.7}$ & $2.8_{-2.1}^{+7.0}$ & $0.018_{-0.013}^{+0.020}$ & $7.5_{-1.1}^{+0.7}$\
SMDG0016502-002756 & $0.11_{-0.08}^{+0.17}$ & $-1.0_{-0.5}^{+0.8}$ & $7.1_{-4.0}^{+4.5}$ & $0.021_{-0.015}^{+0.020}$ & $8.0_{-1.0}^{+0.6}$\
SMDG0021031+004447 & $0.18_{-0.13}^{+0.28}$ & $-0.4_{-0.8}^{+0.6}$ & $8.0_{-4.5}^{+4.3}$ & $0.022_{-0.015}^{+0.021}$ & $7.9_{-0.9}^{+0.7}$\
SMDG0025396+011515 & $0.10_{-0.07}^{+0.19}$ & $-1.1_{-0.5}^{+0.8}$ & $5.8_{-4.5}^{+5.5}$ & $0.019_{-0.013}^{+0.020}$ & $7.5_{-1.0}^{+0.7}$\
SMDG0035569+010149 & $0.08_{-0.06}^{+0.14}$ & $-1.2_{-0.4}^{+0.6}$ & $3.1_{-2.3}^{+6.9}$ & $0.017_{-0.011}^{+0.021}$ & $7.4_{-1.0}^{+0.7}$\
SMDG0045200-011839 & $0.07_{-0.05}^{+0.12}$ & $-1.3_{-0.4}^{+1.0}$ & $1.5_{-0.9}^{+6.0}$ & $0.018_{-0.013}^{+0.018}$ & $7.4_{-1.2}^{+0.7}$\
SMDG0055526-011739 & $0.14_{-0.10}^{+0.24}$ & $-0.8_{-0.7}^{+0.8}$ & $7.4_{-4.6}^{+4.4}$ & $0.020_{-0.014}^{+0.022}$ & $7.5_{-1.1}^{+0.7}$\
SMDG0058071-010201 & $0.09_{-0.07}^{+0.14}$ & $-1.2_{-0.4}^{+0.8}$ & $4.6_{-3.5}^{+6.1}$ & $0.021_{-0.015}^{+0.021}$ & $8.0_{-1.0}^{+0.6}$\
SMDG0108359-002834 & $0.18_{-0.14}^{+0.28}$ & $-0.5_{-0.8}^{+0.6}$ & $8.0_{-4.4}^{+4.1}$ & $0.022_{-0.015}^{+0.024}$ & $7.9_{-1.1}^{+0.7}$\
SMDG0113101-001223 & $0.10_{-0.07}^{+0.15}$ & $-1.1_{-0.5}^{+0.8}$ & $4.3_{-3.4}^{+6.6}$ & $0.020_{-0.014}^{+0.020}$ & $7.4_{-1.1}^{+0.7}$\
Stellar masses
--------------
We determine the stellar mass of each UDG combining our SED fitting results of the S-PLUS data with the photometric properties measured in the deeper SMUDGes images. We adopt two different approaches. First, we use the SED fitting photometric redshift to estimate the distance and the total apparent $r$-band magnitude from SMUDGes to determine the total magnitude, assuming a Hubble-Lemaître law with $H_0=70\pm2$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$. Next, we use the $r$-band mass-to-light ratio from the E-MILES models [@2010MNRAS.404.1639V; @2012MNRAS.424..172R] to obtain the total stellar mass, assuming that $M_{\odot,r}=4.65$ [@2018ApJS..236...47W]. These calculations are performed using the Monte Carlo chains, and thus the uncertainties are marginalized over all parameters in the SED fitting model. Second, we estimate the stellar mass using the color-mass relation from @2011MNRAS.418.1587T, which is based on data from the survey . Reassuringly, the stellar masses resulting from the two approaches always agree to within $0.1$ dex, which is a difference that is much smaller than the typical mass uncertainties ($\sim$0.8 dex). We conclude that our stellar mass estimates are likely to be dominated by internal random uncertainties rather than by a systematic error in the conversion between luminosity and stellar mass. For the remainder of this work, we use the stellar masses determined using the first method. The stellar masses derived by the first method are also presented in Table \[tab:results\].
Evaluating the posterior distributions {#sec:posteriors}
--------------------------------------
To understand how well we constrain the parameters in our model, we compare the posterior distributions with the prior distributions. We perform this exercise in Fig. \[fig:magr\_params\], where we show the posterior medians and uncertainties for five free parameters in our model ($A_V$, $R_V$, Age, \[Fe/H\], $z$) as a function of $m_r$, the apparent magnitude of the galaxies according to the SMUDGes measurements. Overall, the fitting is better constrained, i.e., is restricted to a narrower range of values in the posterior distribution, for the brighter sources ($m_r\lesssim 19$), while the posterior distributions tend to be more similar to the prior distribution for the fainter sources ($m_r\gtrsim 19$). We discuss the results for the individual parameters below.
The extinction law parameters have limited impact on the optical SED shape of the UDGs, and no strong dust attenuation was required to fit the models. The median total extinction of $A_V\approx 0.1-0.2$ is recovered in all cases, whereas the total-to-selective extinction $R_V$ is mostly unchanged from the prior distribution. In practice, both parameters have the role of nuisance parameters in our analysis, as they are not of direct interest for this work, but are still taken into consideration in the analysis of the stellar populations parameters and the redshift.
The metallicity clearly departs from the prior distribution in most cases, with median metallicities systematically small (\[Fe/H\]$\approx -1$ dex). Even though the $1\sigma$ uncertainties remain similar to the prior for the faint UDGs, the posterior distributions for the metallicity are usually skewed towards low metallicities in most cases, and are not flat-shaped like the priors. The main concern in the derived metallicities occur for the more metal-poor galaxies, given that they are sometimes compatible with the lowest metallicity available in our SSP grid (\[Fe/H\]=$-$1.79). Without a larger grid of models, we can not rule out that some of these systems have even lower metallicities. Overall, however, we conclude that our metallicities estimates are well constrained by our SED fitting.
Similarly, despite the large uncertainties for the faint UDGs, we do find that the luminosity-weighted ages tend to be smaller than the prior median (Age $\approx 7$ Gyr). One important point in the evaluation of the ages is that we can see more variation in the SED’s of younger galaxies, in the sense that it is easier to differentiate between a 1 Gyr and a 2 Gyr old population than to differentiate between a 10 Gyr and a 12 Gyr old population. We see that effect in practice in our modeling in Fig. \[fig:magr\_params\], as the posterior distribution for galaxies with young ages are usually narrower than the prior distribution, while for those with old ages we tend to obtain relatively flat posteriors. Overall, we conclude that we are able to differentiate between young and old stellar populations in our UDG candidates, which is enough to allow a broad discussion of the formation of these systems.
Finally, the quality of the modeled photometric redshifts also depends on the apparent magnitude of the UDGs. The posterior redshift distribution for the faint UDGs is very similar to the prior distribution. In these cases, the quoted uncertainties in the redshift are around $0.8$ dex, which is simply the propagation of allowed prior range. On the other hand, the bright UDGs have a narrower range of redshifts in the posterior distribution, and their median redshifts are usually smaller than the prior median of $\approx 0.02$. However, even in these cases, the redshift estimate is very uncertain, and we are only able to constrain the photometric redshift with errors $\sigma_z \approx 0.01$ in the best cases. This has important implications in the classification of the UDG candidates, as we discuss below.
Implications of the estimated redshifts to the classification of UDG candidates
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The most important implication of the redshift uncertainty is on the question of whether the UDG candidates are real UDGs, i.e., are they physical large, $R_e\geq 1.5$ kpc. We showed in §\[sec:posteriors\] that we are only able to minimally constrain photometric redshift for the bright UDG candidates ($m_r\lesssim 19$), and we rely on the prior distribution to estimate the redshift of the fainter UDG candidates.
If, for the sake of argument, we consider the photometric redshift estimates to be correct, we can test whether the candidates can be classified as UDGs and whether this leads to any obvious irregularities. First, in Fig. \[fig:magr\_re\] we show the estimated effective radii of our UDG candidates as a function of the apparent magnitude, using the posterior distribution samples for the photometric redshift, and adopting the angular sizes, $R_e$, determined by SMUDGes. We use the apparent magnitude as the independent variable to emphatize that our ability to constrain the sizes are directly affected by the observed luminosity of the UDGs, but this does not reflect the actual size-luminosity relation that is expected to exist for UDGs if they are similar to other galaxies [e.g. @1977ApJ...218..333K]. All but two candidates are larger than the UDG criterion with greater than 50% confidence. Of course, for the fainter systems this is principally a reflection of the adopted prior distribution, but for the brighter systems, where the determined redshift differs from the prior median, we have greater confidence that the physical sizes bear some resemblance to the truth. Second, the adopted redshifts do not lead to an unexpected set of very large ($R_e > 6$ kpc) UDGs. As such, our determinations are not manifestly incorrect.
Given the limited redshift information contained in our observations, we are unable to conclude that our candidates are all real UDGs, but the bright ones are likely to be real UDGs, as well as the ones we discussed previously as confirmed through distance-by-association. For the sample as a whole, we argue based on volume considerations that they are likely to be farther away than our adopted median prior distance. The argument goes as follows. First, we specify that the maximum size of any UDG is $R_e = 6$ kpc, which sets a maximum distance for each of our candidates. The candidate can lie at any distance up to this maximum distance. Second, we assume that the parent population of our candidates is uniformly distributed throughout the local volume. Third, we claim that our selection is effectively independent of distance, within this volume, because it depends on surface brightness more than on luminosity. The latter statement is not strictly correct, but valid at the coarse level of this argument [@2019ApJS..240....1Z]. In such a scenario the mean distance to our candidates is $159 \pm 40$ Mpc, or $z = 0.036 \pm 0.01$, which is greater than our adopted median prior and supports the argument that the majority of candidates are indeed UDGs. In the next sections, we use the term UDG for all candidates, acknowledging that some of them might not meet the physical size criterion for UDGs.
Discussion {#sec:discussion}
==========
In this section we examine a variety of established galactic relations and properties, and place our UDG sample in context. We restrict our discussion to the stellar population properties and to only one variable that depends on the distance, the stellar mass, to avoid observed relations that may be contaminated by large correlations among parameters owing to our photometric redshift estimations.
The stellar mass-metallicity relation of UDGs {#sec:mass-metal}
---------------------------------------------
We begin this exploration by determining whether are similar to other galaxies [see @2012AJ....144....4M; @2013ApJ...779..102K], and thus follow the same stellar mass-metallicity as bright galaxies [@2005MNRAS.362...41G]. Previous studies found that UDGs usually conform to the stellar mass-metallicity relation defined by dwarf galaxies, but most of those UDGs are in or near clusters, such as Coma [@2018ApJ...859...37G; @2018MNRAS.479.4891F; @2018MNRAS.478.2034R], with a few examples of UDGs not associated to clusters .
In Figure \[fig:stellarmass-metal\] we show the stellar mass-metallicity relation and include our sample of UDGs. There is a large variety of data types, models and methods involved in the determination of stellar populations of UDGs in the literature, and part of the scatter in the mass-metallicity and other relations may be attributed to that. For instance @2018ApJ...866..112G have shown a difference of $0.3-0.5$ dex in the metallicity of UDGs by simply changing from a to an extended star formation history. However, despite this important caveat, our measurements are consistent with previous work, with UDGs filling part of the gap between dwarf and giant galaxies. In the bottom left of the figure, we included an ellipse whose shape shows the covariance between the two parameters, which indicates that the stellar mass and the metallicity are basically independent in our measurements.
Our large sample of galaxies allows the observation of a range of metallicities that matches the variety of metallicities previously indentified in the literature. However, the large uncertainties and the censored limits in the range of metallicites do not allows a reliable measure of the metallicity scatter for the UDGs in the sample. Overall, the location of the population of in the stellar mass-metallicity diagram indicates a similarity with other dwarf galaxies, such as those observed by @2013ApJ...779..102K. On average, the metallicities of the UDGs, as presented, are slightly larger than those predicted from the extrapolation of the relation derived from measurements of dwarf galaxies, but there are a few important considerations that favor the idea that the metallicity of UDGs follows the same relation of the dwarf galaxies.
First, the UDGs are not statistically far away from the dwarf sequence. Considering only our sample of UDGs, the mean difference between the measured metallicity and the expected metallicity from the @2013ApJ...779..102K relation is 0.18 dex, which is similar to the scatter of the dwarf galaxies around the mean (0.14 dex), and much smaller than the mean error in our measurements (0.6 dex). Second, there may be a systematic error in our measurements related to the assumed relation between the total metallicity and the iron abundance, \[M/H\]=\[Fe/H\], because the low metallicity stars used in the E-MILES models contain alpha elements. @2018MNRAS.479.4891F reported a few UDGs with significant over abundance of magnesium ( $0\lesssim$ \[Mg/Fe\] $\lesssim0.4$ for three out of four galaxies) and @2019MNRAS.484.3425M reported an even larger over abundance in DGSAT I, \[Mg/Fe\]=1.5. An average magnesium abundance of \[Mg/Fe\]$\approx 0.2$ dex is enough to account for the difference we find between the metallicity of our UDGs and that published for the dwarf galaxies[^2]. Finally, our models are restricted to a lower limit of \[Fe/H\]$=-1.8$, and thus the metallicity of some UDGs in our sample may be over estimated. Note that a factor of two smaller distances, which would then render most of our candidates as non-UDGs, would lead to a factor of 4 lower stellar mass and would exacerbate the metallicity offset.
In conclusion, the metallicity of the UDGs is roughly consistent with that of other galaxies of similar stellar masses, the high-mass end of the dwarf sequence, and so do not show any signs of a different formation path than those galaxies.
The luminosity-weighted ages of field UDGs
------------------------------------------
The reported ages of UDGs have usually been large, $>$ 4 Gyrs, but again almost all published results are for Coma galaxies [@2018ApJ...859...37G; @2018MNRAS.478.2034R; @2018MNRAS.479.4891F]. In the limited available examples of field UDGs, however, the reported luminosity-weighted ages have consistently been younger, with ages ranging from 1 to 3 Gyr [@2016AJ....151...96M; @2018ApJ...866..112G; @2019MNRAS.484.3425M]. In fact, the UDG population in the field is expected to have a larger variety of colors than that of the clusters [@2017MNRAS.466L...1D] and there is observational support for this trend .
In Figure \[fig:age\_hist\] we compare the luminosity-weighted age distribution of galaxies in our sample to that of UDGs observed in the Coma [@2018ApJ...859...37G; @2018MNRAS.478.2034R; @2018MNRAS.479.4891F] and Virgo [@2018ApJ...858...29P] clusters, to contrast the distribution of ages in clusters and in the field. Both the field and cluster UDGs typically have intermediate ages, with a peak in the age histogram around 7 Gyr, but our sample also indicates a significant fraction of UDGs with ages smaller than 4 Gyr.
Considering that we only have luminosity-weighted ages, the results from the our analysis are expected to be biased toward the youngest populations within a galaxy. Therefore, a few different, non-exclusive scenarios can explain the additional fraction of UDGs with young ages. One possible explanation is the existence of different UDG formation channels not present in the cluster [e.g. @2019MNRAS.tmp.2566L]. Other possibilities are that in the field might have more continuous star formation activity, presumably in the absence of cluster-related processes, such as harassment and ram-pressure stripping, and that field UDGs have had a recent, even on-going, star formation burst that outshines the older and more massive stellar component of the galaxy. Regardless of the detailed explanation, UDGs are able to flourish in the field by forming stars until much more recently than UDGs in clusters.
The age-metallicity relation of UDGs
------------------------------------
We compare in Figure \[fig:age\_metal\] the luminosity-weighted age-metallicity relation for , both in the field and in galaxy clusters, to that of bright galaxies. Within our own field UDG sample, there appears to be a correlation between age and metallicity, but considering the existence of a well-known age-degeneracy problem, we first inspect whether this is causing the observed relation.
The original age-deneracy problem [@1994ApJS...95..107W] indicates that the colors of an old population are similar to those of another population three times older and with half the metallicity. This degeneracy is specific for broad bands and old stellar systems, and thus it is unclear whether this holds in our analysis. However, it is an important cautionary note to any stellar population analysis, as degeneracies are bound to happen in SED fitting. As we indicate with the error ellipse in the bottom of the figure, there is a correlation between the age and the metallicity in our posterior distributions that is similar to the known age-metallicity degeneracy. However, the observed relation between the ages and metallicities of our UDGs does not have a slope in the same direction as the age-degeneracy relation. Therefore, we conclude that the observed relation between ages and metallicities in our UDG sample is not driven by the age-metallicity degeneracy, and thus we are able to discuss some properties of the observed relation.
For the old UDGs (age$\gtrsim 6$ Gyr), the age-metallicity relation follows a similar pattern to that of bright galaxies [@2005MNRAS.362...41G], in the sense that younger systems have low metallicity and older systems have high metallicity, although with different slope and offset. The old UDGs have metallicities similar to those reported in other works for UDGs in clusters, but this possible age-metallicity relation was not hinted at in previous work.
The young UDGs have a flat age-metalicity relation, but the modeling limitation in the range of very low metallicities limits us in reaching further conclusions as to whether the flattening in the relation is real or a result of the modeling restriction. The location of our young UDGs in this space is similar to that of the field UDGs from @2018ApJ...866..112G, which were suggested to be currently star forming.
Interestingly, there are also a few young UDGs ($t\lesssim 1$ Gyr) with relatively high metallicities (\[Fe/H\]$\approx -0.5$ dex), populating the location of more massive galaxies. These UDGs are located in age-metallicity plane in a location similar to that of DGSAT I, a passive, field UDG found in the Pisces-Perseus supercluster filament [@2016AJ....151...96M]. A visual inspection of our young, metal-rich UDGs does not suggest current tidal interactions with bright galaxies, and thus it is not likely that these particular UDGs have tidal origins, which could have explained their higher metallicity. A more likely scenario is that these cases indicate more massive UDGs that have a recent burst in star formation, such that their luminosity-weighted metallicities are driven by a potentially old, mass-dominant stellar component, while their luminosity-weighted ages are driven by a less massive, young component.
The stellar mass-age relation
-----------------------------
In Figure \[fig:mass\_age\] we present the relation between the stellar mass and the luminosity-weighted age for our UDG sample and more massive galaxies. Similarly to the age-metallicity relation, we also observe a correlation between the ages and the stellar masses. However, in this case, the error ellipse in the bottom of the figure indicates that the observed correlation may be caused by a degeneracy in the parameters, and thus we do not have any confidence that this relation actually exists.
Most old UDGs (Age $\gtrsim 6$ Gyr) follow the stellar mass - mass weighted age relation observed by @2005ApJ...621..673T, extrapolated to the UDG regime. We explain this agreement by noting that the luminosity-weighted and mass-weighted ages converge the longer a galaxy is not forming stars. However, the young UDGs are displaced from the relation of @2005ApJ...621..673T, and have ages similar to those in the low-mass end of the @2005MNRAS.362...41G relation. We expect these young field UDGs to move upward in this diagram when they eventually stop forming stars.
Summary and conclusion {#sec:conclusion}
======================
Ultra-diffuse galaxies (UDGs) are large, low surface brightness galaxies. Although such systems are now known in significant numbers, establishing physical characteristics has proven to be challenging even when using the largest telescopes of this generation. Field UDGs, in particular, have barely been studied. In this work, we perform the first systematic study of the stellar populations of field combining the deep and large area search of UDGs performed by the SMUDGes survey [@2019ApJS..240....1Z] with the multiband capabilities of the survey [@2019MNRAS.489..241M]. Covering an area of the $\sim$330 deg$^2$ in the Stripe 82 region, we fit spectral energy distributions (SEDs) to a sample of 100 field UDGs, representing the largest sample of UDGs (field or cluster) for which ages and metallicites have been measured to date.
We constrain our Bayesian SED fitting method with up to 12 broad and narrow bands from S-PLUS, resulting in estimated luminosity-weighted ages, metallicities and stellar masses of the field UDGs. While stellar masses and metallicities are mostly in agreement with previous studies, we observed a number of UDGs with ages younger than those found in cluster. This result suggests that UDGs in the field may have extended star formation histories that may, in some cases, extend to the current time, contrasting with the typical old ages of UDGs found in clusters. We also found a few cases of relatively high-metallicity UDGs (\[Fe/H\]$\approx -0.5$) with young ages (ages $\lesssim 1$ Gyr) without clear indications of tidal interactions, which suggest ongoing episodes of star formation among the most massive UDGs.
Previous studies have already indicated that UDGs may represent the extension of normal galaxy properties rather than arising from a disconnected, new path of galaxy formation, but these conclusions have been based on small samples of galaxies [@2016ApJ...830...23B; @2017MNRAS.464L.110Z] or models [@2016MNRAS.459L..51A]. By placing a large sample of field UDGs in stellar population scaling relations, we were able to confirm that UDGs, as a population, are similar to dwarf and giant galaxies. There are still puzzles to solve, such as the large globular cluster abundances in the largest UDGs [@2017ApJ...844L..11V; @2018ApJ...856L..31T] and the offset from the baryonic Tully-Fisher relation [@2019ApJ...883L..33M], but we conclude that these should arise naturally from considering a broader range of galaxies within the current picture of galaxy formation [@2019MNRAS.485..796M] rather than any exotic processes [@2018ApJ...866L..11B]. Of course, these statements apply to the general case and individual exceptions, where UDGs form in tidal tails, for example, are not excluded.
Despite the improvement in sample size in this work, there is still much to be gained from even larger samples. In particular, we want to apply the same analysis methods to UDGs in a range of environments, including massive clusters, to more confidently compare results. Even larger samples will enable us to test for further dependencies on UDG mass, environment, and morphology. Both SMUDGes and S-PLUS are still in their early phases. A much larger area of the sky will be probed by both surveys in the next years, increasing the sample for which this type of analysis can be replicated into the thousands.
The authors thank the anonymous referee for his/her comments. We are thankful to Stavros Akras, Yoli Jiménez Teja, Marco Grossi, Alvaro Alvarez-Candal, José Luis Nilo Castellón, Paulo Lopes, Kanak Saha, Eduardo Telles and Ana Chies Santos for providing comments and suggestions. CEB, CMdO gratefully acknowledges the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), grants 2011/51680-6, 2016/12331-0 and 2018/24389-8. DZ, RD, and HZ gratefully acknowledge financial support from NSF AST-1713841. PC acknowledges support from FAPESP project 2018/05392-8, and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) project 310041/2018-0. LS thanks the FAPESP scholarship grant 2016/21664-2. FRH thanks FAPESP for the financial support, grants 2019/23141-5 and 2018/21661-9. J.A.H.J. thanks to Brazilian institution CNPq for financial support through postdoctoral fellowship (project 150237/2017-0) and Chilean institution CONICYT, Programa de Astronomía, Fondo ALMA-CONICYT 2017, Código de proyecto 31170038. The T80South robotic telescope [@2019MNRAS.489..241M] was founded as a partnership between FAPESP, the Observatório Nacional (ON), the Federal University of Sergipe (UFS) and the Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), with important financial and practical contributions from other collaborating institutes in Brazil, Chile (Universidad de La Serena) and Spain (CEFCA). This work has made use of the computing facilities of the Laboratory of Astroinformatics (Instituto de Astronomia, Geofísica e Ciências Atmosféricas, Departamento de Astronomia/USP, NAT/Unicsul), whose purchase was made possible by FAPESP (grant 2009/54006-4) and the INCT-A. This research has made use of 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.
[^1]: <https://datalab.noao.edu/splus/index.php>
[^2]: For the E-MILES models, \[Fe/H\]=\[M/H\]-0.75\[Mg/Fe\].
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The nucleus of M87 displays a LINER spectrum at optical wavelengths, with a nuclear disk of nebulosity that is resolved by the [*Hubble Space Telescope*]{}. We present new results from optical and ultraviolet spectra of the central $\sim 40$ pc as measured by [*HST*]{}. In contrast with previous results for the extended disk, the emission-line spectrum of the central region is best reproduced by a multi-component photoionization scenario, rather than shock heating. The nebular properties as well as energetic considerations suggest a transition on scales of several tens of parsecs, from predominantly photoionization by a central accretion source, to shock ionization within the disk. If this source is at all representative, it suggests that many LINERs may be composite in terms of the energetic processes that give rise to the emission spectrum. We also report measurements of resonance-line absorption for the nucleus. The absorption spectrum, like the emission lines, is characterized by low ionization. The absorption line measurements coupled with independent constraints suggest a total hydrogen column density of $10^{19} - 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$, outflowing from the galaxy center with a velocity of $\sim 126$ km s$^{-1}$. The kinematic signature of an outflow, along with evidence that the absorber covers the power-law continuum source but not the emission-line clouds, suggests that the absorbing matter is related to accretion phenomena in the nucleus. The presence of such an outflow resembles similar behavior in luminous AGNs, although the low ionization that characterizes LINERs is probably indicative of a different mode of accretion in these sources.'
author:
- 'Bassem M. Sabra, Joseph C. Shields, Luis C. Ho, Aaron J. Barth, and Alexei V. Filippenko'
title:
- Emission and Absorption in the M87 LINER
- 'Table 1: HST STIS and FOS Observations '
- 'Table 2: Observed Emission-Line Fluxes (STIS & FOS)'
- 'Table 3: Photoionization Predictions$^1$'
- 'Table 4: Absorption Lines (STIS, G140L)'
- 'Table 5: Absorption Lines (FOS, G270H, G400H, G570H) '
---
Introduction
============
A large fraction of nearby galaxies harbor low-ionization nuclear emission-line regions (LINERs; e.g., Heckman 1980; Ho, Filippenko, & Sargent 1997). A variety of mechanisms have been suggested for the underlying power source in these objects, including shocks, black hole accretion, and hot stars. LINER case studies have revealed candidate prototypes for each of these phenomena, strengthening speculation that LINERs are a heterogeneous class (e.g., Filippenko 1996).
The LINER galaxy M87 is a particularly interesting example. Ground-based optical spectra of its nucleus show narrow-line emission with a complex velocity profile, but no clear signature of the broad permitted lines that are the hallmark of quasar activity. Observations with the [*Hubble Space Telescope*]{} ([*HST*]{}) reveal a spatially resolved disk of emission at the nucleus, and analysis of emission from the disk provides strong evidence of shock excitation (Dopita et al. 1997, hereafter D97). Considered alone, these properties give little indication that the system is related to luminous AGNs; yet this object provides one of the best cases for accretion-powered activity in the nucleus of a galaxy. The evidence takes the form of its famous synchrotron jet (e.g., Boksenberg et al. 1992; Bicknell & Begelman 1996) and a velocity field in the nuclear gas disk requiring the presence of a central dark object with a mass of $3.2 \times 10^9$ M$_\odot$ (Ford et al. 1994; Harms et al. 1994; Macchetto et al. 1997).
One possible interpretation of the existing results for M87 is that LINER emission is caused primarily by shocks, even when coexistent with an accretion power source that may generate substantial ionizing radiation. This scenario contrasts markedly with the behavior of Seyfert galaxies, which have narrow-line emission powered primarily by photoionization (e.g., Laor 1998). Moreover, the evidence for shocks in the M87 disk comes from ultraviolet emission-line ratios, but the same diagnostics observed in a handful of other LINERs do not provide similar indications of mechanical heating (e.g., Barth et al. 1996, 1997; Maoz et al. 1998). The latter finding may imply that the LINER in M87 is an anomaly; however, another possibility is that the uncharacteristic result for this source reflects the unusual circumstance that its central nebulosity is resolved, and the previous [*HST*]{} study considered emission from only a part of the disk that did not include the nucleus [*per se*]{}. In order to understand fully the nature of the nebulosity at the center of M87, and to assess the larger implications for LINERs, measurement of the UV/optical spectrum of the nucleus is clearly desirable. In this paper we present the results of spectroscopic observations carried out with [*HST*]{} for this purpose.
Observation and Data Analysis
=============================
Long-slit spectra of the nucleus of M87 were obtained with the Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS) on 1999 February 1 UT, using the 52$\times$ 05 aperture and the gratings listed in Table 1. The slit was oriented at position angles $216\arcdeg$ and $240\arcdeg$ for the optical (CCD) and UV (MAMA) data, respectively. (The difference in position angle resulted unintentionally from a roll-angle adjustment during the observation sequence.) The resulting spectra provide continuous wavelength coverage of the nucleus in the range $\sim 1150-10270$ Å. The relatively large slit width leads to rather low spectral resolution (see Table 1) but was selected in order to maximize the measured signal in the UV bandpass, while maintaining a uniform aperture dimension across the entire spectrum. The full-width at half maximum (FWHM) spatial resolution is $\sim 0\farcs 05$ for the MAMAs, and $\sim 0\farcs 12$ for the CCDs. The data were calibrated “On-The-Fly” upon retrieval from the data archive at the Space Telescope Science Institute. All data reduction and analysis was performed with IRAF[^1]. With this slit width, geocoronal Ly$\alpha$ is blended with the redshifted Ly$\alpha$ from M87. We measured the background geocoronal emission in the G140L spectrum near the ends of the slit, and subtracted the result from each row of the two-dimensional spectrum, making sure that we also propagate errors in the correct way.
Spectra of the nucleus were extracted for an aperture size of $\sim
0\farcs25$ along the slit (i.e., 10 MAMA pixels and 5 CCD pixels, corresponding to approximately twice the spatial FWHM for the CCD). The result is shown in Figure 1. In order to aid in removing any underlying galaxy starlight, we generated a stellar continuum template by averaging the spectra of off-nucleus regions that were emission-free. The resulting aperture was $10\arcsec$ ($5\arcsec$ for UV spectra) wide and centered at $7\farcs5$ ($3\farcs75$ for UV spectra) southwest of the nucleus. Emission from the nebular disk at these scales is negligible within our aperture, in comparison with that measured from the nucleus. [*HST*]{} images show a rapid fall-off of nebular surface brightness with radius (e.g., D97). In contrast with the FOS study reported by D97, which measured the spectrum 06 from the nucleus with a 10 aperture, the data reported here employ a narrower slit, and consequently do not exhibit a signal-to-noise ratio sufficient to measure nebular features outside the central aperture defined above.
We measured the fluxes of the emission features while simultaneously fitting the continuum, via $\chi^2$ minimization, using SPECFIT as implemented in IRAF (Kriss 1994). We fitted Gaussians to the emission lines, and represented the continuum as the sum of a featureless power law and the galaxy template. The results of the measurements are given in Table 2. In all cases, the fit results were consistent with the continuum being dominated by the power-law component. Errors were evaluated by SPECFIT from the accompanying error extensions to the spectra. The FWHM velocity for H$\beta$ is $\sim 2100$ km s$^{-1}$, after correcting for the instrumental profile for a point source, and $\sim 900$ km s$^{-1}$ if the emission is extended uniformly across the slit; the latter value can thus be taken as a lower limit. Due to the significant intrinsic velocity width and the low spectral resolution, H$\alpha$ was heavily blended with \[\] $\lambda\lambda$6548, 6583, and the \[\] $\lambda\lambda$6717, 6731 lines were also heavily blended with each other; no attempt was made at deblending these composite features, which we instead fit by single Gaussians. The width and redshift of the \[\] $\lambda$6364 template were linked to those of \[\] $\lambda$6300 and, as dictated by atomic physics (Osterbrock 1989), \[\] $\lambda\lambda 6300/6364 = 3.0$. The same procedure was followed for \[\] $\lambda\lambda$4959, 5007.
A joint analysis of the optical and UV spectra is potentially sensitive to reddening. The fact that H$\alpha$ was heavily blended with the \[\] lines makes it impossible to get a direct measure of reddening using the H$\alpha$/H$\beta$ ratio. Moreover, H$\delta$ is blended with \[\] $\lambda\lambda$4069, 4076, and H$\gamma$ leads to unphysical extinction values when combined with H$\beta$; this may be due to an overestimate of the H$\gamma$ flux caused by blended emission in \[\] $\lambda$4363. Our spectral range includes the recombination lines $\lambda$4686 and $\lambda$1640. For Case B recombination, the ratio $\lambda\lambda 1640/4686
\approx 7$ (Hummer & Storey 1987). Our spectra set a $3\sigma$ upper limit on $\lambda$4686 of 20% of H$\beta$. This limit is calculated according to the formula $3\sqrt{2\pi}\sigma_c$(14Å), where $\sigma_c$ is the root-mean-square uncertainty per Ångstrom in the local continuum, and 14 Å is the measured Gaussian dispersion of the H$\beta$ profile. (This prescription corresponds to a Gaussian profile with amplitude $3\sigma_c$.) The result is ( $\lambda\lambda
1640/4686)_{observed} > 2.0$. Employing the extinction curve of Cardelli, Clayton, & Mathis (1989), we find that $A_V < 2.4$ mag. The Galactic foreground extinction toward M87 is expected to be much less than this value, and independent estimates of the total absorption (§3) suggest that the Galactic component dominates the total extinction, with $A_V \approx 0.15$ mag.
Additional spectra of the nucleus of M87 spanning 1140 – 6820 Å were obtained on 1996 July 2 UT with the FOS, using the 0 aperture (Table 1). The calibrated data were obtained from the public domain archive. We measured the emission lines as for the STIS spectra, assuming a power-law form for the continuum. Uncertainties in the line fluxes are generally larger for the FOS observations, reflecting a somewhat lower signal-to-noise ratio. Measurements from the two spectra are in general agreement although significant differences are present in Ly$\alpha$, which may be affected by uncertain geocoronal subtraction for the FOS spectrum, and \[\] $\lambda$3869.
In addition to emission lines, there is a wealth of UV absorption features seen in the spectra. The velocity shifts of some lines are consistent with absorption within the Galaxy, while others appear associated with M87. We used spectra with the highest spectral resolution for our absorption-line measurements. Table 1 shows that all the FOS gratings have higher spectral resolution than those employed with STIS, except for FOS G160L, which has a lower resolution than STIS G140L. The absorption lines in the FOS spectra segregate into two systems distinguished by their line widths; those with FWHM $\approx$ 200 km s$^{-1}$ are of Galactic origin (and are unresolved), while those with FWHM $\approx$ 400 km s$^{-1}$ are intrinsic to M87, where the FWHM values quoted here have not been corrected for the instrument profile of FWHM$ = 230$ km s$^{-1}$. The absorption lines in the STIS G140L have FWHM $\approx 400$ km s$^{-1}$, uncorrected for the line-spread function of FWHM $= 190$ km s$^{-1}$ for a point source; the velocity widths of many features in this spectrum are potentially affected by blends. Identification of features was based on wavelength correspondence with line lists from Verner, Barthel, & Tytler (1994), and consistency tests with the measured line strengths or upper limits for resonance features from the same ions.
The STIS and FOS observations are separated by $\sim 2.6$ years. The equivalent widths of the absorption lines agree to within the measurement errors. The continuum level in the FOS spectrum is higher by 20%, with greater contrast at shorter wavelength. Tsvetanov et al. (1998) discussed variability in the optical continuum during 1994 and 1995, and found differences of a factor of $\sim 2$ on a timescale of 2.5 months, so variability is clearly a concern when comparing measurements from different epochs.
Results and Interpretation
==========================
The physical interpretation of nebular emission in LINERs is complicated by the fact that several different energy sources may give rise to such emission. Theoretical predictions of optical lines are degenerate in the sense that the same line ratios can be explained equally well by more than one physical scenario, including in particular shocks and photoionization (e.g., D97; Allen, Dopita, & Tsvetanov 1998). Allen et al. (1998) have suggested that the inclusion of ultraviolet emission diagnostics provides a basis for distinguishing between shocks and photoionization, and UV emission lines figure prominently in the analysis by D97 implicating shocks in the extended nuclear disk in M87. In the present study we extend this analysis to the interpretation of the emission of nuclear emission as measured in the central $\sim 0\farcs 5$, corresponding to $\sim 39$ pc (for an assumed distance of 16.1 Mpc; Tonry et al. 2001).
Line Ratio Diagrams and the Excitation Mechanism
------------------------------------------------
Comparisons of our measurements with theoretical predictions are presented in two-dimensional line ratio diagrams in Figure 2, which employs optical and UV lines, and Figure 3, which uses exclusively UV lines. These diagrams are selected from those shown by D97 and Allen et al. (1998) to hold promise for distinguishing ionization processes. In addition to our STIS results, line ratios from the FOS spectra of the nucleus (our measurements) and of the ionized disk (D97) are also shown. The diagrams involve intensity ratios of lines close in wavelength, so that they are relatively insensitive to reddening; the plotted data points have consequently not been corrected for reddening.
Predictions for several excitation mechanisms are overplotted in Figures 2 and 3. Predicted ratios for shock excitation are taken from Dopita & Sutherland (1995); for their models, the parameters that produce the range in line ratios are the shock velocity and the magnetic parameter $B/n^{1/2}$, where $B$ is the magnetic field strength and $n$ is the hydrogen number density. Predictions for photoionized plasma assume power-law continua with a spectral index $\alpha = (-1.0, -1.4)$ (assuming $f_\nu \propto
\nu^{\alpha}$), density $n_H=(100, 1000)$ cm$^{-3}$, and ionization parameter $U = 10^{-4} - 10^{-1}$, where $U$ is the ratio of ionizing photon and hydrogen densities at the face of the irradiated cloud (Binette, Wilson, & Storchi-Bergmann 1996).
A possible limitation of these photoionization models is their assumption of a single population of ionization-bounded clouds. Binette et al. (1996) have argued that the spectra of AGN narrow-line regions can be better reproduced by photoionization scenarios with multi-component cloud systems; in particular, they emphasize the possible importance of a mix of ionization- and matter-bounded clouds. We have consequently also shown for comparison in Figures 2 and 3 the predictions of a two-zone photoionization model, in which we have reproduced the Binette et al. results using the photoionization code CLOUDY, version 90.05 (Ferland et al. 1998). In this scenario, matter-bounded (MB) clouds filter the ionizing continuum from the AGN before it irradiates the ionization bounded (IB) clouds. The MB clouds are irradiated by a power law with $\alpha=-1.3$, and are characterized by $U_{MB}= 0.04$ and $n_{MB}=50$ cm$^{-3}$, while the IB clouds have $U=5.2\times 10^{-4}$ and $n_{IB}=2300$ cm$^{-3}$. The relative contribution of emission from the two cloud populations is parametrized by $A_{M/I}$, which is the ratio of solid angles subtended by MB and IB clouds. Formally, $A_{M/I}$ is always larger than one, but in calculating the resulting spectrum, it can be effectively less than one if the MB clouds are hidden along our line of sight but seen by the IB gas.
The measured ratios reported by D97 at an off-nuclear position, and for the nucleus as given here, are different, and Figures 2 and 3 suggest different interpretations for the two locations. A similar inference was noted by Sankrit, Sembach, & Canizares (1999) based on FOS measurements of the /Ly$\alpha$ ratio alone. As discussed by D97 and illustrated also here, the line ratios for the off-nucleus measurement of M87 are consistent in all of these diagrams with a shock interpetation; the photoionization predictions, particularly the single cloud models, do not agree with the data. The line ratios measured for the M87 nucleus are, however, less clear-cut in their interpretation. In Figure 2 (optical and UV lines), the nucleus ratios generally fall within the shock model loci and are inconsistent with both single-cloud and $A_{M/I}$ photoionization predictions. However, in Figure 3 (UV lines) the nucleus measurements fall outside the predictions for shocks. Single-cloud photoionization models are likewise inconsistent with these data; but the $A_{M/I}$ sequence intersects the measured ratios in all of the plots in Figure 3, and in most cases the data are in fact consistent with predictions for a single value of $A_{M/I} \approx 0.03$. This result provides a strong suggestion that photoionization is, in fact, important in the nucleus. In contrast, comparison of the observed ratios with the detailed shock models of Dopita & Sutherland (1995) shows that the optical line ratios in Figure 2 are not reproduced by a single combination of shock parameters. The $A_{M/I}$ model remains problematic, however, for explaining the optical line ratios in Figure 2 as well as generally underpredicting the strengths of the UV lines relative to H$\beta$ for the nucleus.
Is it possible to reconcile a single excitation scenario with the nucleus line ratios plotted in both Figures 2 and 3? It is interesting to note that the division between optical and UV lines separates strong transitions not only by excitation energy, but also by the critical densities for the collisionally excited lines: lower $n_{crit}$ for the optical lines, which are forbidden transitions, and higher $n_{crit}$ for the UV lines, which are intercombination or resonance features. As a result, increasing the plasma density will affect the predicted line strengths in different ways; the forbidden lines will become suppressed, while the lines with high $n_{crit}$ will strengthen as they take over a larger share of the nebular cooling. For the M87 nucleus, increasing the nebular density might thus be expected to improve the success of photoionization models by decreasing the \[\]/H$\beta$ ratio and boosting the strengths of the UV lines relative to H$\beta$. Nebular components spanning a wide range of density are known to exist within AGNs, as revealed by line width-$n_{crit}$ correlations (e.g., Pelat, Alloin, & Fosbury 1981; Filippenko & Halpern 1984; Filippenko 1985), and dense components on small spatial scales are explicitly revealed in nuclei through [*HST*]{} studies (e.g., Barth et al. 2001).
To investigate these effects, we experimented with $A_{M/I}$ sequences with increased densities and found that many characteristics of the nuclear spectrum are reproduced if $n_{MB}=10^6$ cm$^{-3}$ and $n_{IB}=10^{6.3}$ cm$^{-3}$. The calculation results are again shown for comparison in Figures 2 and 3. The observed line ratios fall consistently near the predictions for the high-$n$ $A_{M/I} \approx
0.002 - 0.004$, except in Figure 2a. In the latter case, the predicted \[\] $\lambda$3727 strength is very weak, due to the low critical density of this line. A likely remedy to this problem is the inclusion of an additional low-density IB (low-$n$ IB) component that emits efficiently in this transition while minimally perturbing the other line ratios.
We modeled this third component as the low-density IB of Binette et al. (1996), except that it was irradiated by an ionizing continuum, the same power-law continuum discussed above, which has not been filtered through the MB clouds. To achieve the final combination of high-$n$ $A_{M/I}$ + low-$n$ IB, we assumed that our observation aperture is filled with high-$n$ $A_{M/I}=0.004$ nebulae and low-$n$ IB clouds. Relevant line ratios for each component, normalized by H$\beta$, are listed in Table 3. The composite model represents a weighted sum of the three components, and a good overall match with the nucleus observations was obtained with relative H$\beta$ contributions from (high-$n$ MB): (high-$n$ IB): (low-$n$ IB) = 0.02 : 0.68 : 0.3 (note that the high-$n$ MB : high-$n$ IB ratio is already fixed by $A_{M/I}$). The composite predicted ratios and observed values are listed in the last two columns of Table 3.
While the 3-component simulation should not be taken too literally as a physical representation of the nebular structure in the M87 nucleus, the comparison presented here nonetheless provides an important demonstration that a multi-component photoionized plasma may account for the emission-line properties of this source. The choice of nebular parameters in this picture is not entirely arbitrary. Gas with densities ranging from $\sim 100$ cm$^{-3}$ to $\sim 10^6$ cm$^{-3}$ exists in the cores of AGNs, and more general arguments exist for the importance of composite cloud populations in these environments. In particular, Baldwin et al. (1995) and Ferguson et al. (1997) have discussed the phenomenon of locally optimally emitting clouds (LOCs), in which emission in a particular line emerges predominantly from the subset of clouds with appropriately favorable nebular conditions for that transition. In the spirit of the LOC models, we conclude that it appears likely that a combination of high-density nebulae emit most of the lines observed in the nucleus of M87, while lower density clouds lead to the emission from ions with low critical densities, such as \[\] $\lambda$3727 and \[\] $\lambda\lambda$6717, 6731. Analyses of other LINERs have similarly suggested that multiple cloud populations may be required to account for the observed emission-line properties (e.g., Péquignot 1984; Barth et al. 2001).
An interesting point which our high-$n$ $A_{M/I}$ calculations raise is whether the UV line-ratio diagrams are in fact robust in distinguishing between shock heating and photoionization, if density effects are taken into consideration. Figures 2 and 3 show that the line ratios from the ionized disk of M87 could be well described by the high-$n$ $A_{M/I}=0.006$, except for \[\] $\lambda$3727. We again attempted to construct a composite model with different combinations of the high-$n$ $A_{M/I}$ and low-$n$ IB components. We found that the same fractional contributions of the components used above (with H$\beta$ proportions 0.7 : 0.3) give reasonably satisfactory results, although low-$n_{crit}$ lines such as \[\] and \[\] $\lambda\lambda$6717, 6731 remain underpredicted by a factor of $\sim 2$. We conclude that the extended disk of M87 remains a good candidate for shock ionization, but emphasize that the UV line diagnostics advocated by D97 and Allen et al. (1998) may encounter limitations when applied to composite nebular systems that include high-density components.
Energetics
----------
A consistency test for photoionization interpretations of the nuclear nebula in M87 is whether the central source provides sufficient ionizing photons to power the line emission. To address this point, we employed recent measurements of the nuclear continuum as measured by [*XMM-Newton*]{} in 2000 (Böhringer et al. 2001). These data have the advantage of simultaneously sampling the UV and X-ray bandpasses; while the central source is known to be variable, we employ these measurements as a representative snapshot of the broad-band continuum. The narrow lines in this source are neither known nor expected to be variable. In the UV bandpass, the [*XMM-Newton*]{} data provide a flux density for the M87 nucleus of $(1.90 \pm 0.04) \times 10^{-27}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ Hz$^{-1}$ at 2120 Å, and an integrated X-ray flux of $1.5 \times 10^{-12}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ for 2 – 10 keV.
We can extrapolate the [*XMM-Newton*]{} UV flux by assuming that the spectral shape is the same as during our [*HST*]{} observation. We first attempted to derive an analytic fit to the continuum we measured for the nucleus, using SPECFIT as before. The continuum was represented by a broken power law subject to reddening, combined with a stellar component represented by the template described in §2. The fit indicates that the galaxy starlight contribution is negligible, and the continuum is well-represented by only a power law with a break at $4501 \pm 6$ Å, subject to reddening given by $A_V = 0.15 \pm
0.01$ mag. This amount of reddening is reasonably consistent with the value of $0.11\pm 0.02$ mag predicted from the Galactic column density toward M87 \[$N_{HI} = (2.1 \pm 0.3) \times
10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$; Sankrit et al. 1999\] and a standard $N_{HI}/A_V$ ratio (Bohlin, Savage, & Drake 1978). The spectral indices of the power law are $\alpha = -1.35 \pm 0.02$ and $\alpha = -1.78 \pm
0.02$ for the red and blue portions, respectively. The spectrum of the nucleus along with this fit are shown in Figure 4. A similar fit to the FOS spectra was reported by Tsvetanov et al. (1999b). Our 1999 STIS flux at 2120 Å is $(7.4 \pm 0.6) \times 10^{-28}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ Hz$^{-1}$, a factor of 2.6 below that obtained in 2000 by [*XMM-Newton*]{}, which provides one indicator of the level of variability between these two measurements. Scaling our continuum observation to bring it into agreement with the [*XMM-Newton*]{} data, and removing reddening corresponding to $A_V = 0.15$ mag, implies a flux density at 2500 Å of $3.6 \times 10^{-27}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ Hz$^{-1}$.
At higher energies, the continuum is constrained by the [*XMM-Newton*]{} X-ray measurements. Böhringer et al. (2001) reported that the $0.6
- 10$ keV spectrum was successfully described assuming Galactic absorption only, and a power law with best-fitting $\alpha = -1.2$. Using the same spectral index with the $2 - 10$ keV flux noted above implies that the 2 keV flux density is $2.2 \times 10^{-30}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ Hz$^{-1}$. The two-point spectral index connecting 2500 Å and 2 keV is then $\alpha_{ox} \approx -1.2$. While this value is the same as that measured in X-rays, it is shallower than the measured UV index of $-1.78$, implying that the spectrum must show some spectral curvature across the ionizing ultraviolet region. If we approximate the continuum with a single power law with $\alpha \approx -1.2$, normalized to match the dereddened 2500 Å flux, the hydrogen-ionizing photon flux at the Earth in the absence of absorption would be 0.12 photons s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$. After correction for $A_V = 0.15$ mag, the H$\beta$ photon flux in our STIS nucleus aperture is $1.90 \times 10^{-3}$ photons s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$, implying a photon ratio $Q_{ion}/Q_{{\rm H}\beta} = 63$. For comparison, Case B recombination at a temperature of $10^4$ K and density of $10^3$ cm$^{-3}$ predicts $Q_{ion}/Q_{{\rm H}\beta} = 8.55$ (Hummer & Storey 1987). It thus seems likely that the central source provides enough ionizing photons to power the emission nebula within the central $\sim 1$, if the covering factor for the nebular gas is $\sim 10 - 20$% .
The nebular disk extends beyond the aperture employed here for the nucleus, however. The surface brightness distribution for the nebular disk has been studied by Ford et al. (1994), D97, and Tsvetanov et al. (1999a) using [*HST*]{} narrow-band imaging of H$\alpha$ + \[\]. Within 1 of the nucleus, the resulting integrated H$\alpha$ + \[\] flux is $(2.0 \pm 0.7) \times 10^{-13}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ (Ford et al. 1994). If we integrate out from this radius the analytic fit provided by Tsvetanov et al. (1999a) for the surface brightness distribution, the total extrapolated H$\alpha$ + \[\] flux for the disk is then $2.6 \times 10^{-13}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$. This flux exceeds our nuclear measurement by a factor of $\sim 3.3$; if we scale our H$\beta$ flux by a corresponding amount, the ratio $Q_{ion}/Q_{{\rm H}\beta} \approx 19$, which still allows consistency with photoionization if the covering factor is at least $\sim 40 - 50$%.
The calculation described above for the ionizing photon flux is uncertain in several ways. First, it requires an uncertain extrapolation across the unobservable ionizing UV bandpass that contains most of $Q_{ion}$. In addition, the continuum source is variable. It is therefore uncertain whether our choice of flux level adopted for this calculation is close to an average value. The calculation above involves a further assumption that the continuum we measure is emitted isotropically at the source. If a portion of this continuum is in fact beamed in our direction, our estimate of the photon production available for photoionizing the nebula would be overestimated. Some amount of beaming would not be surprising in light of other similarities between the M87 nucleus and BL Lac objects (see Tsvetanov et al. 1998 for discussion). In any case, it appears likely that the energetics change from being driven primarily by the nuclear radiation field, to other processes at larger radii; on large scales ($\la 10$), the total integrated line flux grows to $1.2 \times 10^{-12}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$, implying as above $Q_{ion}/Q_{{\rm H}\beta} \approx 4$, which is likely to be problematic. Taken at face value, the models for photoionization of the nucleus (§3.1) and shock heating of the disk (D97) suggest that this transition occurs within only a few tens of parsecs from the center.
Absorption Lines
----------------
The absorption lines detected in our spectra provide another diagnostic of material that may be in close proximity to the AGN. The data with the best combination of (high) spectral resolution and signal-to-noise ratio, from STIS G140L and FOS G270H, can be used to estimate some of the properties of the absorbing matter. Absorption lines identified in these spectra and measurements of their equivalent widths (EWs) are presented in Table 4, where we have also included measurements of the K + H and D lines from the FOS G400H and G570H spectra, respectively. The lines were measured using SPECFIT assuming Gaussian profiles. We show in Figure 5 close-up views of the spectra and fits around the absorption lines. Tsvetanov et al. (1999b) have reported the detection of absorption lines in the same FOS spectra that we are using.
The velocity of the absorption lines relative to that of the emission lines in M87 is of importance for determining the nature and physical state of the absorber. The measured wavelengths listed in Table 4 reflect the wavelength scale resulting from the pipeline reduction of the spectra, which may be subject to significant zero-point shifts. The average velocity of the absorption lines measured with the FOS G270H, not including lines blended with Galactic features, is $1091\pm 11$ km s$^{-1}$; for the STIS G140L spectrum, the mean velocity is $1066\pm 36$ km s$^{-1}$. These values are consistent within their uncertainties, and for each grating considered individually the velocities of the individual lines are likewise consistent with each other. We also fit emission lines in the same spectra. For FOS G270H, $]$ $\lambda$2326 appears at $2334.9
\pm 0.5$ Å, corresponding to a velocity of $1073\pm 66$ km s$^{-1}$; for STIS G140L, $\lambda$1549 appears at $1555.3\pm 0.6$ Å and $\lambda$1640 appears at $1647.0 \pm 0.6$ Å, yielding velocities of $1220 \pm 120$ km s$^{-1}$ (assuming an optically thin doublet ratio) and $1200\pm 110$ km s$^{-1}$, respectively. These results indicate that the absorber and the emitter are at approximately the same redshift. The G140L measurement yields a wavelength for Ly$\alpha$ of $1221.45\pm 0.06$ Å, corresponding to $1426\pm 15$ km s$^{-1}$, which is significantly larger than the results for the other lines; however, this finding is consistent with expectations that the Ly$\alpha$ emission may be modified significantly (30% – 40% flux reduction) due to absorption by Galactic , resulting in a redward shift of the transmitted line centroid (Sankrit et al. 1999).
We can improve estimates of absolute velocity from these spectra by associating the Galactic absorption features with 21 cm absorption measured toward M87. Results from Davis & Cummings (1975) indicate that radio absorption arising in the Milky Way along this sightline is spread over a 50 km s$^{-1}$ range, with the major component at $\sim -8$ km s$^{-1}$ with respect to the Local Standard of Rest; this velocity corresponds to a heliocentric value of $\sim
-12$ km s$^{-1}$. The average redshift of Galactic lines in the FOS G270H spectrum is nominally $-72\pm 16$ km s$^{-1}$, implying that a correction of $+60\pm 16$ km s$^{-1}$ should be added to velocities derived from this spectrum in order to obtain heliocentric values. The heliocentric velocity of the M87 absorber is then $1151\pm 19$ km s$^{-1}$, based on the G270H measurement. This result means that the absorber is blueshifted by $\sim 126\pm 19$ km s$^{-1}$ with respect to M87, which is at $1277\pm 2$ km s$^{-1}$ as determined from stellar absorption lines (van der Marel 1994). The data for $]$ in the G270H spectrum likewise implies that the emission-line plasma is also blueshifted with respect to the host galaxy, by $144\pm 68$ km s$^{-1}$.
We carried out a curve-of-growth analysis to calculate the column densities of the absorbing ions. We followed the procedure outlined in Spitzer (1978) using our observed equivalent widths. One major uncertainty in this derivation is the detailed shape of the absorption features, since the lines that we detect are not entirely resolved; some substructure within the lines is suggested from previous observations of the D lines (Carter, Johnstone, & Fabian 1997). We consequently chose a Doppler parameter $b={\rm FWHM}/1.665 =200$ km s$^{-1}$ for consistency with the intrinsic FWHM of the lines as measured in the FOS and STIS spectra. We used the oscillator strengths from Verner et al. (1994). The resulting values of the column densities $N_{ion}$ are listed in Tables 4 and 5. Given the low spectral resolution and possibility of unresolved substructure in the lines, the resulting $N_{ion}$ estimates should be treated as lower limits. This point is reinforced by the tendency for some ions to display lower calculated column densities for lines with larger oscillator strengths, consistent with the presence of saturated substructure within these lines.
The results for the individual ions can be used to place constraints on the total column density of the absorber. Each $N_{ion}$ gives a lower limit to the corresponding $N_{element}$, which in turn provides a lower limit to the total hydrogen column density $N_H$, assuming solar abundances (Anders & Grevesse 1989). The inferred $N_H$ from the various ions, whose absorption lines are not contaminated by absorption from other absorption features, indicates that $N_H \ga 10^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$, except from the column densities of ($N_H \ga 10^{19}$ cm$^{-2}$) and ($N_H \ga 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$).
The total $N_H$ in the M87 absorber can be constrained by other means. Dwarakanath, van Gorkom, & Owen (1994) used 21 cm observations to place an upper limit on the absorbing column density of $5\times 10^{19}$ cm$^{-2}$. (This value is sensitive to the spin temperature, assumed by these authors to be 100 K.) Since the absorption lines detected in the [*HST*]{} spectra arise only from very low ionization species (requiring ionization energies $<13.6$ eV to produce), the hydrogen in the absorber is expected to be mostly neutral, and this value can thus be taken as a useful limit on the total $N_H$. As noted in §3.2 for the nucleus, the reddening of the optical/UV continuum and the X-ray absorbing column as measured by [*XMM-Newton*]{} both appear to be dominated by the Galactic contribution, suggesting that the absorber associated with M87 has $N_H \la 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$. Recent [*Chandra*]{} X-ray measurements reported by Di Matteo et al. (2002) indicate that any absorbing matter associated with the nucleus has $N_H < 3.2 \times
10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$. A consistent picture thus emerges in which the absorber has $N_H \approx 10^{19} - 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$. The only potential disagreement arises from the lower limit of $N_H \ga
10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$ obtained above from the absorption lines. The $\lambda$2577 line is potentially contaminated by Galactic absorption in $\lambda$2587, and $\lambda$2594 suffers a similar problem with Galactic $\lambda$2606, leaving the $\lambda$2606 in M87 as the best option for measuring this ion; the measurement uncertainty for this feature is relatively large, however (1$\sigma$ error of 26% ; see also Fig. 5$d$), suggesting that it does not represent a significant inconsistency.
A fundamental question concerning the absorber in M87 is its relation, if any, to the accretion-powered activity in the nucleus. LINERs commonly exhibit resonance-line absorption tracing modest column densities, and these absorbers characteristically display a low-ionization state that mirrors the low ionization of the emission plasma in these sources (Shields et al. 2002, and references therein). These absorbers are not particularly exotic in their properties, and a natural question is whether they have any connection to the active nucleus, or simply represent normal components of the interstellar medium of the host galaxy that happen to fall along our line of sight to the central UV source. The latter possibility is underscored by the similarity in detected ions and equivalent widths for the Galactic and M87 absorbers (Tables 4 and 5).
While the nature of absorbers in LINERs in general remains ambiguous, in the case of M87 there are indications that the absorbing material is, in fact, associated with the central accretion phenomenon. The offset in velocity between the absorber and the underlying galaxy, indicative of outflow of the absorbing matter, is highly reminiscent of absorption commonly associated with more luminous AGNs, which is often blueshifted with typical velocities of a few $\times 100$ km s$^{-1}$ (e.g, Crenshaw et al. 1999). In addition, Sankrit et al. (1999) concluded that the substantial strength of the Ly$\alpha$ emission feature requires that the absorber cover the continuum source, but little if any of the emission-line clouds, if $N_H \ga
10^{18}$ cm$^{-2}$, as seems to be the case. The most straightforward way of interpreting this finding geometrically is that the absorber has a distance from the central source and a size that are smaller than the typical dimensions of the emission clouds. Since the [*HST*]{} aperture employed by Sankrit et al. had a diameter of $0\farcs 26
\approx 20$ pc, the size and scale of the absorber are probably much smaller than this dimension, which would be consistent with an origin in the central accretion structure or its environs.
The absorption characteristics of M87 and possibly other LINERs may lead to important insights into the accretion process in these objects. The low ionization describing both absorption and emission sets these sources apart from Seyfert nuclei and QSOs, and likely arises from a characteristically different mode of accretion at low accretion rates. In particular, physical scenarios employing advection-dominated accretion flows (ADAFs), adiabatic inflow-outflow solutions (ADIOS), or other low radiative efficiency accretion structures are showing promise for interpreting these sources (see Quataert 2001 for a recent review). Substantial outflows of hot gas are predicted in some versions of these models (e.g., Blandford & Begelman 1999; Beckert 2000), and potentially some cooler material is accelerated in these winds, giving rise to the observed absorption. One quantity of interest for comparison with theoretical predictions is the rate of mass ejection $\dot M$ represented by the M87 absorber. From simple geometrical considerations, $\dot M \approx \mu
m_p f N_H 4\pi r v$, where $\mu$ is the mean atomic mass per H atom, $m_p$ is the proton mass, $f$ is the global covering factor, $r$ is the radial location of the absorber, and $v$ is the outflow velocity. Assuming solar abundances ($\mu = 1.41$; D[ä]{}ppen 2000), this can be expressed as $$\dot M \approx 0.002 f
\left({{N_H}\over{10^{20}\,{\rm
cm}^{-2}}}\right)\left({{r}\over{1\,{\rm
pc}}}\right)\left({{v}\over{126\,{\rm km\, s}^{-1}}}\right)\,{\rm
M}_\odot\,{\rm yr}^{-1}\, .\eqno{(1)}$$ This result indicates that $\dot
M$ is much less than the Bondi accretion rate for the central object, which is $\sim 0.1$ M$_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ (Di Matteo et al. 2002), but consistent with the idea that the absorbed gas may be material entrained in an outflow from the central accretion structure. Observations with higher spectral resolution will be necessary to establish the detailed kinematic and spatial structure of the absorbing gas in M87 and other LINERs.
Conclusions
===========
The present study of UV/optical emission and absorption in the nearby LINER M87 provides several new insights into the nature of this source. Within a radius of $\sim 20$ pc, emission-line ratios for the nucleus are well-described by photoionization of a multi-phase medium with a range of densities; shock models are less successful. The data also show a low-ionization absorber that evidently resides on small scales and is outflowing. These attributes, along with the famous radio jet, strongly resemble those of more luminous AGNs, and clearly point to accretion as the underlying power source responsible for the LINER behavior.
M87 is, however, a good case for a composite system in terms of the ionization process generating the optical LINER. The emission-line characteristics of the resolved nebula change significantly away from the center; the emission-line ratios (D97) as well as energetics arguments suggest that mechanical heating becomes important for this gas on scales of tens of parsecs. If this pattern is typical, larger apertures common in ground-based measurements will sample emission plasma that may trace a complex mix of energetic processes. Efforts to identify a single, or even dominant, ionization mechanism in these systems may thus be unproductive, although the question of whether alternatives to accretion power are important provides a good reason to conduct detailed investigations of other LINER galaxies that lack broad lines or other clear signatures of accretion.
Support for this research was provided by NASA through grants GO-07357 and GO-08607 from the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS5-26555. We also acknowledge NASA grant NAG5-3556 to A.V.F. We thank Gary Ferland for access to the photoionization code CLOUDY, Matthias Dietrich and Fred Hamann for helpful discussions, and the anonymous referee for constructive comments.
Allen, M. G., Dopita, M. A., & Tsvetanov, Z. I. 1998, , 493, 571
Anders, E., & Grevesse, N. 1989, , 53, 197
Baldwin, J., Ferland, G., Korista, K., & Verner, D. 1995, , 455, L119
Barth, A. J., Ho, L. C., Filippenko, A. V., Rix, H.-W., & Sargent, W. L. W. 2001, , 546, 205
Barth, A. J., Reichert, G. A., Filippenko, A. V., Ho, L. C., Shields, J. C., Mushotzky, R. F., & Puchnarewicz, E. M. 1996, , 112, 1829
Barth, A. J., Reichert, G. A., Ho, L. C., Shields, J. C., Filippenko, A. V., & Puchnarewicz, E. M. 1997, , 114, 2313
Beckert, T. 2000, , 539, 223
Bicknell, G. F., & Begelman, M. C. 1996, , 467, 597
Binette, L., Wilson, A. S., & Storchi-Bergmann, T. 1996, , 312, 365
Blandford, R. D., & Begelman, M. C. 1999, , 303, L1
Bohlin, R. C., Savage, B. D., & Drake, J. F. 1978, ApJ, 224, 132
Boksenberg, A., et al. 1992, , 261, 393
Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, , 345, 245
Carter, D., Johnstone, R. M., & Fabian, A. C. 1997, , 285, L20
Crenshaw, D. M., Kraemer, S. B., Boggess, A., Maran, S. P., Mushotzky, R. F., & Wu, C.-C. 1999, , 516, 750
D[ä]{}ppen, W. 2000, in Allen’s Astrophysical Quantities, 4th ed., ed. A. N. Cox (New York: Springer), 29
Davies, R. D., & Cummings, E. R. 1975, , 170, 95
Di Matteo, T., Allen, S. W., Fabian, A. C., Wilson, A. S., & Young, A. J. 2002, , in press (astro-ph/0202238v3)
Dopita, M. A., & Sutherland, R. S. 1995, , 102, 161
Dopita, M. A., et al. 1997, , 490, 202 (D97)
Dwarakanath, K. S., van Gorkom, J. H., & Owen, F. N. 1994, , 432, 469
Ferguson, J. W., Korista, K. T., Baldwin, J. A., & Ferland, G. J. 1997, , 487, 122
Ferland, G. J., Korista, K. T., Verner, D. A., Ferguson, J. W., Kingdon, J. B., & Verner, E. M. 1998, , 749, 761
Filippenko, A. V. 1985, , 289, 475
Filippenko, A. V. 1996, in ASP Conf. Ser. 103, The Physics of LINERs, ed. M. Eracleous et al. (San Francisco: ASP), 17
Filippenko, A. V., & Halpern, J. P. 1984, , 285, 458
Ford, H. C., et al. 1994, , 435, 27
Harms, R. J., et al. 1994, , 435, 35
Heckman, T. M. 1980, , 87, 152
Ho, L. C., Filippenko, A. V., & Sargent, W. L. W. 1997, , 487, 568
Hummer, D. G., & Storey, P. J. 1987, , 224, 801
Kriss, G. 1994, in ASP Conf. Ser. 61, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems III, ed. D. R. Crabtree, R. J. Hanisch, & J. Barnes (San Francisco: ASP), 437
Laor, A. 1998, , 496, L71
Macchetto, F., Marconi, A., Axon, D. J., Capetti, A., Sparks, W., & Crane, P. 1997, , 489, 579
Maoz, D., Koratkar, A., Shields, J. C., Ho, L. C., Filippenko, A. V., & Sternberg, A. 1998, , 116, 55
Nicholson, K. L., Reichert, G. A., Mason, K. O., Puchnarewicz, E. M., Ho, L. C., Shields, J. C., & Filippenko, A. V. 1998, , 300, 893
Osterbrock, D. E. 1989, Astrophysics of Gaseous Nebulae and Active Galactic Nuclei (Mill Valley, CA: University Science Books)
Pelat, D., Alloin, D., & Fosbury, R. A. E. 1981, , 195, 787
Péquignot, D. 1984, , 131, 159
Quataert, E. 2001, in ASP Conf. Ser. 224, Probing the Physics of Active Galaxies by Multiwavelength Monitoring, ed. B. M. Peterson, R. S. Polidan, & R. W. Pogge (San Francisco: ASP), 71
Reynolds, C. S., Di Matteo, T., Fabian, A. C., Hwang, U., & Canizares, C. R. 1996, , L111
Sankrit, R., Sembach, K. R., & Canizares, C. R. 1999, , 527, 733
Schlegel, D. J., Finkbeiner, D. P., & Davis, M. 1998, , 500, 525
Shields, J. C., Sabra, B. M., Ho, L. C., Barth, A. J., & Filippenko, A. V. 2002, in ASP Conf. Ser. 255, Mass Outflow in Active Galactic Nuclei: New Perspectives, ed. D. M. Crenshaw, S. B. Kraemer, & I. M. George (San Francisco: ASP), 105
Spitzer, L., Jr. 1978, Physical Processes in the Interstellar Medium (New York: Wiley)
Tonry, J. L., Dressler, A., Blakeslee, J. P., Ajhar, E. A., Fletcher, A. B., Luppino, G. A., Metzger, M. R. & Moore, C. B. 2001, , 546, 681
Tsvetanov, Z. I., Allen, M. G., Ford, H. C., & Harms, R. J. 1999a, in the Radio Galaxy Messier 87, ed. H.-J. R[ö]{}ser & K. Meisenheimer (Berlin: Springer), 301
Tsvetanov, Z. I., Hartig, G. E., Ford, H. C., Dopita, M. A., Kriss, G. A., Pei, Y. C., Dressel, L. L., & Harms, R. J. 1998, , 493, L83
Tsvetanov, Z. I., Hartig, G. E., Ford, H. C., Kriss, G. A., Dopita, M. A., Dressel, L. L., & Harms, R. J. 1999b, in the Radio Galaxy Messier 87, ed. H.-J. R[ö]{}ser & K. Meisenheimer (Berlin: Springer), 307
van der Marel, R. P. 1994, , 270, 271
Verner, D. A., Barthel, P. D., & Tytler, D. 1994, , 108, 287
Whysong, D., & Antonucci, R. 2002, astro-ph/0207385v1
0.3truein
0.3truein
0.3truein
[cccccc]{}\
STIS & & &\
Grating &Detector &Coverage (Å) &Point Source & Extended &Exp. (seconds)\
G140L &FUV-MAMA &1150-1720 &190 & 2500 &2590\
G230L &NUV-MAMA &1590-3160 &600 & 4000 &2296\
G430L &CCD &2900-5710 &380 & 1900 & 900\
G750L &CCD &5270-10270 &390 & 1900 &1000\
FOS\
Grating &Detector &Coverage (Å) &Point Source & Extended &Exp. (seconds)\
G160L &FOS/BL &1140-2510 &1300 & 1300 &2300\
G270H &FOS/RD &2220-3275 &230 & 230 &2300\
G400H &FOS/RD &3235-4780 &230 & 230 &2300\
G570H &FOS/RD &4560-6820 &230 & 230 &2300\
$^1$ FWHM resolution in km s$^{-1}$.
[ccc]{}\
Emission Line &STIS Flux$^{1}$ &FOS Flux$^{2}$\
Ly$\alpha$ &14.07$\pm$0.59 &30.86$\pm$2.96\
$\lambda$1549 & 0.60$\pm$0.06 & 0.99$\pm$0.28\
$\lambda$1640 & 0.40$\pm$0.06 & 0.51$\pm$0.27\
\] $\lambda$1909 & 1.03$\pm$0.13 & 0.92$\pm$0.27\
\] $\lambda$2326 & 1.05$\pm$0.08 & 1.26$\pm$0.17\
$\lambda\lambda$2796, 2804 & 1.12$\pm$0.09 & 1.24$\pm$0.17\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$3727 & 2.47$\pm$0.11 & 2.45$\pm$0.18\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$3869 & 0.36$\pm$0.04 & 0.79$\pm$0.09\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$4072$^3$ & 1.52$\pm$0.08 & 2.22$\pm$0.19\
H$\gamma^4$ & 0.49$\pm$0.04 & 0.52$\pm$0.08\
H$\beta$ & 1.00$\pm$0.05 & 1.00$\pm$0.10\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$4959 & 0.61$\pm$0.03 & 0.76$\pm$0.06\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$5007 & 1.84$\pm$0.08 & 2.29$\pm$0.18\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$6300 & 1.62$\pm$0.08 & 2.28$\pm$0.19$^5$\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$6364 & 0.53$\pm$0.03 & .............\
H$\alpha,[$$]$ $\lambda$6548,83 & 12.33$\pm$0.49 &13.29$\pm$0.95\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$6717,6731 & 3.10$\pm$0.13 & 2.32$\pm$0.21\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$7165$^6$ & 0.10$\pm$0.04 & .............\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$7325 & 0.87$\pm$0.08 & .............\
$^1$ Normalized to H$\beta = 6.45 \times10^{-15}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$, uncorrected for reddening.\
$^2$ Normalized to H$\beta = 4.03 \times10^{-15}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$, uncorrected for reddening.\
$^3$ Blended with H$\delta$.\
$^4$ Blended with \[\] $\lambda$4363.\
$^5$ Includes \[\] $\lambda$6364.\
$^6$ Uncertain.\
[ccccccc]{}\
Line &high-$n$ MB & high-$n$ IB & $A_{M/I}=0.004$ & low-$n$ IB & Total$^2$ &Observed$^3$\
$\lambda$1549 & 26.76 & 0.05 & 0.76 & 0.00 & 0.53 &0.60\
$\lambda$1640 & 7.70 & 0.08 & 0.28 & 0.70 & 0.41 &0.40\
\] $\lambda$1909 & 1.88 & 1.26 & 1.28 & 0.10 & 0.93 &1.03\
\] $\lambda$2326 & 0.00 & 1.11 & 1.08 & 0.66 & 0.95 &1.05\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$3727 & 0.00 & 0.05 & 0.05 & 6.48 & 1.98 &2.47\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$3869 & 0.41 & 1.82 & 1.78 & 0.96 & 1.53 &0.36\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$5007 & 3.11 & 1.91 & 1.95 & 0.32 & 1.46 &1.84\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$6300 & 0.00 & 2.33 & 2.27 & 1.47 & 2.03 &1.62\
H$\alpha$ + $[$$]$ $\lambda\lambda 6548, 6584$ & 0.00 & 3.80 & 3.78 & 9.81 & 5.59 & 12.33\
$[$$]$ $\lambda$6717,6731 & 0.00 & 0.26 & 0.25 & 6.91 & 2.25 &2.32\
$^1$ All fluxes expressed relative to H$\beta$.
$^2$ Fluxes predicted for the composite, 3-component photoionization model.
$^3$ STIS measurements, uncorrected for reddening.
[cccccc]{}\
Line ID &$\lambda_{obs}$ (Å) &EW(Å) &log(N cm$^{-2}$) &Origin\
$\lambda$1255$^1$ &1259.31$\pm$0.16 &0.75$\pm$0.10 &14.35 &M87\
$\lambda$1260$^2$ &1264.49$\pm$0.33 &0.40$\pm$0.03 &12.42 &M87\
$\lambda$1270$^3$ &1271.40$\pm$0.29 &0.33$\pm$0.12 &15.86 &Gal.(?)\
$\lambda$1401$^3$ &1399.44$\pm$0.16 &0.79$\pm$0.10 &15.59 &Gal.\
$\lambda$1413$^3$ &1417.96$\pm$0.38 &0.38$\pm$0.10 &15.55 &M87\
$\lambda$1425$^3$ &1424.64$\pm$0.36 &0.47$\pm$0.14 &14.38 &Gal.\
......... &1432.49$\pm$0.15 &0.39$\pm$0.09 &..... &Unknown\
......... &1435.13$\pm$0.41 &0.55$\pm$0.15 &..... &Unknown\
......... &1446.64$\pm$0.65 &0.59$\pm$0.16 &..... &Unknown\
$\lambda$1450$^4$ &1455.69$\pm$0.36 &0.50$\pm$0.16 &15.93 &M87\
$\lambda$1468$^5$ &1468.55$\pm$0.79 &0.73$\pm$0.18 &16.30 &Gal.(?)\
$\lambda$1527 &1531.62$\pm$0.26 &0.70$\pm$0.19 &14.47 &M87\
$^1$ Contributions from Galactic $\lambda$1259.52 and $\lambda$1260.53.\
$^2$ Contributions from M87 $\lambda$1259.52 and $\lambda$1260.53.\
$^3$ Multiple components.\
$^4$ Contributions from M87 $\lambda$1448.01 and Galactic $\lambda$1454.84.\
$^5$ Contributions from Galactic $\lambda$1466.20 and $\lambda$1467.26.\
[ccccc]{}\
Line ID &$\lambda_{obs}$ (Å) &EW(Å) &log(N cm$^{-2}$)&Origin\
$\lambda$2344 &2343.23$\pm$0.15 &0.63$\pm$0.11 &14.11 &Gal.\
$\lambda$2344 &2352.87$\pm$0.39 &0.59$\pm$0.16 &14.08 &M87\
$\lambda$2374 &2373.86$\pm$0.28 &0.80$\pm$0.24 &14.80 &Gal.\
$\lambda$2383 &2382.22$\pm$0.22 &1.13$\pm$0.15 &13.94 &Gal.$^1$\
$\lambda$2383 &2391.09$\pm$0.22 &1.33$\pm$0.15 &13.04 &M87\
$\lambda$2577 &2586.21$\pm$0.52 &0.70$\pm$0.48 &13.57 &M87\
$\lambda$2587 &2586.11$\pm$0.39 &0.39$\pm$0.35 &14.03 &Gal.\
$\lambda$2587 &2595.62$\pm$0.36 &1.21$\pm$0.21 &14.59 &M87$^2$\
$\lambda$2600 &2599.74$\pm$0.24 &0.73$\pm$0.17 &13.78 &Gal.\
$\lambda$2600 &2609.70$\pm$0.26 &1.66$\pm$0.16 &14.20 &M87\
$\lambda$2606 &2606.03$\pm$0.57 &0.87$\pm$0.21 &13.92 &Gal.\
$\lambda$2606 &2617.19$\pm$0.78 &0.72$\pm$0.19 &13.83 &M87\
$\lambda$2796 &2795.91$\pm$0.10 &1.28$\pm$0.12 &13.58 &Gal.$^3$\
$\lambda$2796 &2803.08$\pm$0.11 &1.59$\pm$0.40 &13.70 &M87$^4$\
$\lambda$2803 &2813.61$\pm$0.24 &1.91$\pm$0.55 &14.05 &M87\
$\lambda$2853 &2863.19$\pm$0.35 &1.27$\pm$0.18 &12.08 &M87\
$\lambda$3935 &3949.40$\pm$0.26 &2.10$\pm$0.20 &13.45 &M87\
$\lambda$3970 &3984.29$\pm$0.32 &1.83$\pm$0.12 &13.80 &M87\
$\lambda$5891 &5909.44$\pm$2.15 &0.61$\pm$0.69 &12.48 &M87\
$\lambda$5897 &5915.01$\pm$1.07 &2.96$\pm$0.72 &12.53 &M87\
$^1$ Contaminated by M87 $\lambda$ 2376.\
$^2$ Contaminated by Galactic $\lambda$2594.\
$^3$ Contaminated by Galactic $\lambda$2795.\
$^4$ Contaminated by Galactic $\lambda$2803 and M87 $\lambda$2795.\
[^1]: IRAF 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.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'While a large number of algorithms for optimizing quantum dynamics for different objectives have been developed, a common limitation is the reliance on good initial guesses, being either random or based on heuristics and intuitions. Here we implement a *tabula rasa* deep quantum exploration version of the Deepmind AlphaZero algorithm for systematically averting this limitation. AlphaZero employs a deep neural network in conjunction with deep lookahead in a guided tree search, which allows for predictive hidden variable approximation of the quantum parameter landscape. To emphasize transferability, we apply and benchmark the algorithm on three classes of control problems using only a single common set of algorithmic hyperparameters. AlphaZero achieves substantial improvements in both the quality and quantity of good solution clusters compared to earlier methods. It is able to spontaneously learn unexpected hidden structure and global symmetry in the solutions, going beyond even human heuristics.'
author:
- Mogens Dalgaard
- Felix Motzoi
- 'Jens Jakob S[ø]{}rensen'
- Jacob Sherson
bibliography:
- 'refs.bib'
title: Global optimization of quantum dynamics with AlphaZero deep exploration
---
Recent progress on technologies with quantum speedup focuses largely on optimizing dynamical quantum cost functionals via a set of external classical parameters. Such research includes quantum variational eigensolvers [@kandala2017hardware], annealers [@johnson2011quantum], simulators [@Lloyd1996; @SimulationRMP2014], circuit optimization [@Bocharov2015; @Motzoi2017], optimal control theory [@Warren1993Dream; @khaneja2005optimal; @GlaserCat2015], and Boltzmann machines [@biamonte2017quantum]. The minimized functional could be for example the energy of a simulated system, or the distance to a quantum computational gate.
A shared algorithmic feature is domain knowledge about where to search, such as near the Hartree-Fock Ansatz for variational eigensolvers, or in the analytical gradient direction. An open question in optimization research is how much this specialized approach can be supplanted by a problem-agnostic methodology: One which does not require expert knowledge, avoiding both the overhead in human labour [@Sorensen2016] and the potential for local, suboptimal trapping [@pechen2011there; @de2013closer; @zhdanov2015role]. In other words, an autonomous machine learning approach has the potential to plan its solutions both strategically and tactically.
It has been argued that, due to the inherent smoothness of unitary quantum physics [@Hardy2001], local *exploitation* of quantum dynamics can be sufficient for efficiently finding good solutions [@Rabitz2004Traps]. Local search has been especially successful in the well-established field of Quantum Optimal Control Theory (QOCT), enjoying a half century of continued progress in NMR [@Freeman1987NMRbook], quantum chemistry [@Warren1993Dream; @Tannor2007ChemBook], and spectroscopy [@Kawashima1995Spec]. This has culminated in Hessian extraction approaches [@quantumLBFGS] that generally outperform other local methods [@machnes2011comparing; @sorensen2018quantum].
Yet, similar to classical NP-complete problems [@Cheeseman1992NPtransition], quantum functionals can suffer a phase transition [@bukov2018PhasesReinforcement] from easier to “needle in a haystack” instances that require global *exploration* of parameters. Mounting evidence has shown that critically constrained dynamics lead to such complexity [@Zahedinejad2014DEGA; @Sorensen2016; @Moore2012; @bukov2018PhasesReinforcement], especially as QOCT has veered into high-precision quantum computation [@Negrevergne2006nmr12], circuit compilation [@Shende2006compil], and architecture design [@Goerz2017fab]. It is therefore crucial to balance resources for exploitation of smooth, local quantum landscapes with state-of-the-art classical methods for domain-agnostic exploration.
In the literature, dynamics optimization is characterized by a lookahead-depth, i.e. how far into the future one plans current actions. A shallow depth may broaden exploration, a strategy typically found in Reinforcement Learning (RL) [@sutton2011reinforcement]. This has been powerfully combined with Deep Neural Networks (DNN) [@mnih2015human; @lillicrap2015continuous; @schulman2017proximal; @salimans2017evolution; @mania2018simple] and applied recently to quantum systems [@carleo2017solving; @bukov2018reinforcementFloquet; @zhang2018automatic; @fosel2018reinforcement; @niu2018universal; @albarran2018measurement; @an2019deep; @xu2019transferable]. Unfortunately, single-step lookaheads are inherently local and thus require a slower learning rate, with no performance gain found over full-depth, domain-specialized (Hessian approximation) methods in QOCT. Other full-depth methods have also had mixed success, e.g. Genetic Algorithms [@GAchem1995; @liebermann2016optimal] and Differential Evolution [@Zahedinejad2014DEGA], but they typically require careful fine-tuning since they are based on *ad-hoc* heuristics rather than being mathematically rooted.
A recent stunning breakthrough has been due to the *AlphaZero* class of algorithms [@silver2016mastering; @silver2017mastering; @silver2017masteringchess]. AlphaZero has already effectively outclassed all adversaries in the games of Go, Chess, Shogu, and Starcraft. The key to the success of AlphaZero was the combination of a Monte Carlo tree search with a one-step lookahead DNN. As a result, the lookahead information from far down the tree dramatically increases the trained DNN precision, and together they compound to produce much more focused and heuristic-free exploration.
Here, we implement and benchmark a QOCT version of AlphaZero for optimizing quantum dynamics. We characterize improvements in learning and exploration compared to traditional methods. We find a crossover from difficult problems where AlphaZero learning alone is ideal and those where a combination of deep exploration and quantum-specialized smooth exploitation is optimal. We show this leads to a dramatic increase in both the quality and quantity of good solution clusters. Our AlphaZero implementation retains the *tabula rasa* character of Ref. [@silver2017mastering] in two important respects. Firstly, it efficiently learns to solve three different optimization problem classes using the same algorithmic hyperparameters. Secondly, we demonstrate that AlphaZero is able to identify quantum-specific heuristics in the form of hidden symmetries without the need for expert knowledge.
Results
=======
Unified quantum exploration algorithm
-------------------------------------
In this work, we seek to obtain pulse sequences that can unitarily steer a quantum system towards given desired dynamics. For our purposes, we quantify this task through the state-averaged overlap fidelity $\mathcal{F}(U(t))$ with respect to a target unitary $\hat{U}_{\text{target}}$, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Fidelity}
\mathcal{F}(U(t)) = \bigg |
\frac{1}{\text{dim}}
\text{Tr}
\big[
\hat{U}^{\dagger}(t) \hat{U}_{\text{target}}
\big]
\bigg |^2.\end{aligned}$$ Here, $U(t)$ denotes the time evolution operator of the system, which solves the Schrödinger equation. We fix for concreteness our physical architeture as superconducting circuit QED [@ClarkSuperReview], being both a highly tunable and potentially scalable architecture, with potential near-term applications [@preskill2018quantum]. The system is chosen to be a resonator-coupled two-transmon system, as depicted in Fig. \[fig:Transmon\_treesearch\_neuralnetwork\]a. Here the transmon qubits are mounted on either side of a linear resonator and we drive the first qubit with an external control $\Omega$, which could be a piecewice constant pulse as depicted in the bottom of the figure. The system dynamics are governed by the Hamiltonian [@magesan2018effective] $$\begin{aligned}
\hat{H}(t) = \Delta \hat{b}_1^{\dagger} \hat{b}_1 +
J (\hat{b}_1^{\dagger} \hat{b}_2 + \hat{b}_1 \hat{b}_2^{\dagger})
+ \Omega(t) (\hat{b}_1^{\dagger} + \hat{b}_1),
\label{eq:Hamiltonian}\end{aligned}$$ where $b_j$ is the qubit-lowering operator for transmon $j$, and the external control $\Omega(t)$ is shaped by the optimization algorithm to maximize , with $\hat{U}_{\text{target}}=\sqrt{ZX}$ being a standard entangling gate. $\hat{U}_{\text{target}}$ with single qubit gates form a universal gate set, e.g. , for quantum computation on a surface code circuit-QED layout. We fix the parameters to be within typical experimental values (see e.g. Refs. [@leek2009using; @sheldon2016procedure]) for the qubit-qubit coupling $J/2\pi = 5 \si{\mega \hertz}$ and the detuning $\Delta /2\pi = 0.35 \si{\giga \hertz}$.
We consider three optimization classes to test a unified AlphaZero algorithm and benchmark it against both domain-specialized and domain-agnostic algorithms. These three correspond to control parameters $\Omega(t)$ that are digital, i.e. taken from a discrete set of possibilities; that can vary continuously as a function of continuous but highly-filtered controls; and lastly, piecewise constant controls, which is standard in the QOCT approximation.
Within the RL framework, an autonomous agent must interact with an environment that at each time step $t$ inhabits a state $s_t$. Here we choose the unitary $\hat{U}(t)$ to represent this state. The agent then alters the unitary at each time step $t$ by applying an action $a_t$ (here $\Omega(t)$) that transforms the unitary $\hat{U}(t) \rightarrow \hat{U}(t+\Delta t)$. The purpose of the agent is to maximize an expected score $z$ at final time $T$, which we choose to be the fidelity $z=\mathcal{F}(U(T))$. This is done by implementing a probabilistic policy $\boldsymbol{\pi}(s) = (\pi_{a_1}, \pi_{a_2},\ldots)$, which maps states $s$ to probabilities of applying actions, i.e. $\pi_{a} = \text{Pr}(a|s)$. The agent attempts to improve the policy by gradually updating it with respect to the experience it gains.
Fig. \[fig:Transmon\_treesearch\_neuralnetwork\]b, c illustrate the tree search and the neural network for AlphaZero, respectively. The upper output of the neural network approximates the present policy for a given input state, i.e. $p_a\sim\pi_a$. Meanwhile, the lower output provides a value function which estimates the expected final reward, that is $v(s_t)\sim \mathcal{F}(T)$. Both functions use only information about the current state and suffer from being lower-dimensional approximations of extremely high dimensional state and action spaces. The insight of the AlphaZero algorithm is to supplement the predictive power of the value function $v(s_t)$ with retrodictive information coming from future action decisions in a Monte Carlo search tree. The tree depicted in Fig. \[fig:Transmon\_treesearch\_neuralnetwork\]b consists of nodes, which represent states (here depicted as pulses) and edges, which are state-action pairs (depicted as lines). At each branch in the tree, the algorithm chooses actions based on a combination of those with the highest expected reward and the highest uncertainty, a measure of which edges remain unexplored. Whenever new states (called leaf-nodes) are explored, the neural network is used to estimate the value of that node, and the information is propagated backward in the tree to the root node. The forward and backward traversals of the tree are described in greater detail in Methods.
In the manner described above, the predictive nature of the network is able to inform choices in the tree while the retrodictive information coming back in time is able to give better estimates of the state values already explored, which are then used to train the network. This reinforcing mechanism is thus able to globally learn about the parameter landscape by choosing the most promising branches while effectively culling the vast majority of the rest. The result is neither an exhaustive sampling at full depth, which would yield the true landscape albeit at a computationally untenable cost, nor is it an exhaustive sampling at shallow depth, which would require a prohibitively slow learning rate for information from the full depth of the tree to propagate back. Instead, AlphaZero intelligently balances the depth and the breadth of the search below each node. While the hidden-variable approximation given by the neural network and MC tree are certainly not exhaustive and cannot find solutions with exponentially small footprint, it is nonetheless able to discover patterns and learn an effective global policy strategy that produces robust, heterogeneous classes of promising solutions. In our implementation we restrict AlphaZero such that it can only find new unique solutions, which is done by cutting of branches in the tree that have previously been fully explored.
In what follows we apply the algorithm with unified hyperparameters to three optimization classes: Discrete, continuous, and continous with strong constraints. The three problem types accentuate different optimization strategies. In the discrete optimization case, we show how AlphaZero stands up against other domain-agnostic methods (where the gradient is not defined) and compare their abilities to learn structures in the parameters. For the constrained continuous pulses, we validate the hypothesis that the analytical gradient, while computable, is highly inefficient and indeed unable to find near global solutions that are at least as good as those found by AlphaZero. Finally, in the continuous-valued piecewise-constant case, we show the balance between state-of-the-art physics-specialized and agnostic AlphaZero approaches. We show that the combination of exploration and exploitation is able to produce new clusters of high-quality solutions that are otherwise highly unlikely to be found, while learning hidden problem symmetry.
Digital gate sequences
----------------------
As a first application with AlphaZero, we demonstrate optimal control using Single Flux Quantum (SFQ) pulses [@mcdermott2014accurate; @liebermann2016optimal; @li2019scalable]. The aim is to control the quantum system by using a pulse train that consists of individual, very short pulses typically in the pico-second scale. This technology originated as way of utilizing superconductors for large-scale, ultrafast, digital, classical computing [@likharev2012superconductor]. At each time slice there either is a pulse or not, which implies that the unitary evolution is governed by two unitaries $\hat{U}_1$ and $\hat{U}_0$. Hence, the pulse train can be stored as a digital bit string with 0 and 1 denoting no pulse and a single pulse respectively. SFQ devices are interesting candidates for quantum computation since they potentially allow for ultrafast gate operations as well as scalable quantum hardware [@li2019scalable]. We model the pulses as $\Delta t = 2.0 \si{\pico \second}$ Gaussian functions $
\Omega(t) = \frac{a}{\sqrt{2\pi}\tau} e^{-\frac{(t-\Delta t/2)^2}{2\tau^2}},$ where $\tau = 0.25\si{\pico \second}$ and $a = 2\pi/1000$. The pulse is depicted to the right in Fig. \[fig:SFQ\]a.
The optimization task is to find the input string that maximizes the fidelity functional . The current approach for this type optimization is to apply a genetic algorithm (GA) [@sutton1994genetic; @whitley1994genetic; @liebermann2016optimal]. Besides GA and AlphaZero, we also compare two conventional algorithms, Q-learning and stochastic descent (SD) as in Ref. [@bukov2018PhasesReinforcement]. Q-learning was one of the first RL algorithms developed, and applied recently to quantum control [@bukov2018PhasesReinforcement; @bukov2018reinforcementFloquet]. It is a tabular-based algorithm that applies one-step updates in order to solve the optimal Bellman equation [@watkins1992q] (see Methods). SD is a time-local, greedy optimizer that changes the pulse at a randomly chosen time if this results in an increasing fidelity.
Our unified AlphaZero algorithm has an action space of 60 for the neural network, and thus we group together binary SFQ action choices of multiple time steps. For this purpose, we take larger steps in time, and the 60 action choices are given using bit strings from a randomly chosen basis (see Methods). We benchmark the different algorithms by using equal wall-time simulations. For all simulations presented in this paper, we used a wall-time of 50 hours on an Intel Xeon X5650 CPU (2.7 GHz) processor. Similar to Ref. [@liebermann2016optimal] we use a population size of 70 with a mutation probability of 0.001 for the GA (see Methods).
The results are plotted in Fig. \[fig:SFQ\]b. Amongst conventional approaches, we see the SD algorithm performs slightly better than the GA. We attribute this to the fact that the SD algorithm is a greedy exploitation algorithm, while the GA is an exploration algorithm performing random permutations. As with many exploration algorithms, learning can be quite slow. Meanwhile, the Q-learning algorithm performs especially poorly. However, this algorithm is a tabular-based method. Such methods are known to break down for larger search spaces. This is one reason why modern RL algorithms use deep neural networks instead, motivating also our use of AlphaZero. We emphasize that AlphaZero also contains a deep lookahead tree search, which we found crucial to the success of our RL implementation (having also tested DQN [@mnih2015human] against simpler problems). We see in Fig. \[fig:SFQ\]b that AlphaZero indeed performs dramatically better than the greedy approach, with over an order of magnitude improvement in the low error regime. We attribute this drop in error to the existence of a quantum speed limit (QSL) at or near 60ns, a minimum time for high-fidelity computation. This regime is known to be the most computationally difficult to optimize, with a high probability of local trapping [@Moore2012; @bukov2018PhasesReinforcement; @sorensen2018quantum].
AlphaZero and GA are both learning algorithms in the sense that they utilize previous obtained solutions in order to form new ones. We compare the learning curves for the two algorithms in Fig. \[fig:SFQ\]c, where we have plotted the infidelity as a function of wall time at $60\si{\nano \second}$. For AlphaZero, we use the infidelity after each episode, where each data point is unique. For GA, we use the best performing solution in the population after each iteration. Since GA is a relatively greedy algorithm it performs very well initially, but fails to explore the larger solution space as the members in the population converge upon a single class of solution and the learning curve flattens out. In contrast, AlphaZero keeps a high level of exploration that ultimately allows it to reach a very large number of different high-fidelity solutions.
Constrained analog pulses
-------------------------
![**a** A piecewise constant pulse (dark blue) convoluted by a Gaussian filter (light orange). Here $\sigma = 0.7 \si{\nano \second}$. **b** The error of the unitary as a function of its resolution. **c** Comparison between AlphaZero and GRAPE on the cross resonance gate using Gaussian filtered pulses.[]{data-label="fig:pulse_with_error"}](pulsewitherror.pdf)
A common challenge within quantum optimization is achieving realistic and efficient controls when experimental limitations constrain the underlying dynamics. Such constraints become very important when high precision is required, e.g. for very high fidelity operation of quantum technologies. Here, we consider standard constraints on duration, bandwidth, and maximum energy. Such constraints can be expected to greatly increase the computational cost of Hessian approximation-based solutions, which are otherwise known to converge quickly [@Rabitz2004Traps] and generally outperform other greedy methods [@machnes2011comparing; @sorensen2018quantum]. The workhorse algorithm for this is GRAPE [@khaneja2005optimal], with quasi-Newton [@quantumLBFGS] and exact derivative [@MotzoiGRAPE] enhancements being crucial to the state of the art and its super-linear convergence.
We model the bandwidth constraints via a convolution with a Gaussian filter function $$\begin{aligned}
\tilde{\Omega}(t) = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-\frac{(t-t')^2}{\sigma^2}}
\Omega(t') dt',
\label{eq:GaussianConvolution}
\end{aligned}$$ where $\tilde{\Omega}(t)$ denotes the filtered control function. Fig. \[fig:pulse\_with\_error\]a illustrates the effect of this filter. Here, a piecewise constant pulse (dark blue) with amplitudes $a_{1-4}$ is convoluted into a smooth pulse (light orange) via Eq. (\[eq:GaussianConvolution\]). Throughout the remainder of this paper, we constrain the pulse amplitude to lie between $0$ and $\Omega_{\text{max}}/2\pi = 1.0 \si{\giga \hertz}$.
Most commonly, GRAPE is applied to piecewise constant pulses, but it can be modified to include filtering [@MotzoiGRAPE; @Kirchhoff2018CRG], as we also do here. Each time-step is divided into a number of substeps (giving the resolution) and the filtered pulse is then approximated as being constant within each substep. This subdivision is depicted in Fig. \[fig:pulse\_with\_error\]a as light orange vertical lines. In order to obtain the gradient, GRAPE calculates the time-evolution unitary using matrix exponentiation at each substep.
Fig. \[fig:pulse\_with\_error\]b shows the error (infidelity) between the exact and discretized unitaries as a function of the resolution. If we seek errors below the desired gate error ($10^{-2}$), the resolution should be around a couple of hundred. This significantly impedes the performance of GRAPE for this type of problem, since it requires considerably more matrix multiplications. A different strategy is to limit the control to a set of discretized amplitudes whose corresponding unitary can be calculated in advance and then apply a discretized optimization algorithm such as AlphaZero. In order to do so, we apply a two-action update strategy, where we propagate from half the previous pulse to halfway into the next one. So, if the previous action was $a_2$ and the next one $a_3$ then the unitary $U_{2,3}$ would correspond to the shaded region in Fig. \[fig:pulse\_with\_error\]a. Here we ignore negligible contributions from adjacent pulses. For instance, calculating $U_{2,3}$ would be independent of $a_1$ and $a_4$. Here we limit the amplitude to 60 different values (out of a continuous set), hence this methods requires calculating $60^2=3600$ unitaries, which we do in the beginning of the simulation.
In our comparison between AlphaZero and GRAPE, we choose $ 4.0 \si{\nano \second}$ convoluted pulses using $\sigma = 0.7 \si{\nano \second}$. For GRAPE, we choose a resolution of 200. Fig. \[fig:pulse\_with\_error\]c shows the results of an equal wall-time simulation. Here, AlphaZero obtains a systematic improvement over its domain-specialized counterpart. At $96 \si{\nano \second}$, AlphaZero outperforms GRAPE with an improvement that is significantly above one order of magnitude. Interestingly, both graphs shows significant fluctuations, which we attribute to the difficulty of the optimization task itself caused by the highly constrained dynamics. This is likely compounded by the random initialization of the neural network which can effect the convergence properties of AlphaZero. Despite these fluctuations, AlphaZero performs significantly better in the regime of interest corresponding to infidelities below $10^{-2}$.
Piecewise-constant analog pulses
--------------------------------
![**a** An equal wall-time comparison between the various algorithms. The AlphaZero (here abbreviated AZ) Hybrid is presented in the text. **b** The fraction of successful solutions found by AlphaZero Hybrid and the GRAPE algorithm.[]{data-label="fig:CRGResults"}](CRGres.pdf)
So far, we have considered problems where gradient searches have not been applicable (digital sequence) or where gradient searches become inefficient (constrained analog pulses). For specific tasks where highly specialized algorithms exist and are known to perform relatively well, domain-agnostic algorithms typically perform inadequately. Thus, to properly benchmark our algorithm we have also considered the domain of piecewise constant pulses, a scenario where GRAPE typically performs extremely well due to the presence of high-frequency components and the limited number of matrix multiplications. In the following we hence focus on picewise constant pulses where we choose a single step duration of $2 \si{\nano \second}$.
In this scenario, we characterize the performance of the exploitation and exploration algorithms in terms of both the variety of solutions found and the quality of the solutions. At first, we compare the algorithms already discussed, namely Q-learning, Stochastic Descent, AlphaZero, and GRAPE. Fig. \[fig:CRGResults\]a shows GRAPE is able to outperform the other algorithms for piecewise constant pulses. However, AlphaZero still performs well despite its limitation of only having amplitude-discretized controls. To improve the AlphaZero algorithm further we conceive a hybrid algorithm where GRAPE optimizes the solutions found by AlphaZero. The hybrid algorithm, which is given the same wall-time as the others, is also plotted in Fig. \[fig:CRGResults\]a. Here the hybrid algorithm shows a significant improvement over GRAPE near $60 \si{\nano \second}$, which we again relate to the presence of a quantum speed limit where the optimization task becomes difficult due to induced traps in the fidelity landscape. It is also worth noting that the optimization curve flattens out and the two algorithms again perform equally well when the pulse duration goes beyond $62 \si{\nano \second}$. We attribute this to the existence of a secondary QSL, i.e. further improvement below $10^{-4}$ in infidelity requires gate durations beyond $200 \si{\nano \second}$ (not plotted here).
We also quantify the number of successful solutions found by either GRAPE or the hybrid AlphaZero algorithm, which we define as solutions having infidelities within four times the lowest infidelity obtained. The fraction of successful solutions are plotted in Fig. \[fig:CRGResults\]b. Here the improvement is even more substantial. At $60 \si{\nano \second}$, we find almost three orders of magnitude more successful solutions compared to GRAPE with random seeding. The fact that the GRAPE-curve dips around $60 \si{\nano \second}$ seems to confirm our previous statement about the QSL in the sense that this is a combinatorially harder region to obtain relatively good solutions. Having a large number of good solutions is especially important because experimentally it may be that some are better suited or some provide additional advantages.
To further investigate the differences between the two algorithms, we compare the exploration of the control parameter landscape using a two-dimensional embedding provided by the t-SNE visualization method [@maaten2008visualizing; @Sorensen2016].
We do a single t-SNE analysis at $60 \si{\nano \second}$, plotted in Fig. \[fig:tSNE\], which we have separated for clarity into different figures for GRAPE (a), the Hybrid before optimization (b), and after optimization (c). Here the color scale depicts the infidelity. Strikingly, the two algorithms seem to prefer entirely different portions of the landscape. GRAPE mostly finds solutions to the left in the t-SNE representation, but its high performing solutions are actually to the right. Interestingly, AlphaZero primarily finds solutions in the right region, which implies that AlphaZero has identified an underlying basic generic structure of good solutions. When all the AlphaZero solutions are optimized this leads to a large quantity of high performing solutions that inhabit the same region in the t-SNE representation.
We also see that the hybrid solutions naturally cluster towards some general basins of attraction. This suggests that AlphaZero has not converged on a single class but multiple different classes of solutions with different underlying physics. Some pulses from different clusters are depicted, showing some resemblance to typical bang-bang sequences. The different clustering that occurs demonstrates that a global exploration has indeed taken place, effectively finding different classes of solutions in different parts of the landscape.
![The initial seeds and the GRAPE optimization at $60\si{\nano \second}$ for **a** random generated seeds and **b** AlphaZero’s solutions i.e. the Hybrid. The figures plot the infidelity ($1-\mathcal{F}$) as a function of the asymmetry measure . The color scale depicts the iteration of the algorithm.[]{data-label="fig:Symmetry"}](symmetry.pdf)
We further test the hypothesis that AlphaZero has found underlying structure that supersedes a shallow heuristic search. Note that the solutions seem to have at least some symmetry with respect to a reflection around the center of the time-axis. In fact, this symmetry already exists in the control problem. Since the Hamiltonian is real and the target its own transpose, the fidelity is unchanged if the pulse sequence is reversed i.e. $\mathcal{F}(\Omega_1, \Omega_2, \ldots, \Omega_{N-1}, \Omega_N) = \mathcal{F}(\Omega_N, \Omega_{N-1}, \ldots, \Omega_2, \Omega_1)$. However, it is not *a priori* clear that satisfying this symmetry is a good control strategy. We quantify the degree of time-asymmetry in the pulses via the measure $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:Assymetry}
C(\{\Omega(t)\}) = \frac{1}{N}\sqrt{\sum_{j=1}^{N} |\Omega_j-\Omega_{N-j}|^2},\end{aligned}$$ where $C = 0$ implies pulses that are completely palindromic, i.e. symmetric with respect to reversion of the sequence.
We plot in Fig. \[fig:Symmetry\] the infidelity and the asymmetry for the two algorithms i.e. for GRAPE using random seeding (a) and the Hybrid, i.e. GRAPE using the AlphaZero solutions (b). Here the color scale depicts the iteration number. The first thing to notice is that high fidelity solutions tend to maintain this symmetry. The second feature is that GRAPE often only partially satisfies this symmetry. In contrast, AlphaZero learns over its training to increasingly prefer this symmetry, moving towards the bottom left of the plot. After post-optimization using GRAPE, the solutions improve significantly in infidelity and move ever further to the bottom left emphasizing this trend. We conclude that AlphaZero has identified this underlying symmetry specific to the problem instance we have chosen. Naturally, hard-coding such heuristics would not only be inefficient, but for many problems finding symmetries is nontrivial. Using deep learning, AlphaZero is able to learn these hidden symmetries without the need for human intervention. We therefore expect that AlphaZero’s ability to learn hidden problem structures generalizes to other problems as well.
Discussion
==========
From our three examples, we conclude that the AlphaZero methodology of combining neural network and guided tree search reinforces global information about good solutions that can also mark a significant algorithmic advantage for quantum optimization. This is true for specific problems, but especially when comparing across a range of problems. None of the other algorithms we have considered are able to do well on all three problems, be it with heuristic, machine learning or domain-specialized approaches.
The three problems considered marked different optimization tasks, but AlphaZero is able to find high fidelity solutions with a single set of algorithmic hyperparameters. This suggests that learning the control landscape can be performed with minimal expert knowledge about the physical problem.
This conclusion is further enforced by the realization that hidden symmetries in the dynamics can be effectively learned by AlphaZero during its training. Such unexpected symmetries are not trivial to find for many Hamiltonians and would require significant human intervention even where they can be found. More over, hard-coding such heuristics into optimization algorithms can have many pitfalls, limiting broad exploration and potentially leading to suboptimal trapping in the optimization landscape.
Nonetheless, because the deep exploration methodology is by design agnostic to expert knowledge, it is most powerful when combined with specialized knowledge about locally exploiting promising seeds, leveraging the vast body of literature about local quantum optimization. This tradeoff between exploitation and exploration is a common trend in reinforcement learning and optimization in general. For example, in AlphaZero’s chess matches with its competing AI, Stockfish [@Stockfish], the latter was trained with sophisticated domain knowledge and thus was generally acknowledged as outperforming in the final moves of games. Combining the domain-agnostic exploration of the former with the domain-specialized exploitation of the latter seems like a common sense solution, as we have done here in the quantum dynamics case. An even tighter integration of the two approaches that examines the tradeoffs during different learning stages may also be promising. Alternatively, one could also also relax the *tabula rasa* character of the learning to enhance the exploration abilities using specialized knowledge. Supervised learning can in principle speed up the initial learning phase, perhaps most seemlessly when integrated with other broad exploration strategies, for instance crowd sourcing [@heck2018remote; @Sorensen2016].
In this work we have considered digital, constrained, and underconstrained optimization of controlled quantum dynamics in the context of the design and execution of physical quantum-mechanical devices. This choice was deliberately made because the most advanced algorithms exist in this field owing to half a century of dedicated research. That being said, many of the more abstract and potentially groundbreaking dynamics algorithms, including those used in the design of digital sequences of quantum circuits or for analog evolutions in annealers and variational eigensolvers, can be seen as direct analogues of the algorithmic framework illustrated here.
Methods
=======
Reinforcement Learning {#reinforcement-learning .unnumbered}
----------------------
A general RL setup consists of an environment and an agent. At each time step $t$, the environment is characterized by a state $s_t$. Given $s_t$, the agent selects an action $a_t$ that changes the environment to a new state $s_{t+1}$. Based on this change the agent receives a feedback signal called a reward, $r_{t+1} \in \mathbb{R}$. The agent must learn how to maximize the sum of rewards it receives during an episode. This is done by implementing a policy $\pi$, which is a mapping from all states of the environment to probabilities of selecting possible actions $\text{Pr}(a|s)=p_a(s)$. The state-value function describes the quality of a given policy $$\begin{aligned}
v_{\pi}(s) = \mathbb{E}_{\pi} \left[\sum_{t'>t} r_{t'} \Bigg| s=s_{t'} \right],
\label{eq:value_function}\end{aligned}$$ which is simply the expected sum of future reward staring from state $s$ and subsequently following the policy $\pi$. Given two policies $\pi$ and $\pi'$ we say that $\pi \geq \pi'$ if $v_{\pi}(s) \geq v_{\pi'}(s)$ for all states $s$.
The task considered here is to a construct a pulse sequence, which realizes a target unitary. At each time step, the agent must select an action that updates the unitary representing the state of the system. At each time step, the reward is zero except at the last step where it is simply the fidelity given by equation (\[eq:Fidelity\]).
AlphaZero implementation \[sec:AlphaZero\] {#alphazero-implementation-secalphazero .unnumbered}
-------------------------------------------
AlphaZero is a policy improvement algorithm that combines a neural network with a Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) as depicted in Fig. \[fig:Transmon\_treesearch\_neuralnetwork\] b and c [@silver2017mastering; @silver2017masteringchess]. The neural network maps from states to policies $\mathbf{p} = (p_1, p_2, \ldots)$ and values $v$. The MCTS, guided by the neural network, also computes a policy $\boldsymbol{\pi}$ that the actions are drawn from. At each time step, the policy $\boldsymbol{\pi}$ is stored in a replay buffer. At the end of an episode, the final score $z = \sum_t r_t$ is also stored in the buffer. Training of the neural network uses data drawn uniformly at random from the replay buffer in order to let the network predictions $(\mathbf{p}, v)$ approach the stored data $(\boldsymbol{\pi}, z)$. This is done by minimizing the loss function
$$\begin{aligned}
l(\boldsymbol{\theta}) = (z-v)^2 - \boldsymbol{\pi}^T \log \mathbf{p} +c||\boldsymbol{\theta}||^2,\end{aligned}$$
where the last term denotes L2 regularization with respect to the network parameters $\boldsymbol{\theta}$.
A MCTS is a way of looking several steps ahead by only visiting a small subset of possible future states. The tree is built by nodes (states) connected to each other by edges (state-action pairs). Each edge has four numbers associated with it: The number of visits $N(s,a)$, the total action value $W(s,a)$, the mean action value $Q(s,a)$, and a prior probability of selecting set edge $P(s,a)$. Starting from the root node (initial state), a single tree search moves through the tree by selecting actions according to $a_t = \arg \max_a (Q(s_t,a)+U(s_t,a))$, where $U(s_t,a)$ denotes an uncertainty given by $$\begin{aligned}
U(s,a) = c_{\text{puct}}P(s,a)\frac{\sqrt{\sum_b N(s,b)}}{N(s,a)}.\end{aligned}$$ Here $c_{\text{puct}}$ denotes a parameter determining the level of exploration. If a terminal node or a leaf node (i.e. a not-previously-visited state) is encountered, the search stops. The tree is expanded in the latter case by adding the node and initializing its edges as $N(s,a)=W(s,a)=Q(s,a)=0$ and $P(s,a)=p_a$, where $p_a$ is given by the neural network. The rest of the tree is updated by using the state-value $v$ in a backwards pass through all the visited edges since the root node according to $N(s,a) \leftarrow N(s,a) + 1$, $W(s,a) \leftarrow W(s,a) + v$, and $Q(s,a) \leftarrow W(s,a)/N(s,a)$. After a pre-set number of such searches have been conducted, an actual policy is calculated according to
$$\begin{aligned}
\pi(a|s_0) = \frac{N(s_0,a)^{1/\tau}}{\sum_b N(s_0,b)^{1/\tau}},\end{aligned}$$
where $s_0$ is the root state and $\tau$ denotes a parameter controlling the level of exploration, which is annealed during the simulations. The action in drawn from the policy and the rest of the tree is reused for subsequent searches during the episode.
For all tasks presented in this paper we used the same algorithmic parameters. The learning rate was $0.01$, $c_{\text{puct}} = 1.0$, and $\tau$ was hyperbolically annealed from $1.0$ using an annealing rate of $0.001$. After $\tau$ was annealed below a value of $0.90$ we switched to deterministic policies by setting the largest policy value to one and the others zero. The neural network was a simple feed forward network where the hidden nodes consisted of four layers. Each layer contained $400$ nodes followed by batch normalization and a rectified linear unit. Both the policy and the value head of the neural network consisted of a single hidden layer as well, where the policy head ended in a sigmoid-layer with same dimension as the action space and the value head ended in a single linear node. The L2 regularization parameter was $c = 0.001$ and we used stochastic gradient descent (SGD) for training the network. Similar to the AlphaZero paper [@silver2017mastering] we achieve more exploration by adding Dirichlet noise to the search probabilities for the root nodes $P(s,a) = (1-\epsilon)p_a + \epsilon\eta_a$, where $\boldsymbol{\eta} \sim \text{Dir}(0.03)$ and $\epsilon = 0.25$.
GA implementation {#sec:GA .unnumbered}
-----------------
A genetic algorithm (GA) works by iteratively updating a population of solutions, which are bit strings [@sutton1994genetic; @whitley1994genetic]. A GA generates new solutions based on the old population via processes inspired by biological evolution, namely crossover and mutations, which respectively combine two parent solutions and flip individual bits at random. If any improved solutions are found, these replace the worst ones in the population. Similar to Ref. [@liebermann2016optimal], we used a population size of 70 and a mutation probability of 0.001. At each iteration we would select $2\times 30$ parent solutions.
Q-learning implementation {#sec:Qlearning .unnumbered}
-------------------------
Similar to equation (\[eq:value\_function\]) one can define an action-value function
$$\begin{aligned}
q_{\pi}(s,a) = \mathbb{E}_{\pi} \left[\sum_{t'>t} r_{t'} \Bigg| s = s_{t'}, a = a_{t'} \right],\end{aligned}$$
which is the expected reward if we choose action $a$ from state $s$ and then follow the policy $\pi$ [@sutton2011reinforcement]. Q-learning is a tabular-based RL algorithm, which approximates the optimal action-value function i.e. the action-value function for the optimal policy $\pi_{opt} = \max_{\pi} v_{\pi}(s)$. The approximation $Q(s,a)$ is initialized at random and subsequently updated according to
$$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber
Q(s_t,a_t) &\leftarrow Q(s_t,a_t)\\ &+ \alpha [r_{t+1} + \max_{a_{t+1}} Q(s_{t+1},a_{t+1}) - Q(s_t,a_t)],\end{aligned}$$
where $\alpha$ denotes the learning rate. Similar to Ref. [@bukov2018PhasesReinforcement] we choose our state to be a tuple of time and control $s = (t,\Omega)$. The learning rate was $\alpha = 0.001$ and we followed an epsilon-greedy strategy with linear annealing of epsilon [@sutton2011reinforcement].
Cross Resonance Gate {#cross-resonance-gate .unnumbered}
--------------------
The cross resonance (CR) gate [@paraoanu2006microwave; @chow2011simple; @magesan2018effective] is currently the standard fixed-frequency qubit entangling gate used on transmon systems. Its main advantage is avoiding the overhead associated with magnetic (flux) tuning of the frequency [@Groszkowski2011; @koch2007charge], which can be a leading cause of dephasing. As illustrated in Fig. \[fig:Transmon\_treesearch\_neuralnetwork\]a, the physical setup we optimize includes two fixed frequency qubits that are coupled to each other via a transmission line resonator. The transmons [@koch2007charge] may be modelled as anharmonically spaced Duffing oscillators [@Khani2009nonlin], resulting in an extended Jaynes-Cummings model Hamiltonian $$\begin{aligned}
\nonumber
\label{eq:drift_Hamiltonian}
H &= \sum_{j=1,2}\bigg( \omega_j \hat{b}_j^{\dagger} \hat{b}_j
+ \frac{\delta_j}{2} \hat{b}_j^{\dagger}\hat{b}_j(\hat{b}_j^{\dagger}\hat{b}_j-1)
+ \omega_r \hat{a}^{\dagger}\hat{a}
\\ &+ g_j (\hat{b}_j^{\dagger} \hat{a}
+ \hat{b}_j\hat{a}^{\dagger}) + \Omega(t)(\hat{b}_j+\hat{b}_j^{\dagger}) \bigg), \end{aligned}$$ where $\hat{b}_{1,2}^{\dagger}(\hat{b}_{1,2})$ and $\hat{a}^{\dagger} (\hat{a})$ are the transmon and cavity creation (annihilation) operators respectively. Here $\omega_1 \neq \omega_2$ is the transmon resonance frequency, $\delta_{1,2}$ denotes the anharmonicity, $\omega_r$ denotes the cavity resonance, and $g_{1,2}$ the transmon-cavity coupling. The transmons are directly driven by external control parameters $\Omega(t)$, increasing the controllability compared to earlier architectures that drive through the common cavity. The transition of the second qubit is then driven resonantly through the control line of the first [@Kirchhoff2018CRG].
This model may be significantly simplified using the method in Ref. [@magesan2018effective]. After adiabatic elimination of the cavity and block diagonalization into the qubit subspace, the authors derive an equivalent equation (Eq. 3.3), which is the same as our Eq. (\[eq:Hamiltonian\]).
To see that the natural gate that is produced from this Hamiltonian is a $\sqrt{ZX}$ gate, a (Schrieffer-Wolff) perturbative expansion shows [@chow2011simple] that the leading coefficients in the effective driving terms are given by $$H_d = \Omega(t) \big[ XI + \frac{J}{\Delta} ZX + m IX\big],$$ where $Z$ and $X$ are Pauli matrices acting on the respective qubits, $I$ is the identity, and $m$ is a hand-tuned crosstalk parameter. The single-qubit terms and higher order terms (not shown) must be decoupled in the control optimization in order to correctly implement the CR gate.
Digital pulses {#sec:Methods_digital_pulses .unnumbered}
--------------
For each time step, the evolution of the system is governed by either one of two unitaries $\hat{U}_0$ and $\hat{U}_1$, which respectively corresponds to the amplitude being zero or not [@leonard2019digital]. We calculate these unitaries in advance by solving the Schrödinger equation numerically. The entire pulse sequence can be encoded as a bit string as illustrated to the left in Fig. \[fig:SFQ\]a and the corresponding unitary can be calculated as $\hat{U}(T) = \prod_{j = 1}^{N} \hat{U}_{b_j}$ where $b_j \in [0,1]$. Pulse durations in the nano-second scale require $10^4-10^5 $ steps.
For AlphaZero we create 60 unitaries $\{ \hat{U}^{(i)} \}_{i=1}^{60}$ by drawing a bit string $b_1^{(i)},b_2^{(i)},\dots, b_{500}^{(i)}$ at random, where $ b_j^{(i)}\in [0,1]$, which we then multiply $\hat{U}^{(i)} = \prod_{j=1}^{500} \hat{U}_{b_j^{(i)}}$. In order to obtain pulse sequences that have both high and low concentrations of $b_j^{(i)} = 0$ we anneal the probability $\text{Pr}(b_j^{(i)} = 0)$ linearly from one ($i = 1$) to zero ($i = 60$). The 60 unitaries constitute the action space and the unitary is now calculated as $\hat{U}(t) = \prod_{t' \leq t} \hat{U}^{(a_{t'})}$. The 60 actions allows us to use the same neural network architecture as for piece-wise constant and filtered pulses which have the same input space dimension.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
This work was funded by the European Research Council, John Templeton Foundation, and the Carlsberg Foundation. The authors would also like to personally thank Jesper H. M. Jensen, Carrie Ann Weidner, and Miroslav Gajdacz for fruitfull discussions and input. The numerical results presented in this work were obtained at the Centre for Scientific Computing, Aarhus http://phys.au.dk/forskning/cscaa/.
Author contributions {#author-contributions .unnumbered}
====================
M.D. and F.M. wrote and implemented the software, performed the simulations, and analyzed the data. All authors contributed to interpreting data as well as participating in useful scientific discussions. J.S. planned and supervised this project. J.J.S. advised the project on a day-to-day basis. All authors contributed to writing this paper.
Code and data availability {#code-and-data-availability .unnumbered}
==========================
All data presented in this paper and the code that generated it is available upon request. All requests should be directed at J. Sherson ([email protected]).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- 'M. A. Kuntman and E. Kuntman'
title: Two theorems on the outer product of input and output Stokes vectors for deterministic optical systems
---
$2\times2$ complex Jones matrix transforms two dimensional complex Jones vectors into complex Jones vectors and accounts for phase introduced by deterministic optical systems. On the other hand, Mueller-Jones matrix transforms four parameter real Stokes vectors into four parameter real Stokes vectors that contain no information about phase. Previously, a $4\times4$ complex matrix ($\mathbf{Z}$ matrix) was introduced. $\mathbf{Z}$ matrix is analogous to the Jones matrix and it is also akin to the Mueller-Jones matrix by the relation $\mathbf{M}=\mathbf{Z}\mathbf{Z^*}$. It was shown that $\mathbf{Z}$ matrix transforms Stokes vectors (Stokes matrices) into complex vectors (complex matrices) that contain relevant phases besides the other information. In this note it is shown that, for deterministic optical systems, there exist two relations between outer product of experimentally measured real input-output Stokes vectors and complex vectors (matrices) that represent the polarization state and phase of totally polarized output light.
Introduction
============
$2\times2$ complex Jones matrices represent optical properties of deterministic optical systems and two dimensional complex Jones vectors represent polarization state of totally polarized light. Jones matrices transform Jones vectors into Jones vectors. Jones matrices and Jones vectors account for phase introduced by deterministic optical systems.
Optical properties of deterministic systems can also be represented by $4\times4$ Mueller-Jones matrices. Mueller-Jones matrices are real matrices, hence they can be obtained by polarimetric methods that rely on only intensity measurements. Mueller-Jones matrices act on four parameter real Stokes vectors and they transform real Stokes vectors into real Stokes vectors, which contain no information about phase.
Previously, a $4\times4$ complex matrix, $\mathbf{Z}$, analogous to the Jones matrix, $\mathbf{J}$, was introduced. $\mathbf{Z}$ matrix is also akin to the real Mueller-Jones matrix, $\mathbf{M}$, by the relation $\mathbf{M}=\mathbf{Z}\mathbf{Z^*}$. It can be shown that $\mathbf{Z}$ matrices transform Stokes vectors (Stokes matrices) into complex vectors (complex matrices) that contain relevant phase besides the other information [@KKA; @KKPA; @KKCA].
$\mathbf{Z}$ matrix represents optical properties of deterministic optical systems and it is defined by four dimensionless parameters $\tau, \alpha, \beta$ and $\gamma$:
$$\mathbf{Z}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\begin{pmatrix}
\tau&\alpha&\beta&\gamma\\
\alpha&\tau&-i\gamma&i\beta\\
\beta&i\gamma&\tau&-i\alpha\\
\gamma&-i\beta&i\alpha&\tau
\end{pmatrix}.$$
$\tau, \alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ are generally complex numbers related with basic anisotropy parameters of the deterministic optical system [@KKA]. One of the parameters can always be chosen as real and positive if overall phase is not taken into account.
$\mathbf{Z}$ matrix is a mathematical object devised to act on Stokes vectors (Stokes matrices). In this note it is shown that, for deterministic optical systems, there exist two relations between outer product of real input-output Stokes vectors of totally polarized light and complex vector (matrix) states that obtained as a result of transformation of Stokes vectors (matrices) by $\mathbf{Z}$ matrices.
Relations between the matrices representing deterministic optical systems
=========================================================================
$\mathbf{Z}$ matrix is a $4\times4$ version of the Jones matrix, $\mathbf{J}$. The relation between $\mathbf{Z}$ and $\mathbf{J}$ matrices can be disclosed by writing the Jones matrix in terms of parameters $\tau, \alpha, \beta$ and $\gamma$:
$$\mathbf{J}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\begin{pmatrix}
\tau+\alpha&\beta-i\gamma\\ \beta+i\gamma&\tau-\alpha
\end{pmatrix}$$
$\mathbf{Z}$ matrix is also closely related with the real Mueller-Jones matrix, $\mathbf{M}$. In terms of $\mathbf{Z}$ matrices, Mueller matrix of nondepolarizing optical system can be written as, $$\label{ZZ=M}
\mathbf{M}= \mathbf{Z}\mathbf{Z^*}=\mathbf{Z^*}\mathbf{Z}.$$ Eq. leads to an expression for the Mueller-Jones matrix in terms of basic parameters $\tau, \alpha, \beta$ and $\gamma$ [@KKA]: $$\label{table2}
\mathbf{M}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{c|c|c|c}
\tau\tau^*+\alpha\alpha^*&\tau\alpha^*+\alpha\tau^*&\tau\beta^*+\beta\tau^*&\tau\gamma^*+\gamma\tau^*\\
\beta\beta^*+\gamma\gamma^*&+i(\gamma\beta^*-\beta\gamma^*)&+i(\alpha\gamma^*-\gamma\alpha^*)&+i(\beta\alpha^*-\alpha\beta^*)\\
\hline
\tau\alpha^*+\alpha\tau^*&\tau\tau^*+\alpha\alpha^*&\alpha\beta^*+\beta\alpha^*&\alpha\gamma^*+\gamma\alpha^*\\
-i(\gamma\beta^*-\beta\gamma^*)&-\beta\beta^*-\gamma\gamma^*&+i(\tau\gamma^*-\gamma\tau^*)&+i(\beta\tau^*-\tau\beta^*)\\
\hline
\tau\beta^*+\beta\tau^*&\alpha\beta^*+\beta\alpha^*&\tau\tau^*-\alpha\alpha^*&\beta\gamma^*+\gamma\beta^*\\
-i(\alpha\gamma^*-\gamma\alpha^*)&-i(\tau\gamma^*-\gamma\tau^*)&+\beta\beta^*-\gamma\gamma^*&+i(\tau\alpha^*-\alpha\tau^*)\\
\hline
\tau\gamma^*+\gamma\tau^*&\alpha\gamma^*+\gamma\alpha^*&\beta\gamma^*+\gamma\beta^*&\tau\tau^*-\alpha\alpha^*\\
-i(\beta\alpha^*-\alpha\beta^*)&-i(\beta\tau^*-\tau\beta^*)&-i(\tau\alpha^*-\alpha\tau^*)&-\beta\beta^*+\gamma\gamma^*\\
\end{array}\right).$$
From Eq. , by direct calculation, it can be shown that $tr(\mathbf{M}\mathbf{M}^T)=4M_{00}^2$.
Transformation of polarization states of light by the states representing the optical system
============================================================================================
Mueller matrices transform four parameter real Stokes vectors $|s\rangle$ into four parameter real Stokes vectors $|s'\rangle$: $$|s'\rangle=\mathbf{M}|s\rangle,$$ where $|s\rangle=(s_0, s_1, s_2, s_3)^T$, $|s'\rangle= (s'_0,s'_1,s'_2,s'_3)^T$; $s_i, s'_i$ are real numbers. If $s_0^2=s_1^2+s_2^2+s_3^2$ the light is totally polarized. If the Mueller matrix is nondepolarizing (optical system is deterministic) and if $|s\rangle$ represents totally polarized light then $|s'\rangle$ is also totally polarized, $(s'_0)^2=(s'_1)^2+(s'_2)^2+(s'_3)^2$.
On the other hand, $\mathbf{Z}$ matrices transform real Stokes vectors of totally polarized light, $|s\rangle$, into complex vectors, $|\Tilde{s}\rangle$: $$\label{s=Zs}
|\Tilde{s}\rangle=\mathbf{Z}|s\rangle,$$ where $|\Tilde{s}\rangle=(\Tilde{s}_0,\Tilde{s}_1,\Tilde{s}_2,\Tilde{s}_3)^T$ and $\Tilde{s}_0, \Tilde{s}_1, \Tilde{s}_2$ and $\Tilde{s}_3$ are, in general, complex numbers.
$\mathbf{Z}$ matrix also transforms $\mathbf{S}$ matrices (Stokes matrices) into $\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}$ matrices:
$$\label{S=ZS}
\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}=\mathbf{Z}\mathbf{S}$$
where $\mathbf{S}$ and $\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}$ are matrix states representing input and output polarization states of totally polarized light, and they are defined as follows:
$$\mathbf{S}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\begin{pmatrix}s_0&s_1&s_2&s_3\\s_1&s_0&-is_3&is_2\\s_2&is_3&s_0&-is_1\\s_3&-is_2&is_1&s_0\end{pmatrix}$$
$$\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\begin{pmatrix}\Tilde{s}_0&\Tilde{s}_1&\Tilde{s}_2&\Tilde{s}_3\\\Tilde{s}_1&\Tilde{s}_0&-i\Tilde{s}_3&i\Tilde{s}_2\\\Tilde{s}_2&i\Tilde{s}_3&\Tilde{s}_0&-i\Tilde{s}_1\\\Tilde{s}_3&-i\Tilde{s}_2&i\Tilde{s}_1&\Tilde{s}_0\end{pmatrix}$$
$\mathbf{S}$ matrix is a complex matrix but it is based on real Stokes parameters, hence, it may be appropriate to name it as “Stokes matrix”. $\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}$ matrix is a complex matrix based on complex parameters, $\Tilde{s}_i$, and it represents the polarization state and phase of totally polarized output light. There is a connection between $\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}$ matrix and $|\Tilde{s}\rangle$ vector: First column of $\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}$ matrix is proportional to $|\Tilde{s}\rangle$ vector, because, Eq. is closely related with Eq. and with their quaternion counterparts.
It can be shown that, just like complex Jones matrices, $\mathbf{Z}$ matrices and hence $|\Tilde{s}\rangle$ vectors (and $\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}$ matrices) bear total phases introduced by optical systems on totally polarized input light[@KKCA]: $$\langle E|E'\rangle=\langle E|\mathbf{J}|E\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\langle s|\mathbf{Z}|s\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\langle s|\Tilde{s}\rangle.$$ where $\mathbf{J}$ is the Jones matrix, $|E\rangle$ is the Jones vector, and $|E'\rangle=\mathbf{J}|E\rangle$.
Matrices defined by outer products of vector states
===================================================
A real matrix $\mathbf{Q}$ is defined as an outer product of $|s\rangle$ vectors:
$$\mathbf{Q}=|s\rangle\langle s|.$$
A real matrix $\mathbf{K}$ is defined as an outer product of $|s'\rangle$ and $|s\rangle$ vectors:
$$\mathbf{K}=|s'\rangle\langle s|,$$
or, $$\mathbf{K}=\mathbf{M}\mathbf{Q}.$$ If $|s\rangle$ and $|s'\rangle$ represent totally polarized light, then it can be shown that $$tr(\mathbf{K}\mathbf{K}^T)=4K_{00}^2.$$
A complex-Hermitian matrix $\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}$ is defined as an outer product of $|\Tilde{s}\rangle$ vector with its Hermitian conjugate:
$$\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}=|\Tilde{s}\rangle\langle \Tilde{s}|.$$
Two theorems for outer product of input and output Stokes vectors
=================================================================
In this note it is shown that there exists two relations between real Stokes vectors ($|s\rangle, |s'\rangle$) and complex vectors and matrices ($|\Tilde{s}\rangle, \mathbf{\Tilde{S}}$) representing polarization state and phase of totally polarized output light.
First relation is between $\mathbf{K}=|s'\rangle\langle s|$ matrix and matrix product of $\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}$ with its complex conjugate:
$$\mathbf{K}=|s'\rangle\langle s|=\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}^*.$$
Proof is straightforward. From $\mathbf{M}=\mathbf{Z}\mathbf{Z}^*$, Mueller-Jones matrix, $\mathbf{M}$, is written in terms of parameters $\tau, \alpha, \beta$ and $\gamma$. From $\mathbf{M}|s\rangle=|s'\rangle$, $\mathbf{K}$ can be obtained in terms of $\tau, \alpha, \beta$ and $\gamma$. Then, it can be shown that $\mathbf{K}_{i,j}=(\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}^*)_{i,j}$.
Second relation can be formulated between real $\mathbf{K}$ and complex $\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}$ matrix ($\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}=|\Tilde{s}\rangle\langle
\Tilde{s}|$). $|s'\rangle$ and $|s\rangle$ vectors are real and directly measurable quantities and $\mathbf{K}$ has the following explicit form: $$\mathbf{K}=
\begin{pmatrix}s'_0s_0& s'_0s_1&s'_0s_2&s'_0s_3\\s'_1s_0&s'_1s_1&s'_1s_2&s'_1s_3\\s'_2s_0&s'_2s_1&s'_2s_2&s'_2s_3&\\s'_3s_0&s'_3s_1&s'_3s_2&s'_3s_3
\end{pmatrix}.$$ On the other hand, $\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}$ matrix is a complex-Hermitian matrix that contains information about phase introduced by the optical system which cannot be measured by simple polarimetric methods and it has the following explicit form: $$\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}=\begin{pmatrix}\Tilde{s}_0\Tilde{s}^*_0&\Tilde{s}_0\Tilde{s}^*_1&\Tilde{s}_0\Tilde{s}^*_2&\Tilde{s}_0\Tilde{s}^*_3\\\Tilde{s}_1\Tilde{s}^*_0&\Tilde{s}_1\Tilde{s}^*_1&\Tilde{s}_1\Tilde{s}^*_2&\Tilde{s}_1\Tilde{s}^*_3\\ \Tilde{s}_2\Tilde{s}^*_0&\Tilde{s}_2\Tilde{s}^*_1&\Tilde{s}_2\Tilde{s}^*_2&\Tilde{s}_2\Tilde{s}^*_3&\\ \Tilde{s}_3\Tilde{s}^*_0&\Tilde{s}_3\Tilde{s}^*_1&\Tilde{s}_3\Tilde{s}^*_2&\Tilde{s}_3\Tilde{s}^*_3
\end{pmatrix}.$$
It can be shown that $\mathbf{K}$ and $\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}$ matrices can be bridged by a $\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}$ transformation:
$$\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}=\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}(\mathbf{K}),$$
where the $\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}$ transformation is defined as
$$\label{sigmaK}
\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}(\mathbf{K})=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i,j=0}^3 K_{ij}{\Sigma}_{ij},$$
or, in an explicit form: [$$\label{table}\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}(\mathbf{K})=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{c|c|c|c}
K_{00}+K_{11}&K_{01}+K_{10}&K_{02}+K_{20}&K_{03}+K_{30}\\
K_{22}+K_{33}&-i(K_{23}-K_{32})&+i(K_{13}-K_{31})&-i(K_{12}-K_{21})\\
\hline
K_{01}+K_{10}&K_{00}+K_{11}&K_{12}+K_{21}&K_{13}+K_{31}\\
+i(K_{23}-K_{32})&-K_{22}-K_{33}&+i(K_{03}-K_{30})&-i(K_{02}-K_{20})\\
\hline
K_{02}+K_{20}&K_{12}+K_{21}&K_{00}-K_{11}&K_{23}+K_{32}\\
-i(K_{13}-K_{31})&-i(K_{03}-K_{30})&+K_{22}-K_{33}&+i(K_{01}-K_{10})\\
\hline
K_{03}+K_{30}&K_{13}+K_{31}&K_{23}+K_{32}&K_{00}-K_{11}\\
+i(K_{12}-K_{21})&+i(K_{02}-K_{20})&-i(K_{01}-K_{10})&-K_{22}+K_{33}\\
\end{array}\right)$$]{} Details of the transformation can be found in the Appendix.
The relation $\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}=\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}(\mathbf{K})$ can be proved by calculating each element of $\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}(\mathbf{K})$ to show that $\mathfrak{S}_{i,j}=(\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}(\mathbf{K}))_{i,j}$.
An example
==========
As an example, let $\tau=1+i,\: \alpha=1-2i,\: \beta=2+3i$ and $\gamma=0$. Corresponding $\mathbf{Z}$ matrix is $$\mathbf{Z}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\begin{pmatrix}
1+i&1-2i&2+3i&0\\1-2i&1+i&0&-3+2i\\2+3i&0&1+i&-2-i\\0&3-2i&2+i&1+i
\end{pmatrix}$$
The Mueller matrix of the deterministic optical system can be easily obtained from the relation $\mathbf{M}=\mathbf{Z}\mathbf{Z}^*$: $$\mathbf{M}=\frac{1}{2}\begin{pmatrix}
20&-2&10&-14\\
-2&-6&-8&-2\\
10&-8&10&-6\\
14&2&6&-16
\end{pmatrix}$$ For a given input Stokes vector of totally polarized light all relevant vectors and matrices can be calculated. For example let $s_0=5, s_1=3, s_2=0, s_3=4$ be four real Stokes parameters representing the polarization state of totally polarized light:
$$|s\rangle=\begin{pmatrix}
5\\3\\0\\4
\end{pmatrix},\quad
|s'\rangle=\mathbf{M}|s\rangle=\begin{pmatrix}
19\\-18\\1\\6
\end{pmatrix};\quad |\Tilde{s}\rangle=\mathbf{Z}|s\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\begin{pmatrix}
8-i\\-4+i\\2+11i\\13-2i
\end{pmatrix}.$$
$$\mathbf{K}=|s'\rangle\langle s|=\begin{pmatrix}95&57&0&76\\-90&-54&0&-72\\5&3&0&4\\30&18&0&24
\end{pmatrix}$$
$\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}$ matrix can be written as follows $$\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}=\frac{1}{2}\begin{pmatrix}
8-i&-4+i&2+11i&13-2i\\
-4+i&8-i&-2-13i&-11+2i\\
2+11i&2+13i&8-i&1+4i\\
13-2i&11-2i&-1-4i&8-i
\end{pmatrix}$$ By direct multiplication it can be shown that $\mathbf{K}=\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}^*
$.
In order to show the second relation, $\mathbf{K}$ matrix is subjected to a $\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}$ transformation given by Eq.:
$$\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}(\mathbf{K})=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i,j=0}^3 K_{ij}{\Sigma}_{ij}=\frac{1}{2}\begin{pmatrix}65&-33-4i&5-90i&106+3i\\-33+4i&17&3+46i&-54+5i\\5+90i&3-46i&125&4+147i\\106-3i&-54-5i&4-147i&173
\end{pmatrix}.$$
It is now easy to show $\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}=\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}(\mathbf{K})$ by calculating the outer product $\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}=|\Tilde{s}\rangle\langle \Tilde{s}|$: $$\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}=\frac{1}{2}\begin{pmatrix}8-i\\-4+i\\2+11i\\13-2i
\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}8+i,&-4-i,&2-11i,&13+2i
\end{pmatrix}.$$
It is worth noting that $rank(\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}})=1$, hence, all column vectors of $\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}$ matrix are equivalent to each other, i.e., they differ from each other only by respective phases, and they are also equivalent to the $|\Tilde{s}\rangle$ vector apart from overall phase factors. For example the first column vector of $\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}(\mathbf{K})$ matrix, $|c_1\rangle$, differs from the $|\Tilde{s}\rangle$ vector by a factor $(8+i)/\sqrt{2}$:
$$|c_1\rangle=\frac{1}{2}\begin{pmatrix}
65\\-33+4i\\5+90i\\106-3i
\end{pmatrix}=\frac{8+i}{\sqrt{2}}|\Tilde{s}\rangle .$$
Now, suppose that $\mathbf{Z}$ matrix and the Mueller matrix $\mathbf{M}$ are not given, but $|s\rangle$ and $|s'\rangle$ vectors are known as a result of measurement, then $|\Tilde{s}\rangle$ vector can be calculated from the outer product of $|s\rangle$ and $|s'\rangle$ vectors apart from its original overall phase. Situation is very similar to the overall phase issue encountered while trying to calculate the Jones matrix of the optical system from the associated nondepolarizing Mueller matrix [@arxiv1].
Complex components of $|\Tilde{s}\rangle$ vector are not easily accessible by measurement, but $|\Tilde{s}\rangle$ vector plays a very important role in the extended and unified formalism of polarization optics [@zenframework]. If $|\Tilde{s}\rangle$ is given or calculated it is possible to extract corresponding $|s\rangle$ and $|s'\rangle$ vectors from $\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}=|\Tilde{s}\rangle\langle \Tilde{s}|$ by the following inverse transformation:
$$\label{K}
\mathbf{K}=\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}(\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}})=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i,j=0}^3 \mathfrak{S}_{ij}{\Sigma}_{ij}.$$
Once $\mathbf{K}$ matrix is calculated from $\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}$ matrix, it can be shown that $|s'\rangle$ and $|s\rangle$ vectors (input and output Stokes vectors) can be obtained from $\mathbf{K}=|s'\rangle\langle s|$. In the above example, $|s\rangle$ vector can be read from the first row of $\mathbf{K}$ matrix and $|s'\rangle$ can be read from the first column of $\mathbf{K}$ matrix:
$$\textbf{(First row)}^T=\begin{pmatrix}95\\57\\0\\76\end{pmatrix}=s'_0|s\rangle=19\begin{pmatrix}5\\3\\0\\4
\end{pmatrix}$$
$$\textbf{First column}=\begin{pmatrix}95\\-90\\5\\30\end{pmatrix}=s_0|s'\rangle=5\begin{pmatrix}19\\-18\\1\\6
\end{pmatrix}$$
In order to recover the original $|s\rangle$ and $|s'\rangle$ vectors, actual values of the parameters $s'_0$ and $s_0$ are needed. But, usually, absolute values of the input and output Stokes parameters are not important, hence, $|s\rangle$ and $|s'\rangle$ vectors can be re-normalized for further calculations.
Conclusion
==========
Jones matrix transforms two dimensional complex Jones vectors into complex Jones vectors and accounts for the phase introduced by deterministic optical systems. Mueller-Jones matrix of deterministic optical system transforms real Stokes vectors into real Stokes vectors which contains no information about phase. A $4\times4$ complex matrix $\mathbf{Z}$ matrix transforms Stokes vectors and Stokes matrices into complex vectors $|\Tilde{s}\rangle$ and complex matrices $\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}$ that contain relevant phase besides the other information. In this note it is shown that, for deterministic optical systems, there exists two relations between outer product of real input-output Stokes vectors and complex vectors/matrices that represent polarization state and phase of totally polarized output light.
Matrix $\mathbf{K}$ is defined as an outer product of real Stokes vectors $|s\rangle$ and $|s'\rangle$: $\mathbf{K}=|s'\rangle\langle s|$, where $|s'\rangle=\mathbf{M}|s\rangle$. $\mathbf{Z}$ matrix acts of the real Stokes vector: $\mathbf{Z}|s\rangle=|\Tilde{s}\rangle$, where $|\Tilde{s}\rangle$ is a complex valued vector that can account for the phase. $\mathbf{Z}$ matrix also transforms Stokes matrices: $\mathbf{Z}\mathbf{S}=\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}$, where $\mathbf{\Tilde{S}}$ is a complex valued matrix with relevant phase. First relation is that $\mathbf{K}=\mathbf{S}\mathbf{S}^*$, and the second relation can be written as $\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}(\mathbf{K)=\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}}$, where $\mathbf{\mathfrak{S}}=|\Tilde{s}\rangle\langle\Tilde{s}|$; $\mathbf{\mathbb{\Sigma}}$ is a special transformation from a real matrix to a complex-Hermitian matrix.
These relations show that $\mathbf{K}$ matrix may have importance in the mathematical framework of polarization algebra. $\mathbf{K}$ matrix serves as an interface where the real-measurable parameters meet complex parameters which are rather remote from the experiment [@zenframework]. It can be shown that K matrix may also have practical implications. For example, it can be shown that, by using either one of the theorems involving K matrix, the Jones matrix, and hence the Mueller-Jones matrix of a deterministic optical system with certain symmetry properties, can be obtained from the results of two polarimetric measurements. [@zenJbytwo].
Appendix
========
Let $\mathbf{G}$ be any $4\times4$ real matrix. $\mathbf{G}$ can be transformed into an associated complex-Hermitian matrix $\mathbf{\mathfrak{G}}$ by the transformation $\mathbb{\Sigma}$[@KKA]:
$$\label{Transform}
\mathbf{\mathfrak{G}}=\mathbb{\Sigma}(\mathbf{G})= \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i,j=0}^3G_{ij}{\Sigma}_{ij},$$
where $G_{ij} (i,j = 0,1,2,3)$ are the elements of the real matrix $\mathbf{G}$, and ${\Sigma}_{ij}=\mathbf{U}({\sigma}_{i}\otimes{\sigma}_{j}^*)\mathbf{U}^{-1}$ with,
[$$\mathbf{U}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\begin{pmatrix}1&0&0&1\\1&0&0&-1\\0&1&1&0\\0&i&-i&0\end{pmatrix},\quad\mathbf{U}^{-1}=\mathbf{U}^{\dagger}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\begin{pmatrix}1&1&0&0\\0&0&1&-i\\0&0&1&i\\1&-1&0&0\end{pmatrix}.$$]{} The superscript $^{\dagger}$ indicates the complex conjugate and transpose, the superscript $^*$ indicates complex conjugate, $\otimes$ is the Kronecker product and ${\sigma_{i}}$ are the Pauli matrices with the $2\times2$ identity in the following order: $${\sigma}_0=\begin{pmatrix}1&0\\0&1\end{pmatrix},\quad{\sigma}_1=\begin{pmatrix}1&0\\0&-1\end{pmatrix}\quad{\sigma}_2=\begin{pmatrix}0&1\\1&0\end{pmatrix},\quad{\sigma}_3=\begin{pmatrix}0&-i\\i&0\end{pmatrix}.$$
Explicit form of the $\mathbf{\mathfrak{G}}$ matrix can be obtained from the following transformation table: [$$\label{Transformation}
\mathbf{\mathfrak{G}}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{c|c|c|c}
G_{00}+G_{11}&G_{01}+G_{10}&G_{02}+G_{20}&G_{03}+G_{30}\\
G_{22}+G_{33}&-i(G_{23}-G_{32})&+i(G_{13}-G_{31})&-i(G_{12}-G_{21})\\
\hline
G_{01}+G_{10}&G_{00}+G_{11}&G_{12}+G_{21}&G_{13}+G_{31}\\
+i(G_{23}-G_{32})&-G_{22}-G_{33}&+i(G_{03}-G_{30})&-i(G_{02}-G_{20})\\
\hline
G_{02}+G_{20}&G_{12}+G_{21}&G_{00}-G_{11}&G_{23}+G_{32}\\
-i(G_{13}-G_{31})&-i(G_{03}-G_{30})&+G_{22}-G_{33}&+i(G_{01}-G_{10})\\
\hline
G_{03}+G_{30}&G_{13}+G_{31}&G_{23}+G_{32}&G_{00}-G_{11}\\
+i(G_{12}-G_{21})&+i(G_{02}-G_{20})&-i(G_{01}-G_{10})&-G_{22}+G_{33}\\
\end{array}\right)$$]{} It is worth noting that rank of the Hermitian matrix $\mathbf{\mathfrak{G}}$ can take any value between $1-4$, in general.
Eq. can be inverted by the same transformantion, $\mathbb{\Sigma}$:
$$\label{Inverse}
\mathbf{G}=\mathbb{\Sigma}(\mathbf{\mathfrak{G}})= \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i,j=0}^3\mathfrak{G}_{ij}{\Sigma}_{ij},$$
[99]{} E. Kuntman, M. Ali Kuntman, and O. Arteaga, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 34, 80 (2017). E. Kuntman, M. A. Kuntman, J. Sancho-Parramon, and O. Arteaga, “Formalism of optical coherence and polarization based on material media states,” Phys. Rev. A 95, 063819 (2017). 11. E. Kuntman, M. A. Kuntman, A. Canillas, O. Arteaga, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 36, 492-497 (2019). J. J. Gil, Eur. Phys. J. Appl. Phys. 40, 1 (2007). J. J. Gil, Journal of Applied Remote Sensing 8, 081599 (2014). S.R. Cloude, “Group theory and polarization algebra,“ Optik 75, 26-36 (1986) M. A. Kuntman, E. Kuntman, ”Transfoming nondepolarizing Mueller matrices into Jones matrices,“ arXiv:1906.11198v1\[physics.optics\]. M.A. Kuntman, E. Kuntman, ”A mathematical framework for polarization algebra of deterministic optical systems,“ DOI 10.5281/zenodo.3257582 M.A. Kuntman, E. Kuntman, ”Obtainment of a Mueller-Jones matrix from two polarimetric measurements under certain symmetry conditions," DOI 10.5281/zenodo.3247006
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The aim of this paper is to give a finer geometric description of the algebraic varieties parametrizing conjugacy classes of nonsolvable subgroups in the plane Cremona group.'
address: 'Johannes Gutenberg-Universität, Institut für Mathematik, Staudingerweg 9, 55099 Mainz, Germany'
author:
- Vladimir Igorevich Tsygankov
title: 'The conjugacy classes of finite nonsolvable subgroups in the plane Cremona group.'
---
Keywords: Cremona group, del Pezzo surface, conic bundle, automorphisms group.
MSC: 14E07; 14J26
Introduction.
=============
The classification of finite subgroups in the plane Cremona group over the field $\mathbb{C}$ denoted by ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ is a classical problem. The history of this problem begins with the work of E. Bertini [@3], where are classified the conjugacy classes of subgroups of order $2$ in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$. There were obtained three families of conjugacy classes now called as involution de Jonquières, Geiser and Bertini. However, the classification was incomplete, and the proof was not rigorous. Only recently in [@1] was obtained complete and short proof.
In 1895 Kantor [@7] and Wiman [@8] gave a description of finite subgroups in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$. The list was fairly comprehensive, but was not full in the following aspects. Firstly, for a given finite subgroup on this list could not be defined, whether it is contained in the Cremona group or not. Secondly, the question of conjugacy between the subgroups was not considered.
Modern approach to the problem was initiated by the work of Manin [@Manin-67] and continued in works of Iskovskikh [@9], [@10], [@11]. In the paper [@Manin-67] is established a clear link between the classification of conjugacy classes of finite subgroups of the Cremona group and the classification of $G$-minimal rational surfaces $ (S, G) $ and $G$-equivariant birational maps between them. The consideration is divided into two cases: when $S$ is a del Pezzo surface, and when $S$ is a conic bundle.
Let $G$ be a finite group. A $G$-surface is a triple $(S,G,\rho)$, where $S$ is a nonsingular projective surface, and $\rho$ is a monomorphism of the group $G$ to the automorphisms group of the surface $S$. For brevity, $G$-surface will be denoted by $(S, G)$.
Let $G$ be a finite subgroup in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ with an embedding $\theta: G \hookrightarrow {\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$. It turns out that the action of $G$ on $\mathbb{P}^2$ can be *regularized*, i.e there exists a smooth rational surface $S$ and a birational map $\mu: S \dashrightarrow \mathbb{P}^2$ such that $\mu^{-1} \circ \theta(G) \circ \mu$ is a subgroup of automorphisms of $S$.
Certainly, any regularization is not unique. For example, if we blow up any $G$-orbit of points on $S$. Two distinct $G$-surfaces $(S,G)$ and $(S',G)$ define two conjugate embeddings $\theta: G \rightarrow {\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ and $\theta': G\rightarrow {\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ respectively, iff there exist a $G$-equivariant birational map $\zeta: S \dashrightarrow S'$.
A $G$-surface $(S,G)$ is called $G$-minimal, if any $G$-equivariant birational morphism $S\rightarrow Y$ onto a smooth $G$-surface $Y$ is a $G$-isomorphism.
\[Man1\] There are two types of the rational $G$-minimal surfaces $(S,G)$:
- $S$ is a del Pezzo surface, and ${\operatorname{Pic}}(S)^G \simeq \mathbb{Z}$;
- $S$ has a $G$-equivariant structure of conic bundle $\phi: S \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$, and ${\operatorname{Pic}}(S)^G \simeq \mathbb{Z}^2$.
The classes of $G$-minimal rational surfaces from the first and the second cases of the Theorem \[Man1\] will be denoted respectively as $\mathbb{D}$ and $\mathbb{CB}$.
More recently, I.V. Dolgachev and V.A. Iskovskikh [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh] improved the list of Kantor and Wiman. The answer was obtained in terms of action of the groups $G$ on the del Pezzo surfaces and on the conic bundles. It was considered question about conjugacy of the finite subgroups in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$, using the theory of elementary links of V.A. Iskovskikh (see [@Iskovskikh-96]). For general case this paper is currently the most precise classification of conjugacy classes of finite subgroups in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$. I note that J. Blanc in [@Blanc-2011] obtained a more precise classification in case of finite cyclic subgroups.
However in [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh] explicit equations of $G$-minimal surfaces $(S,G)$ in weighted projective spaces and explicit descriptions of actions of $G$ on surfaces $S$ were obtained only in case of Del Pezzo surfaces. Also description of groups $G$, acting on $G$-minimal conic bundles $(S,G,\phi)$, was given only in terms of groups extensions. In other words, for a given abstract finite group it is still impossible, using [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh], to say whether the group is isomorphic to a subgroup of ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$. Also classification of conjugacy classes of finite subgroups in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ has some gaps. If $G \subset {\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ is regularized as a subgroup of automorphisms of a conic bundle $\phi: S \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ with $K_S^2=1$, or $2$, and $(S,G,\phi)\in \mathbb{CB}$. I will show it consistently for $K_S^2=1$ and 2.
Let $K_S^2=1$. Consider [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Section 8.1, Pages 534-535]. There is stated non-existence of triples $(S,G,\phi)\in \mathbb{CB}$ with $K_S^2=1$ and ample divisor $-K_S$. However, it’s wrong. An example of such triples is presented in [@Tsygankov-10 Section 6.2.3, Theorem 6.8]. In this case the authors of [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh] applied an old incorrect version of [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Theorem 5.7]. This version existed until J. Blanc reported about a mistake to I. Dolgachev. I note that in published version of [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh] Theorem 5.7 is presented in correct form. Unfortunately, for large volume of work, the authors forgot to update some conclusions from the theorem.
Let $K_S^2=2$. In [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Section 8.1, Pages 535] is stated: if $(S,G,\phi)\in \mathbb{CB}$ with $K_S^2=2$ and non-ample divisor $-K_S$ then the surface $S$ is *exceptional conic bundle* (see Definition \[defExceptcon\]). In other words the surface $S$ contains two smooth non-intersecting rational $(-3)$-curves. This is also wrong. In [@Tsygankov-10 Section 5.1.1, Theorem 5.4] is presented an example of triple $(S,G,\phi)\in \mathbb{CB}$ with $K_S^2=2$ and nef, non-ample divisor $-K_S$.
In the paper [@Tsygankov-10] I continue classification of $G$-minimal conic bundles, which was begun in [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh]. For given arbitrary value of $K_S^2$, it was constructed a method of classification by means of explicit equations of $G$-minimal conic bundles $(S,G)$ in weighted projective spaces and explicit descriptions of the actions of $G$ on the Picard group ${\operatorname{Pic}}(S) $ and on the surface $S$. The classification is carried on completely for $K_S^2> 0$. If $K_S^2 \le 0$ then the $G$-minimal conic bundle $(S,G)$ is birationally rigid. So there is no question about conjugacy (see [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Section 8]).
The aim of this paper is to give a finer geometric description of the algebraic varieties parameterizing conjugacy classes of finite nonsolvable subgroups in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$, applying methods of papers [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh] and [@Tsygankov-10]. It is obtained explicit equations of $G$-minimal surfaces $(S,G)$ in weighted projective spaces and explicit descriptions of actions of $G$ on surfaces $S$. Also all possibilities for the groups $G$ are fully described.
In [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Section 9] were stated the following problems for ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$:
- Find the finer classification of the conjugacy classes of de Jonquières groups.
- Give a finer geometric description of the algebraic varieties parameterizing conjugacy classes.
This article gives a solution of these problems for the nonsolvable finite subgroups in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$.
It’s important to note that investigation method described in the paper can be employed to solve these problems for all finite subgroups in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$, i.e. not necessary nonsolvable. However due to large amount of routine work investigation was conducted only for nonsolvable subgroups.
The paper has the following structure. In Section \[DelPezzo\] I study surfaces from the class $\mathbb{D}$, i.e. the $G$-minimal del Pezzo surfaces $(S,G)$, where ${\operatorname{Pic}}(S)^G\simeq \mathbb{Z}$ and $G$ is a finite nonsolvable group. I will apply here results of [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh]. There are no my results in this section.
In Section \[ConBundle\] I study surfaces from the class $\mathbb{CB}$, i.e. the $G$-minimal surfaces $(S,G,\phi)$, where a morphism $\phi: S\rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ defines a $G$-equivariant conic bundle structure, ${\operatorname{Pic}}(S)^G\simeq \mathbb{Z}^2$, and $G$ is a finite nonsolvable group. The main my results are described in this section.
In Section \[Conjugate\] I study conjugacy classes of embeddings $G\rightarrow {\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ defined by $G$-minimal surfaces $(S,G)$, for all finite nonsolvable subgroups $G \subset {\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$. Here I reprove results in [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Section 7] for the sake of completeness.
In Section \[List\] I present a list of the finite nonsolvable subgroups in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$, obtained on the basis of results of sections \[DelPezzo\] and \[ConBundle\].
This work is dedicated to my supervisor Vasily Alekseevich Iskovskikh, who initiated my study of the Cremona group. I am very grateful to Yuri Gennadievich Prokhorov and Ilya Alexandrovich Tyomkin for useful tips and remarks.
The base field is assumed everywhere to be $\mathbb{C}$. Throughout this paper we will use the following notations.
- $\varepsilon_n$ denotes a primitive n-th root of unity.
- $S_n$ denotes the permutation group of degree $n$.
- $A_n$ denotes the alternating group of degree $n$.
- Consider a subgroup $A_5\subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$, which is isomorphic to the icosahedral automorphisms group, and the standard projection $\psi: SL(2,\mathbb{C})\rightarrow PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$. Then $\bar{A}_5$ denotes the group $\psi^{-1}(A_5)$, which is isomorphic to the binary icosahedral group.
- $A.B$, where $A$ and $B$ are some abstract groups, is one of the possible extensions with help of the exact sequence: $0\rightarrow A \rightarrow G \rightarrow B \rightarrow 0$.
- Let $H$ be an abstract group. Then $H\wr S_n$ will denote the semidirect product $H^n \rtimes S_n$, where $S_n$ is the symmetric group, acting on $H^n$ by permuting the factors.
- $A \triangle_D B$ is a diagonal product of abstract groups $A$ and $B$ over their common homomorphic image $D$ (i.e. the subgroup of $A \times B$ of pairs $(a,b)$, such that $\alpha(a)=\beta(b)$ for some epimorphisms $\alpha: A \rightarrow D,\ \beta: B \rightarrow D$).
- $\mathbb{P}(a_1,\ldots,a_n)$, where $a_i \in \mathbb{Z}$, $i=1,\ldots,n$, is the weighted projective space, with the set of weights $(a_1,\ldots,a_n)$.
Case of del Pezzo surfaces. {#DelPezzo}
===========================
In this section we study the surfaces $(S,G)\in \mathbb{D}$, i.e. $S$ is a $G$-minimal del Pezzo surface, and ${\operatorname{Pic}}(S)^G\simeq \mathbb{Z}$. The groups $G$ are supposed to be finite nonsolvable. We will apply here results of [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh]. There are no author’s results in this section.
Recall that a surface $S$ is called a del Pezzo surface, if $S$ is smooth, and $-K_S$ is ample. It’s well known that $1 \le K_S^2 \le 9$. We will carry our investigation, considering different values of $K_S^2$.
In the next theorem we study the case $K_S^2=9$. In this case $S \simeq \mathbb{P}^2$.
\[K\_S9\] Let $(S,G) \in \mathbb{D}$, $K_S^2=9$, and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Then $S \simeq \mathbb{P}^2$ with the coordinates $(x_0:x_1:x_2)$, and $G$ is any finite nonsolvable subgroup of ${\operatorname{Aut}}(\mathbb{P}^3)\simeq PGL(3,\mathbb{C})$. The subgroup $G \subset PGL(3,\mathbb{C})$ can be conjugated to one of the following subgroups.
1. $H$ is a group, consisting of maps $$(x_0:x_1:x_2)\mapsto (ax_0+bx_1:cx_0+dx_1:x_2).$$ The image of matrices $$\begin{pmatrix}
a & b\\
c & d
\end{pmatrix}
\in GL(2, \mathbb{C})$$ in $PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$ under the natural projection $GL(2,\mathbb{C}) \rightarrow PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$ is isomorphic to $A_5$. The group $H$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Z}_n \times \bar{A}_5$, $n\ge 1$.
2. The icosahedral group $A_5$ isomorphic to $L_2(5)$. It leaves invariant a nonsingular conic $C \subset \mathbb{P}^2$.
3. The Klein group isomorphic to $L_2(7)$. This group is realized as automorphism group of the Klein’s quartic $x_0^3x_1+x_1^3x_2+x_2^3x_0=0$.
4. The Valentiner group isomorphic to $A_6$. It can be realized as automorphism group of the nonsingular plane sextic $$10x_0^3x_1^3+ 9x_2x_0^5 + x_1^6-45x_0^2 x_1^2 x_2^2 -135 x_0x_1 x_2^4 +27 x_2^6=0.$$
The statement follows directly from [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Corollary 4.6, Theorems 4.7, 4.8]. We need only to check the isomorphism $H \simeq \mathbb{Z}_n \times \bar{A}_5$, $n\ge 1$ in the first case of theorem. It follows from [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Lemma 4.5, case (i)].
In the next theorem we consider the case $K_S^2=8$.
\[K\_S8\] Let $(S,G) \in \mathbb{D}$, $K_S^2=8$, and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Then $S \simeq \mathbb{F}_0 \simeq \mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1$ with the coordinates $(x_0:x_1,t_0:t_1)$. We will employ definition of the group $St(A_5)$ (see Notation \[stA5\]), and define involution $$\tau: (x_0:x_1,t_0:t_1)\mapsto (t_0:t_1, x_0:x_1).$$ We have the following possibilities for $G$.
1. The subgroup $G \subset {\operatorname{Aut}}(\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1)$ is conjugate to the subgroup $St(A_5)\wr \langle \tau \rangle$.
2. The subgroup $G \subset {\operatorname{Aut}}(\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1)$ is conjugate to the subgroup $H\times \langle \tau \rangle$, where $H$ is the image of the diagonal embedding of $St(A_5)$ in $PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$.
One knows that if $S$ is a del Pezzo surface with $K_S^2=8$ then $S \simeq \mathbb{F}_0$ or $\mathbb{F}_1$. However in the second case the exceptional section of ruled surface $\mathbb{F}_1$ is $G$-invariant. Therefore the pair $(\mathbb{F}_1,G)$ is not $G$-minimal. Hence $S\simeq \mathbb{F}_0 \simeq \mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1$.
It’s well known that ${\operatorname{Aut}}(\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1)\simeq PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \wr \langle \tau \rangle$. Whence $G$ is generated by a nonsolvable subgroup $H \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$ and by an element $\eta=\mu \circ \tau$, where $\mu \in PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$. We write $\mu=(B,B')$, where $B$, $B'\in PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$. For any $\varsigma= (A,A')\in PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$ we have $$\label{teh1}
\eta \circ \varsigma \circ \eta^{-1}=(BA'B^{-1} , B'AB'^{-1}).$$ Let’s study the structure of group $H$, applying Goursat’s Lemma (see [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Lemma 4.1]). Consider projections $\pi_i: PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \rightarrow PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$, $i=1,2$ on the first and the second factor respectively. We get $H \simeq \pi_1(H) \triangle_D \pi_2(H)$, where $D \simeq {\operatorname{Im}}(\pi_1|H)/{\operatorname{Ker}}(\pi_2|H)$. Obviously, either ${\operatorname{Im}}(\pi_1|H) \simeq A_5$ or ${\operatorname{Im}}(\pi_2|H)\simeq A_5$ (see Klein’s classification of finite nonsolvable subgroups in $PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$ in [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Section 5.5]). The group $A_5$ is simple. Therefore $D \simeq 1$ or $A_5$.
Suppose that $D\simeq 1$. From we get ${\operatorname{Im}}(\pi_1|H) \simeq {\operatorname{Im}}(\pi_2|H)\simeq A_5$. Hence $H$ can be conjugated to $St(A_5) \times St(A_5)$. We will prove that $B$, $B'\in St(A_5)$. Suppose that it doesn’t holds. Then from we get $St(A_5) \rtimes B$, $St(A_5) \rtimes B' \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$. But $St(A_5)$ is a maximal finite subgroup of $PGL(2, \mathbb{C})$. Contradiction. We get the first case of the theorem.
Suppose that $D\simeq A_5$. Then $H$ is conjugated to the image of diagonal embedding of $St(A_5)$ in $PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$. Arguing as above, we get $B$, $B' \in St(A_5)$. By these elements define the same inner automorphism of $A_5$. Hence $B=B'$. We get the second case of the theorem.
In the next theorem we consider cases: $K_S^2=7$, $K_S^2=6$, $K_S^2=4$, and $K_S^2=1$.
\[thdp3\] There are no surfaces $(S,G)\in \mathbb{D}$, such that $K_S^2$ is equal to either $7$, or $6$, or $4$ , or $1$, and $G$ is a finite nonsolvable group.
Let’s consider the case $K_S^2=7$. The surface $S$ is presented as a blowing up of two different points in $\mathbb{P}^2$. However the strict transform of line, containing this two points, is a $G$-invariant rational $(-1)$-curve. Hence the surface $S$ is not $G$-minimal.
The case $K_S^2=6$ follows directly from [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Theorem 6.3, Corollary 4.6, Theorem 4.7].
The case $K_S^2=4$ follows directly from [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Theorem 6.9].
The case $K_S^2=1$ follows directly from [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Table 8].
In the next theorem we consider the case $K_S^2=5$.
\[thdp4\] Let $(S,G) \in \mathbb{D}$, $K_S^2=5$, and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Introduce on $\mathbb{P}^2$ the coordinates $(T_0:T_1:T_2)$. Then the surface $S$ is isomorphic to the blowing up of $\mathbb{P}^2$ at points: $(0:0:1)$, $(0:1:0)$, $(1:0:0)$ and $(1:1:1)$. The group ${\operatorname{Aut}}(S)$ is isomorphic to $S_5$, and is generated by the maps: $$\label{K_S5eq}
\begin{aligned}
&(T_0:T_1:T_2)\mapsto (T_1:T_2:T_0),\\
&(T_0:T_1:T_2)\mapsto (T_2:-T_0+T_2:-T_1+T_2),\\
&(T_0:T_1:T_2)\mapsto (T_0(T_2-T_1):T_2(T_0-T_1):T_0T_2).
\end{aligned}$$ The subgroup $G \subset {\operatorname{Aut}}(S)$ is isomorphic to $A_5$ or $S_5$.
This follows directly from [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Theorem 6.4] and arguments of [@DolgachevTopics Theorem 8.4.15].
In the next theorem we consider the case $K_S^2=3$.
\[thdp2\] Let $(S,G) \in \mathbb{D}$, $K_S^2=3$, and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Then the surface $S$ can be represented by the following equations in $\mathbb{P}^3$ with the coordinates $(T_0:T_1:T_2:T_3)$: $$T_0^2 T_1+T_1^2T_2+T_2^2T_3+T_3^2T_0=0.$$ The group $G$ is isomorphic to $S_5$ and is generated by the following maps: $$\label{K_S3eq}
\begin{aligned}
&(T_0:T_1:T_2:T_3)\mapsto (T_0:\varepsilon_5^4 T_1:\varepsilon_5 T_2:\varepsilon_5^2 T_3),\\
&(T_0:T_1:T_2:T_3)\mapsto (T_1:T_2:T_3:T_0).
\end{aligned}$$
This follows directly from [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Theorem 6.14].
In the next theorem we consider the case $K_S^2=2$.
\[thdp1\] Let $(S,G) \in \mathbb{D}$, $K_S^2=2$, and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Then the surface $S$ can be represented by the following equation in $\mathbb{P}(2,1,1,1)$ with the coordinates $(T_0:T_1:T_2:T_3)$: $$\label{K_S2}
T_3^2+T_0^3T_1+T_1^3T_2+T_2^3T_0=0.$$ The group ${\operatorname{Aut}}(S)$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Z}_2 \times L_2(7)$. The subgroup $G \subset {\operatorname{Aut}}(S)$ is isomorphic to either $L_2(7)$, or $\mathbb{Z}_2 \times L_2(7)$.
This follows directly from [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Theorem 6.17].
Case of conic bundles {#ConBundle}
=====================
In this section we study the surfaces $(S,G,\phi)$ in the class $\mathbb{CB}$, i.e. $G$-minimal surfaces $S$ with ${\operatorname{Pic}}(S)^G\simeq \mathbb{Z}^2$, having a $G$-equivariant conic bundle structure $\phi: S\rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$. The groups $G$ are supposed to be finite nonsolvable.
Recall (see [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Item 3.7]) that a rational $G$-surface $(S,G)$ has a conic bundle structure, if there exist a $G$-equivariant morphism $\phi: S \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$, whose each fiber $F_t=\phi^{-1}(t),\ t\in \mathbb{P}^1$ is either a nondegenerate plane conic (isomorphic to $\mathbb{P}^1$) or a reducible reduced conic, i.e. a pair of intersecting lines.
A conic bundle $(S,G,\phi)$ is said to be *relatively $G$-minimal*, if the fibres of $\phi$ do not contain $G$-orbits, consisting of nonintersecting rational $(-1)$-curves (i.e. components of reducible fibres — equivalently to ${\operatorname{Pic}}(S)^G=\phi^*{\operatorname{Pic}}(\mathbb{P}^1)\oplus \mathbb{Z}\simeq \mathbb{Z}^2$). Recall that a $G$-surface $(S,G)$ is said to be *$G$-minimal*, if any $G$-equivariant birational morphism $S\rightarrow Y$ onto a smooth $G$-surface $Y$ is a $G$-isomorphism. It is clear that a $G$-minimal surface, having a conic bundle structure, is relatively minimal. The inverse statement is not always valid.
Denote by $r$ the number of the reducible fibers of a conic bundle $(S,G,\phi)$. By Noether formula we have $r=8-K_S^2$, so $K_S^2\le 8$. If $K_S^2=8$, then $S$ is isomorphic to Hirzebruch’s surface $\mathbb{F}_n$, $n\ge 0$.
\[th01\] Let $(S,G,\phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$ with $K_S^2=8$, and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Then the surface $S$ is isomorphic to Hirzebruch’s surface $\mathbb{F}_n$, $n\ge 0$. The morphism $\phi: S\rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ coincides with the standard projection $\mathbb{F}_n \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$.
1. Let $n=0$. Then $\mathbb{F}_0\simeq \mathbb{P}^1\times \mathbb{P}^1$. The group ${\operatorname{Aut}}(\mathbb{F}_0)$ is isomorphic to $PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \wr S_2$. The subgroup $G\subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C})\times PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \subset {\operatorname{Aut}}(\mathbb{F}_0)$ is isomorphic to one of the following: $A_5 \times B$, $B \times A_5$, $A_5 \triangle_{A_5} A_5$, where $B$ is any finite subgroup of $PGL(2, \mathbb{C})$.
2. Let $n>0$. Then $n>1$. Consider $\mathbb{F}_n \rightarrow \mathbb{P}(n,1,1)$ the blowdown of exceptional section of $\mathbb{F}_n$. We have $${\operatorname{Aut}}(\mathbb{F}_n)\simeq \mathbb{C}^{n+1} \rtimes (GL(2,\mathbb{C}) \slash \mu_n),$$ where $GL(2,\mathbb{C}) \slash \mu_n$ acts on $\mathbb{C}^{n+1}$ by means of its natural linear representation in the space of binary forms with degree n. The subgroup $G\subset {\operatorname{Aut}}(\mathbb{F}_n)$ is isomorphic to one of the following groups: $$\label{dff}
G \simeq
\left \{
\begin{aligned}
&\mathbb{Z}_m \times A_5, m \ge 1, & \textrm{if $n$ is even};\\
&\mathbb{Z}_m \times \bar{A}_5, m \ge 1, & \textrm{if $n$ is odd}.
\end{aligned}
\right.$$
If $S\simeq \mathbb{F}_0 \simeq \mathbb{P}^1\times \mathbb{P}^1$, then $G$ is a nonsolvable subgroup in ${\operatorname{Aut}}(\mathbb{F}_0)\simeq PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \wr S_2$. Note that $G \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$, so as ${\operatorname{Pic}}(S)^G \simeq \mathbb{Z}^2$. We apply Goursat’s lemma (see [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Lemma 4.1]) and Klein’s classification of the finite subgroups in $PGL(2,\mathbb{C}$) (see [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Section 5.5]). We get that $G \simeq B \triangle_D C$, where one of groups $B$ and $C$ is isomorphic to $A_5$. Since the group $A_5$ is simple, the group $D$ is isomorphic to either $1$ or $A_5$. Therefore the group $G$ is isomorphic to one of the following groups: $A_5 \times B$, $B \times A_5$, $A_5 \triangle_{A_5} A_5$, where $B$ is any finite subgroup of $PGL(2, \mathbb{C})$. Remark that a group $A_5 \triangle_{A_5} A_5$ is conjugate to image of a diagonal embedding of group $A_5$ to $PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$.
Consider the case $S \simeq \mathbb{F}_n,\ n > 0$. Let $\mathbb{F}_n \rightarrow \mathbb{P}(n,1,1)$ be the blowdown of the exceptional section of $\mathbb{F}_n$.
We note that if $n=1$ then $\mathbb{P}(1,1,1)$ is a smooth surface. Hence the triple $(S,G,\phi)$ is not minimal. Therefore $n\ne 1$.
Introduce the coordinates $(x:t_0:t_1)$ on $\mathbb{P}(n,1,1)$. It’s well known (see [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Theorem 4.10]) that ${\operatorname{Aut}}(\mathbb{F}_n)\simeq \mathbb{C}^{n+1} \rtimes (GL(2,\mathbb{C}) \slash \mu_n)$. The group $\mathbb{C}^{n+1}$ is generated by maps $(x:t_0:t_1) \mapsto (x+f_n(t_0,t_1):t_0:t_1)$, where $f_n$ is a binary form with degree $n$. The group $GL(2,\mathbb{C}) \slash \mu_n$ is generated by invertible maps $(x:t_0:t_1) \mapsto (x:at_0+bt_1:ct_0+dt_1)$. Moreover, we have $$GL(2,\mathbb{C}) \slash \mu_n \simeq
\left \{
\begin{aligned}
& \mathbb{C}^* \rtimes SL(2,\mathbb{C}), &\text{if $n$ is odd};\\
& \mathbb{C}^* \rtimes PGL(2,\mathbb{C}), &\text{if $n$ is even}.
\end{aligned}
\right.$$ Consider the sequence of homomorphisms $G \xrightarrow{h_1} GL(2,\mathbb{C}) \slash \mu_n \xrightarrow{h_2} PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$, where $h_2$ is natural projection. Obviously that the homomorphism $h_1$ is injective, and ${\operatorname{Im}}(h_2) \simeq A_5$ (see [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Section 5.5]).
Thus the group $G$ is isomorphic to a central extension $\mathbb{Z}_m.A_5$, if $n$ is even, or $\mathbb{Z}_m.\bar{A}_5$, if $n$ is odd. Applying [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Lemma 4.4], we get .
There are no relatively $G$-minimal conic bundles $(S,G,\phi)$, if $K_S^2=7$. So there are no $G$-minimal conic bundles too. If $K_S^2=3$, $5$ or $6$, then there exists a $G$-equivariant morphism $(S,G)\rightarrow (S',G)$, where $(S',G) \in \mathbb{D}$ (see [@10 Proposition 2.1, Theorem 4.1] and, for example, [@Tsygankov-10 Section 2]). Thus study of this cases reduces to study of $G$-minimal del Pezzo surfaces. For other values $K_S^2=4,2,1,\ldots$ relatively $G$-minimal conic bundles are always $G$-minimal.
The morphism $\phi:S \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ induces a homomorphism $\phi_*: G \rightarrow {\operatorname{Aut}}(\mathbb{P}^1)$. We have the following exact sequence $$\label{1}
1\rightarrow G_K\rightarrow G\rightarrow G_B\rightarrow 1,$$ where $G_K \simeq {\operatorname{Ker}}(\phi_*)$, and $G_B \simeq {\operatorname{Im}}(\phi_*)$.
Also consider the natural representation of group $G$ in the automorphisms group of lattice ${\operatorname{Pic}}(S)$. By $G_0$ we denote the kernel of this representation. The group $G_0$ fixes the divisor classes of the sections with negative self-intersection. Such sections obviously exist. Hence $G_0$ fixes it pointwisely. Considering one of these sections as a point on a general fibre, we conclude that $G_0$ is a cyclic group.
\[th1.1.2\] Let $(S,G,\phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$ with $K_S^2\le 4$, $K_S^2\ne3$. Suppose that $G_0\neq \{1\}$. Then the surface $S$ has an exceptional conic bundle structure (see below).
\[defExceptcon\] Define the *exceptional conic bundles*. This is the minimal resolution of singularities of surface, given by the equation in weighted projective space $\mathbb{P}(1,1,g+1,g+1)$, where $g\geq 1$: $$Y_g:F_{2g+2}(t_0,t_1)+t_2t_3=0,$$ where $F_{2g+2}$ is a binary form without multiple factors with degree $2g+2$.
After the resolution of indeterminacy points, the projection onto $\mathbb{P}^1$ with coordinates $(t_0,t_1)$ will induce a conic bundle structure $\phi:\widetilde{Y_g}\rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$. This conic bundle has reducible fibres over the points from $\mathbb{P}^1$, where $F_{2g+2}(t_0,t_1)=0$. The surface $\widetilde{Y_g}$ contains $2$ nonintersecting rational $(-g-1)$-curves defined by the equations $t_2=0$ and $t_3=0$. Automorphisms of the surface $\widetilde{Y_g}$ are induced by automorphisms of $\mathbb{P}(1,1,g+1,g+1)$.
The case of exceptional conic bundles will be considered in Section \[Exceptional conic\].
There is a theorem about the structure of minimal finite groups, acting on the non-exceptional conic bundles.
\[th1.4\] Let $(S,G,\phi)\in \mathbb{CB}$ with $K_S^2\le 4$, $K_S^2\ne3$, and $\Sigma$ be the set of reducible fibres of $\phi$. Suppose that $G_0\simeq 1$. Then one of the following cases occurs.
1. Case $G_K\simeq \mathbb{Z}_2$. The central involution $\iota$, generating the group $G_K$, fixes pointwise a smooth bisection $C$ of the fibration $\phi$ and switches the components of fibres in a subset $\Sigma'\subset \Sigma$. The morphism $\phi$ defines the linear system $g_2^1$ on the curve $C$ having branch points in the singular points of the fibres in the set $\Sigma'$. Genus of the curve $C$ is equal to $g=(m-2)/2$, where $m=|\Sigma'|$. The group $G_B$ is isomorphic to a subgroup of the automorphism group of curve $C$ modulo the involution defined by $g_2^1$.
2. Case $G_K\simeq \mathbb{Z}_2^2$. Each nontrivial element $\iota_i,\ i=0,1,2$ of the group $G_K$ fixes pointwise an irreducible smooth bisection $C_i$. The set $\Sigma$ is partitioned into three subsets $\Sigma_0,\ \Sigma_1,\ \Sigma_2$, such that $\Sigma_i=(\Sigma_j \cup \Sigma_k)\setminus (\Sigma_j \cap \Sigma_k),\ i\neq j\neq k \ne i$. The morphisms $\phi|_{C_i},\ i=0,1,2$ are branched over the singular points of fibres in subsets $\Sigma_i$. The group $G_B$ leaves invariant the set of points $\phi(\Sigma) \in \mathbb{P}^1$ and its partition into three subsets $\phi(\Sigma_i),\ i=0,1,2$.
Consider cases of Theorem \[th1.4\] separately. We note that the subgroup $G_B \subset {\operatorname{Aut}}(\mathbb{P}^1)\simeq PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$ (see ) is nonsolvable, since $G_K$ is solvable by Theorem \[th1.4\]. Hence $G_B \simeq A_5$ (see Klein’s classification of the finite subgroups in $PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$ in [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Section 5.5]). We will use the fact in sections \[conbund1\], \[conbund2\], \[conbund3\] without mentioning.
1. Case $G_K \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2$, and $\Sigma'=\Sigma$. This case will be investigated in Section \[conbund1\].
2. Case $G_K \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2$, and $\Sigma' \ne \Sigma$. This case will be investigated in Section \[conbund2\].
3. Case $G_K \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2^2$. This case will be investigated in Section \[conbund3\].
We will often use the following facts about finite nonsolvable subgroups $\bar{P}\subset SL(2,\mathbb{C})$ (see [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Section 5.5]). Obviously that $\bar{P} \simeq \bar{A}_5$. Any group of this type is conjugated to a group with the following generators: $$\label{generat}
g_1 = \begin{pmatrix}\varepsilon_{10}&0\\
0&\varepsilon_{10}^{-1}\end{pmatrix}, \quad g_2 = \begin{pmatrix}0&i\\
i&0\end{pmatrix}, \quad g_3 = \frac{1}{\sqrt{5}}\begin{pmatrix}\varepsilon_5-\varepsilon_5^4&\varepsilon_5^2-\varepsilon_5^3\\
\varepsilon_5^2-\varepsilon_5^3&-\varepsilon_5+\varepsilon_5^4\end{pmatrix}.$$
\[stA5\] We will denote a group generated by as $St(\bar{A}_5)$. It’s image in $PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$ we will denote as $St(A_5)$.
Consider the natural representation of $St(\bar{A}_5)$ in space of polynomials $\mathbb{C}[t_0,t_1]$. Space of relative invariants of the representation is generated by the following Gründformens: $$\label{grundform}
\begin{aligned}
&\Phi_1 = T_0^{30}+T_1^{30}+522(T_0^{25}T_1^5-T_0^{5}T_1^{25})-10005(T_0^{20}T_1^{10}+T_0^{10}T_1^{20}),\\
&\Phi_2 = -(T_0^{20}+T_1^{20})+228(T_0^{15}T_1^5-T_0^{5}T_1^{15})-494T_0^{10}T_1^{10},\\
&\Phi_3 = T_0T_1(T_0^{10}+11T_0^5T_1^5-T_1^{10}).
\end{aligned}$$ Since $\bar{A}_5/(\pm 1) \cong A_5$ is a simple group and all Gründformens have even degree, we easily see that $g(\Phi_i)=\Phi_i$, $i=1,2,3$, for any $g\in St(\bar{A}_5)$. In other words, the characters are trivial.
\[mathcalI\] We will denote space of invariants of group $\bar{A}_5$ generated by this Gründformens as $\mathcal{I}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$.
Case of exceptional conic bundles {#Exceptional conic}
---------------------------------
In this section we will prove the following theorem.
\[thExcept\] Let $(S,G,\phi)\in \mathbb{CB}$ be an exceptional conic bundle, and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Then the surface $S$ can be represented as the minimal resolution of singularities of surface given by the equation in the weighted projective space $\mathbb{P}(1,1,g+1,g+1)$, $g\geq 1$ with coordinates $(t_0:t_1:t_2:t_3)$: $$Y_g:F_{2g+2}(t_0,t_1)+t_2t_3=0,$$ where $F_{2g+2}\in \mathcal{I}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$ is a binary form without multiple factors with degree $2g+2$. The morphism $\phi: S\rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ is induced by the map $\phi': Y_g \dashrightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ given by $$\phi':\ (t_0:t_1:t_2:t_3)\mapsto (t_0:t_1).$$ The group $G$ is isomorphic to $$G\simeq \left \{
\begin{aligned}
& D_n \times \bar{A}_5,\ n\ge 1, \ \text{if $g$ is even};\\
& D_n \times A_5,\ n\ge 1, \ \text{if $g$ is odd}.
\end{aligned}
\right.$$ All possibilities for $G$ occur. The group $G$ is generated by the maps: $$\label{3.6}
\begin{aligned}
& (t_0:t_1:t_2:t_3) \mapsto (\varepsilon_{10}t_0:\varepsilon_{10}^{-1}t_1:t_2:t_3),\\
& (t_0:t_1:t_2:t_3) \mapsto (i t_1:i t_0:t_2:t_3),\\
& (t_0:t_1:t_2:t_3) \mapsto ((\varepsilon_{5}-\varepsilon_{5}^4)t_0+(\varepsilon_{5}^2-\varepsilon_{5}^3)t_1:
(\varepsilon_{5}^2-\varepsilon_{5}^3)t_0+(-\varepsilon_{5}+\varepsilon_{5}^4)t_1:t_2:t_3),\\
& (t_0:t_1:t_2:t_3) \mapsto (t_0:t_1:\varepsilon_m t_2: \varepsilon_m^{-1} t_3),\\
& (t_0:t_1:t_2:t_3) \mapsto (t_0:t_1:t_3:t_2),
\end{aligned}$$ where $m=n$, if $g$ is odd, and $m=2n$, otherwise.
By [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Proposition 5.3] we have ${\operatorname{Aut}}{Y_g}\simeq N.P$, where $N \simeq \mathbb{C}^* \rtimes \mathbb{Z}_2 $ is a group generated by the maps: $$\label{3.7}
\begin{aligned}
& (t_0:t_1:t_2:t_3)\mapsto (t_0:t_1:t_3:t_2),\\
& (t_0:t_1:t_2:t_3)\mapsto (t_0:t_1:ct_2: c^{-1}t_3),\ c\in \mathbb{C},\ c\ne 0.
\end{aligned}$$ And $P$ is the subgroup of $PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$, leaving the form $F_{2g+2}(t_0,t_1)$ semi-invariant. Obviously that $P\simeq A_5$. We conjugate the subgroup $P \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$ to the subgroup $St(A_5)$. Then $F_{2g+2} \in \mathcal{I}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$. Whence we get that the group ${\operatorname{Aut}}(Y_g)$ is generated by maps and . Hence $${\operatorname{Aut}}(Y_g)\simeq \left \{
\begin{aligned}
(N\slash \mu_2) \times \bar{A}_5, \text{if $g$ is even};\\
N \times A_5, \text{if $g$ is odd},
\end{aligned}
\right.$$ where the group $\mu_2$ acts by $(t_0:t_1:t_2:t_3)\mapsto (t_0:t_1:-t_2:-t_3)$. It follows from the description of exceptional conic bundles (see [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Section 5.2]) that the triple $(S,G,\phi)$ is minimal, iff the group $G$ permutes points: $(0:0:1:0)$ and $(0:0:0:1)$. Therefore $G\cap N \simeq D_n$. Further arguments are obvious.
Case, when $G_0\simeq 1$, $G_K \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2$, and $\Sigma'=\Sigma$. {#conbund1}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we will apply arguments of [@Tsygankov-10 Section 3.1].
The group $G_K$ is generated by involution $\iota$. By [@Tsygankov-10 Theorem 3.2] we get $S/ \iota \simeq \mathbb{F}_e$. The morphism $\pi: S \rightarrow S/ \iota \simeq \mathbb{F}_e$ is $G$-equivariant, and a faithful action of the group $G_B$ is defined on $\mathbb{F}_e$(see exact sequence ). Recall (see Theorem \[th1.4\]) that the morphism $\pi: S \rightarrow \mathbb{F}_e$ is branched over a nonsingular hyperelliptic curve $C$. Let $\bar{C}=\pi(C)$. We consider cases $e=0$ and $e>0$ in Theorems \[th1\] and \[th2\] respectively.
We make some preparations before statement of Theorem \[th1\]. Introduce the coordinates $(x_0:x_1,t_0:t_1)$ on $\mathbb{F}_0\simeq \mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1$. The morphism $\phi: S \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ induces projection $(x_0:x_1,t_0:t_1) \mapsto (t_0:t_1)$. The curve $\bar{C}$ is represented by the equation: $$\label{eqC}
{\operatorname{Equat}}(\bar{C})= p_0(t_0,t_1)x_0^2+2p_1(t_0,t_1)x_0x_1+p_2(t_0,t_1)x_1^2=0,$$ where $p_i, \ i=0,1,2$ are binary forms with degree $2d$. Note that the degree is even, so as the divisor class $\bar{C}\in 2 {\operatorname{Pic}}(\mathbb{F}_0)$ (where $2 {\operatorname{Pic}}(\mathbb{F}_0) \subset {\operatorname{Pic}}(\mathbb{F}_0) \simeq \mathbb{Z}^2$ is the even sublattice). The form ${\operatorname{Disc}}(\bar{C})=p_0p_2-p_1^2$ has no multiple factors, since $\bar{C}$ is nonsingular. We will apply the Segre embedding $\nu: \mathbb{P}^1\times \mathbb{P}^1 \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^3$ to represent the surface $S$ by equations. Introduce the coordinates $(x:y:z:w)$ on $\mathbb{P}^3$. This embedding is given by $\nu: (x_0:x_1, t_0:t_1)\mapsto (x_0t_0:x_0t_1:x_1t_0:x_1t_1)$. We choose some polynomials $F_i(x,y,z,w)$, $i=0,\ldots,2d-2$, such that $x_0^i x_1^{2d-2-i}{\operatorname{Equat}}(\bar{C})=\nu^*(F_i)$. The surface $S$ is represented by the equations in $\mathbb{P}(d^{d},1^4)$ with the coordinates $u_i,\ x,\ y,\ z,\ w,\ i=0,\ldots,d-1$: $$\label{sur1}
\begin{aligned}
& u_i u_j=F_{i+j},\ 0 \le i \le j \le d-1,\\
& x^{j-i}u_i=u_j z^{j-i},\ y^{j-i}u_i=u_j w^{j-i},\ 0 \le i< j \le d-1,\\
& xw=yz.
\end{aligned}$$
\[th1\] Let $(S,G,\phi)\in \mathbb{CB}$ , and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Suppose that $G_0\simeq 1$, $G_K \simeq \langle \iota \rangle \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2$, $\Sigma'=\Sigma$, and $S/\iota \simeq \mathbb{F}_0$. Then the surface $S$ is represented by equations . The morphism $\phi: S \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ is given by $$\phi:\ (u_0:\ldots:u_{d-1}:x:y:z:w) \mapsto \left \{
\begin{aligned}
&(x:y), \text{if}\ (x:y)\ne (0:0);\\
&(z:w), \text{if}\ (z:w)\ne (0:0).
\end{aligned}
\right.$$
There is defined a faithful action of $G_B$ (see exact sequence ) on $\mathbb{F}_0$, and $G_B \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C})\times PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$. One of the following cases occurs.
1. The subgroup $G_B \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2, \mathbb{C})$ is conjugated to the subgroup $1\times St(A_5)$, and $G \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2 \times A_5$.
2. The subgroup $G_B \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2, \mathbb{C})$ is conjugated to the diagonal embedding $St(A_5)\hookrightarrow PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2, \mathbb{C})$, and $$G \simeq \left \{
\begin{aligned}
&\bar{A}_5, \text{if $d$ is even in \eqref{eqC}},\\
& \mathbb{Z}_2 \times A_5, \text{otherwise}.
\end{aligned}
\right.$$
All cases exist. And all possibilities for $G$ occur.
In all cases $G$ acts on $S$ by the following way. Embedding $G_B \simeq St(A_5)$ to $PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2, \mathbb{C})$ defines a unique embedding $St(\bar{A}_5) \hookrightarrow SL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times SL(2, \mathbb{C})$. This defines an action of $St(\bar{A}_5)$ on the surface $S$ given by equation . The action of $St(\bar{A}_5)$ on coordinates $u_i,\ i=0,\ldots,d-1$ coincides with the action on monomials $x_0^i x_1^{d-1-i},\ i=0, \ldots, d-1$, respectively. An action of $G$ is generated by the action of $St(\bar{A}_5)$ and by the map $$(u_0:\ldots:u_{d-1}:x:y:z:w) \rightarrow (-u_0:\ldots:-u_{d-1}:x:y:z:w).$$
Recall that $G_B \simeq A_5$. The subgroup $G_B \subset {\operatorname{Aut}}(\mathbb{F}_0)$ acts trivially on ${\operatorname{Pic}}(\mathbb{F}_0)$. Hence $G_B \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$. We apply Goursat’s Lemma (see [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Lemma 4.1]) to study the subgroups $A_5 \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$. Consider projections $\pi_i: PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \rightarrow PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$, $i=1,2$ on the first and the second factor respectively. We get $G_B \simeq \pi_1(G_B) \triangle_D \pi_2(G_B)$, where $D \simeq {\operatorname{Im}}(\pi_1|G_B)/{\operatorname{Ker}}(\pi_2|G_B)$. The group $A_5$ is simple. Therefore $D \simeq 1$ or $A_5$. These cases corresponds respectively to cases $1$ and $2$ of the theorem.
It’s need to check existence of the nonsingular curve $\bar{C} \subset \mathbb{F}_0$ for each of these cases. In the first case this curve obviously exists. Because we can choose binary forms $p_i \in \mathcal{I}^{St(\bar{A}_5)},\ i=0,1,2$ in without multiple and common factors (see the generators of $\mathcal{I}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$ in ). It remains to verify existence of the nonsingular curve $\bar{C}$ in the second case. Also we need to show that the parameter $d$ in can be odd and even. This follows from the next lemma.
\[lem1\] There exist nonsingular curves $\bar{C} \in \mathbb{F}_0$ with odd and even parameter $d$ given by equation and invariant under the diagonal action of group $St(A_5)$ on $\mathbb{F}_0 \simeq \mathbb{P}^1\times \mathbb{P}^1$.
Consider the linear space of polynomials $\mathbb{C}[x,y]$. The space has the natural structure of $SL(2,\mathbb{C})$-module. Denote by $R_n \subset \mathbb{C}[x,y]$ the subspace of polynomials with degree $n$. We have ${\operatorname{Equat}}(\bar{C})\in R_2 \otimes R_{2d}$. It’s known (see [@Fulton Exercise 11.11]) that $ R_2 \otimes R_{2d} \simeq R_{2d+2} \oplus R_{2d} \oplus R_{2d-2}$ as $SL(2,\mathbb{C})$-module.
Consider a linear system $\mathcal{J}$ of $St(\bar{A}_5)$-invariant curves with bidegree $(2,2d)$ in $\mathbb{F}_0$. Obviously, we have $\mathcal{J} \simeq (R_2 \otimes R_{2d})^{St(\bar{A}_5)} \simeq R_{2d+2}^{St(\bar{A}_5)} \oplus R_{2d}^{St(\bar{A}_5)} \oplus R_{2d-2}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$.
First, we prove existence of a nonsingular curve $\bar{C}$ with odd parameter $d$. We take $d=30k +15, k \in \mathbb{N}, \ k\ge 2$. It’s easy to check (see ) that each set $R_{2d+2}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}, R_{2d}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$ and $R_{2d-2}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$ is not empty. To apply Bertini theorem, we need to study the base points of system $\mathcal{J}$.
We have $(x_0t_1-x_1t_0)^2 R_{2d-2}(t_0,t_1)^{St(\bar{A}_5)} \in \mathcal{J}$. It’s easy to check that $R_{2d-2}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}=\Phi_3^4 R_{60k-20}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$, and $\Phi_2^2 R_{60(k-1)}^{St(\bar{A}_5)} \subset R_{60k-20}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$ (see ). The space $R_{60(k-1)}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$ has not a common factor, since $k \ge 2$. Hence the base points of $\mathcal{J}$ lie in the union of sets: $x_0t_1-x_1t_0=0$, $\Phi_2(t_0,t_1)=0$ and $\Phi_3(t_0,t_1)=0$.
Consider the projection $\xi: R_2 \otimes R_{2d} \simeq R_{2d+2} \oplus R_{2d} \oplus R_{2d-2} \rightarrow R_{2d+2}$. It is given by the polynomial $p_0t_0^2+2p_1t_0t_1+p_2t_1^2$. This polynomial defines intersection of the curve $\bar{C}$ and of diagonal $x_0t_1-x_1t_0=0$. We have $\Phi_2 \Phi_3 R_{60k}^{St(\bar{A}_5)} \subset R_{2d+2}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$. The space $R_{60k}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$ has not a common factor, since $k \ge 2$. Hence we can take a polynomial ${\operatorname{Equat}}(\bar{C}) \in R_2 \otimes R_{2d}$, such that $\xi({\operatorname{Equat}}(\bar{C})) = \Phi_2 \Phi_3 h(t_0,t_1)$, where the forms $\Phi_2$, $\Phi_3$, $h(t_0,t_1)$ have not pairwise common factors. Therefore the base points of $\mathcal{J}$ lie in the union of sets: $\Phi_2(t_0,t_1)=0$ and $\Phi_3(t_0,t_1)=0$. However by choose of ${\operatorname{Equat}}(\bar{C})$ we get that the curve $\bar{C}$ is nonsingular at these sets.
It remains to prove existence of a nonsingular curve $\bar{C}$ with even parameter $d$. We take $d=30k, k \in \mathbb{N}, \ k\ge 3$. It is easy to check (see ) that each set $R_{2d+2}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}, R_{2d}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$ and $R_{2d-2}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$ is not empty. To apply Bertini theorem, we need to study the base points of system $\mathcal{J}$.
We have $\Phi_1 \mathcal{J}'\subset \mathcal{J}$, where $\mathcal{J}'$ is a linear system of $St(\bar{A}_5)$-invariant curves with bidegree $(2,2d-30)$ in $\mathbb{F}_0$. By previous arguments, we know that the base points of $\mathcal{J}'$ lie in the union of sets: $\Phi_2(t_0,t_1)=0$ and $\Phi_3(t_0,t_1)=0$. Hence the base points of $\mathcal{J}$ lie in the union of sets: $\Phi_1(t_0,t_1)=0$, $\Phi_2(t_0,t_1)=0$ and $\Phi_3(t_0,t_1)=0$.
Again consider projection $\xi$. We have $\Phi_1 \Phi_2 \Phi_3 R_{60(k-1)}^{St(\bar{A}_5)} \subset R_{2d+2}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$. The space $R_{60(k-1)}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$ has not a common factor, since $k \ge 3$. Hence we can take a polynomial ${\operatorname{Equat}}(\bar{C}) \in R_2 \otimes R_{2d}$, such that $\xi({\operatorname{Equat}}(\bar{C})) = \Phi_1 \Phi_2 \Phi_3 h(t_0,t_1)$, where the forms $\Phi_1$, $\Phi_2$, $\Phi_3$, $h(t_0,t_1)$ have not pairwise common factors. Again the conditions of Bertini theorem are satisfied.
It remains to describe the action of group $G$. The embedding of the group $G_B \simeq St(A_5)$ to $PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2, \mathbb{C})$ defines a unique embedding $St(\bar{A}_5) \hookrightarrow SL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times SL(2, \mathbb{C})$. We note that ${\operatorname{Equat}}(\bar{C})$ is invariant under the action of $St(\bar{A}_5)$. Hence there is defined an action of $St(\bar{A}_5)$ on the surface $S$ given by equation . The action of $St(\bar{A}_5)$ on coordinates $u_i,\ i=0,\ldots,d-1$ coincides with the action on monomials $x_0^i x_1^{d-1-i},\ i=0, \ldots, d-1$, respectively. The remaining arguments are obvious.
The case $e > 0$ will be considered in the next theorem.
\[th2\] Let $(S,G,\phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$ , and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Suppose that $G_0\simeq 1$, $G_K \simeq \langle \iota \rangle \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2$, $\Sigma'=\Sigma$, and $S/\iota \simeq \mathbb{F}_n,\ n>0$. Then there is a $G$-invariant curve $E$, which is the preimage of exceptional section $\mathbb{F}_e$. Consider the contraction of this curve $(S,G,\phi) \rightarrow (S',G,\phi')$, where a map $\phi': S' \dashrightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ is defined by $\phi$.The surface $S'$ is given by the following equation in $\mathbb{P}(d+e,e,1,1)$ with the coordinates $(u:x:t_0:t_1)$: $$\label{surf1}
u^2+p_0(t_0,t_1)x^2+2p_1(t_0,t_1)x+p_2(t_0,t_1)=0,$$ where $p_i, \ i=0,1,2$ are binary forms with degree $2d$, $2d+e$, $2d+2e$, respectively. The binary form $p_0p_2-p_1^2$ has no multiple factors. The map $\phi'$ is given by $$\phi':\ (u:x:t_0:t_1)\mapsto (t_0:t_1).$$ Moreover, $e$ is even. The group $G$ is generated by the maps: $$\begin{aligned}
&u \mapsto -u,\\
& (u:x:t_0:t_1) \mapsto (u:x+F_e(t_0,t_1):at_0+bt_1:ct_0+d't_1),
\end{aligned}$$ where $$\label{matr1}
\begin{pmatrix}
a & b\\
c & d'
\end{pmatrix}
\in St(\bar{A}_5),$$ and $F_e(t_0,t_1)$ is a some binary form with degree $e$, unique for each matrix . The group $G$ is isomorphic to $$\label{opG}
G \simeq \left \{
\begin{aligned}
&\bar{A}_5, \text{if $d$ is odd},\\
& \mathbb{Z}_2 \times A_5, \text{if $d$ is even}.
\end{aligned}
\right.$$ All possibilities for $G$ occur.
We will use the following construction to represent the surface $S$ by equations. Consider the morphism $\mathbb{F}_e \rightarrow \mathbb{P}(e,1,1)$, which is the blowing down of exceptional section $\mathbb{F}_e$. Introduce the coordinates $(x:t_0:t_1)$ on $\mathbb{P}(e,1,1)$. The morphism $\phi$ induces projection $(x:t_0:t_1)\mapsto (t_0:t_1)$. The curve $\bar{C}$ will be represented by the following equation in $\mathbb{P}(e,1,1)$: $$p_0(t_0,t_1)x^2+2p_1(t_0,t_1)x+p_2(t_0,t_1)=0.$$ The form ${\operatorname{Disc}}(\bar{C})=p_0p_2-p_1^2$ has no multiple factors, since $\bar{C}$ is nonsingular. We construct a double cover of $\mathbb{P}(e,1,1)$, branched along $\bar{C}$. We get the surface $S'$ given by the equations .
Note that ${\operatorname{deg}}(p_0)$ is even, since $\bar{C} \in 2 {\operatorname{Pic}}(\mathbb{F}_e)$. Denote the degree as $2d$. The automorphism group of $\mathbb{P}(e,1,1)$ consists of the maps $$(x:t_0:t_1) \mapsto (a'x+P_e(t_0,t_1):b't_0+c't_1:d't_0+v't_1).$$ where $P_e$ is a binary form with degree $e$. We can choose coefficients $b',\ c',\ d',\ v'$, so that $$\begin{pmatrix}
b' & c'\\
d' & v'
\end{pmatrix}
\in SL(2,\mathbb{C}).$$ We have $G_B\simeq A_5 \not \subset \bar{A}_5$ (see ). Therefore $e$ is even. We conjugate $G_B$ to a group consisting of the following maps $$(x:t_0:t_1) \mapsto (v x+F_e(t_0,t_1): at_0+bt_1:ct_0+d't_1),$$ where the coefficients $a$, $b$, $c$, $d'$ and the binary form $F_e$ satisfy conditions of the theorem. But $v=1$, since $A_5$ is a simple group, and all it’s characters $A_5 \rightarrow \mathbb{C}^*$ are trivial. Obviously, we get .
Finally, we need to prove that all possibilities for $G$ in occur. It’s sufficient to construct nonsingular curves $\bar{C}$ invariant under an action of $G_B$ with odd and even parameter $d$. We assume that $G_B$ is a group consisting of maps $$(x:t_0:t_1) \mapsto (x: at_0+bt_1:ct_0+d't_1),$$ with condition . Let $d$ is even. Then the curve $\bar{C}$ is represented by the following equation in $\mathbb{P}(4,1,1)$: $$\Phi_3(t_0,t_1) x^2+ \Phi_2(t_0,t_1) =0,$$ where $\Phi_i$, $i=2$, $3$ are binary forms in .
Let’s construct the curve $\bar{C}$ with odd $d$. Consider the equation of $\bar{C}$ in $\mathbb{P}(30,1,1)$: $$\Phi_1(t_0,t_1) x^2 +2 h(t_0,t_1)x + h'(t_0,t_1)=0,$$ where $\Phi_1$ is a binary form in , and $h$, $h'$ are some binary forms in $\mathcal{I}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$. It’s easy to check by counting of parameters that $h$ and $h'$ can be chosen, such that ${\operatorname{Disc}}(\bar{C})=\Phi_1 h'- h^2$ has no multiple factors. Then $\bar{C}$ is nonsingular.
Case, when $G_0\simeq 1$, $G_K \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2$, and $\Sigma' \ne \Sigma$. {#conbund2}
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we will apply arguments of [@Tsygankov-10 Section 3.2]. Let $r= |\Sigma|$, and $m=|\Sigma'|$.
Let $g_1: \widetilde{S} \rightarrow S$ be blowing up of the singular points of reducible fibres $\Sigma \setminus \Sigma'$, and $g_2: \widetilde{S} \rightarrow S'$ be the contraction of proper transform of $\Sigma \setminus \Sigma'$. The surface $S'$ has $2(r-m)$ singular points of type $A_1$. Obviously that maps $g_1$ and $g_2$ are $G$-equivariant. We have the $G$-equivariant commutative diagram. $$\label{diagramma}
\xymatrix{
& \widetilde{S} \ar@{->}[dl]_{g_1} \ar@{->}[dd]_{\widetilde{h}} \ar@{->}[dr]^{g_2}\\
S \ar@{->}[dd]_h && S' \ar@{->}[dd]_{h'}\\
& \widetilde{S}/\iota \ar@{->}[dl]_{g_1'} \ar@{->}[dr]^{g_2'}\\
S/ \iota && S'/ \iota \\
}$$
In the diagram the vertical arrows correspond to the quotient map by the involution $ \iota $, and maps $ g_1'$ and $ g_2' $ are induced by maps $ g_1 $ and $ g_2 $. The triple $(S,G,\phi)$ defines a triple $(S',G,\phi')$, where the morphism $\phi': S' \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ is induced by the morphism $\phi$.
By [@Tsygankov-10 Lemma 3.4] we get that surfaces $\widetilde{S}/\iota$ and $S'/ \iota$ are nonsingular. Moreover, $S'/\iota \simeq \mathbb{F}_e$.
The morphism $h': S' \rightarrow \mathbb{F}_e$ is a double cover branched over the union of curves $C' \cup g_{2*}(g_1^*(\Sigma \setminus \Sigma'))$, where the curve $C'$ is the proper transform of curve $C$. The image of the curve $g_{2*}(g_1^*(\Sigma \setminus \Sigma'))$ on the ruled surface $\mathbb{F}_e$ is the union of $r-m$ fibres. Denote these fibres as $S_i,\ i=1,\ldots , r-m$. Also let $\hat{C}=h'(C')$.
For each fiber $S_i,\ i=1,\ldots , r-m$ denote by $x_{i1}$ and $x_{i2}$ two distinct points of the intersection $S_i \cap \hat{C}$. Obviously, there is defined a faithful action of $G_B$ (see exact sequence ) on $\mathbb{F}_e$. By [@Tsygankov-10 Lemma 3.5] the triple $(S,G,\phi)$ is minimal, iff points $x_{i1}$ and $x_{i2}$ lie in the same orbit under the action of $G_B$ for each $i=1,\ldots , r-m$.
We consider cases $e=0$ and $e>0$ in Theorems \[th3\] and \[th4\] respectively.
We make some preparations before statement of Theorem \[th3\]. Introduce the coordinates $(x_0:x_1,t_0:t_1)$ on $\mathbb{F}_0\simeq \mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1$. The morphism $\phi': S' \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ induces projection $\sigma: (x_0:x_1,t_0:t_1) \mapsto (t_0:t_1)$. The fibres $S_i \subset \mathbb{F}_0$, $i=1,\ldots , r-m$ are represented by the equations: $$S_i: a_i t_0 + b_i t_1=0.$$ Consider the form $Q_{r-m}= \prod_{i=1}^{r-m} (a_i t_0 + b_i t_1) $. We conjugate the subgroup $G_B \simeq A_5 \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$ to the group $St(A_5)$. Let ${\operatorname{Stab}}_{St(A_5)}(\sigma(S_i))$, $i=1,\ldots,r-m$ be a stabilizer of point $\sigma(S_i) \subset \mathbb{P}^1$ in the group $St(A_5)$. Considering equations , we get that $\left| {\operatorname{Stab}}_{St(A_5)}(\sigma(S_i)) \right.|$ is either $1$, or $2$, or $3$, or $5$. Applying [@Tsygankov-10 Lemma 3.5], we get ${\operatorname{Stab}}_{St(A_5)}(\sigma(S_i))\simeq \mathbb{Z}_2$, $i=1, \ldots, r-m$. Hence $r-m=30$, and $Q_{r-m}=\Phi_1$. The curve $\hat{C}$ is represented by the equation: $$\label{eqC1}
{\operatorname{Equat}}(\hat{C})= p_0(t_0,t_1)x_0^2+2p_1(t_0,t_1)x_0x_1+p_2(t_0,t_1)x_1^2=0,$$ where $p_i, \ i=0,1,2$ are binary forms with degree $2d$. Note that the degree is even, so as the divisor class $\hat{C}+ \sum_i S_i \in 2 {\operatorname{Pic}}{F}_0$ (see [@Tsygankov-10 Lemma 3.6]), and $r-m=30$ is even. The form ${\operatorname{Disc}}(\hat{C})=p_0p_2-p_1^2$ has no multiple factors, since $\hat{C}$ is nonsingular. We will apply the Segre embedding $\nu: \mathbb{P}^1\times \mathbb{P}^1 \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^3$ to represent the surface $S$ by equations. Introduce the coordinates $(x:y:z:w)$ on $\mathbb{P}^3$. This embedding is given by $\nu: (x_0:x_1, t_0:t_1)\mapsto (x_0t_0:x_0t_1:x_1t_0:x_1t_1)$. We choose some polynomials $F_i(x,y,z,w)$, $i=0,\ldots,2d+28$, such that $x_0^i x_1^{2d+28-i} \Phi_1 {\operatorname{Equat}}(\hat{C})=\nu^*(F_i)$. The surface $S$ is represented by the equations in $\mathbb{P}(d^{d+15},1^4)$ with the coordinates $u_i,\ x,\ y,\ z,\ w,\ i=0,\ldots,d+14$: $$\label{sur3}
\begin{aligned}
u_i u_j=F_{i+j},\ 0 \le i \le j \le d+14,\\
x^{j-i}u_i=u_j z^{j-i},\ y^{j-i}u_i=u_j w^{j-i},\ 0 \le i< j \le d+14,\\
xw=yz.
\end{aligned}$$
\[th3\] Let $(S,G,\phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$ , and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Suppose that $G_0\simeq 1$, $G_K \simeq \langle \iota \rangle \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2$, $\Sigma' \ne \Sigma$ and $S'/\iota \simeq \mathbb{F}_0$. Then there is defined a faithful action of $G_B$ (see ) on $\mathbb{F}_0$, and $G_B \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C})\times PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$. There is a $G$-invariant birational map $(S,G, \phi) \dashrightarrow (S', G,\phi')$ described in the diagram . The surface $S'$ can be represented by equations . The parameter $d$ in is odd. The morphism $\phi': S' \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ is given by $$\phi':\ (u_0:\ldots:u_{d+14}:x:y:z:w) \mapsto \left \{
\begin{aligned}
&(x:y), \text{if}\ (x:y)\ne (0:0);\\
&(z:w), \text{if}\ (z:w)\ne (0:0).
\end{aligned}
\right.$$
We have $$\label{cond1}
\Phi_1(t_0,t_1) \not | (p_0(t_0,t_1)t_0^2 + 2p_1(t_0,t_1)t_0t_1 + p_2(t_0,t_1)t_1^2),$$ where $p_i,\ i=0,1,2$ are binary forms in , and $\Phi_1$ is the binary form from .
The group $G_B \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2, \mathbb{C})$ is the image of diagonal embedding $St(A_5)\hookrightarrow PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2, \mathbb{C})$. The group $G$ is isomorphic to $\bar{A}_5$. This possibility for $G$ occur.
The group $G$ acts on $S'$ by the following way. Embedding of $G_B \simeq St(A_5)$ to $PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2, \mathbb{C})$ defines a unique embedding $St(\bar{A}_5) \hookrightarrow SL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times SL(2, \mathbb{C})$. This defines an action of $St(\bar{A}_5)$ on the surface $S'$ given by the equation . The action of $St(\bar{A}_5)$ on coordinates $u_i,\ i=0,\ldots,d+14$ coincides with the action on monomials $x_0^i x_1^{d+14-i},\ i=0, \ldots, d+14$. An action of $G$ is generated by the action of $St(\bar{A}_5)$ and by the map $$(u_0:\ldots:u_{d+14}:x:y:z:w) \rightarrow (-u_0:\ldots:-u_{d+14}:x:y:z:w).$$
The subgroup $G_B \subset {\operatorname{Aut}}(\mathbb{F}_0)$ acts trivially on ${\operatorname{Pic}}(\mathbb{F}_0)$. Hence $G_B \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$. Consider projections $\pi_i: PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \times PGL(2,\mathbb{C}) \rightarrow PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$, $i=1,2$ on the first and the second factor respectively. By Goursat’s Lemma (see [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Lemma 4.1]) we get that $G_B \simeq \pi_1(G_B) \triangle_D \pi_2(G_B)$, where $D \simeq {\operatorname{Im}}(\pi_1|G_B)/{\operatorname{Ker}}(\pi_2|G_B)$. We have $D \simeq 1$ or $A_5$.
By [@Tsygankov-10 Lemma 3.5] we need to find conditions, when points $x_{i1}$ and $x_{i_2}$ for each $i=1,\ldots,30$ lie in the same orbit under an action of $G_B$. Obviously, $D\simeq A_5$. We conjugate $G_B \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C})\times PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$ to the image of diagonal embedding $St(A_5) \hookrightarrow PGL(2,\mathbb{C})\times PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$. It’s easy to check that none of points $x_{i1}$ and $x_{i_2}$ for each $i=1,\ldots,30$ lies on the diagonal $x_0t_1-x_1t_0=0$. This is a sufficient condition, and it’s equivalent to .
Therefore we need to prove existence of curves $\hat{C} \subset \mathbb{F}_0$ with odd parameter $d$, such that condition holds. Also we will prove that $d$ cannot be even. We will use notations and arguments of Lemma \[lem1\]. Consider a linear system $\mathcal{J}$ of $St(\bar{A}_5)$-invariant curves with bidegree $(2,2d)$ in $\mathbb{F}_0$. Consider the projection $\xi: R_2 \otimes R_{2d} \rightarrow R_{2d+2}$. It’s is given by the polynomial $p_0t_0^2+2p_1t_0t_1+p_2t_1^2$.
Suppose that $d$ is even. It’s easy to check that any polynomial $f(t_0,t_1)\in R_{2d+2}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$ is divided by $\Phi_1$. Therefore it’s impossible.
Let $d$ is odd. In Lemma \[lem1\] we proved that a general member of $\mathcal{J}$ is nonsingular, if $d=30k + 15, k \in \mathbb{N}, \ k\ge 2$. But it’s obvious that there exist polynomial $f(t_0,t_1)\in R_{2d+2}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$ with degree $2d+2=60k+32$, $k\ge 2$, which is not divided by $\Phi_1$.
The remaining arguments follow from the construction of equations and are obvious.
In the next theorem we consider case $e>0$.
\[th4\] Let $(S,G,\phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$, and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Suppose that $G_0\simeq 1$, $G_K \simeq \langle \iota \rangle \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2$, $\Sigma' \ne \Sigma$, and $S'/\iota \simeq \mathbb{F}_e$, $e>0$. Then there is a $G$-invariant birational map $(S,G, \phi) \dashrightarrow (S', G,\phi')$ described in diagram . The surface $S'$ contains a $G$-invariant curve $E$, which is the preimage of exceptional section $\mathbb{F}_e$. Consider the contraction of this curve $(S',G,\phi') \rightarrow (S'',G,\phi'')$, where a map $\phi'': S'' \dashrightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ is defined by $\phi'$.The surface $S''$ is given by the following equation in $\mathbb{P}(d+e+15,e,1,1)$ with the coordinates $(u:x:t_0:t_1)$: $$\label{surf2}
u^2+\Phi_1(t_0,t_1) (p_0(t_0,t_1)x^2+2p_1(t_0,t_1)x+p_2(t_0,t_1))=0,$$ where $p_i, \ i=0,1,2$ are binary forms with degree $2d$, $2d+e$, $2d+2e$, respectively, and $\Phi_1$ is the binary form from . Also $\Phi_1 \not | (p_0 p_2-p_1^2)$.
The map $\phi''$ is given by $$\phi'':\ (u:x:t_0:t_1) \mapsto (t_0:t_1).$$
Moreover, $e \equiv 2$ $(mod$ $4)$. The group $G$ is generated by the maps: $$\begin{aligned}
&u \mapsto -u,\\
& (u:x:t_0:t_1) \mapsto (u:x+F_e(t_0,t_1):at_0+bt_1:ct_0+d't_1),
\end{aligned}$$ where $$\label{matr2}
\begin{pmatrix}
a & b\\
c & d'
\end{pmatrix}
\in St(\bar{A}_5),$$ and $F_e(t_0,t_1)$ is a some binary form with degree $e$, unique for each matrix . The group $G$ is isomorphic to $$\label{opG2}
G \simeq \left \{
\begin{aligned}
&\bar{A}_5, \text{if $d$ is even},\\
& \mathbb{Z}_2 \times A_5, \text{if $d$ is odd}.
\end{aligned}
\right.$$ All possibilities for $G$ occur.
We will use the following construction to represent the surface $S''$ by equations. Consider the morphism $\mathbb{F}_e \rightarrow \mathbb{P}(e,1,1)$, which is the blowing down of exceptional section $\mathbb{F}_e$. Introduce on $\mathbb{P}(e,1,1)$ the coordinates $(x:t_0:t_1)$. The map $\phi':S' \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ induces the projection $\sigma: (x:t_0:t_1) \mapsto (t_0:t_1)$. The fibres $S_i \subset \mathbb{F}_e$, $i=1,\ldots,r-m$ are represented by the equations: $$S_i: a_i t_0 + b_i t_1=0.$$ Consider the form $Q_{r-m}= \prod_{i=1}^{r-m} (a_i t_0 + b_i t_1) $. We conjugate the group $G_B \simeq A_5 \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$ to the group $St(A_5)$. Let ${\operatorname{Stab}}_{St(A_5)}(\sigma(S_i))$, $i=1,\ldots,r-m$ be a stabilizer of point $\sigma(S_i) \subset \mathbb{P}^1$ in the group $St(A_5)$. Considering equations , we get that $\left| {\operatorname{Stab}}_{St(A_5)}(\sigma(S_i)) \right.|$ is either $1$, or $2$, or $3$, or $5$. Applying [@Tsygankov-10 Lemma 3.5], we get ${\operatorname{Stab}}_{St(A_5)}(\sigma(S_i))\simeq \mathbb{Z}_2$, $i=1, \ldots, r-m$. Hence $r-m=30$, and $Q_{r-m}=\Phi_1$ (see ). The curve $\hat{C}$ is represented by the following equation in $\mathbb{P}(e,1,1)$ with the coordinates $(x:t_0:t_1)$: $$p_0(t_0,t_1)x^2+2p_1(t_0,t_1)x+p_2(t_0,t_1)=0.$$ Each fibre $S_i$, $i=1, \ldots,30$ intersects the curve $\hat{C}$ in two distinct points: $x_{i1}$ and $x_{i2}$. Hence $\Phi_1 \not | (p_0 p_2-p_1^2)$. We construct a double cover of $\mathbb{P}(e,1,1)$ branched along $\hat{C}$ and $\Phi_1(t_0,t_1)=0$. We get the surface $S''$ given by the equation .
Note that ${\operatorname{deg}}(p_0)$ is even, since $\hat{C} + \sum_i S_i\in 2 {\operatorname{Pic}}(\mathbb{F}_e)$ (see [@Tsygankov-10 Lemma 3.6]), and $r-m=30$ is even. Denote the degree as $2d$.
Then we apply the arguments as in Theorem \[th2\]. We prove that $e$ is even, and conjugate $G_B$ to a group consisting of the following maps $$(x:t_0:t_1) \mapsto (x+F_e(t_0,t_1): at_0+bt_1:ct_0+d't_1),$$ where the coefficients $a$, $b$, $c$, $d'$ and the binary form $F_e$ satisfy conditions of the Theorem.
By [@Tsygankov-10 Lemma 3.5] we need to find conditions, when the points $x_{i1}$ and $x_{i_2}$ for each $i=1,\ldots,30$ lie in the same orbit under an action of $G_B$. Obviously, it’s sufficient to check, that each element $g \in G_B$ with ${\operatorname{ord}}(g)=2$ doesn’t have fixed points on the curve $\hat{C}$. The element $g$ can be conjugated to the map: $$(x:t_0:t_1) \mapsto (x:it_0: -it_1).$$ It’s easy to see that $g$ doesn’t have fixed points on $\hat{C}$, iff $e \equiv 2$ $(mod$ $4)$. We easily get .
We need to prove existence of curves $\hat{C} \subset \mathbb{F}_e$ with odd and even parameters $d$, such that listed above conditions holds. We assume that $G_B$ is a group consisting of maps $$(x:t_0:t_1) \mapsto (x: at_0+bt_1:ct_0+d't_1),$$ with condition .
Let $d$ is even. We take $e=34$, and the curve $\hat{C}$ is represented by the following equation in $\mathbb{P}(34,1,1)$ with the coordinates $(x:t_0:t_1)$ $$\Phi_3(t_0,t_1)x^2+Q_{60}(t_0,t_1)\Phi_2(t_0,t_1)=0,$$ where $\Phi_2$ and $\Phi_3$ are binary forms from , and $Q_{60}\in \mathcal{I}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$ (see Notation \[mathcalI\]) is a some binary form with degree $60$ and without multiple factors.
Let $d$ is odd. We can employ here example constructed in proof of Theorem \[th2\].
Case, when $G_0\simeq 1$, $G_K \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2^2$. {#conbund3}
------------------------------------------------------
In this section we prove the next theorem.
\[th5\] Let $(S,G,\phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$, and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Suppose that $G_0\simeq 1$, $G_K \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2^2$. Then there exists an embedding $S \hookrightarrow \mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E})$, where $\mathcal{E}$ is a line bundle on $\mathbb{P}^1$. We have $\mathcal{E}= \mathcal{E}_0 \oplus \mathcal{E}_1 \oplus \mathcal{E}_2$, and isomorphisms $f_i: \mathcal{E}_i \rightarrow \mathcal{O}(a_i)$, $i=0,1,2$, $a_0=0$, $0\le a_1 \le a_2$. The surface $S$ can be represented by the equation in $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E}) \simeq \mathbb{P}(\mathcal{O}\oplus \mathcal{O}(a_1) \oplus \mathcal{O}(a_2))$: $$\label{eq3}
\sum_{i=0}^2 \sum_{j,k=0}^{a_i} p_i^{j,k}(t_0,t_1) \xi_i^j \xi_i^k=0,$$ where $p_i^{j,k}$ are binary forms with degree $d$, and $\xi_i^j=f_i^{-1}(t_0^j t_1^{a_i-j})$, $i=0,1,2$, $0\le j \le a_i$. The morphism $\phi: S \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$ is induced by the natural projection $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E}) \rightarrow \mathbb{P}^1$. The following conditions holds. $$\label{cond3}
\begin{aligned}
& H_0=p_0^{0,0}(t_0,t_1) \in \mathcal{I}^{St(\bar{A}_5)},\\
&H_1=\sum_{j,k=0}^{a_1} p_1^{j,k}(t_0,t_1) t_0^{j+k}t_1^{2a_1-j-k} \in \mathcal{I}^{St(\bar{A}_5)},\\
& H_2=\sum_{j,k=0}^{a_2} p_2^{j,k}(t_0,t_1) t_0^{j+k}t_1^{2a_2-j-k} \in \mathcal{I}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}.
\end{aligned}$$ Also the binary forms $H_0$, $H_1$ and $H_2$ do not have multiple and pairwise common factors.
The group $G_K$ acts by the following way (see Theorem \[th1.4\]). $$\begin{aligned}
\iota_0(\xi)=\mp \xi_0 \pm \xi_1 \pm \xi_2,\\
\iota_1(\xi)=\pm \xi_0 \mp \xi_1 \pm \xi_2,\\
\iota_2(\xi)=\pm \xi_0 \pm \xi_1 \mp \xi_2,\\
\end{aligned}$$ for any $\xi=\xi_0+\xi_1+\xi_2$, $\xi_i \in \mathcal{E}_i$, $i=0,1,2$.
The action of $G$ on the surface $S$ is generated by the action of $G_K$ and an action of $St(\bar{A}_5)$. The action of $St(\bar{A}_5)$ on sections $\xi_i^j=f_i^{-1}(t_0^j t_1^{a_i-j})$, $i=0,1,2$, $0\le j \le a_i$ is induced by the action on $\mathbb{C}[t_0,t_1]$. We have $$\label{G}
G \simeq \left \{
\begin{aligned}
& \mathbb{Z}_2 \times \bar{A}_5, \text{if either $a_1$, or $a_2$ is odd},\\
& \mathbb{Z}_2^2 \times A_5, \text{otherwise.}
\end{aligned}
\right.$$ All possibilities for $G$ occur.
Denote as $f$ the fibre’s divisor class of the conic bundle $(S,G,\phi)$. We have $-K_S \cdot f=2$. It’s well known that a line bundle $\mathcal{O}(-K_S)$ is locally free of rank $3$. Hence the line bundle $\mathcal{O}(-K_S)$ is relatively very ample and defines an embedding $S \hookrightarrow \mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E}')$, where $\mathcal{E}'=\phi_*(\mathcal{O}(-K_S))$. By Grothendieck theorem we have $\mathcal{E}'=\mathcal{O}(a_0')\oplus \mathcal{O}(a_1')\oplus \mathcal{O}(a_2')$. Obviously, we can take $a_0' \le a_1' \le a_2'$. Hence we can take the bundle $\mathcal{E}$ in the statement of theorem to be equal $\mathcal{E}=\mathcal{E}' \otimes \mathcal{O}(-a_0')$.
An action of $G$ on $\mathcal{O}(-K_S)$ defines an action on $\mathcal{E}$. In the next lemma we show that the action of $G_K$ on $\mathcal{E}$ is diagonalizable.
\[lem2\] We can choose a decomposition $\mathcal{E} = \mathcal{E}_0\oplus \mathcal{E}_1\oplus \mathcal{E}_2$, where $\mathcal{E}_i \simeq \mathcal{O}(a_i)$, $i=0,1,2$, such that $G_K$ acts by the following way. Denote three different nontrivial elements in $G_K \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2^2$ as $\iota_0$, $\iota_1$, $\iota_2$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
\label{generatK}
\iota_0(\xi)=\mp \xi_0 \pm \xi_1 \pm \xi_2,\\
\iota_1(\xi)=\pm \xi_0 \mp \xi_1 \pm \xi_2,\\
\iota_2(\xi)=\pm \xi_0 \pm \xi_1 \mp \xi_2,\\
\end{aligned}$$ for any $\xi=\xi_0+\xi_1+\xi_2$, $\xi_i \in \mathcal{E}_i$, $i=0,1,2$.
Recall that $a_0=0$, $0 \le a_1 \le a_2$. Also remind that $G_K$ acts trivially on the base of fibration $\phi$.
Suppose that $0 < a_1 < a_2$. Then each bundle $\mathcal{E}_i$, $i=0,1,2$ is invariant under the action of $G_K$. Hence the statement is obvious.
Suppose that $a_i=a_j$, $a_i\ne a_k$ for some $i\ne j \ne k \ne i$. Without loss of generality we can take $0=a_1 < a_2$. Then the action of $G_K$ on $\mathcal{E}_0 \oplus \mathcal{E}_1$ defines an embedding $G_K \hookrightarrow GL(2,\mathbb{C})$. But, obviously, any subgroup $\mathbb{Z}_2^2 \subset GL(2,\mathbb{C})$ is diagonalizable.
Suppose that $0=a_1=a_2$. Then the statement follows from the fact that any subgroup $\mathbb{Z}_2^2 \subset GL(3,\mathbb{C})$ is diagonalizable.
We apply Lemma \[lem2\]. Fix isomorphisms $f_i: \mathcal{E}_i \rightarrow \mathcal{O}(a_i)$, $i=0,1,2$. Let $\xi_i^j=f_i^{-1}(t_0^j t_1^{a_i-j})$, $i=0,1,2$, $0\le j \le a_i$ be generators of global section spaces of bundles $\mathcal{E}_i$. Then the surface $S$ is presented by the following equation in $\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{E})$ $$\sum_{0 \le i\le j \le 2} \sum_{k\le a_i, l\le a_j} p_{i,j}^{k,l}(t_0,t_1) \xi_i^k \xi_j^l =0,$$ where $p_{i,j}^{k,l}(t_0,t_1)$ are binary forms with degree $d$. But it easily follows from equations that $p_{i,j}^{k,l}=0$, if $i\ne j$. Hence the surface $S$ can be represented by equation .
Let’s find relations on the forms $p_i^j$, $0\le j \le a_i$, $i=0,1,2$. By Theorem \[th1.4\] each nontrivial element $\iota_i,\ i=0,1,2$ of the subgroup $G_K$ fixes pointwise an irreducible smooth bisection $C_i$. Hence, there is defined an action of $G$ on the set of these curves, since $G_K\triangleleft G$. This action defines a homomorphism $\sigma: G \rightarrow S_3$. But $G_B\simeq A_5$ is simple. Therefore $\sigma$ is trivial. The curves $C_i$, $i=0,1,2$ on the surface $S$ are cut out by the hypersurfaces: $$\xi_i^j=0,\ 0\le j \le a_i.$$ We conjugate $G_B \subset PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$ to $St(A_5)$. We employ now notations . From triviality of $\sigma$ we get: $H_0 H_1$, $H_0 H_2$, $H_1 H_2 \in \mathcal{I}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$. Hence $H_0^2$, $H_1^2$, $H_2^2 \in \mathcal{I}^{St(\bar{A}_5)}$. One knows that all characters of $St(\bar{A}_5)$ are trivial (see ). Therefore we get .
It’s easy to check that the surface $S$ is nonsingular, iff the binary forms $H_0$, $H_1$ and $H_2$ do not have multiple and pairwise common factors.
Now we can describe an action of group $G$ on the surface $S$. The action of $St(\bar{A}_5)$ on $\mathbb{C}[t_0,t_1]$ induces an action on $\xi_i^j=f_i^{-1}(t_0^j t_1^{a_i-j})$, $i=0,1,2$, $0\le j \le a_i$. The action of $G$ is generated by the action of $G_K$ and the action of $St(\bar{A}_5)$. Therefore we easily get . It’s easy to check that all possibilities for $G$ in occur.
Conjugacy question. {#Conjugate}
===================
The main result of this section is Theorem \[th6\]. Here we reprove results of [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Section 8] for the sake of completeness. As the main tool we will use the next theorem.
\[thIsk\]
1. Let $(S,G)$ be a surface in the class $\mathbb D$ with degree $K_S^2=1$, and let $\chi : S \dashrightarrow S'$ be a birational $G$-invariant map onto an arbitrary surface $(S',G) \in \mathbb D \cup \mathbb {CB} $. Then $S'$, like $S$, is a del Pezzo surface of degree $1$ and $\chi$ is an isomorphism.
2. Let $\chi: S \dashrightarrow S'$ be a birational map, where $(S,G) \in \mathbb D$ and $(S',G) \in \mathbb D \cup \mathbb{CB} $. Suppose that $S$ has no points $x$ with $|{\operatorname{Orb}}_G(x)| < K_S^2$, where ${\operatorname{Orb}}_G(x)$ is an orbit of point $x$ under action of $G$. Then $\chi$ is an isomorphism.
3. Let $\chi : S \dashrightarrow S'$ be a birational $G$-invariant map, where $(S,G,\phi) \in \mathbb {CB} $ and $(S',G) \in \mathbb D \cup \mathbb {CB}$. Suppose that $K_S^2\le 0$; then $(S',G,\phi') \in \mathbb {CB}$, $K_S^2 = K_{S'}^2$, and $\chi$ takes a pencil of conics on $S$ to a pencil of conics on $S'$, that is, the diagram $$\xymatrix{
S \ar@{-->}[r]^\chi \ar[d]_\phi & S'\ar[d]_{\phi'}\\
\mathbb{P}^1 \ar[r]^\pi & \mathbb{P}^1
}$$ is commutative, where $\pi$ is an isomorphism over $\mathbb{C}$.
\[th6\]
1. \[1case\] Let $(S,G,\phi)$ be a surface in the class $\mathbb{CB}$, $K_S^2\le 0$, and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Let $\chi: S \dashrightarrow S'$ be a birational $G$-invariant map, where $(S',G) \in \mathbb{D} \cup \mathbb{CB}$. Then $(S',G,\phi') \in \mathbb{CB}$, and $K_S^2=K_{S'}^2$. The map $\chi$ is a composition of elementary transformations ${\operatorname{elm}}_{x_1}\circ \ldots \circ {\operatorname{elm}}_{x_n}$, where $(x_1,\ldots, x_n)$ is a $G$-invariant set of points not lying on a singular fibre with no two points lying on the same fibre.
2. Let $(S,G,\phi)$ be a surface in the class $\mathbb{CB}$, $K_S^2> 0$, and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Let $\chi: S \dashrightarrow S'$ be a birational $G$-invariant map, where $(S',G)\in \mathbb{D} \cup \mathbb{CB}$. Then $K_S^2=8$, $S\simeq \mathbb{F}_n$, $n\ne 1$.
1. \[case1\] Let $n$ is odd. Then one the following cases occurs $$\begin{aligned}
& S'\simeq \mathbb{P}^2, \text{and}\ G\simeq \mathbb{Z}_{n'} \times \bar{A}_5;\\
& S' \simeq \mathbb{F}_m, \text{where}\ m\ \text{is odd and}\ m\ne 1.
\end{aligned}$$
2. \[case2\] Let $n$ is even. Then $S'$ can be isomorphic to $\mathbb{F}_m$, where $m$ is even. If $n=0$, and $m\ne 0$, then $G\simeq \mathbb{Z}_m \times A_5$.
3. Let $(S,G)$ be a surface in the class $\mathbb{D}$, and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group. Let $\chi: S \dashrightarrow S'$ be a birational $G$-invariant map, where $(S',G)\in \mathbb{D} \cup \mathbb{CB}$. Then we have the following.
1. Let $S\simeq \mathbb{P}^2$, and $G\simeq \mathbb{Z}_m \times \bar{A}_5$. Then the surface $S'$ may be isomorphic to either $\mathbb{P}^2$, or $\mathbb{F}_n$, where $n$ is odd.
2. Otherwise we have $S' \simeq S$. If $K_S^2 < 9$, then $\chi$ is an automorphism of $S$.
I.Cheltsov proved the following. If $(\mathbb{F}_n,G,\phi)\in \mathbb{CB}$, $n\ne 1$, and $G$ be a finite nonsolvable group, then there exist a birational $G$-invariant map $\chi: \mathbb{F}_n \dashrightarrow S'$, where $$\begin{aligned}
& S'\simeq \mathbb{P}^2, \text{if $n$ is odd};\\
& S' \simeq \mathbb{F}_0, \text{if $n$ is even}.
\end{aligned}$$
The first case of theorem follows from Theorem \[thIsk\] and [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Theorems 7.7, Proposition 7.14].
Let’s prove the second case of theorem. First we prove that $K_S^2=8$. Denote by $r$ the number of the reducible fibres of conic bundle $(S,G,\phi)$. Suppose that $r\ne 0$. Obviously, we have $G_B \simeq A_5$ (see exact sequence and Klein’s classification of the finite subgroups in $PGL(2,\mathbb{C})$ in [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Section 5.5]). Then by we have $r \ge 12$. Hence by Noether formula $K_S^2=8-r \le -4$. Therefore $r=0$, $K_S^2=8$.
We will use results of Theorem \[th01\] and theory of elementary links (see [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Section 7.2]). By [@Dolgachev-Iskovskikh Theorem 7.7] the map $\chi$ is equal to a composition of elementary links $\chi_1 \circ \ldots \circ \chi_k$. It’s easy to check that $\chi_k$ is an elementary link of type II (see Theorem \[th01\]). We have $\chi_k(\mathbb{F}_n)\simeq \mathbb{F}_l$. Then we apply Theorem \[th01\]. For any point $x \in \mathbb{P}^1$ we have $|{\operatorname{Orb}}_{St(A_5)}(x)|$ is even (see Notation \[stA5\]). Hence we easily get that $l-n$ is even.
Therefore if $n$ is even, then $\chi_i$, $i=1,\ldots,k$ are elementary links of type II. And we easily get the case \[case2\] of theorem.
Consider case, when $n$ is odd. Then $G \simeq \mathbb{Z}_{n'}\times \bar{A}_5$ by Theorem \[th01\]. Suppose that $\chi$ is not a composition of elementary links of type II. Then one of elementary links $\chi_i$, $1 \le i \le k-1$ must be a link of type III. We may suppose that the links $\chi_j$, $i<j \le k$ are of type II. In this case $\chi_i\circ \ldots \circ \chi_k(S)\simeq \mathbb{P}^2$. Below we will see that $S'\not \simeq X$, where $(X,G)\in \mathbb{D}$, and $K_X^2<9$. Therefore we get the case \[case1\] of theorem.
Let’s prove the third case of theorem. To apply Theorem \[thIsk\], we need to show, that $S$ has no points $x$ with $|{\operatorname{Orb}}_G(x)| < K_S^2$. We will argue, considering different values of $K_S^2$.
If $K_S^2$ is equal to either $7$, or $6$, or $4$ , or $1$, then by Theorem \[thdp3\] there is no such pairs $(S,G)$.
Let $K_S^2=2$. We apply Theorem \[thdp1\]. Consider the following two automorphisms of surface $S$, given by equation : $$\begin{aligned}
& \alpha: (T_0:T_1:T_2:T_3) \mapsto (T_1:T_2:T_0:T_3),\\
& \beta: (T_0:T_1:T_2:T_3) \mapsto (\varepsilon_7 T_0: \varepsilon_7^4 T_1: \varepsilon_7^2 T_2: T_3).
\end{aligned}$$ It’s easy to check by calculations that $\alpha$, $\beta\in G$, and there is no point $x\in S$ fixed under an action of subgroup $H\subset G$ generated by $\alpha$ and $\beta$.
Let $K_S^2=3$. We apply Theorem \[thdp2\]. Consider the maps . Again by easy calculations we can check that there is no point $x\in S$, such that $|{\operatorname{Orb}}_G(x)|< 3$.
Let $K_S^2=5$. We apply Theorem \[thdp4\]. It’s sufficient to consider the case $G\simeq A_5$. Suppose that there is a point $x\in S$, such that $|{\operatorname{Orb}}_G(x)|<K_S^2=5$. Denote by ${\operatorname{Stab}}_G(x)$ the stabilizer of point $x$ in the group $G$. Then ${\operatorname{Stab}}_G(x)$ is a subgroup of $G$ with order either $15$, or $20$, or $30$ or $60$. It’s well known that there are no subgroups of $A_5$ with order either $15$, or $20$, or $30$. Hence $|{\operatorname{Stab}}_G(x)|=60=|G|$. But it’s easy to see from that the action of group $G$ on the surface $S$ has no fixed points. Contradiction.
Let $K_S^2=8$. We apply Theorem \[K\_S8\]. Consider the action of $St(A_5)$ on $\mathbb{P}^1$. It’s known (see ) that $|{\operatorname{Orb}}_{St(A_5)}(x)|\ge 12$ for any point $x \in \mathbb{P}^1$. Therefore $|{\operatorname{Orb}}_G(x)|\ge 12$ for any point $x \in S$.
The case $K_S^2=9$ easily follows from the above investigation and Theorem \[K\_S9\]. However in this case the condition $|{\operatorname{Orb}}_{St(A_5)}(x)| \ge 9$ for any point $x \in S\simeq \mathbb{P}^2$ not always holds. For example in the second case of Theorem \[K\_S9\]. Therefore we cannot apply Theorem \[thIsk\] to prove that $\chi$ is an isomorphism. But in fact we need only to know an isomorphism class of $S'$ to describe conjugacy classes.
Suppose that the conditions of case \[1case\] of Theorem \[th6\] are satisfied. After suppose that $G_K
\not \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2$ (see ). Then $\chi$ is an isomorphism.
By Theorems \[th1.4\] and \[thExcept\] we have $G_K \simeq \mathbb{Z}_2^2$ or $D_n$, $n \ge 2$. Therefore it’s easy to see that any $G$-orbit of points $(x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ has two points lying on the same fibre of conic bundle $\phi$. Contradiction to case \[1case\] of Theorem \[th6\].
The list of finite nonsolvable subgroups in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$. {#List}
================================================================================
Summarizing results obtained in sections \[DelPezzo\] and \[ConBundle\] we get the following list of finite nonsolvable subgroups in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$.
- $L_2(7)$
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by pairs $(S,L_2(7)) \in \mathbb{D}$, which were described in Theorems \[K\_S9\] and \[thdp1\].
- $\mathbb{Z}_2 \times L_2(7)$
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by pairs $(S,\mathbb{Z}_2 \times L_2(7)) \in \mathbb{D}$, which were described in Theorem \[thdp1\].
- $A_6$
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by pairs $(S,A_6) \in \mathbb{D}$, which were described in Theorem \[K\_S9\].
- $S_5$
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by pairs $(S,S_5) \in \mathbb{D}$, which were described in Theorems \[thdp4\], \[thdp2\].
- $St(A_5)\wr \langle \tau \rangle$
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by pairs $(S,St(A_5)\wr \langle \tau \rangle) \in \mathbb{D}$, which were described in Theorem \[K\_S8\].
- $A_5 \times A_5$, $A_5 \times S_4$, $A_5 \times A_4$.
These groups are presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by triples $(S,G,\phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$ ($G$ is one of our groups), which were described in Theorem \[th01\].
- $D_n \times \bar{A}_5$, $n\ge 3$
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by triples $(S,D_n \times \bar{A}_5, \phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$, which were described in Theorem \[thExcept\].
- $D_n \times A_5$, $n\ge 3 $
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by triples $(S,D_n \times A_5, \phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$, which were described in Theorems \[th01\] and \[thExcept\].
- $\mathbb{Z}_n \times \bar{A}_5$, $n \ge 3$
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by pairs $(S,\mathbb{Z}_n \times \bar{A}_5) \in \mathbb{D}$ and triples $(S,\mathbb{Z}_n \times \bar{A}_5,\phi)$, which were described in Theorems \[K\_S9\], \[th01\].
- $\mathbb{Z}_n \times A_5$, $n \ge 3$
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by triples $(S,\mathbb{Z}_n \times A_5,\phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$, which were described in Theorem \[th01\].
- $\mathbb{Z}_2^2 \times \bar{A}_5$
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by triples $(S,\mathbb{Z}_2^2 \times \bar{A}_5, \phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$, which were described in Theorem \[thExcept\].
- $\mathbb{Z}_2^2 \times A_5$
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by triples $(S,\mathbb{Z}_2^2 \times A_5,\phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$, which were described in Theorems \[th01\], \[thExcept\] and \[th5\].
- $\mathbb{Z}_2 \times \bar{A}_5$
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by pairs $(S,\mathbb{Z}_2 \times \bar{A}_5) \in \mathbb{D}$ and triples $(S,\mathbb{Z}_2 \times \bar{A}_5,\phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$, which were described in Theorems \[K\_S9\], \[th01\], and \[th5\].
- $\mathbb{Z}_2 \times A_5$
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by pairs $(S,\mathbb{Z}_2 \times A_5) \in \mathbb{D}$ and triples $(S,\mathbb{Z}_2 \times A_5,\phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$, which were described in Theorems \[K\_S8\], \[th01\], \[th1\], \[th2\], \[th4\].
- $\bar{A}_5$
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by pairs $(S,\bar{A}_5) \in \mathbb{D}$ and triples $(S,\bar{A}_5,\phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$, which were described in Theorems \[K\_S9\], \[th01\], \[th1\], \[th2\], \[th3\], \[th4\].
- $A_5$
This group is presented in ${\operatorname{Cr}}_2(\mathbb{C})$ by pairs $(S,A_5) \in \mathbb{D}$ and triples $(S,A_5,\phi) \in \mathbb{CB}$, which were described in Theorems \[K\_S9\], \[thdp4\], \[th01\].
[10]{}
L. Bayle and A. Beauville, Birational involutions of $\mathbb{P}^2$. *Asian J. Math.* **4** (2000), no. 1, 11-17.
E. Bertini, Richerche sulle transformazioni univoche involutorie nel piano. *Annali di Mat.* **8** (1877), 244-286.
J. Blanc, Elements and cyclic subgroups of finite order of the Cremona group. *Comment. Math. Helv.* **86** (2011), ¹ 2, 469-497.
I. Dolgachev and V. Iskovskikh, Finite subgroups of the plane Cremona group. In: *Algebra, arithmetic, and geometry: in honor of Yury I. Manin*, Vol. I, pp. 443-–548, Boston 2009.
I. Dolgachev, Topics in classical algebraic geometry. Preprint (2010). http://www.math.lsa.umich.edu/idolga/lecturenotes.html
W. Fulton and J. Harris, *Representation theory: A first course*. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag New York Inc 1991.
V. A. Iskovskikh, Rational surfaces with a pencil of rational curves. *Sbornik Mathematics (N.S.)*. **74(116):4** (1967), 608-–638.
V. A. Iskovskikh, Rational surfaces with a pencil of rational curves and with positive square of the canonical class. *Sbornik Mathematics (N.S.)*. **83(125):1(9)** (1970), 90-–119.
V. A. Iskovskikh, Minimal models of rational surfaces over arbitrary fields. *Izv. Akad. Nauk USSR Ser. Mat.*. **43:1** (1979), 19–-43.
V. A. Iskovskikh, Factorization of birational maps of rational surfaces from the viewpoint of Mori theory. *Russ. Math. Survey*. **51(4)** (1996), 585-–652.
S. Kantor, *Theorie der endlichen Gruppen von eindeutigen Transformationen in der Ebene*. Berlin (1895).
Yury I. Manin, Rational surfaces over perfect fields, II. *Sbornik Mathematics (N.S.)*. **72(114):2** (1967), 161–-192.
V. I. Tsygankov, Equations of $G$-minimal conic bundles. *Sbornik: Mathematics (N. S.)*. **202**:11 (2011), 1667-1721.
A. Wiman, Zur Theorie der endlichen Gruppen von birationalen Transformationen in der Ebene. *Math. Ann.*. **48** (1896), 195–241.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We uncover the global organization of clustering in real complex networks. As it happens with other fundamental properties of networks such as the degree distribution, we find that real networks are neither completely random nor ordered with respect to clustering, although they tend to be closer to maximally random architectures. We reach this conclusion by comparing the global structure of clustering in real networks with that in maximally random and in maximally ordered clustered graphs. The former are produced with an exponential random graph model that maintains correlations among adjacent edges at the minimum needed to conform with the expected clustering spectrum; the later with a random model that arranges triangles in cliques inducing highly ordered structures. To compare the global organization of clustering in real and model networks, we compute $m$-core landscapes, where the $m$-core is defined, akin to the $k$-core, as the maximal subgraph with edges participating at least in $m$ triangles. This property defines a set of nested subgraphs that, contrarily to $k$-cores, is able to distinguish between hierarchical and modular architectures. To visualize the $m$-core decomposition we developed the LaNet-vi 3.0 tool.'
author:
- 'Pol Colomer-de-Simón$^{1}$, M. Ángeles Serrano$^{1}$, Mariano G. Beiró$^{2}$, J. Ignacio Alvarez-Hamelin$^{2}$, & Mari[á]{}n Bogu[ñ]{}[á]{}$^{1}$'
title: Deciphering the global organization of clustering in real complex networks
---
Introduction
============
The architecture of real complex systems lay at the midpoint between order and disorder, although its precise location is quite difficult to determine. Disorder in complex networks is manifested by the small-world effect [@Watts:1998ga] and a highly heterogeneous degree distribution [@Barabasi:1999ha], both properties commonly present in real complex networks [@Dorogovtsev:2003ti; @newmanbook]. Order is, on the other hand, manifested by the presence of triangles –or clustering– representing three point correlations in the system. Indeed, the very concept of order is typically related to the existence of a metric structure in the system which, from the network perspective, is captured by clustering, the smallest network motif able to encode the triangle inequality. Yet, unlike the small-world effect and the heterogeneity of nodes’ degrees, clustering is not an emergent property spontaneously generated by paradigmatic connectivity principles such as preferential attachment and, therefore, calls for specific mechanisms for explaining its emergence, thus giving important insights into the nature of network formation and network evolution.
On the other hand, the effects of clustering on the structural and dynamical properties of networks have not yet been conclusively elucidated. In fact, several studies have reported apparently contradictory results concerning the effects of clustering on the percolation properties of networks and little is known on its effects on dynamical processes running on networks [@Serrano:2006dq; @Serrano:2006ka; @Trapman2007160; @Newman:2009fk; @Gleeson:2009vn; @Gleeson:2009ys; @Gleeson:2010zr]. This is further hindered by the technical difficulties of any analytical treatment. Indeed, the presence of strong clustering invalidates, in general, the “locally tree-like” assumption used in random graphs, leaving little room for any theoretical study. In an effort to overcome these problems, a new class of clustered network models has been proposed. These models start by defining a certain set of cliques (fully connected subgraphs) of different sizes that are afterwords connected in a random fashion. In this way, by considering cliques as super-nodes, the network connecting these super-nodes is locally tree-like, thus allowing for an analytical treatment [@Trapman2007160; @Newman:2009fk; @Gleeson:2009vn; @Gleeson:2009ys; @Karrer:2010nx; @Gleeson:2010zr; @Allard:2012]. Then, it is possible to generate networks with a given degree distribution $P(k)$ and degree-dependent clustering coefficient $\bar{c}(k)$, defined as the average fraction of triangles attached to nodes of degree $k$.
While this is indeed a fair approach to the problem, triangles generated by these models are arranged in a very specific way, with strong correlations between the properties of adjacent edges. In some sense, we can consider this class of models as generators of maximally ordered clustered graphs. At the other side of the spectrum, we can define an ensemble of maximally random clustered graphs such that correlations among adjacent edges are the minimum needed to conform with the degree-dependent clustering coefficient, but no more. These two types of models define –in a non-rigorous way– two extremes of the phase space of possible graphs with given $P(k)$ and $\bar{c}(k)$. A simple question arises then: where are real networks positioned in this phase space? To give an answer to this question, we need to go beyond the local properties of networks and to study their global organization. In this paper, we study the global structure of clustering in real networks and compare them with the global structure of clustering induced by the two types of models with identical local properties. More specifically, we analyze the organization of real and model networks into $m$-cores, defined as maximal subgraphs with edges participating at least in $m$ triangles, that is able to distinguish between hierarchical and modular architectures. Interestingly enough, real networks tend to be closer to maximally random clustered graphs, although clear differences are evident.
Results
=======
In this paper, we analyze three real paradigmatic networks from different domains: the Internet at the Autonomous System level [@Boguna:2010uq], the web of trust of the Pretty Good Privacy protocol (PGP) [@Boguna:2004jx], and the metabolic network of the bacterium [*E. coli*]{} [@Serrano:2012we]. However, the results obtained here also hold for a wide spectrum of systems (See Supplementary Information for the analysis of a larger set of systems). We first describe their random counterparts, namely, maximally ordered and maximally random clustered graphs with the same degree distribution and clustering spectrum.
Network models
--------------
$N$ $E$ $C$ \# of clusters Giant component
----------------------------------------- ---------------- ----------------- ----------------- ---------------- -------------------
Internet 23752 58416 0.61 3 99.98%
Internet clique-based model 23800$\pm$200 50000$\pm$10000 0.62$\pm$0.01 2200$\pm$400 (75$\pm$4)%
Internet random $\bar{c}(k)$ 23752 58416 0.61 16$\pm$4 (99.84$\pm$0.06)%
Internet random $\bar{c}(k)$, $P(k,k')$ 23752 58416 0.61 4$\pm$1 (99.96$\pm$0.02)%
PGP 57243 61837 0.50 16221 18.65%
PGP clique-based model 62000$\pm$1000 57200$\pm$200 0.506$\pm$0.005 13700$\pm$200 (37$\pm$1) %
PGP random $\bar{c}(k)$ 57243 61837 0.487$\pm$0.001 15550$\pm$60 (21.3$\pm$0.4)%
PGP random $\bar{c}(k)$, $P(k,k')$ 57243 61837 0.493$\pm$0.001 15810$\pm$20 (22.3$\pm$0.3)%
E. Coli 1010 3286 0.48 2 99.8%
E. Coli clique-based model 1010$\pm$40 3300$\pm$700 0.51$\pm$0.01 7$\pm$3 (97.9$\pm$0.6) %
E. Coli random $\bar{c}(k)$ 1010 3286 0.48 2.2$\pm$0.9 (99.7$\pm$0.3)%
E. Coli random $\bar{c}(k)$, $P(k,k')$ 1010 3286 0.48 7$\pm$2 (98.2$\pm$0.6)%
\[table:1\]
One of the best clique-based models to generate maximally ordered clustered networks is the one introduced by Gleeson in [@Gleeson:2009vn]. In this model, nodes belong to single cliques and are also given a number of connections outside their cliques. Then, cliques are considered as super-nodes, each with an effective degree given by the sum of all the external links of the members of the clique, and connected using the standard configuration model. The input of the model is the joint distribution $\gamma(c,k)$, defined as the probability that a randomly chosen node has degree $k$ and belongs to a clique of size $c$. Both the degree distribution and the degree-dependent clustering coefficient are related to function $\gamma(c,k)$. Therefore, by properly choosing its form, it is possible to match the desired degree distribution and clustering. Note, however, that since we start with cliques and not nodes, the number of nodes and their actual degrees are not fixed [*a priori*]{}. As a consequence, in finite heterogeneous networks, there may be some unavoidable discrepancies between real and random versions of the network. Hereinafter, we denote this model as “clique-based model” (CB).
On the other hand, we generate maximally random clustered networks as an ensemble of exponential graphs [@Park:2004vo] with Hamiltonian $$H=\sum_{k=k_{min}}^{k_c} |\bar{c}^*(k)-\bar{c}(k)|,$$ where $\bar{c}(k)$ is the target degree-dependent clustering coefficient and $\bar{c}^*(k)$ is the one corresponding to the current state of the network. This Hamiltonian is minimized by means of simulated annealing coupled to a Metropolis rewiring scheme until the current clustering is close enough to the target one (see Methods Section for further details). Here we use two different rewiring schemes. In the first one [@Maslov:2002wp], degrees of nodes are preserved after each single rewiring event but correlations between the degrees of connected nodes are either destroyed or brought down to the level of the structural ones [@Boguna:2004eh; @Serrano:2007nl]. In the second scheme [@Melnik:2011uq], rewiring events preserve both the degree distribution and the joint degree-degree distribution of connected nodes, $P(k,k')$, so that degree-degree correlations are fully preserved. Hereinafter, we denote these models as “maximally random models” (MR). We would like to stress that, even though there are many models of exponential random graphs generating clustered graphs [@Frank:1986vm; @Milo:2002vs; @Foster:2010uq], none of them reproduces the actual clustering spectrum as a function of node degree. In this sense, our maximally random model gets closer to real networks.
Notice that none of the random models used in this paper enforces global connectivity of the network in a single connected component. Therefore, the number of disconnected components and the size of the giant (or largest) component must be considered as predictions of the models, which can be readily compared to those of real networks. In Table \[table:1\], we show this comparison with the networks analyzed in this paper. Quite remarkably, in the case of the Internet, MR models predict the existence of, basically, a single connected component, as it is also observed in the real network. On the other hand, the CB model generates a very large number of disconnected components and a giant component significantly smaller than the real one. Even more surprising are the results for the PGP web of trust. The real network is fragmented into a large number of small components whereas its giant component occupies around 18% of the network. All models generate a similar number of disconnected components. However, the relative size of the giant component is very well reproduced by MR models, whereas the CB model predicts a giant component twice as large. In the case of the metabolic network of the bacterium [*E. coli*]{}, all models predicts the existence of a single connected component, in good agreement with the real network.
Revealing network hierarchies: $k$-cores and $m$-cores
------------------------------------------------------
![[**m-cores decomposition and its visualization.**]{} The example network in [**a**]{} is colored according to the $m$-coreness of nodes and edges. Nodes and edges colored in blue belong to the $m0$-core but not to the $m1$-core. Nodes and edges colored in green belong to the $m1$-core but not to the $m2$-core, etc. The same structure is represented in [**b**]{} with our visualization tool. The outermost circle in blue represents the $m0$-core, with nodes of $m$-coreness 0 located in its perimeter. The $m1$-core –which is contained within the $m0$-core– is fragmented in two disconnected components, which are represented as two non-overlapping circles within the outermost one and with nodes of $m$-coreness 1 located in their perimeters. The larger of these two components is further fragmented in two disconnected components representing the $m2$-core and $m3$-core. The angular positions of nodes in each circumference are chosen to minimize the angular separation with their neighbors in different layers. Notice that in this representation, each edge is colored with two colors, corresponding to the colors of the $m$-coreness of the nodes at the end of the edge but in reverse order. In this way, it is possible to visualize easily connections between different layers. See [@BAHB2008] for further details of the visualization.[]{data-label="fig:0"}](fig1.pdf){width="\linewidth"}
Real heterogeneous networks are typically hierarchically organized. One of the most useful tools to uncover such hierarchies is the $k$-core decomposition [@Dorogovtsev:2006ik]. Given a network, its $k$-core is defined as the maximal subgraph such that all nodes in the subgraph have at least $k$ connections with members of the subgraph. This defines a hierarchy of nested subgraphs, where the $1$-core contains the $2$-core, which in turn contains the $3$-core and so on until the maximum $k$-core is reached. Nodes belonging to the $k$-core but not to the $(k+1)$-core are said to have coreness $k$. Real networks often show a deep and complex $k$-core structure, as made evident by tools such as LaNet-vi [@BAHB2008]. However, even though clustering has been shown to induce strong $k$-core hierarchies[@Serrano:2006dq], the $k$-core [*per se*]{} does not include any information about clustering and, thus, cannot discriminate well between two networks with different global organization of clustering but with the same clustering coefficient.
To overcome this problem, the concept of $k$-core has been remodeled to account for clustered networks. A key ingredient throughout the paper is the concept of edge multiplicity $m$, defined as the number of distinct triangles going through an edge [@Radicchi:2004av; @Serrano:2006qj]. All edges belonging to a clique of size $n$ have identical multiplicity $n-2$ whereas an edge connecting two cliques has zero multiplicity. Therefore, strong correlations between the multiplicities of adjacent edges indicate that triangles are arranged in a clique-like fashion whereas a weaker correlation indicate a random distribution of triangles. It is therefore clear that, in order to uncover the global organization of triangles in a network, it is necessary to understand the organization of the multiplicities of their edges. This can be achieved with the $m$-core, defined as the maximal subgraph such that all its edges have, at least, multiplicity $m$ within it. This concept was developed in [@Saito:2008nx; @Gregori2013213] under the name of $k$-dense decomposition. The edges in a $k$-dense graph have multiplicity $m=k-2$. Because of this, we prefer the notion of $m$-core, which is directly related to the multiplicity: an edge belongs to the $m$-core if its multiplicity within the $m$-core is, at least, $m$. A node belongs to the $m$-core if at least one of its edges belongs to it. A node belonging to the $m$-core but not to the $(m+1)$-core is said to have $m$-coreness $m$. As in the case of the $k$-core, the $m$-core defines a set of nested subgraphs whose properties informs us about the global organization of triangles in the graph. The left plot in Fig. \[fig:0\] shows an example of a simple network and its $m$-core structure.
In the case of the $k$-core, the density of links within each subgraph grows as $k$ is increased. As a consequence, it is very unlikely that the $(k+1)$-core is fragmented in different components if the $k$-core is connected. Therefore, the main interest of the $k$-core decomposition is focused on the size of the giant $k$-core and the maximum coreness of the system. The situation is completely different in the case of the $m$-core. This is so because of a weaker correlation between $m$-coreness of a node and its degree [@Orsini:2013]. In fact, the $m$-core decomposition is able to distinguish between a strong hierarchical structure –when $m$-cores do not fragment into smaller components– from a highly modular architecture –when $m$-cores are always fragmented. In this case, the quantities of interest are, besides the size of the giant $m$-core and the maximum $m$-coreness, the number of components as a function of $m$.
Figures \[fig:1\], \[fig:2\], and \[fig:3\] show a comparison of the $k$-core and $m$-core decompositions between real networks and their random equivalents. As it can be observed in the top plots of these figures, all models do a reasonably good job at reproducing both the $k$-core structure and the distribution of edge multiplicities, even though MR models are clearly better than the CB one. However, there are important differences in the $m$-core decomposition. While both versions of MR models reproduce well the giant $m$-core, the maximum $m$-coreness, and the number of components as a function of $m$ of all the studied networks, the CB model overestimates the size and number of components in the case of the Internet and underestimate the size of giant $m$-cores in the PGP web of trust. In the case of the metabolic network, MR models reproduce well its entire $m$-core structure. The CB model, on the other hand, does not capture well the $m$-core decomposition. Even though the CB network is originally connected, it fragments into a large number of disconnected components already at the $m1$-core and keeps fragmenting at each level almost up to the largest $m$-core, which is also three times larger than the real one.
![[**Measuring hierarchies in real and random networks.**]{} Comparison of the $k$-core and $m$-core decompositions between the real Internet AS network, the clique based model, and maximally random models. “Random $c(k)$” stands for the maximally random model with a fixed degree distribution and clustering spectrum $c(k)$. “Random $c(k)$, $P(k,k')$” stands for the maximally random model that preserves also the degree-degree correlation structure of the real network. The top left plot shows the relative size of the giant $k$-core as a function of $k$. Top right plot shows the complementary cumulative distribution of edge multiplicities. Bottom left plot shows the relative size of the giant $m$-core as a function of $m$. Finally, the bottom right plot shows the number of components in the $m$-core as a function of $m$.[]{data-label="fig:1"}](fig2.pdf){width="\linewidth"}
{width="\linewidth"}
![[**Measuring hierarchies in real and random networks.**]{} The same as in Fig. \[fig:1\] but for the PGP web of trust.[]{data-label="fig:2"}](fig4.pdf){width="\linewidth"}
{width="\linewidth"}
![[**Measuring hierarchies in real and random networks.**]{} The same as in Fig. \[fig:1\] but for the [*E. Coli*]{} metabolic network.[]{data-label="fig:3"}](fig6.pdf){width="\linewidth"}
{width="\linewidth"}
$m$-core visualization
----------------------
The $m$-core decomposition is actually much richer and complex than what Figs. \[fig:1\], \[fig:2\], and \[fig:3\] show. Certainly, the $m$-core decomposition can be represented as a branching process that encodes the fragmentation of $m$-cores into disconnected components as $m$ is increased. The tree-like structure of this process informs us about the global organization –for instance hierarchical vs. modular– of clustering in networks. To visualize this process we use LaNet-vi 3.0 [@LaNet-vi3], a modified version of LaNet-vi [@BAHB2008], originally designed to visualize the $k$-core structure of a network. In short, LaNet-vi tool evaluates the coreness of all nodes of the network and arrange them in a plane following the hierarchy induced by the $k$-cores, so that nodes with high coreness are placed at the center of the figure whereas nodes with lower coreness are located around nodes with higher coreness in an onion-like shape. The major modification in LaNet-vi 3.0 with respect to the visualization mode in the previous version concerns the representation of disconnected components. If the network forms a single connected component, nodes with $m$-coreness 0 are arranged in the outermost circle of the representation. Whenever the $m1$-core is fragmented into several components, these are arranged in separate and non-overlapping disks within the circle of $m$-coreness 0, with nodes of $m$-coreness 1 placed at the edge of their corresponding disk. The process is repeated for each disconnected component with the $m2$-core, $m3$-core, etc., until the maximum $m$-coreness present in the network is reached. The size of each disk is proportional to the logarithm of the number of nodes in the component. In this way, it is possible to visualize simultaneously all the information encoded in the $m$-cores so that different networks can be easily compared (see the right plot in Fig. \[fig:0\] for a simple example). When the original network is already fragmented (like in the PGP web of trust, for instance), we first proceed to arrange disconnected components in non overlapping disks within the outermost disk, that in this case does not have any node in its perimeter.
Figures \[figInternet\], \[figPGP\], and \[figEcoli\] show the visualization of $m$-cores of real networks and their random equivalents (visualizations of MR models are shown only for $P(k)$ preserving rewiring). In the case of the Internet graph, the $m$-core visualization reveals a strongly hierarchical structure, where each layer is contained within the previous layer and where connections are mainly radial, with nodes with low $m$-coreness connected to nodes with higher $m$-coreness and very few connections between nodes in the same layer. Interestingly, this type of structure is also revealed in recent embeddings of the Internet graph into the hyperbolic plane [@Boguna:2010uq]. This structure is very well reproduced by MR models, as it can be seen in the left bottom plot of Fig. \[figInternet\], but not by the CB model, which generates a highly modular and non-hierarchical structure. The case of the web of trust of PGP is particularly interesting. Figure \[figPGP\] reveals a mixture of a modular structure, with a strong fragmentation for all values of $m$ –as one would expect for a social network–, and a hierarchical structure, revealed by the existence of a persistent giant $m$-core and a large number of layers. Again, this structure is very well reproduced by MR models whereas the CB model generates a very flat modular structure without any hierarchy. Finally, the metabolic network is also strongly hierarchical, although due to the small network size the number of layers is relatively small. MR models reproduce very well its structure whereas the CB model does not generate any hierarchy.
Discussion
==========
The results presented in this paper indicate that, in agreement with previous studies [@jamakovic:2009; @Foster:2011fk], the degree distribution $P(k)$ and clustering spectrum $\bar{c}(k)$ are the main contributors to the global organization of the majority of real networks, which are close to maximally random once these properties are fixed. This supports the idea that most real networks are the result of a self-organized process based on local optimization rules, in contrast to global optimization principles, that yield a hierarchical organization that cannot be reproduced by maximally ordered clustered models. Besides, the strong clustering observed in real networks, supports also the idea that such local principles are related to a similarity measure among nodes of the network that can be quantified by an underlying metric structure [@Serrano:2008hb; @Boguna:2009uz; @Boguna:2010uq; @KrPa10; @Serrano:2012we; @Papadopoulos:2012uq]. On the other hand, global optimization principles are necessarily present, for instance, in power grids, where they induce topologies that are very different from what one would expect at random. This is made evident by its $m$-core decomposition (see Supplementary Information). In this case, even thought the $m$-core structure is not very deep, it is very different from any of the random models, which generate highly unstructured $m$-cores. Therefore, the $m$-core decomposition along with its visualization tool can help us to find the true mechanisms at play in the formation and evolution of real networks.
Methods
=======
Maximally random clustered networks
-----------------------------------
Maximally random clustered networks are generated by means of a biased rewiring procedure. We use two different rewiring schemes. In the first one, two different edges are chosen at random. Let these connect nodes A with B and C with D. Then, the two edges are swapped so that nodes A and D, on the one hand, and C and B, on the other, are now connected. We take care that no self-connections or multiple connection between the same pair of nodes are induced by this process. This rewiring scheme preserves the degree distribution of the original network but not degree-degree correlations. In the second rewiring scheme, we first chose an edge at random and look at the degree of one of its attached nodes, $k$. Then, a second link attached to a node of the same degree $k$ is chosen and the two links are swapped as before. Notice that this procedure preserves both the degree of each node and the actual nodes’ degrees at the end of the two original edges. Therefore, the procedure preserves the full degree-degree correlation structure encoded in the joint distribution $P(k,k')$. Both procedures are ergodic and satisfy detailed balance.
Regardless of the rewiring scheme at use, the process is biased so that generated graphs belong to an exponential ensemble of graphs $\cal{G} = \mit \lbrace G \rbrace$, where each graph has a sampling probability $P(G)\propto e^{-\beta H(G)}$, where $\beta$ is the inverse of the temperature and $H(G)$ is a Hamiltonian that depends on the current network configuration. Here we consider ensembles where the Hamiltonian depends on the target clustering spectrum of the real Network $\bar{c}(k)$ as $$H = \sum_{k=k_{min}}^{k_c} |\bar{c}^*(k)-\bar{c}(k)|,$$ where $\bar{c}^*(k)$ is the current degree-dependent clustering coefficient. We then use a simulated annealing algorithm based on a standard Metropolis-Hastings procedure. Let $G'$ be the new graph obtained after one rewiring event, as defined above. The candidate network $G'$ is accepted with probability $$p = \min{(1,e^{\beta [H(G)-H(G')]})} = \min{(1,e^{-\beta \Delta H})},$$ otherwise, we keep the graph $G$ unchanged. We first start by rewiring the real network $200E$ times at $\beta=0$, where $E$ is the total number of edges of the network. This step destroys the clustering coefficient of the original network. Then, we start an annealing procedure at $\beta_0=50$, increasing the parameter $\beta$ by a $10\%$ after $100E$ rewiring events have taken place. We keep increasing $\beta$ until the target clustering spectrum is reached within a predefined precision or no further improvement can be achieved.
Computing $m$-cores
-------------------
To compute $m$-cores efficiently, we develop a new approach, different from the one in [@Saito:2008nx; @Gregori2013213]. We first map the original graph $G$ into a hypergraph $G^*$, where edges in $G$ become vertices in $G^*$ and where each triangle in the original graph is mapped into an edge (a $3$-tuple) in $G^*$. Then, by noticing that the degree of a vertex $v^*$ in $G^*$ equals the number of triangles associated to the original edge in $G$, it is possible to obtain the $m$-core just by computing the $k$-core of the same level in $G^*$. The complete description can be found in the Supplementary Information.
This work was supported by MICINN projects No. FIS2010-21781-C02-02 and BFU2010-21847-C02-02; [*Generalitat de Catalunya*]{} grants No. 2009SGR838 and 2009SGR1055; the Ramón y Cajal program of the Spanish Ministry of Science; and by the ICREA Academia prize, funded by the [*Generalitat de Catalunya*]{}. It was also supported by Argentine MINCyT project PICT-Bicentenario 01108, and UBACyT 2012 (20020110200181) of the [*Universidad de Buenos Aires*]{}.
[38]{} natexlab\#1[\#1]{}bibnamefont \#1[\#1]{}bibfnamefont \#1[\#1]{}citenamefont \#1[\#1]{}url \#1[`#1`]{}urlprefix\[2\][\#2]{} \[2\]\[\][[\#2](#2)]{}
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ** (, , ).
, ** (, ).
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, (), ISSN .
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , , , ****, ().
, , , **** ().
, , , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , , in **, edited by (, , ), pp. .
, , , , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , , , , ****, ().
, , , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, (), ISSN .
, , , ****, (), ISSN .
, , , , ().
, , , , , , ** ().
, , , , , ().
, , , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , , , ****, ().
, , , , , ****, ().
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The intergalactic medium (IGM) plays an important role in the formation and evolution of galaxies. Recent developments in upcoming radio telescopes are starting to open up the possibility of making a first direct detection of the 21 cm signal of neutral hydrogen (HI) from the warm gas of the IGM in large-scale filaments. The cosmological hydrodynamical EAGLE simulation is used to estimate the typical IGM filament signal. Assuming the same average signal for all filaments, a prediction is made for the detectability of such a signal with the upcoming mid-frequency array of the Square Kilometer Array (SKA1-mid) or the future upgrade to SKA2. The signal-to-noise (S/N) then only depends on the size and orientation of each filament. With filament spines inferred from existing galaxy surveys as a proxy for typical real filaments, we find hundreds of filaments in the region of the sky accessible to the SKA that can be detected. Once the various phases of the SKA telescope become operational, their own surveys will be able to find the galaxies required to infer the position of even more filaments within the survey area. We find that in 120 h, SKA1-mid/SKA2 will detect HI emission from the strongest filaments in the field with a S/N of the order of 10 to $\sim150$ for the most pessimistic model considered here. Some of the brighter filaments can be detected with an integration time of a few minutes with SKA1-mid and a few seconds with SKA2. Therefore, SKA2 will be capable of not only detecting but also mapping a large part of the IGM in these filaments.'
author:
- |
Robin Kooistra$^{1,2}$, Marta B. Silva$^{2,3}$, Saleem Zaroubi$^{2,4,5}$, Marc A. W. Verheijen$^{2,6}$Elmo Tempel$^{7,8}$ and Kelley M. Hess$^{2,9}$\
$^1$Kavli IPMU (WPI), UTIAS, The University of Tokyo, Kashiwa, Chiba 277-8583, Japan\
$^2$Kapteyn Astronomical Institute, University of Groningen, Landleven 12, 9747 AD Groningen, the Netherlands\
$^3$Institute of Theoretical Astrophysics, University of Oslo,P.O. Box 1029 Blindern, N-0315 Oslo, Norway\
$^4$Department of Natural Sciences, Open University of Israel, 1 University Road, PO Box 808, Ra’anana 4353701, Israel\
$^5$Department of Physics, The Technion, Haifa 32000, Israel\
$^6$Adjunct Faculty, National Centre for Radio Astrophysics, TIFR, Ganeshkhind, Pune 411007, India\
$^7$Leibniz-Institut für Astrophysik Potsdam (AIP), An der Sternwarte 16, 14482 Potsdam, Germany\
$^8$Tartu Observatory, University of Tartu, Observatooriumi 1, 61602 Tõravere, Estonia\
$^9$ASTRON, Netherlands Institute for Radio Astronomy, PO 2, 7990 AA, Dwingeloo, The Netherlands
bibliography:
- 'skafils.bib'
title: Detecting the neutral IGM in filaments with the SKA
---
cosmology: theory – diffuse radiation – intergalactic medium – large scale structure of universe
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
In the standard picture, the structure in the Universe forms through non-linear gravitational collapse. This creates an intricate pattern of galaxies, filaments and voids, collectively known as the cosmic web. Such structures are clearly seen in simulations based on the $\Lambda$-Cold Dark Matter ($\Lambda$CDM) cosmological model. Simulations can provide information on both the dark matter and the baryonic gas particles, whereas, on the observational side, the main probe of the large-scale structure has been through the three-dimensional distribution of the observed galaxies, such as in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey [SDSS, @art:sdss1; @art:sdss8], the 6-degree Field (6dF) Galaxy Redshift Survey [@art:6df1; @art:6df3] and the Two Micron All-Sky Redshift Survey [2MRS, @art:2mrs]. Specifically, a significant effort has been made in inferring and characterizing large-scale filaments from galaxy surveys and they seem to match the predictions made by the $\Lambda$CDM model [e.g., @art:sousbie08; @art:jasche10; @art:smith12; @art:tempel14]. Unfortunately however, the positions of galaxies only provide a biased tracer of the underlying density field and give little information on the gas content in the filaments themselves.\
Recent observations have begun to probe the hydrogen gas from the intergalactic medium (IGM). In particular, cross-correlation of neutral hydrogen (HI) 21 cm intensity maps, together with galaxy surveys at $z\sim0.8$ have given strong evidence for the existence of HI gas in galaxies below the detection limit in the cosmic web [@art:chang10; @art:masui13]. Furthermore, at higher redshift, signs of filamentary structure in the gas have been detected in absorption in the spectra of background sources [e.g., @art:abs1; @art:abs2; @art:abs3; @art:finley14]. Nonetheless, the number of direct detections of the IGM in filaments is still limited to a few in the vicinity of galaxies in the circumgalactic medium and the size of the detected filaments is relatively small at a few $\sim100$ kpc [e.g., @art:film31m33; @art:fildet].\
The IGM can be divided into two main components: the Warm-Hot Intergalactic Medium (WHIM) with temperatures of $\sim10^5-10^7$ K and a cooler component with temperatures up to $\sim10^5$ K [@art:cen93; @art:evrard94]. The WHIM consists of highly ionized gas that is heated by local galaxies, but predominantly shock-heated during structure formation, and is expected to contain a large fraction of the baryonic matter in the IGM [e.g., @art:yoshida05]. The existence of significant amounts of hot gas in large-scale filaments has been confirmed through X-ray observations [e.g., @art:eckert15], by tracing the galaxy luminosity density [@art:nevalainen15] and through the thermal Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effect [@art:szeffect]. The cooler component of the IGM, on the other hand, is mostly kept ionized and heated by the the cosmic UV background (UVB). It can be traced through Lyman alpha absorption [e.g., @art:abs2], Lyman alpha emission [@art:silva16] or through HI 21 cm emission [@art:takeuchi14; @art:kooistra17 hereafter K17] if the neutral fraction is high enough.\
In , using a simple model based on the dark matter density field, it was shown that multiple current and upcoming radio telescopes have the sensitivity to possibly detect the HI 21 cm signal from the cold component in strong large-scale filaments at $z$ = 0.1 within $\sim100$ h integrations and with signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) of $\sim1-10$ for phase 2 of the Square Kilometre Array (SKA2). Such an observation could have the potential to provide an unbiased tracer of the underlying dark matter distribution [@art:cui18].\
The differential brightness temperature signal is proportional to the neutral hydrogen number density $n_{\rm HI}$ in cgs units following [@art:furl06]
$$\begin{aligned}
\delta T_{\mathrm{b}}^{\rm HI} (z) = & 5.48\times10^{-14}\times\frac{n_{\rm HI}(z)}{\left(1+z\right)H(z)}\\ \notag
&\times\left(1-\frac{T_{\rm CMB}(z)}{T_s}\right)\left[1 + H(z)^{-1}dv_r/dr\right]^{-1} \mathrm{K},\label{eq_c4:dtb}\end{aligned}$$
where $H(z)$ is the Hubble parameter, $T_{\rm CMB}$ the temperature of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), $T_{\rm s}$ the spin temperature of the gas and $dv_r/dr$ is the comoving gradient of the comoving velocity along the line of sight. The signal can be inferred from the gas density (including clumping) and temperature assuming an ionizing background radiation model. In , these quantities were determined from the density field of a dark matter (DM) only simulation by assuming that the baryonic matter follows the DM density field perfectly. From there, the ionization and neutral fractions and the temperature were derived in thermal and ionization equilibrium. The HI emission in that case is completely governed by the UVB, the density field and the cosmology.\
However, we know from observations that filaments contain galaxies and quasars that provide an extra local source of heating and ionization. This, together with shock-heating negatively impacts the HI 21 cm signal. Therefore, for this study, we adopt a more sophisticated hydrodynamical simulation that includes both these effects, resulting in more realistic conditions in the IGM. This will allow us to better estimate the strength of the filament signal. We furthermore apply a strategy to find filaments that is applicable to both the simulations and the observations. We focus on the most sensitive of the upcoming radio telescopes and carry out a detailed calculation of the prospects for making a detection using either the first phase of the SKA (SKA1-mid) or the future upgrade to SKA2.\
We begin this paper by describing the simulation and the framework we use to obtain a realistic filament signal in Section \[sec:sims\]. The strategy that will be adopted for observations is laid out in Section \[sec:obsstrat\]. Then estimates for observations with SKA1-mid and SKA2 will be made in Section \[sec:snr\]. Finally, some additional observational effects will be discussed in Section \[sec:interfero\]. Throughout the paper we adopt the @art:planck14 cosmological parameters, which are consistent with the latest @art:planck18para parameters within the errors.
The HI 21cm signal from simulations {#sec:sims}
===================================
In this section we provide a description of the simulation that is used to determine a realistic filament signal and the method that was adopted to extract filaments from the box. We then discuss the major sources of uncertainty for such an estimate.
The EAGLE simulation box {#sec:simbox}
------------------------
The Evolution and Assembly of GaLaxies and their Environments (EAGLE) suite of simulations includes heating due to shocks as well as radiative transfer calculations to realistically propagate the photons from local galaxies into their surrounding environment [@art:eagle; @art:eagle2]. We make use of the largest box that is available in the public data release [@art:eagle_pub2]. The box contains $1504^3$ dark matter particles with masses of $6.57\times10^6 h^{-1}\mathrm{M_\odot}$ and initially the same amount of baryonic particles with masses of $1.23\times10^6\, h^{-1}\mathrm{M_\odot}$. The volume of the simulation is $100\,\mathrm{Mpc}^3$.\
The dataset provides us with the smooth particle hydrodynamical (SPH) particle data, namely the gas density, gas temperature and smoothing length of the particles, as well as the positions of halos. We calculate the HI properties of the gas, including the 21 cm differential brightness temperature signal directly on the SPH particles. In order to estimate the hydrogen neutral fraction in each cell, we assume ionization-recombination equilibrium and use the temperature directly from the simulation. The ionization fraction additionally depends on the electron density and the strength of the photo-ionizing background. We note that in this simulation, for starforming particles the temperature represents a parameterization of the effective pressure of the multiphase interstellar medium. Their temperature should therefore not be used to compute the ionization fraction. Since these particles will mostly be located within galaxies, we find that for the IGM in large-scale filaments considered in this work, both removing the starforming particles or fixing their neutral neutral fraction to unity yields the same result.\
The HI 21 cm signal can then further be determined following the prescription outlined in , where we now use the case A hydrogen recombination rate and the corresponding fraction of Lyman $\alpha$ photons per recombination. Case A, where recombinations directly into the ground state are included, is more applicable to the gas considered here than case B, the latter of which was adopted in , since the IGM is optically thin [@book:draine11]. We then use the $YT$ package [@art:yt] to deposit the particles onto a regular grid with $1024^3$ cells, corresponding to a resolution of 66 $h^{-1}$kpc. We adopt a cubic SPH kernel and 58 nearest neighbors, similar to the kernel that was used in EAGLE itself [@art:eagle]. Further analysis in this paper is performed on this gridded box.\
The photo-ionization rate is one of the main uncertainties in this estimation. Here, we consider three different models for the UVB: The @art:hm01 [HM01 after this] UVB gives the highest photo-ionization rate at $z$=0, whereas the @art:hm12 [HM12 hereupon] results in the lowest photo-ionization rate. These models adopt the same methodology, but the uses an updated description of the ionizing sources to adress the observational constraints available at the time. This includes X-ray emission from AGN and UV emission from starforming galaxies at all redshifts, as well as a more detailed treatment of absorption. The most recent continuation of this set of models is given by @art:hm18 [henceforth P18] with an intermediate photo-ionization rate and includes new constraints on the column density distribution of HI absorbers and a new treatment of the opacity for ionizing photons in the IGM. Each of these backgrounds will result in a different filament signal strength and this uncertainty in the intensity of the UVB and its implications will be discussed in more detail in Section \[sec:uvb\]. We note that the EAGLE simulation itself adopts the UVB model. Adopting a different UVB photoionization rate for determining the HI fraction is not fully self-consistent, since the IGM temperature was computed assuming the model. Given that the two other UVB models that we consider have lower photoionization and heating rates, we can infer that by using the temperature provided by the EAGLE simulation, the HI fractions determined for the other UVB models are underestimated. This also results in a lower HI 21 cm signal. The estimates of the filament signal in this work that adopt the and UVB models should thus be considered as lower limits.\
Contamination by galaxies {#sec:galcont}
-------------------------
One thing to take into account for the observations is that emission from galaxies will contaminate the IGM signal. The voxels in the datacube containing the galaxies can be masked and the SKA has sufficient resolution to do this without losing significant fractions of the volume of a filament. The difficulty lies in finding the positions of the galaxies. Surveys, such as SDSS can provide the positions of the most massive galaxies, but that still leaves contamination by the weaker ones. In , this remaining contamination was estimated to be of the order of $\sim10\%$ after masking SDSS galaxies. Since the IGM signal estimates obtained from the EAGLE simulation used in this work are lower, signifying a lower neutral fraction and thus less HI gass, the contamination due to the faint galaxies not detected by SDSS will also be higher. However, SKA itself will be much more sensitive than SDSS, allowing the localisation and masking of faint galaxies well into the dwarf regime . Additionally, even if it will not be possible to mask all of the faint galaxies, the integrated signal would still contain emission from gas that has not been detected before and will therefore still be worth studying.\
![Distribution of the HI 21 cm differential brightness temperature signal as a function of overdensity for cells in the EAGLE simulation, assuming the UV background and after masking cells with a radius of 100 $h^{-1}$kpc around the position of the halos. The cells at the top of the figure, above the main distribution are cells belonging to halos that were not completely masked. The colorbar shows the number of cells.[]{data-label="fig:boxsigdens"}](./images/eagle_denssig_hm01_full_galmask100kpch.pdf){width="49.00000%"}
{width="\textwidth"}
Galaxies and their circumgalactic medium (CGM) contain large amounts of neutral gas, but since we are targetting the HI gas in the IGM, we remove their signal by masking them with a fixed masking radius of 100 $h^{-1}$kpc. We explored the impact of adopting a different radius on the signal and found this radius to effectively remove most of the unwanted signal. Nonetheless, a small amount of contamination still remains from halos that are larger. Properly removing this contamination observationally would require an accurate measurement of the size of each galaxy. Due to the interferometric nature of the SKA, sources such as galaxies that are brighter than the extended emission from the IGM will also add strong sidelobe noise that needs to be removed from the datacube before extracting the IGM signal. This will be discussed in more detail in Section \[sec:interfero\].\
Fig. \[fig:boxsigdens\] shows the distribution of HI 21 cm differential brightness temperature as a function of the overdensity of the cells in the simulation box, assuming the UVB and after masking the galaxies and their CGM. The baryonic physics included in EAGLE yield a wide distribution of signals for a given density that spans more than 4 orders of magnitude. The small number of bright cells that can be seen above the main distribution corresponds to regions in the CGM of large galaxies that were not masked with the adopted fixed masking radius. Since the number density of these cells is small, their effect on the targeted IGM signal is minimal.
Filament extraction {#sec:simfil}
-------------------
Although filaments can be easily identified by eye in slices of the simulation box, fully extracting these three-dimensional structures is difficult. For this study, we chose to use the Bisous model code by @art:tempel14 [@art:tempel16] to find filaments in the EAGLE simulation. It has also been widely applied to observations. The Bisous algorithm models the three-dimensional structures in the distribution of the galaxies through a marked point process and only requires the galaxy positions as input. The statistical nature of the inferred filaments means that there is a significant probability that some of the identified filaments are not real, since a group of galaxies that formed along a line by chance, but whose underlying density field is not connected by a filament could still be inferred by the code as a connected filament. To minimize this effect in our sample, we only consider filaments that are longer than 5 $h^{-1}$Mpc. Moreover, the spatial distribution of the filaments should be closely connected to large galaxies. Therefore, we limit the sample to galaxies with masses above $10^8M_{\odot}$ in order to trace the stronger filaments, as well as those having non-zero starformation rate in EAGLE since filament galaxies can accrete gas from the filament and can thus be expected to have some ongoing starformation. The mean brightness temperature of HI 21 cm emission in a slice of the simulation box of width 5.3 $h^{-1}$Mpc can be seen in Fig. \[fig:boxslice\], where the blue lines denote the inferred filament spines. Most of the structures in the box are traced well by the Bisous filaments.\
The Bisous model code only provides the three-dimensional positions of the points defining the filament spine. Along the spine in the simulation, the width of a filament can vary. However, when dealing with observations, this information from the underlying density field is not available and so an assumption for the width needs to be made a priori. In this case we assume the filaments to have a radius of 0.5 $h^{-1}$Mpc, as was used in @art:tempel14, and mask all the cells that are at a distance greater than this radius away from the filament points to extract the cells in filaments. The signal of the complete filament is then given by the mean of all the cells that fall within the filament radius. Choosing a slightly smaller radius (i.e., 0.25 $h^{-1}$Mpc) did not significantly affect our mean signal estimates, but it gives more scatter in the signal, since some of the inferred spines can be misaligned with parts of the underlying density field. A filament radius of 1 $h^{-1}$Mpc does result in a slightly lower mean signal (i.e. $\sim$10-50$\%$), since some filaments are less wide and thus empty regions around the filaments will be included in the integration. The scatter for this large radius does decrease, since then most of the underlying density field of the filaments will be encapsulated by the cylinders around the filament spines, even if there is a slight misalignment. Because a larger physical radius also results in a larger area on the sky, we take the radius of 0.5 $h^{-1}$Mpc to avoid having to integrate over too large angular scales.\
The distribution of the mean filament signal as a function of the filament length is shown in Fig. \[fig:filsigs\]. The plot shows that there is a large range of mean signals for these filaments due to the different environments inside them. Howver, most of the low density gas sits at brightness temperatures around the median value of a few times $\sim10^{-7}$ K in this distribution. This corresponds to an HI column density of $\sim2-5\times10^{13}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-2}$ for a 100 km $\mathrm{s}^{-1}$ velocity width. In the inner most dense parts of the filaments they tend to be brighter and some dense clumps of gas can additionally drive up the mean filament signal to the higher outliers shown in Fig. \[fig:filsigs\]. The outliers to lower mean signals are due to misalignments of the inferred filament spines with the underlying density distribution.\
![Distribution of the mean signal per cell in filaments as a function of their length for Bisous filaments longer than 5 $h^{-1}$Mpc in the EAGLE simulation box. A filament radius of 0.5 $h^{-1}$Mpc was adopted together with the UVB.[]{data-label="fig:filsigs"}](./images/filaments_siglens_He_hm01_caseA_1cat_sph.pdf "fig:"){width="48.00000%"}\
We note that many other methods have been developed to identify the large-scale structure components in simulations [see e.g., @art:libeskind17 for an overview of a number of different available codes]. For observations, the large-scale structure is only traced by the positions of the galaxies. Recovering the filaments requires a method that can properly infer the structures based solely on the limited data from galaxy surveys. This makes the Bisous model a good choice for this study, since it can be applied directly to both the simulations and real data from galaxy redshift surveys. The same model will therefore come back in our observational strategy in Section \[sec:obsstrat\].\
Another thing to note is that observations do not measure distances in physical distances. Instead, galaxy surveys observe in redshift-space, where the peculiar velocities of galaxies can add Doppler shifts to the measured redshifts [e.g., @art:davispeebles83; @art:kaiser87]. This effect can result in errors in the inferred spatial positions of galaxies, whereby certain large-scale structures can appear to be more elongated along the line of sight than they are in reality. Therefore, before a filament finder can be applied to a sample of galaxies from a galaxy redshift survey, the redshifts first need to be converted to proper distances, which need to be corrected for the redshift-space distortions. The majority of the effects of velocities on redshift measurents can be supressed [e.g., @art:tegmark04; @art:tempel14], but for some filaments errors in the locations of the inferred spines can remain.
UV background uncertainty {#sec:uvb}
--------------------------
As was briefly touched upon in Section \[sec:simbox\], another large uncertainty to the expected signal strength is the intensity of the UVB. For this reason, we considered three observationally driven models for the UVB. Although there is a large spread in the possible filament signal values, we use a mean value from the distribution shown in Fig. \[fig:filsigs\] calculated for each UVB to determine its effect on the overall distribution. Since some of the highest signals are likely contaminated by remaining contribution from galaxies, we remove the 10$\%$ highest and lowest signal filaments to determine the mean. The resulting values are given in Table \[tab:uvbsigs\], together with the standard deviation of the cut distribution. For reference, we also give the corresponding HI column density over a 100 km $\mathrm{s}^{-1}$ velocity width. These values are consistent with the lower-density gas found through HI absorption measurements at low redshift [e.g., @art:teppergarcia12]. The last column in Table \[tab:uvbsigs\] presents the column density based on the mean signal in the brightest 10 per cent of the cells in filaments in the simulation box. This shows that a significant fraction of the IGM gas in the filaments has densities one or two orders of magnitude higher than the mean and can thus also result in a stronger signal.\
----------- ------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ------------------------ ----------------------
UVB model $\Gamma_{\rm HI}$ at $z$=0 $<\delta T_{\rm b}^{\rm HI}>_{\rm fil}$ $N_{\rm HI}^{\rm all}$ $N_{\rm HI}^{10 \%}$
($10^{-14}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$) ($10^{-7}$ K) (cm$^-2$) (cm$^-2$)
2.3 $6\pm6$ $1\times10^{14}$ $2\times10^{16}$
6.1 $2\pm2$ $4\times10^{13}$ $8\times10^{15}$
8.4 $2\pm2$ $3\times10^{13}$ $5\times10^{15}$
----------- ------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- ------------------------ ----------------------
: Estimated mean filament signals $<\delta T_{\rm b}^{\rm HI}>_{\rm fil}$ of the Bisous filaments for the three different UVB models (after removing the 10$\%$ lowest and highest outliers). The values are given in order of increasing HI photo-ionization rate ($\Gamma_{\rm HI}$) at $z$=0. The error on the signal denotes the standard deviation of the distribution of filament signals. The HI column densities $N_{\rm HI}^{\rm all}$ have been determined from the mean filament signals over a 100 km $\mathrm{s}^{-1}$ velocity width, corresponding to twice the filament radius of [$0.5\, h^{-1}\, \mathrm{Mpc}$]{} at $z$ = 0.01. $N_{\rm HI}^{10 \%}$ denotes the column density based on the mean filament signal in the brightest 10 per cent of the cells within filaments in the simulation.
\[tab:uvbsigs\]
Due to its high photo-ionization rate, the model also gives the lowest signal limit. However, the photo-ionization rate of this model lies above the limits derived from observations of H$\alpha$ emission in a nearby galaxy [@art:uvbmeasure]. The model on the other hand, results in the highest signal, but its photo-ionization rate lies below the observed limits. The UVB model by is fully consistent with those limits and results in a filament signal that is a factor $\sim$3 lower than the one derived using . The difference between the mean signals from the and is negligible within the standard deviations of the distributions. We assume these values to be representative for typical filaments and we note that the difference in the resulting filament signal strengths for the two extreme models is only a factor of 3. For further estimates of the detectability, we consider both extreme cases: $\delta T_{\rm b} = 2\times10^{-7}$ K from as the lower limit and $\delta T_{\rm b} = 6\times10^{-7}$ K assuming as the upper limit.
Observational strategy {#sec:obsstrat}
======================
In order to maximize the chance of a detection, it is essential to first determine where on the sky the best candidate filaments can be found. The only resource available to find target filaments are the positions of the galaxies detected beforehand. In the same way that we determined filament signals from the galaxy catalogue of the simulation in Section \[sec:simfil\], we propose to use galaxy surveys to first determine the locations of the filament spines and then integrate the emission around these spines to obtain a signal.\
In this Section we apply this strategy to existing galaxy surveys to determine how many filaments are accesible to the SKA. We then use the average filament signals obtained in Section \[sec:simfil\] to estimate the S/N for the integrated signal per filament with the SKA, where the S/N then depends on the three-dimensional orientation of the filament. Here, we outline which steps will be required to make a detection and how we estimate the noise that can be expected for such an observation with the SKA.\
In this case we consider the two phases of the telescope separately. The first phase of the SKA will consist of the 64 13.5m dishes currently operating as the Karoo Array Telescope (MeerKAT) together with 133 dishes of 15m diameter that will be added to it[^1]. For its second phase, this system will be significantly expanded to a total of 1500 dishes, which will result in an unprecedented sensitivity at these frequencies. The relevant properties of these two arrays that will be used in this study are summarized in Table \[tab:specs\].\
Parameter SKA1-Mid SKA-2
--------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------- -----------
Number of dishes, $N_{\rm dish}$ 197 1500
Dish diameter, $D_{\rm dish}$ (m) 64$\times$13.5 + 133$\times$15 15
Total collecting area, $A_{\rm tot}$ ($\rm{m}^2$) 32,664 265,071
System temperature, $T_{\rm sys}$ (K) 20 30
Aperture efficiency, $\epsilon_{\rm ap}$ 0.8 0.8
Field of View ($\rm{deg}^2$) $\sim$1 $\sim$1
Angular resolution (arcsec) $\sim$0.3 $\sim$0.1
System Equivalent
Flux Density, SEFD (Jy) 2.1 0.4
: Properties of the two phases of the SKA (see footnote \[footnote:ska\]).
\[tab:specs\]
Filament catalogues from SDSS, 2MRS and 6dF {#sec:filcat}
-------------------------------------------
Given their high sensitivity, both SKA1-mid and SKA2 will be able to detect extremely faint galaxies and therefore it would be possible to trace almost the complete cosmic web within their surveys. However, until data from such surveys becomes available, it is necessary to resort to existing galaxy surveys in order to determine the location of filament spines on the sky. In this case, we use the galaxy catalogues from three large-area galaxy redshift surveys to identify realistic filaments as a proxy for what the SKA should be able to detect in its survey volumes.\
One of the largest and most dense samples of galaxy redshifts was obtained by SDSS. We adopt the filament catalogue that was described in @art:tempel14, whose data is publicly available. The catalogue uses a sample of 499340 galaxies in the redshift range 0.009 $\leq z \leq$ 0.155 and is limited in magnitude by the spectroscopic sample [@art:ssdssspecsamp].\
Additionally, we applied the Bisous model to the galaxy sample of the 2MRS survey and to a combined sample of 2MRS and 6dF galaxies. The 6dF sample of 126754 sources is limited in magnitudes by $m_{\rm K} \leq$ 12.65, $m_{\rm H} \leq$ 12.95, $m_{\rm J} \leq$ 13.75, $m_{\rm r_{\rm F}} \leq$ 15.60 and $m_{\rm b_{\rm J}} \leq$ 16.75, and has a median redshift of 0.053 [@art:6df3]. In the case of 2MRS, the sample contains 44599 galaxies and is limited in magnitude by $m_{\rm K_{\rm s}} \leq 11.75$. The survey only probes out to redshifts of $z \approx$ 0.05, but it covers a larger area of the sky than the other two surveys [@art:2mrs]. Because the 2MRS galaxies are used in both filament catalogues, there will be some overlap between the filament spines derived from them.\
Noise estimation {#sec:noise}
----------------
The signal-to-noise ratio of a filament depends on both the signal itself and on the noise originating from the instrument and the survey characteristics. We assume every filament has the same signal, so that the S/N only varies depending on the filament size on the sky and the telescope sensitivity.\
For the integration of the signal in real data, the filament would be split up into resolution elements, whose angular size corresponds to the filament diameter of $0.5~h^{-1}$Mpc. However, since the resolution of the observation itself is higher, the noise will add together depending on the size of such an integration element. The depth of the filament within that element then sets the frequency range for the integration. In order to estimate the noise for each filament, we take every point of the spine given by the filament catalogue, then use its redshift to determine the angular size of the filament diameter and add together the trapezoid shaped patches set by two neighboring spine points. The parallel sides of the trapezoid are set by the angular size by going up and down 0.5 $h^{-1}$Mpc in declination, whereas the other two sides of the trapezoid are formed by connecting the tops and bottoms of the parallel sides. Fig. \[fig:filnoise\] gives a sketch of how a filament is divided up into the trapezoid patches along the sky for the integration.\
![Sketch of the filament noise integration scheme. The blue line shows the spine of the filament in the sky plane, where the yellow dots denote the filament points from the filament catalogue. The black lines denote the angular size of the 1 $h^{-1}$Mpc filament diameter at each point, $\Theta_i$. The cyan shaded trapezoid areas ($A_{\rm patch}$) between every point are added together in a weighted sum, according to Equation \[eq:totnoise\].[]{data-label="fig:filnoise"}](./images/filnoise.png){width="49.00000%"}
The area $A_{\rm patch}$ on the sky of a single patch is set by the angular size $\Theta$ as: $$A_{\rm patch} = \frac{\Theta_i + \Theta_{i+1}}{2}\times\Delta_{\mathrm{RA}},$$ where $\Theta_i$ is the angular size at point i, $\Theta_{i+1}$ the angular size at the adjacent point and $\Delta_{\rm RA}$ is the difference in right ascension between the two points. The noise of a radio telescope is given by $$\Delta T^{\rm N} = \frac{\lambda_0^2(1+z)^2}{\Delta\theta^2\epsilon_{\rm ap}A_{\rm tot}}\frac{T_{\rm sys}}{\sqrt{\Delta\nu t_{\rm obs}}},\label{eq:telnoise}$$ where the rest frame wavelength of the observed line is denoted by $\lambda_0$ and $\Delta\theta$ is the angular resolution. As an approximation, we set $\Delta\theta^2=A_{\rm patch}$. The parameter $\epsilon_{\rm ap}$ denotes the aperture efficiency, $A_{\rm tot}$ is the total collecting area of the telescope, $T_{\rm sys}$ the system temperature, $\delta\nu$ the frequency bandwidth over which is integrated for the observations and $t_{\rm obs}$ is the integration time [@art:furl06; @art:kooistra17]. Equation \[eq:telnoise\] implies that the sensitivity will be higher when the filament is orientated perpendicular to the line-of-sight. This results in a noise level of 5.2$\times10^{-6}$ K (9.6$\times10^{-7}$ K) for SKA1-mid (SKA2) for an angular resolution of 10 arcmin, and frequency resolution of 20 kHz with an integration time of 120 h at $z = 0.01$.\
All the elements along the filament spine are then added together in the following manner to obtain the total noise per filament: $$\sigma_{\rm fil} = \frac{1}{n_{\rm patch}}\sqrt{\sum_i\sigma_{\mathrm{patch},i}^2},\label{eq:totnoise}$$ with $n_{\rm patch}$ denoting the number of patches.\
The angular size of very local filaments can be quite large. If the scales of the fluctuations in the IGM become too large, the spatial filtering of the telescope would cause a reduction in the S/N and a deviation from Equation \[eq:telnoise\]. Therefore, we limit the filaments considered here to a minimum redshift of $z=0.01$. The effect of the large angular scale of the nearby filaments will be discussed in more detail in Section \[sec:deconv\]. We note that for the observations the voxels containing emission from galaxies would have to be masked, reducing the volume that is integrated over. However, since the size of the galaxies is small compared to the size of a filament, this would require only a minor correction and is not included here.
----------- ---- ------- ------------- --------------- ---------- ------ ---------- ------
Filament ID $z$ $\Theta(z)$ $l$ S/N S/N S/N S/N
Catalogue (deg) ($h^{-1}$Mpc) SKA1-mid SKA2 SKA1-mid SKA2
HM12 HM12 HM01 HM01
SDSS 1 0.01 1.9 10.6 33 182 11 61
2 0.011 1.7 10.1 29 158 9.5 53
3 0.011 1.7 7.3 26 140 8.7 47
4 0.013 1.5 20.6 25 133 8.3 44
5 0.012 1.6 15.6 24 130 8.0 43
6 0.012 1.6 7 20 109 6.7 36
7 0.014 1.4 18.6 19 100 6.3 33
8 0.012 1.6 15.7 17 91 5.6 30
9 0.013 1.5 15.6 17 91 5.6 30
10 0.014 1.4 9.7 16 90 5.4 30
2MRS 11 0.011 1.7 11.5 90 500 30 167
+ 12 0.012 1.6 7 40 214 13 71
6dF 13 0.012 1.6 19.5 40 214 13 71
14 0.01 1.9 13 38 200 13 67
15 0.014 1.4 8.5 38 200 13 67
16 0.012 1.6 25.5 26 140 8.7 47
17 0.017 1.1 19 23 128 7.7 43
18 0.014 1.4 35 22 120 7.4 40
19 0.013 1.5 24 21 113 6.9 38
20 0.015 1.3 27.5 21 111 6.9 37
2MRS 21 0.01 1.9 16 80 429 27 143
22 0.014 1.4 9.5 35 194 12 65
23 0.01 1.9 9 35 188 12 63
24 0.019 1.0 17 30 167 10 56
25 0.025 0.8 9 29 158 9.5 53
26 0.012 1.6 22 26 143 8.7 48
27 0.011 1.7 18.5 25 133 8.3 44
28 0.013 1.5 6.5 24 128 8.0 43
29 0.014 1.4 40 24 128 8.0 43
30 0.022 0.9 11.5 22 120 7.4 40
----------- ---- ------- ------------- --------------- ---------- ------ ---------- ------
\[tab:snr\]
SKA signal-to-noise predictions {#sec:snr}
===============================
Applying the methods described in Section \[sec:noise\] to all the filaments in the filament catalogues described in Section \[sec:filcat\] and dividing the signal estimate by the total noise then yields the expected S/N. Because of the large variety in HI photo-ionization rates for the UVB models discussed in Section \[sec:snr\], we determine the S/N for the two limits derived there: $\delta T_{\rm b} = 2\times10^{-7}$ K (lower) and $\delta T_{\rm b} = 6\times10^{-7}$ K (upper). We assume an integration time of 120 h for the observations.\
The galaxy catalogues also cover areas of the sky that are not accesible to the SKA. Given its latitude of $\sim$-30$^\circ$, we remove all filaments from the sample that fall outside the declination range of +60$^\circ$ to -90$^\circ$. Out of the 9477, 6779 and 2603 filaments of length equal to or greater than 5 $h^{-1}$Mpc at $z\geq$0.01 for the SDSS, 2MRS+6dF and 2MRS filament catalogues, respectively, 85, 231 and 162 filaments can be detected with SKA1-mid at S/N$\geq$2, assuming the lower limit signal. In the case of the upper limit signal, the number of filaments increases to 475, 860 and 637, respectively. For SKA2, the S/N is $\sim5.5$ times higher, following from the difference in the collective areas using Equation \[eq:telnoise\], and thus many more filaments become available for individual detections. The ten highest S/N filaments from each catalogue and their properties are summarized in Table \[tab:snr\]. The maximum integrated S/N value of a filament we estimate for SKA1-mid is 90, whereas the same filament has a S/N value of 500 with SKA2. Therefore, although SKA1-mid can make initial detections of some of the filaments by integrating along the filament, an instrument as sensitive as SKA2 would even be able to map out the brightest parts of the filaments. Looking at the highest S/N filament with SKA2 (filament 11 in Table \[tab:snr\]), the signal would reach S/N = 2 with an integration time of only $\sim$7-62s, depending on the strength of the UVB. The S/N = 2 integration time for the same filament with SKA1-mid would be $\sim$4-32m.\
We point out again that there is significant scatter in the filament signals, as shown in Fig. \[fig:filsigs\]. Therefore, there will be filaments presented here that will be detected with an even higher S/N. Overall it can therefore be expected that a significant number of robust detections will be made already with SKA1-mid. The advantage of the integration method presented here is that, in principle, the integration can be performed with data from any galaxy survey with the same instruments, as long as the integration time per pointing of the survey is long enough.
Effects of interferometers {#sec:interfero}
==========================
Radio interferometers, such as the SKA, are limited by their baselines in which scales they are sensitive to. For a point source, the sensitivity of the telescope corresponds to the value presented in Equation \[eq:telnoise\]. For diffuse emission, the situation becomes more complicated due to spatial filtering, which could cause additional loss of signal on the larger scales. In the next section, we therefore make a rough estimate of the magnitude of this effect by considering two-dimensional images of a filament from the simulation.
Spatial filtering {#sec:deconv}
-----------------
The S/N estimates presented so far have assumed that the telescope can perfectly probe the complete filaments. However, due to the nature of an interferometer, only scales smaller than the scale corresponding to the shortest baseline will be resolved. For the SKA, the minimum baseline will be $\sim 20$ m, corresponding to an angular scale of $\sim$36 arcmin. Also, since the UV-plane is not fully sampled, there will be significant spatial filtering that will cause a signal loss on the more diffuse structures. In order to estimate this loss, we manually extracted a $\sim$10 $h^{-1}$Mpc filament from the simulation box. We then convolved an image of the filament with a point spread function (PSF) of SKA1-mid, where the angular scale of the pixels in the PSF image changes as a function of redshift. This way, we can directly compare between each redshift, since the same filament is imaged in all cases. The baseline design for SKA2 is not yet known, but since it will more dishes than SKA1-mid, as well as include the dishes already in SKA1-mid, we only perform the calculation for SKA1-mid and expect that the performance of SKA2 will be even better.\
The PSF is calculated in two steps. First, a measurement set is created using the publicly available SIMMS package[^2]. Here we adopt the antennae positions of SKA1-mid and choose a pointing to -30$^\circ$ in declination and 0h00m RA, at the frequency corresponding to the required redshift and for a single frequency channel of 20 kHz. In reality, one would have to integrate over multiple frequency channels to cover an entire filament, but here we treat it as if the filament was entirely in the plane of the sky to allow us to estimate the spatial filtering in the angular directions.\
In the next, step we created an image of the PSF from the measurement set using the w-stacking clean imager [WSClean; @art:wsclean], which allows us to sample the PSF in any size and scale. We calculate a separate PSF for each redshift. Here, we used images with a size of $2048\times2048$ pixels, where the angular pixel scale depends on the redshift. We apply uniform weighting to the visibilities. This gives the noise level that was estimated with Equation \[eq:telnoise\], but it also results in the highest resolution. Other weighting schemes, such as robust or natural weighting will result in better surface brightness sensitivity. The angular scale of a pixel in this $2048\times2048$ pixel image then becomes 22.276$^{\prime\prime}$,11.164$^{\prime\prime}$, 4.497$^{\prime\prime}$ and 2.276$^{\prime\prime}$ at z = 0.01, 0.02, 0.05 and 0.1, respectively. The corresponding maximum baselines probed by this PSF then respectively are 2.0, 4.0, 10 and 21 km, which yields much lower resolution than the $\sim$0.3$^{\prime\prime}$ FWHM of the SKA beam. Therefore, we are under-sampling the PSF. However, in order to cover a field of view (FoV) that encompasses the entire filament, this was the maximum resolution we could manage computationally, given the required memory usage. In order to check the robustness of the PSF estimate, we recalculated the PSF by excluding all baselines that are longer than the scale equivalent to the size of a pixel. This resulted in PSFs identical to the ones without a baseline cut and therefore we believe that the estimates presented here are reasonable. Doing a more detailed calculation would require multiple pointings.\
Using the SPH kernel we deposited the simulated filament onto a $2048\times2048$ pixel image, the same size as the PSF image. Finally, we convolved the simulated image with the PSFs at different redshifts to generate dirty images of the filament. We note that the outer regions of the PSF image are noisy and would result in strong edge effects in the dirty image that are not real. We therefore multiplied the PSF image with a Gaussian of width 410 pixels (1/5th the size of the image) before the convolution in order to mitigate this effect. Since the exercise here is meant to quantify the effect of the spatial filtering on the filamentary structure, no noise was added to the images.\
The images were then cleaned using the *deconvolve* task in the Common Astronomy Software Applications package [CASA; @art:casa], adopting the multiscale algorithm with a gain of 0.7 and 30,000 iterations. However, the deconvolution results were unstable due to bright sidelobes from the strong galaxies inside the filament outshining the IGM and being interpreted by $CASA$ as sources. This will also be an issue for observations, where galaxies will contaminate the signal in a similar way. We furthermore attempted the same exercise on the filament image where SPH particles within a radius of 100 $h^{-1}$kpc from the galaxy positions were removed before gridding the image. This image is shown in the furthest left panel of Fig. \[fig:deconv\]. However, the cleaning algorithm still diverges on a solution and, as can be seen in the partially cleaned images in the remaining panels of Fig. \[fig:deconv\] there is added noise from the brighter pixels at the top. The major structures of the filament are recovered well and the integrated filament signal between the black curves becomes lower from a factor $\sim$2 at z = 0.01, up to a factor of 1.1 at z = 0.1. Therefore, we do not believe the spatial filtering to significantly affect the IGM emission. It would, however, require significant tweaking of the parameters to get the cleaning algorithm to converge and also recover the brighter structures at the top of the image with less noise. This falls outside the scope of this paper and we leave this for a future publication.\
Nonetheless, as an additional test we attempted the same cleaning exercise as described above, but then on a smoothed version of the filament image. In this case we extract the same filament with a resolution of 0.13 $h^{-1}$ Mpc and linearly interpolate it to the 2048x2048 pixel image size used for the PSF of SKA. Due to the interpolation, this removes the small scale fluctuations, which makes it easier for the cleaning algorithm to converge, but the spatial filtering would conversely be stronger. This image is shown in the left panel of Fig. \[fig:deconv\_smoothed\]. The cleaned images are given in the second and following panels. As can be expected, some of the diffuse emission is filtered away by the telescope in all cases. For the lowest redshift, the effect is strongest, since the physical size of the fluctuations corresponds to the largest angular scale on the sky. We determine the signal loss by adding all the cells in between the two black lines and dividing the value of the signal in the non-convolved image with that of the convolved images. This gives signals lower by a factor of $\sim$3 and $\sim$1.2 for $z$ = 0.01 and 0.02, respectively. For the $z$ = 0.05 and $z$ = 0.1, the signal loss is less than $\sim1\%$. Therefore, only for the nearest filaments does the spatial filtering become significant.\
Given that both the real and simulated filaments contain structures at smaller scales, as shown in Fig. \[fig:deconv\] already, the signal loss in reality should be lower than this. However, removing the bright contaminating sources will prove challenging for such an experiment and would require modeling the sources and removing them before imaging. Methods for this have already been developed for 21 cm Epoch of Reionization experiments [e.g., @art:sagecal].
{width="\textwidth"}
{width="\textwidth"}
Conclusion {#sec:concl}
==========
Detecting the 21 cm signal from the neutral hydrogen gas in the IGM is very challenging. It requires sensitive telescopes to reach noise levels below the 21 cm signal from the small amount of neutral gas. Therefore, in this study, we determined the prospects for the detection of the integrated HI 21 cm signal of large-scale filaments with the most powerful upcoming radio telescopes, SKA1-mid and SKA2.\
We made use of the density field and gas temperature from the EAGLE simulation in order to realistically estimate the HI 21 cm brightness temperature signal in the IGM. The Bisous filament finder code was then used to extract filaments from the simulation. We find, although there is significant scatter, a conservative estimate of the integrated mean filament signal of $2-6\times10^{-7}$ K, depending on the strength of the UVB.\
We then took filaments from catalogues inferred from existing galaxy surveys to identify realistic filaments within the sky accessible to the SKA to estimate the S/N that can be expected with both SKA1-mid and SKA2. The signal was determined for three different estimates of the UVB. This study yields $\sim$478-1972 filaments that lie within the detection threshold of SKA1-mid with 120h integrations, where the strongest results in a S/N value of 30 (167) for SKA1-mid (SKA2), assuming the most pessimistic UVB and ignoring spatial filtering due to the array. The noise for this filament would already result in S/N = 2 with with integration times of $\sim$4-32m with SKA1-mid and $\sim$7-62s for SKA2.\
In order to estimate the effect on this signal of observing with an interferometer, we made an estimation of the magnitude of the signal loss due to the spatial filtering. This showed that, for the closest filaments, the signal can decrease up to a factor of $\sim3$. We also find that bright sources, such as galaxies will have to be carefully modeled and removed in order to recover the IGM signal.\
Therefore, SKA1-mid will be able to make initial detections of the integrated 21 cm signal of a large sample of filaments, whereas SKA2 will open up the possibility for large statistical studies of the filament signals, as well as potentially mapping parts of them. The direct detection of neutral gas from the IGM in large-scale filaments will greatly contribute to constraining ionization conditions within the IGM in the local Universe.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
RK, MS and SZ thank the Netherlands Foundation for Scientific Research for support through the VICI grant 639.043.006.\
ET was supported by ETAg grants IUT40-2, IUT26-2 and by EU through the ERDF CoE grant TK133 and MOBTP86.\
RK would like to thank Florent Mertens, Bharat Gehlot, Kyle Oman, Ed Elson and Mario G. Santos for the insightful discussions and help with learning to run some of the software. Our gratitude also goes out to Francesco Haardt and Roger Deane for supplying us with some of the required data and helping us find suitable software to use.\
SZ acknowledges support by the Israel Science Foundation (grant no. 255/18).
[^1]: See Baseline Design Document version 2 at: <https://www.skatelescope.org/key-documents/>\[footnote:ska\]
[^2]: Written by Sphesihle Makhathini: <https://github.com/radio-astro/simms>
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We present weak-lensing mass measurements of 50 X-ray luminous galaxy clusters at $0.15\le z\le0.3$, based on uniform high quality observations with Suprime-Cam mounted on the 8.2-m Subaru telescope. We pay close attention to possible systematic biases, aiming to control them at the $\ls4$ per cent level. The dominant source of systematic bias in weak-lensing measurements of the mass of individual galaxy clusters is contamination of background galaxy catalogues by faint cluster and foreground galaxies. We extend our conservative method for selecting background galaxies with $(V-i'')$ colours redder than the red sequence of cluster members to use a colour-cut that depends on cluster-centric radius. This allows us to define background galaxy samples that suffer $\le1$ per cent contamination, and comprise $13$ galaxies per square arcminute. Thanks to the purity of our background galaxy catalogue, the largest systematic that we identify in our analysis is a shape measurement bias of $3$ per cent, that we measure using simulations that probe weak shears upto $g=0.3$. Our individual cluster mass and concentration measurements are in excellent agreement with predictions of the mass-concentration relation. Equally, our stacked shear profile is in excellent agreement with the Navarro Frenk and White profile. Our new LoCuSS mass measurements are consistent with the CCCP and CLASH surveys, and in tension with the Weighing the Giants at $\sim1-2\sigma$ significance. Overall, the consensus at $z\le0.3$ that is emerging from these complementary surveys represents important progress for cluster mass calibration, and augurs well for cluster cosmology.'
bibliography:
- 'my.bib'
title: 'LoCuSS: Weak-lensing mass calibration of galaxy clusters'
---
\[firstpage\]
70Msol
galaxies: clusters: individual - gravitational lensing: weak
\#1\#2[ eprint\#1:\#2::nil]{} eprint@arXiv\#1[[[arXiv:\#1]{}](http://arxiv.org/abs/#1)]{} eprint@dblp\#1[[dblp:\#1](http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bibtex/#1.xml)]{} eprint\#1:\#2:\#3:\#4nil[ tempa[\#1]{} tempb[\#2]{} tempc[\#3]{} tempcempty tempctempb tempbtempa tempbempty tempb[arXiv]{} ifundefined[@eprint@tempb]{} [tempb:tempc]{} [ @eprint@tempb]{}]{}
\#1\#2\#3[ ifundefined[mniiiauth@\#1]{} [mniiiauth@\#1\#2]{} [\#3]{}]{}
Introduction
============
Accurate measurements of the mass and internal structure of dark matter halos that host galaxy clusters and groups are central to a broad range of fundamental research spanning cosmological parameters, the nature of dark matter, the spectrum of primordial density fluctuations, testing gravity theory, and the formation/evolution of galaxies and the intergalactic medium. The requirement for accuracy is most stringent for studies that aim to probe dark energy, e.g. via evolution of the cluster mass function [e.g. @Vikhlinin09b; @Allen11]. Upcoming surveys will discover $\sim10^5$ clusters and intend to infer the mass of the majority of these systems from scaling relations between mass and the observable properties of clusters [e.g. @Pillepich12; @Sartoris15]. Notwithstanding the forecast accuracy and precision of other cosmological probes, the sheer number of clusters upon which future cosmological results will rely implies that per cent level control of systematic biases in the ensemble mass calibration of clusters will ultimately be required.
The challenge of calibrating systematic biases in the ensemble galaxy cluster mass calibration at this level of accuracy is amplified by the fact that the normalization of the calibration is necessary but not sufficient for accurate cluster cosmology. Poorly constrained knowledge of the intrinsic scatter between observable mass proxies (including all “masses” measured from data) and the underlying mass of dark matter halos that host galaxy clusters is a source of bias in cluster-based cosmological constraints [e.g. @Smith03]. Intrinsic scatter between the relevant observable properties of clusters and between mass measurements and underlying halo mass is therefore a key parameter that many studies attempt to constrain [e.g. @Okabe10c; @Okabe14b; @Becker11; @Bahe12; @Marrone12; @Mahdavi13; @Sifon13; @Mulroy14; @Rozo15; @Saliwanchik15]. Cluster mass measurement methods used for calibration studies must therefore permit measurements of individual cluster masses in order to characterise the full distribution of cluster mass around the mean relation between mass and observable mass proxy. Moreover, whilst stacked mass measurements are powerful probes of the population mean, they offer no useful constraints on the scatter around the mean.
An increasing number of galaxy cluster mass calibration studies use weak gravitational lensing measurements to constrain cluster masses [e.g. @Smith05; @Bardeau07; @Okabe10b; @Okabe10a; @Okabe11; @Okabe13; @Okabe14a; @Okabe15b; @Okabe15a; @Hoekstra12; @Applegate14; @Umetsu14; @Hoekstra15]. This is because interpretation of the gravitational lensing signal does not require assumptions about the physical nature or state of the gravitating mass of the cluster. Therefore, despite the fact that individual cluster mass measurements can suffer appreciable biases that correlate with the observer’s viewing angle through asymmetric cluster mass distributions [e.g. @Corless07; @Meneghetti10], gravitational lensing can yield an accurate mean mass calibration of galaxy clusters, supported by knowledge of the scatter between true halo mass and weak-lensing mass measurements [@Becker11; @Bahe12].
The largest samples of clusters for which weak-lensing observations are available are currently drawn from large-scale X-ray surveys and number of order 50 clusters. These surveys are the Local Cluster Substructure Survey (LoCuSS; @Okabe13 [@Martino14]; Smith et al. in prep.), the Canadian Cluster Cosmology Project (CCCP; @Mahdavi13 [@Hoekstra15]), and the Weighing the Giants programme (WtG; @vonderLinden14 [@Applegate14]). In the parlance of the Dark Energy Task Force, these are Stage II studies that examine the systematic uncertainties inherent in using galaxy clusters as probes of Dark Energy [@Albrecht06]. The LoCuSS sample is an $L_X$-limited sub-set of clusters from [*ROSAT*]{} All-sky Survey (RASS) at $0.15<z<0.3$; the CCCP sample is a mixture of X-ray luminous clusters for which optical data are available from the CFHT archive and a temperature-selected sub-set of clusters from the [*ASCA*]{} survey spanning $0.15<z<0.55$; the WtG sample is a representative flux-limited sub-set of the RASS clusters at $0.15<z<0.7$. Smaller, generally heterogeneous, samples of X-ray clusters are also studied, for example, by the the Cluster Lensing And Supernova Survey with Hubble (CLASH; @Postman12 [@Umetsu14]) and the 400SD surveys [@Israel12]. Whilst samples of Sunyaev Zeldovich (SZ) Effect detected clusters are growing rapidly, the weak-lensing studies of SZ samples currently number handfuls of clusters [e.g. @High12; @Gruen14].
Currently, the target accuracy on controlling systematic biases in the ensemble cluster mass calibration is therefore set by the size of the LoCuSS, CCCP and WtG samples, the typical statistical measurement error of a weak-lensing mass measurement of an individual cluster, and the intrinsic scatter of weak-lensing masses around the true underlying halo masses. Given that our sample is not mass-selected, the intrinsic scatter on $M_{\rm WL}-M_{\rm
true}$ for our sample is not known a priori. In setting a nominal goal for control of systematic biases, we therefore ignore the intrinsic scatter and simply adopt a typical statistical measurement error of $30$ per cent as the uncertainty on the ensemble cluster mass calibration that would be achieved from studying one cluster. This motivates a goal of $\sim30/\sqrt{50}=4$ per cent for control of systematic biases. Our goal in this article is to achieve this level of accuracy for the LoCuSS galaxy cluster mass calibration. Note that, by ignoring the intrinsic scatter in $M_{\rm WL}-M_{\rm
true}$, this goal is more challenging than is justified by the statistics of cluster mass measurement discussed above.
The principal systematic biases that can affect an weak-lensing cluster mass measurement relate to (1) the measurement of faint galaxy shapes, (2) accurate placement of faint galaxies along the line of sight such that the sample of background galaxies suffers negligible contamination by faint cluster members and that the inferred redshift distribution of the background galaxies is accurate, and (3) modelling of the shear signal in order to infer the cluster mass. In the brief review of these biases that follows, a key theme is that the approach taken to addressing one source of bias can have consequences for how well other biases are controlled. We also briefly outline our approach to these biases – a unifying theme of which is to minimize the number of strong assumptions in our analysis. The summary that follows intends to help non-experts to understand some of the more technical aspects of this article.
It is common to calibrate faint galaxy shape measurement codes on the STEP and STEP2 simulations [@Heymans06; @Massey07], however the gravitational shear signal of clusters typically exceeds the shear signals injected into these simulations, and therefore these tests are only relevant to the cluster outskirts. For example, WtG calibrate their shape measurement code on the STEP2 simulations, which in part motivates them to restrict the range of the WtG shear profiles to projected clustercentric radii of $0.75-1.5h_{70}^{-1}\Mpc$ – i.e. attempting to avoid regions of the clusters at which the measured shear exceeds that injected into the STEP simulations [@Applegate14]. @Hoekstra15 recently emphasised the importance of carefully matching the properties of the simulated data used for such tests to the observational data. In this article we further develop the shape measurement methods that we developed in @Okabe13 and extend our tests of these methods to include realistic galaxies. As in @Okabe13, we test our code on shear values upto $g=0.3$, i.e. appropriate to the full range of cluster centric radii relevant to weak-lensing – clustercentric radii as small as $\sim200\hkpc$.
Contamination of background galaxy samples by unlensed faint cluster galaxies dilutes the measured lensing signal and causes a systematic underestimate of the shear [e.g. @Broadhurst05; @Limousin07a1689]. It is therefore of prime importance to make a secure selection of background galaxies. The number density of cluster members is a declining function of clustercentric radius, and thus a radial trend in the number density of galaxies selected as being in the background is interpreted as evidence for contamination. Whilst this is qualitatively true, the quantitative details depend on how the gravitational magnification of the cluster modifies the observed distribution of background galaxies. After falling into disuse for a decade since @Kneib03 first proposed the method, boosting the measured shear signal to correct statistically for contamination has enjoyed a renaissance of late [e.g. @Applegate14; @Hoekstra15]. This method is applied to both red and blue galaxies, either by excluding the red sequence galaxies or simply selecting faint galaxies, as per @Kneib03. Due to imperfect background selection, the number density profile of these colour-selected galaxies is found to increase at small cluster-centric radii. Assuming that the number density profile of a pure background galaxy sample is independent of radius, that is ignoring gravitational magnification, the lensing signal is corrected as a radial function of the galaxy-count excess. This correction method is referred to as “boost correction”.
We also note that photometric redshifts based on upto five photometric bands are becoming more common as a method for selecting background galaxies [@Limousin07a1689; @Gavazzi09; @Gruen13; @Applegate14; @McCleary15; @Melchior15]. However photometric redshifts based on a small number of filters are problematic for galaxies with blue observed colours because their spectral energy distribution is relatively featureless. This leads to the well known degeneracy between photometric redshifts of $z\ls0.5$ and $z\gs1.5$ for blue galaxies [e.g. @Bolzonella00]. This is a critical issue for cluster weak-lensing studies that use blue galaxies [@Ziparo15]. Furthermore, the requirement for photometric redshift accuracy is more stringent for cluster lensing studies than for most other fields, because the number density of cluster galaxies – that contaminate background galaxy samples – is a function of clustercentric radius.
We have previously developed a method to select red background that does not assume the radial distribution of background galaxies and thus does not require a boost correction to the measured shear signal [@Okabe13]. Our method also yields a direct measurement of the fraction of galaxies in the background galaxy sample that are contaminants. In @Ziparo15 we considered how to extend this method to include blue galaxies and concluded that additional uncertainties of including blue galaxies do not justify the small number of additional galaxies that we would gain. We therefore extend our red galaxy selection methods in this article, and achieve a $2.6$-fold increase in number density of background galaxies over @Okabe13 – i.e. sufficient to measure individual cluster masses, whilst retaining our conservative requirement that contamination is not greater than 1 per cent.
Despite the intrinsic asphericity of galaxy clusters, it has been shown that modeling cluster mass distributions as spherical and following a @Navarro97 profile yields mass measurements that are accurate in the mean across a sample [@Becker11; @Bahe12]. These results are based on numerical dark matter only simulations, make (well motivated) assumptions about the observational data available to an individual study, and stress the importance of fitting the model to the data across a well-defined radial range. Some observational studies implement directly the method described by @Becker11 in their analysis [e.g. @Applegate14]. We prefer to test our mass modelling scheme directly on simulations. Moreover, parameters that describe the shape of the density profile (generally, a “halo concentration parameter”) are at the same time a nuisance parameter for the mass measurement, and a physically interesting parameter to extract from the data. We therefore let concentration be a free parameter with a flat prior, and marginalise over concentration when measuring cluster mass. We also use the constraints that we derive on concentration to examine the mass-concentration relation. Other studies adopt more restrictive assumptions about halo concentration, in part as a consequence of seeking to minimise contamination and shear calibration issues (see preceding discussion) by excluding the central cluster region from their analysis and modeling.
We describe the observations and data analysis in Section \[sec:data\], including photometry, shape measurements, and the selection of background galaxies. The mass measurements for individual clusters, the mass concentration relation and stacked lensing analysis are presented in Section \[sec:results\]. We discuss several systematics and compare with previous weak lensing studies in Section \[sec:discuss\], and summarize our conclusions in Section \[sec:summary\]. We assume $H_0=100h~{\rm
kms^{-1}Mpc^{-1}}$, $\Omega_{m0}=0.3$ and $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.7$ through the paper. We occasionally use the alternative definition of the Hubble parameter $h_{70}=H_0/70$.
Data and analysis {#sec:data}
=================
Sample {#sec:sample}
------
The sample comprises 50 clusters (Table \[tab:data\]) drawn from the [*ROSAT*]{} All Sky Survey cluster catalogues [@Ebeling98; @Ebeling00; @Boehringer04] that satisfy the criteria: $-25^\circ<\delta<+65^\circ$, $n_H\le7\times10^{20}{\rm cm^{-2}}$, $0.15\le z \le0.3$, $L_X/E(z)>4.1\times10^{44}\ergs$ where $L_X$ is in the $0.1-2.4\keV$ band and $E(z)=\sqrt{\Om(1+z)^3+\Ol}$. The sample is [X-ray luminosity-limited, and therefore approximately mass-limited]{}. Full details of the selection function are available in Smith et al. (2016, in prep.).
Observations {#sec:obs}
------------
The clusters were observed with Suprime-Cam [@Miyazaki02] on the 8.2-m Subaru Telescope[^1][^2] on Mauna Kea. We observed in both $V$- and $i'$-bands for 28 and 36 minutes respectively, splitting the integration times up into individual four minute exposures. The best overhead conditions were reserved for the $i'$-band observations because we use these data to measure the shapes of faint galaxies. The full width half maximum (FWHM) of point sources was routinely sub-arcsecond, with individual exposures often enjoying ${\rm FWHM}\ls0.6''$. The 50 final stacked and reduced $i'$-band frames have median seeing of ${\rm
FWHM}=0.71''$, with 38 of the 50 frames having ${\rm FWHM}<0.8''$ (Table \[tab:data\]). Note that we use archival $g$- and $B$-band data instead of $V$-band data for two clusters in common with [@Okabe08]. Hereafter we refer to the redder filter in which we measure faint galaxy shapes as the $i'$-band, and the bluer filter used for colour measurements as the $V$-band.
Data Reduction {#sec:reduction}
--------------
We reduced all data using a processing pipeline based on the the standard reduction tasks for Suprime-Cam, [SDFRED]{} [@Yagi02; @Ouchi04], and described by [@Okabe10b]. The pipeline includes bias and dark frame subtraction, flat-fielding, instrumental distortion correction, differential refraction, point spread function (PSF) matching, sky subtraction and stacking. The astrometric solution for the final stacked frames was calibrated relative to 2MASS [@2MASS06] to sub-pixel root mean square (rms) precision. Photometric zero-points were calibrated to stellar photometry from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey [@SDSSDR8 SDSS], taking into account foreground galactic extinction [@Schlafly11], to a rms precision of ${\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}}0.1{\rm mag}$. To cross-check the validity of the photometric calibration, we measured the redshift dependence of the colour of early-type member galaxies, that lie on the so-called cluster red-sequence, within $10\,{\rm arcmin}$ of each brightest cluster galaxy (BCG). The colour of the red sequence increases from $(V-i')\simeq0.8$ to $(V-i')\simeq1.2$ as cluster redshift increases from $z=0.15$ to $z=0.3$, in agreement with [@SDSSDR8].
Shape measurement pipeline {#sec:shape}
--------------------------
We analyse the $i'$-band frames with methods introduced by @KSB [the “KSB$+$” method], using the [imcat]{} package with our modifications [@Okabe13; @Okabe14a]. We first measure the image ellipticity, $e_\alpha$, from the weighted quadrupole moments of the surface brightness of objects, and then correct the PSF anisotropy by solving $$e'_{\alpha}(\btheta) = e_{\alpha}(\btheta) - P_{\rm sm}^{\alpha \beta}(\btheta) q^*_{\beta}(\btheta),
\label{eq:qstar}$$ where $P_{\alpha\beta}$ is the smear polarizablity tensor and $q^*_{\alpha}(\btheta) = (P^*_{{\rm sm}})^{-1}_{\alpha
\beta}e_*^{\beta}$; quantities with an asterisk denote those for stellar objects. The details of anisotropic PSF correction is described in @Okabe14a [see the Appendix]. In brief, we selected bright, unsaturated stars in the half-light radius, $r_h$, and magnitude plane to estimate the stellar anisotropy kernel, $q^*_{\alpha}$. Note that the stars and galaxies can be clearly discriminated using the half-light radius. We modeled the variation of this kernel across sub-regions of the field of view by fitting second-order bi-polynomial functions to the vector $\btheta$ with iterative $\sigma$-clipping [e.g. @Okabe08; @Okabe10b; @Okabe14a]. Although distortions at the corners of the field-of-view are larger than those at the centers, modelling across sub-regions is sufficiently flexible to correct the anisotropic PSF pattern in our data.
We tested the validity of our anisotropic PSF correction by measuring the auto-correlation function between stellar ellipticities and the cross-correlation function between stellar and galaxy ellipticities, before and after the correction. We found that $\langle
e_\alpha^{*,\rm raw}e_\alpha^{*,\rm raw}\rangle$ and $\langle e_\alpha
e_\alpha^{*,\rm raw}\rangle$ before the correction show large positive correlations ($\mathcal{O}(10^{-4})$), and that $\langle
e_\alpha^{*,\rm res}e_\alpha^{*,\rm res}\rangle$ and $\langle
e_\alpha^{\rm cor} e_\alpha^{*,\rm res}\rangle$ after the correction are consistent with null correlation in individual cluster fields. Note that $e_\alpha^{\rm cor}$ is the l.h.s. of Equation \[eq:qstar\]. In order to confirm how well the anisotropic PSF correction works at both the corners and centers, we divide the regions into the inner ($r<14'$) and outer regions ($r>14'$) of the fields of view with respect to the respective BCGs (Figure \[fig:xi\]). Note that the BCGs are located close to the center of the field of view in all cases. The top-left and top-right panels show the cross-correlation function between stellar and galaxy ellipticities before the correction at the inner and outer regions, respectively. The raw distortions at the outer region is indeed larger than those at the inner region. The middle panel shows the resulting $\langle e_\alpha^{\rm cor}
e_\alpha^{*,\rm res}\rangle$ after the correction, which are consistent with null correlation both at $r<14'$ and $r>14'$. The cross correlation between the residual stellar ellipticities and the reduced ellipticities for galaxies which are described in next paragraph is shown in the bottom panel. We again found null correlation at $r<14'$ and $r>14'$.
![[Top]{} – The cross-correlation between raw ellipticities for stars an galaxies before the correction. The correlation at the outer region (right) is larger than that at the inner region (left). [Middle]{} – The cross-correlation between residual stellar ellipticities and corrected galaxy ellipticities. [Bottom]{} – The cross-correlation between residual stellar ellipticities and reduced ellipticities. []{data-label="fig:xi"}](f1.eps){width="\hsize"}
Next, we correct the isotropic smearing effect of galaxy shapes due to seeing and the Gaussian window function used for the shape measurements. The reduced ellipticity for each galaxy, $g_\alpha$, is defined by $$\begin{aligned}
g_\alpha&=& (P_g^{-1})_{\alpha\beta} e'_{\beta}, \label{eq:raw_g}\end{aligned}$$ where $(P_g)_{\alpha\beta}$ is the pre-seeing shear polarizability tensor. The measurement of $(P_g)_{\alpha\beta}$ is very noisy for individual faint galaxies because of its non-linearity [@Bartelmann01]. The relationship between noise and biases in the measurement of faint galaxy shapes, using a variety of shape measurement algorithms, has been considered for both cosmic shear and cluster lensing studies [e.g. @Hirata04; @Kacprzak12; @Melchior12; @Refregier12; @Applegate14; @Hoekstra15]. The general feature of this relationship is that the bias in faint galaxy shape measurements typically increases as the size of galaxies decreases, i.e. as signal-to-noise ratio of galaxies decreases. In common with several authors [e.g. @Umetsu10; @Oguri12; @Okura12; @Umetsu15] we have found that this dependence can be reduced significantly for KSB shape measurement methods if the galaxies upon which the isotropic PSF correction is based are limited to those detected at high signal-to-noise ratio [@Okabe13]. We therefore calibrate the isotropic PSF correction, using galaxies detected at very high significance, i.e. a signal-to-noise ratio of $\nu>30$. This selection acts to suppress the measurement uncertainty of $(P_g)_{\alpha\beta}$ that is caused by low signal-to-noise ratio in the objects used for the isotropic PSF correction in other studies. The polarizability tensor is first estimated by the scalar correction approximation $(P_{g})_{\alpha\beta}=\frac{1}{2}{\rm
tr}[P_g]\delta_{\alpha\beta}$. We then compute the median of $(P_{g})_{\alpha\beta}$ in $r_g$, with an adaptive grid to assemble as uniformly as possible, where $r_g$ is the Gaussian smoothing radius used in the KSB method. We employ a size condition of $r_h>\bar{r}_h^*+\sigma(r_h^*)$ and $r_g>\bar{r}_g^*+\sigma(r_g^*)$ and a positive raw $P_g$. Here, $\bar{r}_h^*$ ($\sigma(r_h^*)$) and $\bar{r}_g^*$ ($\sigma(r_g^*)$) are the median (rms dispersion) of half-light radii and Gaussian smoothing radii for the stars used for the anisotropic PSF correction described above. Although galaxies and stars are well separated in $r_h$, we applied the cut in $r_g$ so as to exclude negative values of $P_g$ that are obtained for very small galaxies. We also checked the level of stellar contamination that galaxy catalogues, selected based on the size cuts described here, might suffer. We found that the level of contamination is below 1 per cent, mainly due to the fact that the number density of faint galaxies is an increasing function of apparent magnitude. The faint galaxies therefore out far out-number possible stellar contaminants.
We interpolate the polarizability tensor for individual galaxies with $\nu>10$ as a function of $r_g$ and the absolute value of the ellipticity, $|e|$. Here, we used $|e|$ instead of each component $e_\alpha$ because the isotropic PSF correction is performed by the half of the trace, $\frac{1}{2}{\rm
tr}[P_g]\delta_{\alpha\beta}$ Then, in a major departure from @Okabe13, we applied a similar interpolation for the signal-to-noise ratio, $\nu$. An rms error of the ellipticity estimates, $\sigma_g$, is estimated from 50 neighbours in the magnitude-$r_g$ plane. We also experimented with smaller and larger numbers of neighbours and found that our results are unchanged.
Shape measurement tests {#sec:shapetest}
-----------------------
{width="170mm"} {width="160mm"}
We use two simulated datasets to test the reliability of our faint galaxy shape measurements, broadly following the approach introduced by the STEP programme [@Heymans06; @Massey07] with important modifications compared to STEP and the recent cluster weak-lensing literature. These modifications are designed to match our data, science goals, and our intention to use the weak-shear signal on scales of a few hundred kpc to constrain the shape of the matter density profile. The first modification is to test our ability to measure reduced shears upto $g\simeq0.3$, as seen in the inner regions of clusters. The second modification is to produce simulated fits frames that match the angular size of the Suprime-Cam data; this allows us to include sufficient galaxies with $\nu>30$ that we can test our approach to the isotropic PSF correction. This is critical to validating that our shape measurement pipeline delivers accurate shapes at faint flux levels. We express the results of the tests outlined below following the STEP convention of: $$g_\alpha-g_\alpha^{\rm input}=m_\alpha g_\alpha^{\rm input}+c_\alpha$$ where $g_\alpha$ and $g_\alpha^{\rm input}$ are the measured and input ellipticities, respectively; $m_\alpha$ is the multiplicative bias and $c_\alpha$ is a residual additive term.
Note that in both of the tests described below, we apply a constant shear to all of the simulated galaxies, and thus ignore higher order lensing effects that are present close to the Einstein radius [e.g. @Okura07]. Higher order effects are negligible on the scale that we measure and fit the shear profile of clusters. The distribution of Einstein radii for a background redshift of $z=2$ for clusters from our sample that are known strong lenses is lognormal, peaking at $\theta_{\rm E}(z_{\rm S}=2)=14.5\,{\rm
arcsec}$ [@Richard10]. Rescaling this to the typical redshift of $z\simeq0.8$ for the red background galaxies that we use in this analysis, we estimate $\theta_{\rm E}(z_{\rm
S}=0.8)\simeq12\,{\rm arcsec}$. Converting to physical projected distances, we therefore estimate an upper limit of $30h^{-1}{\rm
kpc}$ on the typical Einstein radius at the median redshift of our cluster sample. Note that we regard this as an upper limit because half of our cluster sample have not been identified as strong lenses, and thus likely have smaller Einstein radii than the clusters discussed by @Richard10. For comparison, the innermost radius to which we typically fit the shear profile in Section \[sec:mass\] is $150h^{-1}{\rm kpc}$. Therefore, our shear analysis begins at clustercentric radii of $\gs5\,\theta_{\rm
E}$, i.e. on scales where higher order lensing effects are negligible.
The first simulated dataset follows @Okabe13 [note that these authors also tested their code upto $g\simeq0.3$], and is based on simulated images, kindly provided by M. Oguri, that are generated with toy models using the software [stuff]{} [@Bertin09]. Each galaxy is characterized by bulge and disc components, with Sersic profiles indices of $n=4$ and $1$, respectively. Galaxy images are convolved with a PSF model based on the Moffat profile $\Sigma(R)\propto\left(1+(R/a)^2\right)^{-\beta}$, with seeing in the range $0.5\le{\rm FWHM}\le1$arcsec and the Moffat profile with power slopes $3<\beta<12$, as described in [@Oguri12]. A number of fits frames matching the Suprime-Cam field of view were produced and analysed using the pipeline described in §\[sec:shape\]. We obtain a shear calibration bias of $m_\alpha\simeq-0.02$ and $c_\alpha\simeq10^{-4}$ (Fig. \[fig:step\]).
We extend @Okabe13’s tests with a second simulated dataset, using the [SHERA]{} software [@Mandelbaum12] to generate simulated ground-based observations that match the properties of our observational data. The galaxies images included in these simulations are from the COSMOS [*Hubble Space Telescope*]{} observations, as described by @Mandelbaum12 in detail. We convolve the simulated data with a Moffat profile that matches our observational data: $\beta=4.6$ and ${\rm FWHM}=0.7\arcsec$. We generated both non-rotated and 90-degree rotated images to extract a shear estimate from a galaxy pair because the intrinsic ellipticity cancels out. The magnitude, size, and signal-to-noise ratio ($\nu$) distributions of the simulated galaxies match those of our Subaru data. We analyse these data using the same pipeline as above, obtaining again $m_\alpha\simeq-0.02$ and $c_\alpha\simeq10^{-4}$ – i.e. consistent results from two methods of simulating the Subaru data (Fig. \[fig:step\]).
We also checked the magnitude and size dependence of the shear calibration using the [SHERA]{}-based simulations. The low level of shear bias detected above does not show a strong trend with size and magnitude, with $m_\alpha\simeq-0.02$ and $c_\alpha\simeq10^{-4}$ (Fig. \[fig:step\]) down to apparent magnitudes of $i'=26$. This result is achieved because of the high signal-to-noise threshold that we apply to galaxies used for the isotropic PSF correction described in §\[sec:shape\].
In summary, our shape measurement bias is below our 4 per cent goal and does not depend on the size of galaxies. However we note that due to the finite number of galaxies used in our tests, in particular in the [SHERA]{}-based test (due to reliance on the COSMOS dataset), we cannot rule out the possibility that our shape measurement biases are different from those obtained here.
Photometry and redshift estimates {#sec:photometry}
---------------------------------
We will select faint background galaxies based on their location in the $(V-i')/i'$ colour magnitude plane in §\[sec:bkg\]. We therefore analyse the data using SExtractor [@SExtractor], adopting [mag\_auto]{} as the total $i'$-band magnitude of each object. $(V-i')$ colours are measured in seeing matched frames, within an aperture of $1.5\times$ the FWHM of point sources in the poorer resolution of the two reduced frames for each cluster. Hereafter for convenience we often denote colour as $C=(V-i')$.
Early-type cluster galaxies occupy a narrow well-defined relation in the colour-magnitude diagram – the so-called red-sequence. We fit a linear model of the form $$(V-i')_{\rm E/S0}=a\,i' + b.
\label{eq:redsq}$$ to galaxies at $i'\le22$ in order to define the colour of the red sequence as a function of $i'$-band magnitude for the purpose of selecting galaxies relative to the red sequence in §\[sec:bkg\].
Our overall strategy is to combine location in the colour-magnitude plane with redshift estimates and reduced shear measurements to identify a low contamination sample of background galaxies. The next step is therefore to estimate the redshift of each galaxy in the photometric catalogues. We base these estimates on the COSMOS UltraVISTA photometric redshift catalogue (McCracken et al. 2012; Ilbert et al. 2013) that is limited at $i'< 27.5$, and benefits from four deep near-infrared filters $Y$, $J$, $H$ and $K_S$. This filter coverage enables more robust photometric redshifts for galaxies at $z>1.3$ than earlier versions of the COSMOS catalogue, since the Balmer break is redshifted to the near-infrared for these galaxies. Furthermore, the COSMOS UltraVISTA photometric redshifts are tested against almost 35,000 new spectra with galaxies at $z>1.5$ (for more details see Ilbert et al. 2013). This catalogue provides currently the most reliable redshift distribution for a magnitude-limited galaxy sample that reaches $i'\simeq26$ with Suprime-Cam on Subaru. We emphasise that the COSMOS dataset includes observations through the same filters with the same camera mounted on the same telescope that we use in this study, thus matching LoCuSS and COSMOS photometry is straightforward.
The lensing kernel for the $i$-th galaxy in our photometric catalogues, $\beta_i\equiv{D_{ls,i}}/{D_{s,i}}$, is estimated by an ensemble average of the $N$ nearest neighbours in colour-magnitude space of the $i$-th galaxy in the COSMOS catalogue: $$\begin{aligned}
\beta_i=\langle{D_{ls}}/{D_s}\rangle_{\rm COSMOS}=\frac{1}{N}\sum_j^N{D_{ls,j}}({z_s})/{D_{s,j}}({z_s}). \label{eq:beta}\end{aligned}$$ Here, $D_s$ and $D_{ls}$ are the angular diameter distances from the observer to the sources and from the lens to the sources, respectively. The source redshift, $z_s$, is the median of the likelihood distribution for the photometric redshift of each COSMOS galaxy. We estimate the uncertainty on $\beta_i$ as the sum of the individual photometric errors and standard errors of the sample: $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma_\beta^2=\frac{1}{N}\sum_j^N\left[
\sigma_{\beta^{\rm COSMOS},j}^{2}+\frac{1}{N-1}(\beta_j^{\rm COSMOS}-\beta)^2\right]\end{aligned}$$ The typical uncertainties are $\sigma_\beta\simeq13-28\%$. We adopt $N=100$, and check that our results are insensitive to whether we adopt $N=50$ or $N=200$ finding that the redshift estimates for individual galaxies are randomly changed by a few per cent. We include this small uncertainty in the redshift uncertainties that are incorporated in to the error bars on the cluster shear profiles in Section \[sec:mass\].
Selection of background galaxies {#sec:bkg}
--------------------------------
Contamination of background galaxy catalogues by unlensed member/foreground galaxies leads to a systematic underestimation of reduced shear signal. This is often referred to as a dilution effect, because the contaminants dilute the signal [@Broadhurst05; @Umetsu10; @Okabe10b; @Okabe13]. The dominant source of contaminant galaxies is faint cluster members, the number density of which increases towards the cluster core.
In [@Okabe13] we quantified the contamination level as a function of the colour offset of faint galaxies from the red-sequence, defined by $\Delta C\equiv(V-i')-(V-i')_{\rm ES0}$, and concentrated on $\Delta C>0$, i.e. galaxies redder than the red sequence. We here briefly summarize the method. The mean tangential distortion strength is averaged over all galaxies satisfying a given colour cut, across all 50 clusters and all cluster-centric radii. The mean lensing signal increases strongly as a function of $\Delta C$ close to the red sequence, flattening to a shallower trend at larger colour offsets (see Fig. 1 of Okabe et al. 2013). We interpreted this behaviour with a two component model comprising contamination by cluster members and the redshift dependence of shear signal – i.e. redder galaxies are on average more distant and thus present a stronger lensing signal. The model includes a parameter that describes the fraction of the total population of galaxies that are contaminants from the cluster. Thus by fitting this model we were able to measure the contamination level and adopt a colour cut that gives a desired level of contamination without relying on any assumptions about the distribution of mass in the clusters, and about the run of number density of background galaxies with cluster-centric radius. We adopted $1\%$ contamination limit which is less than the statistical error of the average mass measurement for the sample of 50 clusters. However, this conservative approach yields a mean number density of background galaxies of just $\langle n_{\rm
bkg}\rangle\sim5.3\pm1.9{\rm arcmin^{-2}}$, which makes it difficult to measure individual cluster masses without invoking assumptions about the shape of the cluster mass density profile.
{width="190mm"}
We develop a new method to select securely a larger sample of background galaxies than achieved by @Okabe13. In the new method, we average the mean tangential distortion strength over all galaxies satisfying each colour cut ($>\Delta C$) and all 50 clusters, in several radial bins. The stacked lensing strength in the $i$-th radial bin is estimated as: $$\begin{aligned}
\langle \Delta \Sigma_{+}\rangle(r_i)= \frac{\sum_n g_{+,n} \Sigma_{{\rm
cr},n} w_{n}}{\sum_n w_{n}}, \label{eq:g+}\end{aligned}$$ where and $\Delta \Sigma_{+}$ is the dimensional reduced shear and the subscript $n$ denotes the $n$-th galaxy located in the annulus spanning $r_1<r_i<r_2$. Note that the reduced shear $\Delta \Sigma_+$ is different from the definition of, for example, [@Mandelbaum06], because we define $\Delta
\Sigma_+$ in terms of the reduced shear, $g$, and not in terms of shear, $\gamma$. The reduced tangential distortion component, $g_+$, with respect to the cluster center is defined by $$\begin{aligned}
g_{+}&=&-(g_{1}\cos2\varphi+g_{2}\sin2\varphi),
\label{eq:gt}\end{aligned}$$ where $\varphi$ is the position angle between the first coordinate axis on the sky and the vector connecting the cluster center and the galaxy position. The reduced tangential shear is expressed by $$\begin{aligned}
g_+=\frac{\gamma_+}{1-\kappa},\end{aligned}$$ where $\gamma_+$ is the tangential shear and $\kappa$ is the dimensionless surface mass density. The weighting functions are taken into account for both the statistical weights, $w_n$, and the critical projected mass density, $\Sigma_{{\rm cr},n}$, describing the lensing efficiency. The weighting $w_{n}$ [e.g. @Hoekstra00; @Hamana03; @Okabe10b; @Umetsu10; @Oguri12] is used to down-weight galaxies whose shapes are less reliably measured, based on the uncertainty in the shape measurement, $\sigma_{g,n}$, given by $$\begin{aligned}
w_n=\frac{1}{\alpha^2+\sigma_{g,n}^2}\frac{1}{\Sigma_{{\rm cr},n}^2}\label{eq:weight}.\end{aligned}$$ We choose $\alpha=0.4$ throughout this paper. The critical projected mass density for individual clusters is defined by $$\begin{aligned}
\Sigma_{{\rm cr}}= \frac{c^2}{4\pi GD_l}\beta^{-1}, \end{aligned}$$ where $D_l$ is the angular diameter distance to a cluster and $\beta$ is the lensing depth (equation \[eq:beta\]).
To clarify the relationship between $\Delta\Sigma_+$ and $g_+$ in the presence of contamination of background galaxy catalogues, we write an equation to describe the contamination effect, as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\langle\Delta\Sigma_+\rangle &=& \frac{\sum_n (g_{+,n} \Sigma_{{\rm cr},n} w_{{\rm
bkg},n} + 0 \times w_{{\rm non-bkg},n} )}{\sum (w_{{\rm bkg},n} + w_{{\rm non-bkg},n})}
\nonumber \\
&=& \frac{\sum \Delta \Sigma_{+,n} w_{{\rm bkg},n}}{\sum (w_{{\rm bkg},n} + w_{{\rm
non-bkg},n})}, \label{eq:dilution_basic}\end{aligned}$$ where $\Delta\Sigma_+=g_+ \Sigma_{cr}$ is the dimensional shear for each background galaxy and the subscripts “bkg” and“non-bkg” denote background galaxies and non-background galaxies, respectively. Since non-background galaxies are not lensed by the cluster, the second term in the numerator is zero. Therefore, contamination by non-background galaxies causes the observed lensing signal to be underestimated. The underestimation of the ensemble average is simply determined by the fraction of non-background galaxies (mainly member galaxies) to background galaxies. This is even clearer if, for the sake of illustration, one assumes that the galaxies have uniform weights, $w=1$, in which case Equation \[eq:dilution\_basic\] can be rewritten as: $$\begin{aligned}
\langle\Delta\Sigma_+\rangle =\langle\Delta\Sigma_+\rangle_{\rm bkg} \frac{1}{1+n_{\rm non-bkg}/n_{\rm bkg}}, \end{aligned}$$ where $\langle\Delta\Sigma_+\rangle_{\rm bkg}$ is the average distortion strength using a pure sample of background galaxies. The correction factor, $(1+n_{\rm non-bkg}/n_{\rm bkg})$ is equivalent to the [*boost factor*]{}, under the assumption of a radially uniform distribution of background galaxies [e.g. @Applegate14; @Hoekstra15], that we discuss in Section \[sec:boost\]. Equation \[eq:dilution\_basic\] shows that the average lensing signal obtained from our formalism is simply underestimated by the fraction of non-background to background galaxies. Therefore also note that the non-linear term in the reduced shear $g_+=\gamma_+/(1-\kappa) \propto \Delta \Sigma_+$ does not impact on our estimated levels of contamination.
The stacked lensing signal is a decreasing function of clustercentric radius and an increasing function of $\Delta C$ for small clustercentric radii, reminiscent of @Okabe13’s (2013) analysis of all clustercentric radii as a single bin (upper left panel of Fig. \[fig:dilution\]). However the increase in lensing signal at moderate values of $\Delta C$ becomes progressively less pronounced as one considers radial bins at larger clustercentric radii. This is qualitatively consistent with faint cluster galaxies being the dominant source of contamination, given that the number density of galaxies in clusters is a declining function of clustercentric radius.
To interpret quantitatively the mean lensing strength as a function of cluster-centric radius, we parameterise the galaxy distribution in terms of the projected clustercentric radius $r$ and the colour offset $\Delta C$, as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
n(r,\Delta C)=n_b(r)\left[1+B f(\Delta C) n_{\rm m}(r)\right],\label{eq:n_dil}\end{aligned}$$ where $n_b(r)$ is the radial distribution of background galaxies. We do not assume any specific functions of $n_b$ because the background distribution is not constant, and may be depleted or boosted by a magnification bias [e.g. @Broadhurst95; @Umetsu11; @Umetsu14; @Coupon13]. The second term in the bracket denotes the member galaxy distribution; $B$ is the fraction, $f(\Delta C)$ is the colour distribution and $n_{\rm m}(r)$ is the radial distribution. The effective lensing strengths for red galaxies are obtained by integrating over the projected radius and the colour offset: $$\begin{aligned}
\langle \Delta\Sigma_{+,i} \rangle (r_1<r_i<r_2,\Delta C<) &=&
\frac{\int^\infty_{\Delta C}d(\Delta C)\int^{r_2}_{r_1} dr\Delta \Sigma_+
n_b(r) r }{\int^\infty_{\Delta C}d(\Delta C) \int^{r_2}_{r_1}dr n(r)r} \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{A_i}{1+BF(\Delta C)N_i}. \label{eq:dil}\end{aligned}$$ Here, $A_i\equiv\Delta\Sigma_{+0,i}$ is the lensing signal estimated from the pure background galaxies and is thereby determined by the cluster mass distribution. The contamination levels in the colour and radial distributions are described by $F(\Delta C)=\int^\infty_{\Delta
C}d(\Delta C) f(\Delta C)$ and $N_i=\int^{r_2}_{r_1}dr n_m(r)r$, respectively. As in [@Okabe13], we employ a Gaussian distribution centering at $\Delta C=0$ as the colour distribution of member galaxies, $$\begin{aligned}
F(\Delta C)=[1-{\rm erf}(\Delta C/\sqrt{2}\sigma)]/2,\end{aligned}$$ where $\sigma$ is the width of colour distribution composed of the intrinsic scatter in the colour distribution and the photometric error. We assume that $\sigma$ is radius-independent. When we average equation (\[eq:dil\]) over all radial bins, the formulation in [@Okabe13] is recovered: $$\begin{aligned}
\langle\langle\Delta \Sigma_{+} \rangle\rangle&=&\sum_i \langle \Delta\Sigma_{+,i}
\rangle \simeq \tilde{A}\left[1-\tilde{B}F(\Delta C)\right].\end{aligned}$$ In this paper, we simultaneously take into account the colour distribution and the radial distribution for member galaxies. We employ $n_m(r)=\exp(-r/r_0)$ as the radial distribution of member galaxies [@Applegate14]. Subsequently, fitting is performed to obtain the colour and radial distribution of member galaxies.
In summary, the fitting parameters are $A_i$, $B$, $\sigma$ and $r_0$. We stress that this method does not assume any specific mass models, which is important to interpret the results after defining the background sample. As shown in the upper left panel of Figure \[fig:dilution\], the best-fit model (solid lines with different colours) well describes the data. The best-fit colour width, $\sigma=0.21$, is higher than the mean width expected from the intrinsic scatter determined by the cluster bright galaxies, which is consistent with [@Okabe13]. This large value of $\sigma$ is driven by the statistical scatter of the faint galaxies included in the calculation – i.e. the photometric uncertainties at $i'\simeq25$. We note that our method assumes that the colour distribution of galaxies redward of the red sequence is Gaussian; the large value of $\sigma$ therefore helps to ammeliorate any concerns that the wings of the actual distribution contain an excess of galaxies over the assumed Gaussian form. The characteristic radius of the member galaxy distribution is $r_0=258~\hkpc$. As expected based on the previous qualitative discussion, the highest level of contamination occurs at $\Delta C=0$ at the smallest clustercentric radii, with $F\simeq0.4$ (Fig. \[fig:dilution\]), and the level of contamination declines significantly with increasing clustercentric radius. Contamination is negligible in the cluster outskirts. We conservatively adopt a limit of $1\%$ on contaminating fraction, and use this to define a radially dependent colour cut (right panel of Fig. \[fig:dilution\]). Note that at $r>1.3~\hMpc$ the contamination level is so low that we adopt $\Delta C>0$ in this region. We achieve a number density of background galaxies of $n_{\rm
bkg}\simeq5-20~{\rm arcmin}^{-2}$ (Table \[tab:data\]), with a mean of $\langle n_{\rm bkg}\rangle\simeq12.8~{\rm arcmin^{-2}}$ that is more than double that of [@Okabe13].
We also use our mid- and far-infrared observations with [ *Spitzer*]{} and [*Herschel*]{} as a sanity check on the possible impact of heavily dust-obscured galaxies on our red galaxy selection and on our COSMOS-based estimates of $\beta$ in the previous Section. Specifically, we consider whether dusty cluster members might leak into the red background galaxy samples and whether $\beta$ might be biased due to the presence of optically faint and heavily dust-obscured galaxies – i.e. Luminous Infrared Galaxies (LIRGs) and Ultra-Luminous Infrared Galaxies (ULIRGs). On the latter point, the COSMOS photometry extends to $8\mu{\rm m}$, whereas we have observed half of the cluster sample discussed in this article with [*Spitzer*]{}/MIPS at $24\mu{\rm m}$ [@Haines15] and with [*Herschel*]{}/PACS and SPIRE at $100-500\mu{\rm m}$ [@Smith10], albeit only to a depth corresponding to a bolometric infrared luminosity of $L_{\rm
IR}\simeq5\times10^{10}L_\odot$ at $z\simeq0.2$. The spectroscopic completeness of follow-up observations with Hectospec [@Fabricant05] is $96$ per cent for objects detected with [ *Spitzer*]{} down to $0.5{\rm mJy}$ and and $\sim80$ per cent down to $i=20$ [@Mulroy14; @Haines15]. Clearly these data are not sensitive enough to obtain definitive estimates of the number and redshifts of dusty galaxies that satisfy our faint red optical background galaxy selection. However they provide a useful sanity check based on bright galaxies. We select galaxies from the catalogues discussed by @Haines15 at $i<20$ that have $(V-i)$ colours that would place them in our red background galaxy catalogues if they were faint enough. We find that $\sim1$ per cent of these bright optically red galaxies are LIRGs, and $\sim1$ per cent of the same bright optically red galaxies are cluster members, and there is no overlap between these two populations. We therefore conclude that the bright optically red galaxy population seen along lines of sight through our cluster sample appear to be consistent with (1) LIRGs and ULIRGs not being a significant population in our red background galaxy samples, and thus not being a concern in terms of the accuracy of $\beta$, and (2) our red background galaxy catalogues suffering just $1$ per cent contamination by cluster members.
Modelling and results {#sec:results}
=====================
Model Fitting Methods {#sec:fitting}
---------------------
We describe how we compute the reduced tangential shear profile of each cluster and the model fitting procedure. We apply the methods described in this section to measure cluster masses in the next section.
We centre each cluster shear profile on the centroid of the optical emission from the cluster’s BCG, following numerous previous studies that have shown BCGs to be a reliable cluster centre for weak-lensing studies of massive galaxy clusters, including @Okabe10b [@Okabe13], @vonderLinden14, and @Hoekstra15. For example, we derived an upper limit of $32\,h^{-1}{\rm kpc}$ on the mean offset of BCGs from the underlying centre of the cluster mass distribution for the sample studied here, in @Okabe13. This upper limit is a factor of 5 smaller than the typical innermost radius of the shear profiles upon which our mass measurements are ultimately based in Section \[sec:mass\]. Any bias caused by centring our shear profiles on the BCGs is therefore negligible.
The reduced shear in a given annulus centered on a given cluster is computed by azimuthally averaging the measured galaxy ellipticities, as defined by Equation \[eq:g+\]. The mean redshift of the background galaxies is a function of cluster centric radius, due to our radially-dependent colour cut (Section \[sec:bkg\]). The formulation in equation \[eq:g+\] takes account of these differences by expressing the reduced shear in physics units.
We employ a maximum-likelihood method to model the shear profiles, and write the log-likelihood as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
-2\ln {\mathcal L}&=&\ln(\det(C_{ij})) + \label{eq:likelihood} \\
&&\sum_{i,j}(\Delta \Sigma_{+,i} - f_{{\rm model}}(r_i))C_{ij}^{-1} (\Delta
\Sigma_{+,j} - f_{{\rm model}}(r_j)), \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where the subscripts $i$ and $j$ are the $i-$ and $j-$th radial bins. Here, $f_{\rm model}$ is the reduced shear prediction for a specific mass model, $$\begin{aligned}
f_{{\rm model}}(r_i)=\frac{\Delta \tilde{\Sigma}_{\rm model}(r_i)}{1 - K_i
\Sigma_{\rm model}(r_i)) }, \label{eq:g+model}\end{aligned}$$ where $\Sigma=\Sigma_{\rm cr}\kappa$ and $\Delta
\tilde{\Sigma}=\Sigma_{\rm cr}\gamma$ are the convergence and the shear in physical units, respectively, and $\kappa$ and $\gamma$ are the dimensionless convergence and shear, respectively. The factor, $K_i$ for the $i$-th bin is given by: $$\begin{aligned}
K_i = \frac{\sum_n \Sigma_{\rm cr,n}^{-1} w_n }{\sum_n w_n}.\end{aligned}$$ Note that $K_i$ is computed separately for each bin due to the radial dependence of the redshift of the background galaxies.
The covariance matrix, $C$, in equation \[eq:likelihood\] is given by: $$\begin{aligned}
C&=&C_g+C_s+C_{{\rm LSS}}. \end{aligned}$$ Where the shape noise, $C_g$, in each radial bin is estimated as $$\begin{aligned}
C_{g,ij}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\sum_n \sigma_{g,n}^2 \Sigma_{\rm cr,n}^2
w_n^2}{(\sum_n w_n)^2}\delta_{ij},\end{aligned}$$ where $\delta_{ij}$ is the Kronecker delta and the factor of $1/2$ accounts for the rms noise, $\sigma_{g,n}$, of two distortion components. The photometric redshift error matrix, $C_s$, is computed from: $$\begin{aligned}
C_{s,ij}=\tilde{C}_{s,ij}+\frac{\Delta \tilde{\Sigma}_{\rm
model}^2\Sigma_{\rm model}^2 \sigma_{K,i}^2}{(1-K_i \Sigma_{\rm
model}(r_i))^4}\delta_{ij}, \label{eq:Cs}\end{aligned}$$ where the first term is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\tilde{C}_{s,ij}=\left[\frac{\sum_n (\Delta \Sigma_{+,n}-2\Delta \Sigma_{+})^2 w_n^2 (\sigma_{\Sigma,n}/\Sigma_{{\rm cr},n})^{2}}{(\sum_n w_n)^{2}}\right] \delta_{ij}.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ The second term of the equation (\[eq:Cs\]) is the photometric redshift errors through an error of the conversion factor, $\sigma_K$, in the mass model (\[eq:g+model\]). The covariance matrix of uncorrelated large-scale structure (LSS), $C_{\rm LSS}$, along the line-of-sight [@Schneider98] at an angular separation between $\theta_i=r_i/D_l$ and $\theta_j$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
C_{{\rm LSS},ij}=\int \frac{ldl}{2\pi}P_{\kappa}(l) J_2(l\theta_i) J_2(l\theta_j),\end{aligned}$$ where $P_\kappa(l)$ is the weak-lensing power spectrum [e.g. @Schneider98; @Hoekstra03], calculated by multipole $l$, the source redshift, and a given cosmology. We employ the redshift, ${\rm min}(z_{s,i},z_{s,j})$, and WMAP9 cosmology [@WMAP09]. And, $J_2(l\theta_i)$ is the Bessel function of the first kind and second order at the $i$-th annulus [@Hoekstra03].
It is also important to compute the radius of each radial bin correctly, because systematic errors in the placement of the binned shear measurements on the radial axis can cause systematic errors in the mass measurement when a model is fitted. This is particularly important in practice, because the number density of background galaxies is neither uniform nor infinite. As described in detail in Appendix \[sec:app0\], we found that the best radius at which to place the measurement of mean tangential shear in a radial bin is the weighted harmonic mean: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:meanr}
\langle r \rangle_i=\frac{\sum_n w_n}{\sum_n w_n\,r_n^{-1}},\end{aligned}$$ where $w_n$ is given by Equation \[eq:weight\]. We therefore compute bin radii in this way, in physics units, in the rest of our analysis.
Finally, before fitting models to the shear profiles (Section \[sec:mass\]), we calculate the signal-to-noise ratio of the tangential shear profile as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
(S/N)^2=\sum_{ij} \Delta
\Sigma_{+,i}(C_{g,ij}+\tilde{C}_{s,ij}+C_{{\rm LSS},ij})^{-1}\Delta
\Sigma_{+,j}.\end{aligned}$$ Each cluster is detected individually at signal-to-noise ratio of $3<S/N<11$ (Table \[tab:data\]).
Mass Measurements {#sec:mass}
-----------------
To infer galaxy cluster masses from the shear profiles, we fit a model to the latter. For this purpose we adopt the universal mass density profile [@NFW96; @NFW97 hereafter NFW], that has had considerable success in describing dark matter halo profile spanning a wide mass range by numerical simulations based on the CDM model of structure formation. It has also been shown that the ensemble mass of a sample of clusters can be recovered to good precision from this approach, provided sufficient care is taken over the radial range over which this model is fitted to data [e.g. @Becker11; @Bahe12].
The NFW profile is expressed in the form: $$\rho_{\rm NFW}(r)=\frac{\rho_s}{(r/r_s)(1+r/r_s)^2},
\label{eq:rho_nfw}$$ where $\rho_s$ is the central density parameter and $r_s$ is the scale radius. The three-dimensional spherical mass, $M_\Delta$, enclosed by the radius, $r_\Delta$, inside of which the mean density is $\Delta$ times the critical mass density, $\rho_{\rm cr}(z)$, at the redshift, $z$, is given by $$M_{\rm NFW}(<r_\Delta)=\frac{4\pi \rho_s r_\Delta^3}{c_\Delta^3}\left[
\ln(1+c_\Delta)-\frac{c_\Delta}{1+c_\Delta}\right].
\label{eq:MNFW}$$ The NFW profile is fully specified by two parameters: $M_\Delta$ and the halo concentration $c_\Delta=r_\Delta/r_s$. We fit this model to the shear profile of each cluster, taking full account of errors of shape measurements, photometric redshifts and the uncorrelated LSS (Section \[sec:fitting\]). For a given $M_\Delta$ and $c_\Delta$ we predict the observed shear signal following the formalism described by @Wright2000.
Measurements of $M_\Delta$ are mainly sensitive to the lensing signal around the overdensity radii $r_\Delta$ [@Okabe10b]. However the concentration parameter, $c_\Delta$, is more strongly affected by the lensing signal in the cluster central regions, i.e. cluster centric radii of hundreds of kpc. Our careful selection of background galaxies ensures that contamination of our background galaxy samples is negligible across the full radial range of our shear profiles. However the very stringent colour cut employed in the central regions, $\Delta\,C>0.52$, and the relatively small solid angle subtended by these innermost bins, render them the noisiest of the entire radial range. To guard against obtaining results on concentration that suffer biases due to the noisy inner profiles, we choose a binning scheme for each cluster via the following procedure. We fit the NFW model to a suite of measured shear profiles that span inner radii in the range $r_{\rm in}=50-300~h^{-1}{\rm kpc}$, outer radii in the range $r_{\rm out}=2000-3000~h^{-1}{\rm kpc}$, and number of bins in the range $N_{\rm bin}=4-8$. We then compute the mean of the suite of $M_\Delta$ values obtained from these fits, and adopt the binning scheme that yields the value of $M_\Delta$ closest to that mean. Note that we allow the virial concentration parameter to be in the range $0<c_{\rm vir}<30$ in the fits. Also, we restrict the radial range of the shear profile fits for A1758N to $r_{\rm out}<2100h^{-1}{\rm
kpc}$ to avoid contamination of lensing signal by its neighbour A1758S. Note that we test the procedure described above using mock observations of simulated and toy model clusters, and confirm that it returns masses and concentrations with negligible bias (Section \[sec:sim\]).
{width="0.45\hsize"} {width="0.45\hsize"}
(bottom panel), , for ABELL2390 (left) and ABELL0901 (right), respectively. \[fig:g+\_each\]
Figure \[fig:g+\_each\] shows the tangential distortion profiles as a function of the projected cluster-centric radius for two example clusters, ABELL2390 and ABELL0901. The former is among the most massive in the sample and the latter among the least massive. The tangential shear clearly decreases from the cluster centre to the outskirts, with the less massive cluster, ABELL0901, presenting an overall shear signal of approximately half that of the more massive cluster, ABELL2390. Note that the $45$ degree rotated component times the clustercentric radius $r$, $r\Delta\Sigma_\times$, is consistent with zero – i.e. this simple test of residual systematics is consistent with zero.
Table \[tab:mass\] lists $M_\Delta$ from our weak-lensing analysis, defined as $M_\Delta=\Delta\rhoc(z)4\pi r_\Delta^3/3$ where $\rhoc(z)$ is the critical density of the universe at the respective cluster redshifts, and $\Delta=\Delta_{\rm vir}$, $200$, $500$, $1000$, and $2500$. We also list $M_\Delta$ defined as $M_\Delta=\Delta\rho_{\rm
m}(z)4\pi r_\Delta^3/3$, where $\rho_{\rm m}(z)=\rhoc(z)\Omega_{\rm
M}(z)$ is the mean matter density of the universe, and $\Delta=180$ and $200$. We denote these latter two masses as $M_{\rm 180m}$ and $M_{\rm 200m}$ respectively.
Mass-Concentration Relation {#sec:MC}
---------------------------
Numerical simulations [e.g. @Bullock01; @Duffy08; @Bhattacharya13; @Diemer14; @Meneghetti14; @Ludlow14] predict that the halo concentration $c_\Delta$ and the mass $M_\Delta$ for the NFW mass model is weakly anti-correlated. Such a correlation is naturally explained by the hierarchical structure formation, that is, less massive halos first form and more massive halos form through mass accretion and mergers of smaller objects. The characteristic central density of more massive halos is lower as reflected by the critical mass density of the universe at the redshift of collapse. Measurements of cluster mass and concentration therefore provide us with a unique opportunity to test structure formation.
Our cluster sample is selected purely on X-ray luminosities without imposing any requirement on the physical properties of the clusters. In particular, we do not select on the dynamical state of clusters as inferred from their X-ray morphology. We are therefore able to investigate the correlation between mass and concentration for a large sample of clusters that is unbiased beyond that which is inherent to an X-ray selection. A typical cluster in our sample has a concentration of $c_{200}\simeq4$ (Figure \[fig:MC\]), with central values of $c_{200}$ in the range $c_{200}\sim2-20$. We quantify the mass-concentration correlation with the following function: $$\begin{aligned}
c_\Delta(M_\Delta)=c_0\left(\frac{M_\Delta}{10^{14}\hMsol}\right)^b,\label{eq:MC}\end{aligned}$$ where $c_0$ and $b$ are the normalization of the concentration parameter at $M_\Delta=10^{14}\hMsol$ and the slope, respectively. This form is motivated by the studies of the numerical simulations [e.g. @Bullock01]. Note that we ignore redshift evolution in this model because the redshift range of our sample is narrow. When we fit this model, we take account of the correlation between the errors on concentration and mass by calculating the error covariance matrix, and include the intrinsic scatter of the lensing-based concentration parameter, $\sigma_{\rm int}$. The log-likelihood is given by: $$\begin{aligned}
-2\ln {\mathcal L}&=&\sum_i\ln\left(\sigma_{\ln c,i}^2+b^2\sigma_{\ln
M,i}^2-2b\sigma_{\ln c,\ln M,i}+\sigma_{\rm
int}^2\right) \nonumber \\
& &+\sum_i \frac{(\ln(c_i)-(a+b\ln(M_i)))^2}{\sigma_{\ln
c,i}^2+b^2\sigma_{\ln M,i}^2-2b\sigma_{\ln c,\ln M,i}+\sigma_{\rm
int}^2} \nonumber, \end{aligned}$$ where $a=\log(c_0)$ and $\sigma_{\ln c}$ and $\sigma_{\ln M}$ are the fractional errors of the concentration and the mass, $\sigma_{\ln
c,\ln M}$ is the error correlation, and $\sigma_{\rm int}$ is the intrinsic scatter in $\ln c$. We perform the fitting at overdensities of $\Delta=180{\rm m},200{\rm m},{\rm vir}$, and $200$. The normalisation of our best-fit mass-concentration relation is in excellent agreement with the results of recent numerical simulations at $z_l=0.23$ (Table \[tab:MC\]; Figure \[fig:MC\]; @Bhattacharya13 [@Diemer14; @Meneghetti14]). As an aside, we note that these three recent independent theoretical studies agree both with each other and with our observational results, whilst older simulations showed considerable variation between their respective mass-concentration relations and a lower overall normalization [e.g. @Duffy08; @Stanek10]. The best-fit slopes agree with the weak-mass dependence of the concentration, $b\simeq-0.1$, seen in simulations (Table \[tab:MC\]), although the uncertainties are too large to rule out positive values of $b$. Adding less massive clusters and increasing the number density of background galaxies will allow improved constraints in future studies.
$\Delta$ $c_0$ $b$ $\sigma_{\rm int}$
-------------- ------------------------ ------------------------- --------------------
$180{\rm m}$ $9.24^{+3.99}_{-2.50}$ $-0.20_{-0.15}^{+0.13}$ $<0.17$
$200{\rm m}$ $8.74^{+3.75}_{-2.49}$ $-0.19_{-0.15}^{+0.14}$ $<0.17$
Virial $7.26^{+3.18}_{-2.07}$ $-0.17_{-0.16}^{+0.15}$ $<0.18$
$200$ $5.12^{+2.08}_{-1.44}$ $-0.14_{-0.16}^{+0.16}$ $<0.20$
: Best-fit parameters for the mass concentration relation. []{data-label="tab:MC"}
![The observed distribution of the concentration parameters $c_{\rm 200}$ as a function of the cluster masses $M_{\rm 200}$ for 50 clusters. The errors denote 68% confidence intervals. The thick and thin lines (red) are the best-fit function and the errors, respectively. The dashed blue, dotted green and dotted-dashed magenta lines are the mean mass-concentration relation from recent numerical simulations of @Bhattacharya13, @Diemer14 and @Meneghetti14 at $z_l=0.23$, respectively.[]{data-label="fig:MC"}](f5.eps){width="\hsize"}
Stacked Lensing Analysis {#sec:stackedWL}
------------------------
![Stacked tangential shear profile for 50 clusters. The errors are composed of $(C_{g,ii}+\tilde{C}_{s,ii}+C_{{\rm
LSS},ii})^{1/2}$. Thick solid red and dashed green lines are the total mass and the NFW model, respectively. The dotted blue and dashed-dotted magenta lines are the two-halo term and point source multiplied by 10, respectively.[]{data-label="fig:stacked_g+"}](f6.eps){width="\hsize"}
Stacked lensing analysis is a powerful technique for measuring the average density profile of a sample of clusters. Stacking the shear signal from a sample of clusters averages over the distribution of internal structures and halo triaxiality, and thus overcomes the structural biases suffered by some individual cluster mass measurements [e.g. @Mandelbaum06; @Johnston07; @Okabe10b; @Okabe13; @Umetsu11; @Umetsu14; @Umetsu15b; @Oguri12; @Leauthaud12; @Miyatake13; @Niikura15].
We compute the average lensing signal in physical length unit centered on the respective BCGs. Note that our redshift range is narrow, and therefore the results described below are unchanged if we instead use comoving length units. Moreover, we have previously tested that adopting physical length units, and not scaling length to an overdensity radius, yields an unbiased measurement of the stacked shear profile of our sample [@Okabe13]. The innermost radius of the stacked shear profile is that at which the innermost bin of the stacked profile contains a minimum of one background galaxy from each cluster. The outermost radius of the stacked profile is the median of the maximum physical scale on which the field of view of the Subaru observations fully encloses a circular aperture centered on each BCG. Note that this simultaneously matches the angular extent of the data, and satisfies the requirement placed on the innermost radius. The stacked shear profile decreases smoothly as a function of clustercentric radius (Figure \[fig:stacked\_g+\]), and yields a signal-to-noise ratio of is $S/N\simeq35.6$, after taking into account the LSS covariance matrix, $C_{\rm LSS}$.
To interpret the average mass profile from the stacked lensing signals, we consider three mass components, $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta \Sigma_{\rm model}=\Delta \Sigma_{\rm pt} +\Delta \Sigma_{\rm NFW}+\Delta \Sigma_{\rm 2h},\end{aligned}$$ where $\Delta \Sigma_{\rm pt}$ is a point mass associated with the BCGs, $\Delta \Sigma_{\rm NFW}$ is the large-scale cluster mass distribution that we parametetrise following NFW, and $\Delta
\Sigma_{\rm 2h}$ is the two-halo term [e.g. @Johnston07; @Oguri11a; @Oguri11b] to account for structure adjacent to the clusters. Note that the latter two terms were ignored in the modeling of individual clusters because the noise level in individual cluster shear profiles renders them insensitive to these contributions.
We describe the contribution from the point mass, of mass $M_{\rm
pt}$, as: $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta \Sigma_{\rm pt}=\frac{M_{\rm pt}}{\pi r^2},\end{aligned}$$ and adopt a prior on $M_{\rm pt}$ based on the stellar mass for the BCG. The stellar mass of each BCG is estimated from the $K$-band luminosity with a @Salpeter55 initial mass function. The prior on the point mass then matches the mean and standard deviation of the BCG stellar masses. The two-halo term is computed following the formulation of @Oguri11b. We use the WMAP9 cosmology [@WMAP09] to compute the linear power spectrum. Given the average mass and redshift for an ensemble of clusters, $\Delta
\Sigma_{2h}$ is proportional to ${\bar \rho_m(z_l)} b_h(M)$, where $b_h(M)$ is the halo bias. To estimate $b_h(M)$, we use a single scaling relation [@Tinker10] which is calibrated by a large set of numerical simulations.
![Confidence intervals on mass and concentration from stacked lensing analysis. From left to right, the contours show the low-mass sample (thin green), the full sample (thick red), and the high-mass sample (thin blue). Crosses denote the best-fit parameters and the contours show the 68.3%, 95.4%, and 99.7% confidence levels. The dashed, dotted and dashed-dotted lines are the same as Figure \[fig:MC\]. []{data-label="fig:MC_stacked"}](f7.eps){width="\hsize"}
-------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
$\Delta$ $M_{\Delta}$ $c_{\Delta}$
$10^{14}\hMsol$
$180{\rm m}$ $8.66_{-0.43}^{+0.45}$ $5.57_{-0.35}^{+0.37}$
$200{\rm m}$ $8.39_{-0.41}^{+0.43}$ $5.32_{-0.33}^{+0.35}$
vir $7.65_{-0.36}^{+0.38}$ $4.68_{-0.30}^{+0.31}$
200 $6.37_{-0.27}^{+0.28}$ $3.69_{-0.24}^{+0.26}$
-------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
: Best-fit parameters for stacked lensing analysis for 50 clusters.[]{data-label="tab:Mass_stacked"}
The best-fit model describes the data very well (Figure \[fig:stacked\_g+\], Table \[tab:Mass\_stacked\]). The two-halo term is an order of magnitude less than the NFW model, with an estimated halo bias of $b_h(M_{200})\simeq5.5$. The point mass is constrained by the upper limit, $M_{\rm pt}<6.19\times10^{11}\hMsol$. The mass and the concentration at $\Delta=200$ (Figure \[fig:MC\_stacked\]) is in excellent agreement with both numerical simulations [@Bhattacharya13; @Diemer14; @Meneghetti14] and individual cluster mass measurements (Section \[sec:MC\]). [@Okabe13] conducted a similar stacked lensing analysis using a background galaxy catalogue based on a single colour cut, and based on the @Ilbert09 COSMOS photometric redshift catalogue. The stacked shear signal presented here is consistent with [@Okabe13]. The measurement uncertainties on the shear signal decrease as radius increases in this study due to radial dependence of our colour cut; this increases the weight of the outer bins in our fit, relative to that of @Okabe13. Therefore, the mass and concentration from our new stacked analysis are marginally higher and lower than [@Okabe13] respectively.
We compare the stacked result at $\Delta=200$, shown in Table \[tab:Mass\_stacked\] with the lognormal mean of the individual cluster mass and concentration measurements listed in Table \[tab:MC\], finding excellent agreement, with the latter being $\langle
M_{200}\rangle=6.38\pm0.24\times10^{14}\hMsol$ and $\langle
c_{200}\rangle=3.73\pm0.38$.
We also divide the clusters into two sub-samples of 25 clusters based on the virial mass measured from the individual cluster shear profile models (Section \[sec:MC\]), adopting $M_{\rm vir}=8\times
10^{14}\hMsol$ as the dividing line between the sub-samples. We calculate the stacked shear profile for both sub-samples, and fit models, following the procedures applied to the full sample. The results are in excellent agreement with both numerical simulations [@Bhattacharya13; @Diemer14; @Meneghetti14] and the best-fit mass-concentration relation for individual cluster mass measurements (Table \[tab:MC\] & \[tab:Mass\_stacked\]; Figure \[fig:MC\_stacked\]).
{width="0.45\hsize"} {width="0.45\hsize"}
Some numerical simulation indicate that an [@Einasto65] profile describes the spherically averaged mass density profile for simulated halos better than the NFW profile [@Navarro04; @Gao12; @Klypin14]. The Einasto profile has the form: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{d\log\rho}{d\log r}=-2\left(\frac{r}{r_{-2}}\right)^{\alpha},\end{aligned}$$ where $r_{-2}$ is a scale radius at which the logarithmic slope is $-2$ and $\alpha$ is a shape parameter to describe the degree of curvature of the profile. The Einasto profile is specified by three parameters of $M_\Delta$, $c_\Delta=r_\Delta/r_{-2}$ and $\alpha$. We measure these three parameters by fitting the stacked lensing profile for all 50 clusters. As demonstrated by the NFW fitting, the contribution from the point mass is negligible compared to that of the main halo in the radial range $0.1-2.8\hMpc$. We therefore just fit the Einasto profile and two-halo term. The best-fit parameters are $\alpha=0.161_{-0.041}^{+0.042}$, $M_{200}=6.49_{-0.29}^{+0.31}\times10^{14}\hMsol$ and $c_{200}=3.26_{-0.54}^{+0.39}$. These constraints on $M_{200}$ and $c_{200}$ are in excellent agreement with the NFW-based measurements (Table \[tab:Mass\_stacked\]), and also agree within $\sim1\sigma$ with predictions from numerical simulations (Figure \[fig:Einasto\]); @Duffy08 [@Gao12; @Bhattacharya13; @Diemer14; @Meneghetti14]). As noted above, the agreement between our results and the predictions from 2013-2014 is excellent. More precise observational constraints on the density profile shape of clusters, including mass dependence of the Einasto profile parameters await larger cluster samples, for example from the Dark Energy Survey (DES), Hyper Suprime-Cam survey (HSC) and the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST).
Discussion {#sec:discuss}
==========
In Section \[sec:syst\] we quantify the remaining systematics in our analysis, in Section \[sec:errorbudget\] we summarize our overall error budget, and in Section \[sec:compare\] we compare our mass measurements with results from the literature.
Systematics {#sec:syst}
-----------
In Section \[sec:sim\] we test the methods described in Section \[sec:fitting\] and that we use in Section \[sec:mass\] to fit NFW models to the observed shear profiles. In Section \[sec:sysShear\] we correct the shear signal for the small colour selection and galaxy shape measurement biases calculated in Sections \[sec:shape\] & \[sec:bkg\] and re-fit the NFW models to the corrected shear profiles. In Section \[sec:Mass\_Pz\] we calibrate the impact of using the full photometric redshift probability distribution of the background galaxies on our mass measurements. In Section \[sec:boost\] we consider the impact of forcing the number density profile of background galaxies to be flat. (We emphasize again that in our analysis and results we do not assume the number density profile to be flat.)
### Simulation Tests {#sec:sim}
The radial range over which recent cluster weak-lensing studies [e.g. @Israel12; @Melchior14; @Applegate14; @Hoekstra15] have modeled the shear profile has been motivated in part by results from numerical simulations. Here, we expand upon @Okabe13, to test our individual mass measurements (Section \[sec:mass\]) using synthetic weak shear catalogues based on simulated clusters and toy models. The former have the advantage of incorporating the full effects of the large-scale structure that surrounds massive clusters, whilst the latter have the advantage of toy model clusters having perfectly known properties, and the properties of the background galaxy catalogues are matched to the observational data. Importantly, we calibrate the specific model fitting method that we apply to our observational data directly on simulations whose properties match our own sample and data.
We use mock observations of clusters from the “Cosmo-OWLS” cosmological hydrodynamical simulation that reproduces a large number of local galaxy cluster scaling relations, within a $400\hMpc$ box [@LeBrun14; @McCarthy14]. We use the simulations that include cooling, star formation, supernova feedback and AGN feedback with a heating temperature $\Delta T_{\rm heat}=10^8$K, known as the [AGN]{} 8.0 model. Weak-lensing catalogues comprising 100 galaxies per ${\rm arcmin}^2$ were constructed following @Bahe12. Specifically, the mock observations include the effect of shape noise, cluster substructure and triaxiality, and correlated large-scale structure, and ignore uncorrelated large-scale structure and observational effects such as uncertainties in galaxy shape measurements and redshifts. Note that ignoring uncorrelated large-scale structure is not expected to affect the measurement of possible biases in mass measurements via tests such as those described here [@Hoekstra11]. The mass of the simulated clusters spans $5\times10^{14}h_{73}^{-1}M_\odot
<M_{200}<17\times10^{14}h_{73}^{-1}M_\odot$ at a redshift of $z_l=0.23$ with the WMAP7 cosmology of $\Omega_{m,0}=0.272$ and $\Omega_\Lambda=0.728$. We randomly extracted galaxies from the parent synthetic weak shear catalogues to match statistically the cluster-centric number density profiles of colour-selected background galaxies in the observational analysis (Section \[sec:bkg\]), and fitted NFW models to the shear profiles following exactly the procedure laid down in Sections \[sec:fitting\] & \[sec:mass\]. This was repeated for 30 realizations, each containing 23 simulated clusters.
To quantify the mass measurement, we define $\Delta_X$ in terms of the geometric mean: $\Delta_X=\exp\left(\langle \ln(X_{\rm fit}/X_{\rm
input})\rangle\right)-1$, following [@Umetsu14], and similar to the methods of [@Becker11]. Here, $X_{\rm fit}$ is the best-fit mass or concentration. We recover the input $M_{200}$ and $c_{200}$ from the numerical simulations with negligible bias. The mean bias on the mass and concentration measurements across the full suite of realizations of the simulations is $\ls1$ per cent. The scatter between measurements of the bias on mass using individual realizations is $4.8$ per cent, which is comparable with the measurement uncertainty of $4.4$ per cent on the bias from an individual realization. Likewise the realization-to-realization scatter in bias on concentration is $6.2$ per cent, with a typical measurement uncertainty on an individual realization of $6.3$ per cent (upper three panels of Figure \[fig:fit\_sys\]).
We repeat this test using cluster density profile models based on analytic NFW halos, and construct synthetic background galaxy catalogues that match the observed catalogues as closely as possible. For each of 50 analytic cluster profiles we adopt the observed positions of background galaxies and randomly draw a galaxy from the full background galaxy sample across all 50 clusters, thus simultaneously randomising the galaxy orientations, and matching statistically the source redshift distribution. The NFW parameters are randomly chosen from the measured values for our cluster sample. We compute the synthetic shear profile for each of these 50 analytic clusters 10 times and fit an NFW model following the procedures laid down in Sections \[sec:fitting\] & \[sec:mass\]. Again, we recover the input masses and concentrations with $\ls1$ per cent bias. The scatter between realizations is $4.3$ and $8.9$ per cent on mass and concentration respectively, and the typical measurement uncertainty on individual realizations is $7.7$ and $14.5$ per cent on mass and concentration respectively (lowest panel of Figure \[fig:fit\_sys\]).
In summary, we conclude that our shear profile fitting algorithm, a key feature of which is the adaptive choice of binning scheme, recovers the mean mass of our sample with negligible bias.
![Calibration tests for weak-lensing mass measurements ($M_{200}$,$c_{200}$). The top three panels and the bottom panel represent the results based on the numerical simulations [diamonds @McCarthy11; @Bahe12; 23 clusters] and the toy models (circles; 50 clusters), respectively. The filled and open symbols denote the geometric means for the mass and the concentration, respectively.[]{data-label="fig:fit_sys"}](f9.eps){width="\hsize"}
### Shear Calibration and Background Selection {#sec:sysShear}
In Sections \[sec:shape\] & \[sec:bkg\] we developed methods to measure the shape of faint galaxies and select faint red galaxies as background galaxies with small systematic biases of $3$ and $1$ per cent respectively; both acting in the sense that we slightly under-estimate cluster mass. Here we estimate how these biases propagate through to the actually cluster mass measurements.
The shape measurement bias is expressed as the multiplicative shear calibration factor, $m=-0.03$, following the STEP programme. Given $m$, we therefore correct the measured tangential shear signal by $\Delta\Sigma_+\rightarrow\Delta\Sigma_+ (1+m)^{-1}$ and repeat the tangential shear fitting described in Section \[sec:fitting\]. We express the comparison between the original masses (Table \[tab:mass\]) and the corrected masses we define $\Delta_M$ in terms of the geometric mean: $\Delta_M=\exp\left(\langle\ln(M_\Delta^{\rm orig}/M_\Delta^{{\rm
corr}})\rangle\right)-1)$. We find that the corrected masses are $\sim3-5\%$ higher than the original masses, the range of values reflecting the non-linearity of tangential shear profiles (Table \[tab:sys\]).
Turning to the colour selection of background galaxies, the right panel of Figure \[fig:dilution\] shows that the contamination levels are $1$ per cent at $r{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}}1.3\hMpc$ and well below this level at $r{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$}}1.3\hMpc$. We therefore boost the shear signals at $r{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}}1.3\hMpc$ and re-derive the cluster masses, again following Section \[sec:fitting\]. Expressing the comparison in the same manner as above, we found that the masses corrected for contamination are within $\ls1$ per cent of the original masses (Table \[tab:sys\]).
For completeness, we combine these two shear correction terms in quadrature to give an effective multiplicative bias of $m=-0.032$, and evaluate the mass measurement bias of the combined shear calibration and contamination effects. As expected, the bias is mainly attributed to the shear calibration, with the combined correction yielding results indistinguishable from the pure shear calibration correction. Individual cluster masses based on the corrected tangential shear profile are given in Appendix \[sec:app1\].
### Mass Estimates with photometric redshift P(z) {#sec:Mass_Pz}
{width="\hsize"}
In Section \[sec:photometry\] we adopted as the redshift of each faint galaxy in our sample, the median of the stacked posterior probability distribution of the nearest 100 neighbours in the $(V-i)-i$ space of the COSMOS catalogue. We therefore essentially adopted a point estimate of the redshift of each of our galaxies. However it is well known that the photometric redshift probability distribution of galaxies can be asymmetric, and present multiple peaks. The full photometric redshift probability density function, $P(z)$, fully describes such implicit systematic uncertainties. Indeed some recent studies have used the full $P(z)$ for some clusters in their weak-lensing sample [e.g. @Applegate14].
Here, we test whether our method that ignores the full $P(z)$ available from the COSMOS survey suffers any significant bias. In a similar vein to Section \[sec:photometry\], we estimate the full $P(z)$ probability function of individual galaxies as an ensemble average of $P^{\rm COSMOS}(z)$ for 100 neighbouring COSMOS galaxies in the colour-magnitude plane, $$\begin{aligned}
P(z)=\frac{1}{N_{\rm nei}}\sum_j^{N_{\rm nei}} P_j^{\rm COSMOS}(z).\end{aligned}$$ Given the probability function, the tangential shear component can then be calculated as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
\langle \Delta \Sigma_+ \rangle (r_i)=\frac{\sum_n\int_{z_l}^\infty
g_{+,n}\Sigma_{\rm cr,n}(z_s) w_n(z_s) P(z_s) dz_s}{\sum_n\int_{z_l}^\infty
w_n(z_s) P(z_s) dz_s}. \label{eq:g+_Pz}\end{aligned}$$ The errors for the shape noise ($C_{g}$) and the photometric redshift ($\tilde{C}_{s}$) are estimated as: $$\begin{aligned}
C_{g,ij}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\sum_n\int_{z_l}^\infty
\sigma_{g,n}^2\Sigma_{\rm cr,n}^2(z_s) w_n^2(z_s) P(z_s) dz_s}{(\sum_n\int_{z_l}^\infty
w_n(z_s) P(z_s) dz_s)^2}\delta_{ij},\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\tilde{C}_{s,ij}=\frac{\sum_n\int_{z_l}^\infty
(g_{+,n}\Sigma_{\rm cr,n}(z_s)w_n(z_s) -\langle \Delta \Sigma_+ \rangle)^2 P(z_s) dz_s}{\sum_n\int_{z_l}^\infty
P(z_s) dz_s}\delta_{ij},\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ respectively.
We select the same background galaxies used in our main analysis and compute the tangential shear profiles using Equation (\[eq:g+\_Pz\]). The radial bins are chosen using the same method as in our main analysis. The difference in the tangential shear components estimated by the single source redshift and $P(z)$ is calculated using: $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta_+^2=\frac{1}{N_{\rm bin}}\sum_i \frac{(\langle \Delta
\Sigma_+^{z_s} \rangle-\langle \Delta \Sigma_+^{P(z)}
\rangle)^2}{(\sigma_+^{z_s})^2+(\sigma_+^{P(z)})^2},\end{aligned}$$ where $\sigma_+^2=C_g+\tilde{C}_s$. The deviation is, on average, $\Delta_+\simeq0.05$, with smaller deviations of $\Delta_+\sim0.02$ at small radii ($r<0.3\hMpc$) and larger deviations of $\Delta_+\sim0.07$ at large radii ($r>1\hMpc$). This is because the errors at small radii are larger, due to a the relatively small number of background galaxies in bins of smaller solid angle. When we ignore the errors, the average deviations are still negligible, $\Delta_+\sim0.01$ at $r<0.3\hMpc$ and $\Delta_+\sim0.002$ at $r>1\hMpc$. We also compare the best-fit mass and concentration parameters (Figure \[fig:Mzs\_vs\_MPz\]). The two measurements are in excellent agreement, with geometric means of $0.97\pm0.05$ and $0.96\pm0.15$ for $M_{200}$ and $c_{200}$, respectively. We also made a background galaxy catalogue using the $P(z)$ function and our radius-dependent colour-cut (Section \[sec:bkg\]), and found that again the mass measurements do not change significantly ($0.96\pm0.05$ and $0.96\pm0.15$ for $M_{200}$ and $c_{200}$). We conclude that with the current sample and data we are unable to detect any systematic difference between the mass and concentration measurements based on the mean of COSMOS point estimates of the redshift of individual galaxies and the full COSMOS $P(z)$ function.
### Boost factor {#sec:boost}
{width="\hsize"}
Imperfect selection of background galaxies leads to under-estimated weak-shear signals because background galaxy samples are contaminated by faint cluster galaxies, the shapes of which present no lensing signal due to the cluster. The number density of cluster galaxies decreases with increasing projected cluster-centric radius. Thus at fixed selection method, the ratio of cluster galaxies to background galaxies, $f_{\rm mem}$, decreases with increasing projected cluster-centric radius, and thereby dilutes the shear signal more at smaller radii than at larger radii. Our approach is to vary the colour cut used to select background galaxies as a function of cluster-centric radius, simply exploiting the declining number density of cluster galaxies as a function of radius, without invoking any physical assumptions. An alternative [e.g. @Kneib03; @Applegate14; @Hoekstra15] is to correct the measured shear signal by a factor $1+f_{\rm mem}$, and thus to assume that the observed number density profile of background galaxies is flat. This correction is referred to as a [*boost factor*]{}. However, the assumption of a flat observed number density profile of background galaxies ignores magnification bias [e.g. @Broadhurst95; @Umetsu14] – i.e. the depletion or enhancement of the number density of background galaxies due to lensing magnification.
We compare the boost-factor method with our methods that do not invoke a boost factor and instead rely on selection of red galaxies to achieve $\le1$ per cent dilution across all radii. For this purpose, we construct background galaxy catalogues that suffer dilution by selecting red galaxies with a positive colour-offset from the red-sequence, $\Delta C>0$, and compute the stacked shear profile for this diluted sample of galaxies. As expected, the amplitude of this shear profile is suppressed relative to the shear profile from our main analysis, with the suppression increasing to $\sim50\%$ at $\sim100\hkpc$ from the cluster centre (left and central panels of Figure \[fig:boost\]). The suppression of the signal due to dilution appears to be negligible at ${\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$}}1\hMpc$. The contaminating population of faint cluster galaxies is seen clearly as an excess of galaxies at $\ls1\hMpc$ in the stacked number density profile of galaxies selected as having $\Delta C>0$ (right panel of Figure \[fig:boost\]). In other words, the excess of number density profile is negligible beyond $r_{200}$. The evidence indicates an internal consistency that the number density excess and the stacked-lensing mass estimate are consistent with each other. Note that the number density profile in Figure \[fig:boost\] is calculated after masking the solid angle subtended by bright galaxies ($i'<20$) out to elliptical radii a factor of $3$ than the elliptical shape parameters of SExtractor – i.e. corresponding to the isophotal limit of detected objects. We also fully consider the finite field-of-view in the number density calculation. To quantify the contaminating population we fit the function $f_{\rm
mem}=A\exp\left(-r/r_0\right)$ to the measured number density profile (dashed blue curve in right panel of Figure \[fig:boost\]). We use this model to boost the measured shear signal by a factor $1+f_{\rm mem}$ (blue crosses in left and central panels of Figure \[fig:boost\]). It is clear that the boosted shear signal underestimates the lensing signal that we detect by $\sim40\%$ on small scales, and $\gs10\%$ at all radii interior to $\sim1\hMpc$. Lens magnification is an obvious culprit for this apparent deficit of signal in the boost-factor-corrected shear profile.
The galaxy-count is depleted by the magnification bias, as expressed by $$\begin{aligned}
N(r;<m) =N_0(r;<m) \mu(r)^{2.5s-1},\end{aligned}$$ where $\mu^{-1}=(1-\kappa)^2-|\gamma|^2$ is the lensing magnification which expands the area of sky and enhances the flux of galaxies, and $s=d\log_{10} N_0(m)/dm$ is a logarithmic count slope. Given the best-fit mass model derived by the stacked shear analysis (Table \[tab:Mass\_stacked\]), we calculate the number density profile expected from the magnification bias, assuming $s=0.15$ [@Umetsu14]. This calculation shows clearly that the expected number density profile of background galaxies is [*not*]{} flat, showing a decline interior to $\sim1\hMpc$ (dotted red curve in right panel of Figure \[fig:boost\]). This indicates that the assumption of a flat background galaxy number density profile is incorrect, even on scales comparable with $r_{500}$.
Next, we boost the $\Delta C>0$ shear profile (blue squares in left and central panels of Figure \[fig:boost\]) by both the boost factor, and the expected number density profile of background galaxies from the magnification bias calculation discussed in the proceeding two paragraphs. This boost factor and magnification bias corrected shear profile comes closer to recovering our measured shear profile, although it remains $\sim10\%$ lower interior to $\sim1\hMpc$ (red points in left and central panels of Figure \[fig:boost\]). Clearly, the number density profile based on an imperfect background selection is tightly coupled with the dilution effect and the magnification bias. It is therefore very difficult to break the degeneracy between the dilution effect and the magnification bias using the imperfect background catalogue. We also mention that the boost-factor gives rise to systematics in the source redshift because member galaxies in background catalogue have inadequate redshifts. Overall, our analysis in this Section indicates that application of a boost factor without consideration of lens magnification may cause systematic biases even on quite large scales up to $\sim\,r_{500}$.
Error budget {#sec:errorbudget}
------------
Name expected $M_{\rm vir}$ $M_{200}$ $M_{500}$ $M_{1000}$ $M_{2500}$
-------------------------- ---------- --------------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ------------
Shear calibration $-3$ $-4.1$ $-4.2$ $-2.7$ $-4.8$ $-5.3$
Colour selection $-1$ $0.2$ $0.0$ $-0.5$ $-0.9$ $-1.7$
Shear+colour calibration $-3.2$ $-4.1$ $-4.2$ $-2.7$ $-4.8$ $-5.3$
Radial bins $-$ $\pm0.9$ $\pm1.0$ $\pm1.4$ $\pm2.3$ $\pm4.4$
We summarize the contributions to our overall error budget. The largest systematic bias in our measurements is caused by imperfections in our faint galaxy shape measurements, with a STEP-like multiplicative bias of $m\simeq-0.03$ that is independent of galaxy size. We tuned our faint galaxy selection method to yield a contamination level of $\le1$ per cent, thus again giving a very small systematic bias. This low level of contamination renders the background galaxy samples essential pure, and thus not requiring correction. Nevertheless, for completeness, we correct the shear profiles for these two bias terms and obtain “corrected masses” (see Appendix) that are $\sim3-5$ per cent higher than the “uncorrected masses” in Table \[tab:mass\]. In particular, after correction, our measurements of $M_{500}$ increase by just $2.7$ per cent on average.
We have also investigated several other errors, none of which contribute to systematic biases. First, the typical uncertainty on the distance ratio $D_{ls}/D_s$ for each individual background galaxy, computed from the COSMOS photometric redshift catalogue following the methods described in Section \[sec:photometry\] is $\sigma_\beta\simeq13-28$ per cent. These uncertainties are included in the covariance matrix when fitting the NFW model to the respective shear profiles (Section \[sec:fitting\]). Second, when exploring different shear profile binning schemes, and applying them to the observational shear measurements, we found that the $M_{500}$ values for individual clusters scatter by $\pm1.4$ per cent. Third, when applying our shear profile binning scheme to simulated data we recovered the true masses with $\ls1$ per cent bias and $\sim5$ per cent scatter between different realizations of the simulations (Section \[sec:sim\]). Fourth, we tested whether using a point estimator of the photometric redshift of a galaxy in the COSMOS catalogue introduced any systematic bias with respect to using the full $P(z)$ distribution. We found that the latter yields masses $4\pm6$ per cent lower than the former. Given the poor precision to which have been able to measure this possible bias, we ignore it here. However this deserves more detailed investigation in future larger surveys. Whilst we have sought to minimize the assumptions in our analysis pipeline, we would like to draw attention to the dependence of our results on the COSMOS field. We have assumed that the galaxy population probed by observations of this field are representative of the universe as a whole. This assumption is relevant to the [shera]{}-based shape measurement tests described in Section \[sec:shapetest\], and aspects of our analysis that rely on the COSMOS photometric redshift distribution (Sections \[sec:photometry\] & \[sec:bkg\]). Several many-filter and deep COSMOS-like calibration fields would be very beneficial for future deep and wide lensing surveys including LSST.
Comparison of mass measurements with the literature {#sec:compare}
---------------------------------------------------
{width="0.45\hsize"} {width="0.45\hsize"} {width="0.45\hsize"} {width="0.45\hsize"}
---------------- --------------- ----------------- ------------ ------------ ------------ ------- ------------------- ------------------- -------------------- ------------------- ---------------------
Name [Method]{} [Calibration]{} [Boost]{} [Radial]{} $c_\Delta$ [N]{} Virial $200$ $500$ $2500$ $1.5h_{70}^{-1}$Mpc
[factor]{} [factor]{} [bins]{}
[This paper]{} $g_+$ No No Adaptive Free $-$ $-$ $-$ $-$ $-$ $-$
Ok10 $g_+$ No No Fixed Free 20 [$0.81\pm0.07$]{} [$0.82\pm0.06$]{} [$0.85\pm0.05$]{} [$0.91\pm0.08$]{} [$-$]{}
[CCCP]{} $g_+$ Yes Yes Fixed Scaling 21 [$0.94\pm0.06$]{} [$-$ ]{} [$0.95\pm0.06$]{} [$0.97\pm0.07$]{} [$-$]{}
[CLASH]{} $g_+$ & $\mu$ Yes No Fixed Free 5 [$0.99\pm0.14$]{} [$1.02\pm0.13$]{} [$1.07\pm0.12$]{} [$-$]{} [$1.03\pm0.10$]{}
[WtG]{} $g_+$ Yes Yes Fixed Fixed 17 [$-$]{} [$1.14\pm0.09$]{} [$1.16\pm0.12$ ]{} [$1.17\pm0.14$]{} [$1.15\pm0.07$]{}
---------------- --------------- ----------------- ------------ ------------ ------------ ------- ------------------- ------------------- -------------------- ------------------- ---------------------
Ongoing projects, including LoCuSS, CCCP [@Hoekstra15], CLASH [@Umetsu14] and WtG [@Applegate14], conducted cluster weak-lensing analyses. Comparison of the cluster mass measurements between these different surveys is of paramount importance for cluster cosmology experiments. There are important differences between the approach taken by each survey to the cluster mass measurements. For example, CCCP and WtG implement the boost factor method (Section \[sec:boost\]) to correct their shear signal. Another key difference is the prior adopted on the concentration parameter of the NFW halo model that is fitted to the data. For example, WtG fix the concentration parameter at $c_{200}=4$, whilst we allow it to be a free parameter in our fits. We summarize the key differences between the respective analysis methods in Table \[tab:com\], and highlight key points in the following sections. Throughout these sections, when we compare cluster masses between two surveys we do so within the same radii so as to avoid errors caused by aperture mis-match. Also, all comparisons are done without applying the colour-selection and shear-calibration corrections to our shear measurements, discussed in Section \[sec:sysShear\].
### LoCuSS – Okabe et al. (2010)
[@Okabe10b] conducted weak-lensing analysis for 30 clusters using Suprime-Cam data. As some of clusters lacked $V-$ band data, we measured masses only for 22 clusters, defining as background galaxies those galaxies with colours are redder or bluer than those of the red-sequence. The red and blue colour cuts were chosen by eye based on the run of lensing signal with colour offset from the red sequence. We didn’t adopt any correction factor inherent in the shear calibration and the profiles of the background number density. The error on the tangential shear measurements only took into account shape noise. We treated the mass and the concentration as free parameters when fitting the NFW model to the tangential shear profiles. The masses derived from our new analysis presented in this article are $20\%$ to $9\%$ higher than obtained in 2010, with larger differences found for masses measured in larger radii (Table \[tab:com\]; Figure \[fig:compare\]). Our previous mass measurements were under-estimated due to issues in shear calibration and imperfect background galaxy selection.
### CCCP – Hoekstra et al. (2015) {#sec:CCCP}
The Canadian Cluster Comparison Project [CCCP @Hoekstra15] carried out weak-lensing mass measurement for 52 clusters using the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT). Their sample is defined by clusters with an [*ASCA*]{} temperature of $k_BT_X>5\,{\rm keV}$ in the range of $0.15<z<0.55$. They used $B-$ and $R-$ bands for the first 20 clusters with the CFH12k camera and $g'-$ and $r'-$ bands for the other 32 clusters with the Megacam (hereafter we refer to the redder band as $r$-band for both instruments). They used solely their $r$-band data to select galaxies at $22<r<25$ as background galaxies. The number density profile of these galaxies was found to increase towards the cluster centres. Hoekstra et al. modelled this excess of galaxies on a cluster-by-cluster basis, and boosted the lensing signals by a factor of $1+f_{\rm contam}(r)$ assuming a flat background number density profile of background galaxies, where $f_{\rm contam}(r)$ is the fraction of contaminating galaxies obtained from their models. This boost factor increases their masses by $1-2$ per cent. They adopt the mass-concentration relation [@Dutton14] for their mass estimates.
There are 21 clusters in common between the CCCP and LoCuSS samples. On average, the CCCP masses are $\sim3\%-6\%$ lower than our masses (Table \[tab:com\]; Figure \[fig:compare\]), however this difference is not statistically significant. We note that the radial range of their model fits is $0.5-2h_{70}^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$ – i.e. it includes scales on which we expect the magnification bias to affect the slope of the number density profile of background galaxies (Figure \[fig:boost\]; see also Ziparo et al. 2015). Nevertheless, we see good agreement between LoCuSS and CCCP mass measurements.
### CLASH – Umetsu et al. (2014) {#sec:CLASH}
The Cluster Lensing And Supernova survey with Hubble [CLASH; @Umetsu14] conducted a joint shear-and-magnification weak-lensing analysis of a sample of 20 galaxy clusters at $0.19{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}}\,z{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}}0.69$, using imaging through multiple filters with Subaru/Suprime-Cam. They measure galaxy ellipticities using the KSB$+$ method, and calibrate the isotropic PSF correction for galaxies detected with high signal-to-noise ratio – i.e. using methods similar to our own. They also employ a correction factor $1/0.95$ to account for residual shear calibration. Background galaxies are selected in a colour-colour plane, typically based on the $B_JR_Cz'$-band filters, following [@Medezinski10]. They do not employ a boost factor to compensate for contamination of their background galaxy catalogues. The halo concentration for the NFW model is treated as a free parameter. We compare the CLASH and LoCuSS masses for 5 clusters in common, obtaining excellent agreement (Figure \[fig:compare\] and Table \[tab:com\]). Recently, Umetsu et al. (2015) have published joint strong plus weak-lensing mass measurements of the CLASH sample. Their strong+weak-lensing masses are in a similar excellent agreement with our measurements.
### WtG – Applegate et al. (2014) {#sec:WtG}
The Weighing the Giants programme [WtG; @Applegate14] have conducted weak-lensing mass measurements for 51 X-ray luminous galaxy clusters in the redshift of $0.15{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}}z{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$}}0.7$, using data from Subaru/Suprime-Cam. They calibrated their shape measurement pipeline using the STEP simulations and used this calibration to correct their faint galaxy shape measurements down to 25th magnitude. Note that their shape measurements suffered significant noise bias at fainter magnitudes. We compare our masses with WtG masses based on colour-selected galaxies, and therefore concentrate further discussion of their methods on those measurements.
WtG define two catalogues of background galaxies to compute tangential shear profiles. The first catalogue is used to calculate the contamination correction, namely the boost factor, which is shown by blue points in Figure 4 of @Applegate14, and the second catalogue is used to compute the tangential shear profile represented by orange points in the left panel of their Figure 4. The first catalogue is defined by employing magnitude and size cuts and exclusions of stars and galaxies that lie on the red-sequence of cluster galaxies. They found an apparent excess in the number density profiles at small radii because of imperfect background selection. The excess is described by $f_{\rm mem}(r)=N_{\rm mem}/(N_{\rm
mem}+N_{\rm bkg})=f_{500}\exp(1-r/r_{500,X})$ which is the ratio of the member galaxies divided by the total number (member and background) of galaxies selected. Here, they assume a constant number density profile of background galaxies, and thus ignore the potential effects of magnification bias. All clusters are fitted simultaneously to estimate $f_{500}$ and $r_{500,X}$. The normalization $f_{500}$ for the first catalogue is $(8.6\pm0.9)\%$. Figure 4 in [@Applegate14] shows that $r_{500,X}\sim1.4-2h_{70}^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$ which is very large. For example, [@Martino14] obtain a median of $r_{500,X}\simeq1h_{70}^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$ and values in the range $0.8-1.6h_{70}^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$ for the same sample that we study here, that has considerable overlap with the WtG sample. Whilst cluster-by-cluster comparison of $r_{500,X}$ measurements is required to be certain, the large values of this parameter used by WtG suggests that they assume a rather shallow radial density distribution when they model contamination of the background galaxy samples (right panel of Figure \[fig:boost\]). Their shallow number density profile indicates that cluster members are distributed beyond the cluster virial radii, which conflicts with our results that the number density of cluster members is negligible in these regions (Section \[sec:boost\]). Their number density result therefore appears to be inconsistent with their weak-lensing mass measurements. The shallow number density profile found by the WtG may therefore be a source of systematic bias in their mass measurements.
Next, they draw the second catalogue from the first catalogue with additional conditions of robust shape measurements and lensing cut ($S/N>3$ and $r_h>1.15r_h*$). The tangential shear profile is computed from the second catalogue. The excess of the number density profile, $f'_{500}=4.8\pm1.6\%$, is less than that obtained by the first catalogue. The tangential shear profile using the second catalogue is corrected by the boost factor that was calculated using the first catalogue. We here explicitly describe their definition of the corrected lensing signal, as follows, $g_+^{\rm 2nd}\rightarrow
g_+^{\rm 2nd}/(1-f_{\rm mem}^{\rm 1st}(r))$. Here, 1st and 2nd denotes the quantities computed by the first and second catalogues, respectively. This inconsistency may affect the precision of the WtG mass measurements.
We emphasize that the boost factor cannot recover the correct lensing signal because of the magnification bias, as demonstrated in Sections \[sec:bkg\] and \[sec:boost\], notwithstanding the fitting range, $0.75-3h_{70}^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$, that WtG adopt. Finally, they assumed $c_{200}=4$ for the NFW model for all clusters at all redshifts. Numerical simulations [e.g. @Bullock01; @Duffy08; @Bhattacharya13; @Diemer14; @Meneghetti14; @Ludlow14] show that the concentration depends on both the halo mass and redshift.
WtG masses are $\sim15\%$ higher than our masses, independent of overdensity, albeit at $\sim1-2\sigma$ significance (Table \[tab:com\]; Figure \[fig:compare\]). Note that we exclude A1758N from this comparison because the WtG adopt a radial fit range that extends into the companion cluster A1758S. When we follow the WtG method – i.e. restrict the radial range of the fit to $0.75-3\,h_{70}^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$ and adopt $c_{200}=4$, the statistical significance of the disagreement increases slightly, with geometric means at $\Delta=200,500,2500$ and $1.5\,h_{70}^{-1}{\rm Mpc}$ of $1.18\pm0.09$, $1.19\pm0.12$,$1.19\pm0.14$, and $1.18\pm0.07$, respectively. We note that the difference between our mass measurements and those of WtG is significant at $\gs2\sigma$ on the scale preferred by WtG, $1.5\,h_{70}^{-1}\Mpc$.
In summary, we have identified several strong assumptions and inconsistencies in the WtG analysis: the inconsistent calculation for the boost factor, the shallow number density profile leading to high boost factor, ignoring the magnification bias, and the fixed concentration $c_{200}=4$. We expect that the tension between our respective mass measurements will be caused by one or more of these issues.
### CCCP, WtG and LoCuSS {#sec:3projects}
![Mass comparisons for 12 cluster overlapped among the three projects of CCCP[@Hoekstra15], WtG [@Applegate14] and LoCuSS. Masses are measured at $1.5h_{70}^{-1}$Mpc, derived by the WtG fitting method; the radial range is $0.75-3\,h_{70}^{-1}$Mpc and $C_{200}=4$. The bottom panel shows a comparison of CCCP masses (red diamonds) and WtG masses (blue circles). The top panel shows individual masses of 12 clusters. Red diamonds, green squares and blue circles denote CCCP, LoCuSS and WtG masses, respectively. []{data-label="fig:compare2"}](f13.eps){width="\hsize"}
The cleanest comparison between surveys is between the respective mass measurements for 12 clusters in common between all of CCCP [@Hoekstra15], WtG [@Applegate14] and LoCuSS (this article). We follow the WtG fitting method, that is, we fix the NFW model concentration parameter at $c_{200}=4$, and fit the NFW model to the observed shear profile in the radial range is $0.75-3h_{70}^{-1}$Mpc. We compare three spherical NFW masses within $1.5h_{70}^{-1}$Mpc. Based on these conditions, the mass comparison approximately corresponds to a comparison of lensing signal at the fixed radial range. This like-for-like comparison confirms the results discussed in the preceding sections: for the subsamples of clusters in the LoCuSS sample that have also been studied by CCCP and WtG, the CCCP and LoCuSS masses are in good agreements with each other, while the WtG masses are $\sim2\sigma$ higher than both CCCP and LoCuSS masses (Figure \[fig:compare2\]).
### Sensitivity of conclusions to “sample selection”
An important caveat on the conclusions discussed in Sections \[sec:CCCP\]–\[sec:3projects\] is that they are strictly only applicable to the specific sub-samples of clusters that have been observed by other surveys that are in common with our sample. We therefore consider whether our conclusions are supported by inter-survey comparisons in the literature – i.e. by comparison of masses of clusters in the overlap between other pairs of surveys, thus excluding our LoCuSS sample selection and mass measurements from the discussion.
@Hoekstra15 find that WtG masses from @Applegate14 are $\sim6-8$ per cent higher than their CCCP measurements at $\sim2\sigma$ significance, depending on the redshift distribution adopted by the two surveys. This is consistent with our conclusions, however it is intriguing to note that WtG masses agree very well with CCCP masses when the latter are computed by deprojecting aperture mass estimates. @Hoekstra15 also compare their mass measurements with CLASH measurements of 6 clusters in common between these surveys, finding that CLASH masses from @Umetsu14 exceed CCCP masses by $12\pm5$ per cent. Umetsu et al. (2015) also find similar results (a $16\pm10$ per cent excess) for five clusters in common between their joint strong plus weak-lensing analysis of the CLASH sample and the @Hoekstra15 weak-lensing masses. The CCCP/CLASH comparison appears to be at odds with our finding that CLASH, CCCP, and LoCuSS are all consistent, and underlines our caveat that conclusions based on mass comparison between surveys may be sensitive to the specific overlapping sub-samples considered. However, the overlap between CLASH and WtG numbers 17 clusters, i.e. a number of clusters comparable with the LoCuSS/CCCP and LoCuSS/WtG samples discussed in Sections \[sec:CCCP\] & \[sec:WtG\]. Both @Umetsu14 and Umetsu et al. (2015) find that WtG masses exceed the CLASH masses by $\sim7-10$ per cent, albeit at $\sim1\sigma$ significance.
In summary, a consistent picture emerges from comparisons between LoCuSS, CLASH, CCCP, and WtG surveys when the samples in common between the surveys number $\gs10$ objects: the WtG cluster mass calibration exceeds that of other surveys by $\sim6-15$ per cent at $\sim1-2\sigma$ significance per pair of surveys considered. Further inter-comparison of mass measurements based on all of the methods used by the respective surveys, preferably using an enlarged and common sample of clusters, should help to clarify the remaining differences between the surveys.
Summary {#sec:summary}
=======
We observed an almost complete $L_X$-selected sample of 50 galaxy clusters at $0.15<z<0.3$ through $V$- and $i'$-band filters with the Suprime-CAM instrument on the Subaru 8.2-m telescope. We used these data to measure the weak gravitational shear signal, and thus to infer the total mass and concentration of each cluster, and the sample as a whole via a stacking analysis. The size of our sample and typical statistical precision on weak-lensing mass measurements of $30$ per cent motivates our goal of controlling systematic biases in our analysis at the $\sim30/\sqrt{50}\simeq4$ per cent level.
The recent literature identifies the dominant systematic uncertainty in weak-lensing analysis of cluster samples as contamination of background galaxy samples by faint cluster galaxies. We extend our background galaxy selection method based on the dependence of gravitational shear signal on the colours of galaxies [@Okabe13] to incorporate the empirical fact that, at fixed colour cut, contamination by faint cluster members is a declining function of clustercentric radius. This allows us to define colour cuts that are a function of clustercentric radius such that we achieve negligible contamination (we required $\le1$ per cent contamination) whilst achieving a number density of 13 galaxies per square arcminute. We stress that our approach to selecting background galaxies neither assumes a form for the cluster mass distribution nor assumes a radial distribution for the background galaxies. We show that this latter point is important because gravitational magnification modifies the observed radial distribution of background galaxies on scales as large as $\gs1\hMpc$ from the cluster centres and thus complicates methods that assume the radial distribution of background galaxies is flat (see also Ziparo et al. 2015 for a detailed discussion).
The dominant systematic bias in our analysis is the accuracy of our faint galaxy shape measurements. We test our modified KSB$+$ method on large simulated datasets that incorporate smooth analytic galaxy templates based on Sersic profiles, and realistic galaxies based on high resolution imaging with the [*Hubble Space Telescope*]{}. The key feature of our shape measurement code is that we use a very high signal-to-noise ratio cut when selecting galaxies to model the isotropic PSF correction. The precision that we achieve in this model as a result of this cut is important because it significantly reduces the noise bias that is typically seen at faint flux levels in other studies [e.g. @Applegate14; @Hoekstra15]. We show that our STEP-like multiplicative shape measurement bias is of order 3 per cent, and is not a strong function of apparent magnitude and galaxy size. This is the largest systematic bias that we have identified in our analysis.
Controlling contamination of our background galaxy sample at the per cent level across a wide range of clustercentric radii (down to $\sim200\hkpc$) affords us the opportunity to fit for both mass and concentration parameter when modeling the weak shear signal. This is important because it eliminates the possibility of systematic biases caused by fixing the shape of the density profile or adopting a mass concentration relation from simulations. We are also interested in measuring the mass-concentration relation of cluster-scale dark matter halos. To further mitigate the possibility of biases when modeling the shear signal, we apply a range of binning schemes (number of bins, inner and outer fit radii) to the data that are well motivated by the physical properties of clusters and previous tests of weak-lensing methods [e.g. @Meneghetti10; @Becker11; @Bahe12]. For each cluster we adopt the mass and concentration measurement of the binning scheme that yields the measurements that are the closest to the mean of the measurements from the range of binning schemes that we explore. This is a new method, and thus we test it on simulations including full hydrodynamical numerical simulations from cosmo-OWLS [@LeBrun14; @McCarthy14], based on an AGN model that reproduces a large number of local X-ray-SZ-optical scaling relations. Our tests show that we recover the ensemble mass and concentration of the simulated systems with sub per cent accuracy and of order 5 per cent scatter between different realisations of the simulated lensing observations. Issues relating to the binning and modeling of the shear signal are therefore sub-dominant in our analysis.
We now summarise our main science results. We measured weak-lensing mass for individual clusters by fitting tangential shear profile with the spherical NFW model and investigated the mass-concentration relation. The best-fit mass-concentration relation is in excellent agreement with recent numerical simulations [@Bhattacharya13; @Diemer14; @Meneghetti14]. We also measured the average mass density profile for the NFW and Einasto profiles by stacked lensing analysis, considering the point mass and the two-halo term. The best-fit NFW model of the stacked signal agrees well with the mean of the individual mass measurements, supporting that the stacked lensing analysis recover the average of individual mass measurements. The Einasto profile also agrees with numerical simulations, albeit large scatter between numerical simulations.
We compared our lensing masses with masses from other projects (CCCP, CLASH and WtG). The philosophy of weak-lensing analyses for the four projects include some strong differences. Our mass measurements agree within $1\sigma$ with the CLASH [@Umetsu14] and CCCP [@Hoekstra15] surveys, with whom we have 5 and 21 clusters in common respectively. Our mass measurements are $\sim15$ per cent lower than WtG measurements for the 17 clusters in common, at $\sim1-2\sigma$ significance, depending on the mass measurement aperture. The fairest comparison between CCCP, WtG and LoCuSS is for the 12 clusters in common between all three surveys and based on a common mass measurement aperture and assumption on density profile shape. Adopting $c_{200}=4$ and measuring mass within $1.5h_{70}^{-1}\Mpc$ (i.e. matching to WtG), confirms that LoCuSS and CCCP mass calibrations are consistent with each other and WtG is in tension at $2\sigma$ higher mass than the other two surveys.
To guard against possible sensitivity of this conclusion to the specific samples under investigation here, we also reviewed recent studies in the literature that compare other pairs of surveys (and thus exclude LoCuSS). We find that WtG are in tension with masses $\sim6-15$ per cent higher than other surveys at $\sim1-2\sigma$ significance in all pairwise comparisons that include $\gs10$ objects. We discuss a range of possible causes of this tension, including strong assumptions on the radial distribution of background galaxies and the halo concentration parameter, and several inconsistencies in the construction of the WtG background galaxy catalogues. We expect that the tension is likely caused by one or more of these factors.
In summary, we have controlled systematic biases in our weak-lensing analysis of a large sample of clusters at $0.15\le z\le0.3$ at the 4 per cent level. Therefore, as far as we can tell, systematics do not dominate our results. Our methods have numerous innovative features that set us apart from contemporary surveys. In that context it is encouraging that out of four surveys including our own, three agree within $1\sigma$ and one is in tension with the other three at just $\sim1-2\sigma$. This represents important progress towards convergence on the mass calibration of galaxy clusters for cosmological surveys. In a companion article [@Smith16] we compare our weak-lensing mass measurements with estimates based on the assumption that the intracluster medium is in hydrostatic equilibrium, and discuss the recently reported tension between the [*Planck*]{} results from the primary CMB and galaxy cluster counts.
Looking to the future, we consider the development of additional deep, i.e. $\gs26$th magnitude, COSMOS-like photometric calibration fields to be vital for further progress on cluster mass calibration. This will be particularly important to make secure progress on the calibration of clusters at higher redshifts, especially given that upcoming surveys concentrate on a relatively small number (typically 4-6) of photometric filters. Further testing of faint galaxy shape measurement techniques in the high shear regime and down to faint photometric limits, preferrably in collaboration with experts in the cosmic shear community, will also be very helpful. Overall, the emerging consensus between surveys at $z<0.3$ that use very different methods, encourages us that the future for cluster cosmology is bright, and we look forward to further progress from ongoing/future optical/near-infrared surveys including KIDS, DES, HSC, [*Euclid*]{}, and LSST.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
We thank the referee, Douglas Clowe, for helpful comments. We thank warmly our colleagues within the LoCuSS collaboration for their support, encouragement, and advice, especially Felicia Ziparo, Keiichi Umetsu, Pasquale Mazzotta, Dan Marrone, Alexis Finoguenov, Sarah Mulroy, Arif Babul, Eiichi Egami, Chris Haines, Gus Evrard, James Taylor, and Toshifumi Futamase. We thank Masamune Oguri for making his simulated Suprime-CAM observations available to us. We acknowledge Ayumu Terukina, Yuki Okura, and Masahiro Takada for helpful discussions and advice. We gratefully acknowledge assistance with some of the Subaru observations described in this article from Chris Haines, Mathilde Jauzac, and Paul May. We thank Amandine Le Brun, Ian McCarthy, Yannick Bahé, and collaborators for providing the shear information for clusters in their cosmo-OWLS simulation. We also thank Olivier Ilbert, Peter Capak and colleagues for making the COSMOS-UltraVISTA photometric redshift catalogue and $P(z)$ distributions available to us prior to publication. We acknowledge stimulating and cordial discussions with Douglas Applegate, Anja von der Linden, Adam Mantz, and Henk Hoekstra. We also thank Henk for kindly providing “WtG-like” mass measurements from his CCCP analysis that we discuss in Section \[sec:3projects\]. NO is supported by a Grant-in-Aid from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan (26800097). This work was supported by “World Premier International Research Center Initiative (WPI Initiative)“ and the Funds for the Development of Human Resources in Science and Technology under MEXT, Japan, and Core Research for Energetic Universe in Hiroshima University (the MEXT program for promoting the enhancement of research universities, Japan). GPS acknowledges support from the Royal Society and the Science and Technology Facilities Council.
Radial Position for Tangential Shear Profile {#sec:app0}
============================================
We consider how to compute the mean tangential shear averaged over background galaxies located in the $i$-th bin of a shear profile, spanning the radial range $r_1<r_i<r_2$. It is important to compute these bin radii accurately so at to minimize systematic biases in cluster mass measurements. In the limit of a uniform sheet of background galaxies with no intrinsic ellipticity and an infinite number density of background galaxies, the average tangential shear in the $i$-th bin can be calculated analytically in the continuum limit: $$\begin{aligned}
\langle g_+\rangle_i=\frac{\int_{r_1}^{r_2}\,g_+(r)\,r\,dr}{\int_{r_1}^{r_2}r\,dr}.\label{eq:Appg+}
\end{aligned}$$ If one assumes a singular isothermal sphere (SIS) model, $g_+\simeq\gamma_+=A\,r^{-1}$, then in the weak limit, the average tangential shear in $i$-th bin becomes: $$\begin{aligned}
\langle g_+\rangle_i=\frac{A}{r_{\rm mid}},
\end{aligned}$$ where $r_{\rm mid}=(r_1+r_2)/2$ – i.e. the average tangential shear corresponds exactly with that of a SIS at a radius that is the mean of the inner and outer radius of the bin. For completeness, we also use the SIS model to demonstrate that the correct way to calculate the radius at which to place a binned shear measurement is to weight by the shear signal, thus: $$\begin{aligned}
r_i=\frac{\int_{r_1}^{r_2}g_+\,r^2\,dr}{\int_{r_1}^{r_2}g_+\,r\,dr},
\label{eq:Appgwgt}
\end{aligned}$$ which yields $r_i=r_{\rm mid}$ for the SIS model, as above. So far we have used the SIS model as a well-motivated illustration in the sense that tangential shear profiles of clusters do not deviate significantly from a power law slope of $r^{-1}$. It is therefore interesting to note the convenience of using $r_{\rm mid}$ because it is trivial to compute and is independent of the details of the trial mass distribution when computing the likelihood of a model, under the assumptions described above.
However the observed density profiles of galaxy clusters do deviate from the SIS model [e.g. @Okabe13]. It is therefore important to check the expected amplitude of systematic biases incurred if $r_{\rm mid}$ is adopted for clusters that do not have a SIS density profile. We therefore consider a power-law profile, $g_+=A\,r^{-\alpha}$, in which case integrating Equation \[eq:Appg+\] yields an average tangential shear in a radial bin of: $$\begin{aligned}
\langle g_+\rangle_i=\frac{2\,A\,(r_2^{2-\alpha}-r_1^{2-\alpha})}{(2-\alpha)\,(r_2^2-r_1^2)}.
\end{aligned}$$ The slope, $\alpha$, for the NFW model is equivalent to $\sim0.5$ on small scales and $1.5$ on large scales. To estimate the possible systematic bias caused by adopting $r_{\rm mid}$ as the radius of a binned shear measurement, we define $r_i$ as: $$\begin{aligned}
r_i=\frac{(2-\alpha)(r_2^2-r_1^2)}{2(r_2^{2-\alpha}-r_1^{2-\alpha})},
\end{aligned}$$ and calculate the deviation of $r_i$ from $r_{\rm mid}$ for the cases $\alpha=0.5$ and $\alpha=1.5$. We find that the deviation of $r_i$ from $r_{\rm mid}$ is less than 1 per cent in these cases. We therefore conclude that, in the idealised case of uniform distribution of background galaxies, infinite number density of background galaxies, and no intrinsic ellipticity, $r_{\rm mid}$ is a sufficiently accurate radius for binned shear measurements, if the goal is to control systematic biases at the per cent level.
![The deviation between the averaged lensing strength and the input tangential shear measured at three different radial definitions. The black diamonds and while circles are the average over all radial bins and $>1{\rm Mpc}$, respectively. The top and lower middle panels show large and small numbers of background galaxies in the large FoV. The upper middle panel is based on a large number of background galaxies with the Suprime-Cam’s FoV, corresponding to stacked lensing analysis. The bottom panel is based on a small number of background galaxies with the Suprime-Cam’s FoV, corresponding to individual cluster lensing analysis. []{data-label="fig:AppReff"}](fA1.eps){width="\hsize"}
In reality, background galaxies are intrinsically elliptical, have a finite number density, and non-uniform distribution on the sky. We therefore now consider how to relate the idealized case to a real observation. We begin by discretizing Equations \[eq:Appg+\] & \[eq:Appgwgt\]: $$\begin{aligned}
\langle g_+\rangle_i=\frac{\sum_n g_{+,n}\,w_n}{\sum_n w_n},
\label{eq:Appg+2}
\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
r_i=\frac{\sum_n g_{+,n}\,w_n\,r_n}{\sum_n g_{+,n}\,w_n}.
\label{eq:AppRsignal}
\end{aligned}$$ Note, when comparing Equations \[eq:Appg+2\] & \[eq:g+\] that here we assume for simplicity that all background galaxies are at the same redshift. The previous discussion of the idealized case encourages the adoption of $g_+\propto\,r^{-1}$ in the realistic case, which yields a definition of $r_i$ as the weighted harmonic mean radius of the background galaxies in a given bin: $$\begin{aligned}
r_{\rm whm}=\frac{\sum_n w_n}{\sum_n w_n r_n^{-1}}.
\end{aligned}$$ This definition has the important advantage that it does not rely on knowledge of the cluster density profile in order to compute the shear profile, and is therefore simple and stable to implement. For example, one alternative would be to use the measured $g_+$ for each galaxy in Equations \[eq:Appg+2\] & \[eq:AppRsignal\]. However the intrinsic ellipticity of galaxies results in this approach producing very noisy results, in some cases returning $r_i<0$. A second alternative is to recompute the shear profile at every step when fitting a model to the shear profile, with the radii of the bins adjusted to reflect the shape and amplitude of the density profile at each step. This approach is computationally expensive, and given the level of accuracy required, it is not currently justified.
We test three alternative definitions of $r_i$ for tangential shear profiles in order to validate the arguments set out above for a realistic case. We conduct a Monte-Carlo simulation using a mock catalogue of 1000 clusters. We assume a spherical NFW mass model. The cluster masses are uniformly and randomly distributed in the log in the range $2\times10^{14}\hMsol< M_{200}< 2\times10^{15}\hMsol$. The concentration of each cluster is calculated from the respective cluster mass via the mass-concentration [@Meneghetti14], taking into account intrinsic scatter. The cluster redshifts are uniformly and randomly distributed in $0.15<z<0.3$. The background galaxy redshifts are fixed $z_s=1$. We fixed the number of radial bins $N_{\rm bin}=6$ for the tangential shear profile in the range $100-2800h_{70}^{-1}\kpc$. We calculate the deviation between the average measured tangential shear and the input tangential shear, measured at $r_{\rm mid}$ and $r_{\rm whm}$, as defined above. We also employ a third definition of radius for comparison, the area-weighted radius, defined as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
r_{\rm wgt}=\frac{\sum_n w_n r_n}{\sum_n w_n},
\end{aligned}$$ that has been used by several groups [e.g. @Niikura15]. The deviation is averaged over all radial bins and over those bins at $r>1h_{70}^{-1}\Mpc$.
The Monte Carlo simulations consider four observing scenarios. First, a large field-of-view (FoV; $60'\times60'$) and large number of background galaxies ($n_{\rm bkg}=300~{\rm arcmin}^{-2}$), which is approximately equivalent to the idealized case discussed above (top panel of Figure \[fig:AppReff\]). Second is the FoV of the Suprime-Cam ($24'\times37'$) and $n_{\rm bkg}=300~{\rm
arcmin}^{-2}$, corresponding to the stacked lensing analysis (Section \[sec:stackedWL\]; upper middle panel of Figure \[fig:AppReff\]). Third is the large FoV and the small number of background galaxies ($n_{\rm bkg}=10~{\rm arcmin}^{-2}$); lower middle panel of Figure \[fig:AppReff\]. Fourth is the FoV of the Suprime-cam and $n_{\rm bkg}=10~{\rm arcmin}^{-2}$, representing our analysis of individual clusters (Section \[sec:mass\]; bottom panel of Figure \[fig:AppReff\].
As expected, based on the discussion above, in the ideal case (top panel) case the lensing signal measured at both $r_{\rm mid}$ and $r_{\rm whm}$ recover the input values accurately, while the signal measured at $r_{\rm wgt}$ is biased high by $\sim1$ per cent. In the case that represents our stacked weak-lensing analysis (upper middle panel) the shear measured at $r_{\rm mid}$ suffers $\sim9$ per cent bias on large scales due to the finite FoV impinging on the outer annuli. On the other hand, the performance of $r_{\rm whm}$ and $r_{\rm wgt}$ are invariant to the size of the FoV, drawing attention to how these radii automatically take account of departures from azimuthal symmetry in the bin definitions. Similar results are seen in the bottom panel. Overall, the weighted harmonic mean radius ($r_{\rm whm}$) well describes the average tangential shear signal in all setup conditions, while the area-weighted radius $r_{\rm wgt}$ gives biases of a few per cent in all cases, and $r_{\rm mid}$ is vulnerable to the accuracy of corrections for annuli that are not fully covered by the observational data. We therefore conclude that the weighted harmonic mean radius is the lowest bias radius at which to place the binned tangential shear measurements for the tangential shear profiles in individual and stacked weak-lensing analyses.
Mass Estimates with correction factors {#sec:app1}
======================================
Cluster mass calibration is of primary importance for cluster-based cosmology. Although we do not apply any correction factor in our analysis, the systematic uncertainty ($m=-0.03$; Section \[sec:sysShear\]) inherent in the shear calibration and the 1 per cent contamination in our background galaxy selection might be not negligible for some scientific motivations like precision cosmology. We therefore tabulate cluster masses determined by fitting the tangential shear profile corrected with the systematic uncertainty in Table \[tab:mass2\]. Note that @Smith16 based their analysis on the masses listed in the submitted version of this paper that are slightly different from those listed in Table \[tab:mass2\]. @Smith16’s result of $\beta_{\rm P}=0.95\pm0.04$ and $\beta_{\rm
X}=0.95\pm0.05$ is unchanged when the updated masses in Table \[tab:mass2\] are used.
\[lastpage\]
[^1]: Based in part on observations obtained at the Subaru Observatory under the Time Exchange program operated between the Gemini Observatory and the Subaru Observatory.
[^2]: Based in part on data collected at Subaru Telescope and obtained from the SMOKA, which is operated by the Astronomy Data Center, National Astronomical Observatory of Japan.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'A network where three users communicate with each other via a relay is considered. Users do not receive other users’ signals via a direct link, and thus the relay is essential for their communication. Each user is assumed to have an individual message to be delivered to each other user. Thus, each user wants to send two messages and to decode two messages. In general, the transmit signals of different nodes can be dependent since they can depend on previously received symbols. We call this case the general case. The sum-capacity is studied, and upper bounds and lower bounds are given. If all nodes have the same power, the sum-capacity is characterized to within a gap of 5/2 bits or a factor of 3 for all values of channel coefficients. This gap is also shown to approach 3/2 bits as the transmit power increases. Moreover, for the symmetric case with equal channel coefficients, the gap is shown to be less than 1 bit. The restricted case is also considered where the transmit signal does not depend on previously received symbols. In this case, the sum-capacity is characterized to within a gap of 2 bits or a factor of 3 for all values of channel coefficients, and approaches 1 bit as the transmit power increases.'
author:
-
- '[^1]'
bibliography:
- '/home/chaaban/tex/myBib.bib'
title: 'On the Sum Capacity of the Y-Channel'
---
Multi-way relaying, sum-capacity, functional decode-and-forward, constant gap.
Introduction
============
A multi-way channel is a scenario where users communicate with each other in both directions. The smallest multi-way communication model is the two way channel [@Shannon_TWC] where 2 nodes communicate with each other, and each has a message to deliver to the other node. In this sense, each node is a source and a destination at the same time.
The two-way channel can be extended into a bi-directional relay channel by including a relay in the model. In the bi-directional relay channel, two nodes communicate with each other via a relay. This setup was introduced in [@RankovWittneben] where relaying protocols were analyzed. In [@KimDevroyeMitranTarokh], further relaying protocols were proposed, and their achievable rate regions were compared to previous work. Achievable schemes for this setup using decode-and-forward and compress-and-forward were studied in [@GunduzTuncelNayak] where rate regions were given and capacity was characterized within half a bit for the Gaussian setting. The capacity region of the two-way relay channel was also characterized within a constant gap in [@AvestimehrSezginTse]. These results were also extended to the larger network consisting of two pair of nodes in addition to the relay. The approximate capacity of the two-pair bi-directional relay network was obtained in [@SezginKhajehnejadAvestimehrHassibi] and [@SezginAvestimehrKhajehnejadHassibi].
If more than two nodes want to communicate via a relay in a bi-directional manner, we get the multi-way relay channel. The multi-way relay channel was studied in [@GunduzYenerGoldsmithPoor], where upper and lower bounds for the capacity of the Gaussian multi-way relay channel were given. In their setup, Gündüz et al. divided users into several clusters, where each user in a cluster has a single message intended to all other users in the same cluster. All users communicate simultaneously via a relay. A similar setup was considered in [@OngKellettJohnson], where all users belong to the same cluster and all channel gains are equal. The authors of [@OngKellettJohnson] obtained the sum-capacity of this Gaussian setup with more than 2 users.
In this paper, we consider a Gaussian 3-way relay channel, with a slight difference from the aforementioned multi-way relay channel. In our 3-way channel, 3 users communicate with each other simultaneously via a relay. However, each user has 2 independent messages, each of which is intended to one of the other users. Thus each node wants to broadcast 2 messages to the other nodes, and wants to decode 2 other messages. A MIMO variant of this model was considered in [@LeeLim], where a transmission scheme was proposed, and its corresponding achievable degrees of freedom were calculated. It was referred to as the “Y-channel".
We consider the single antenna Gaussian case, where all nodes are full-duplex, and derive upper bounds for the sum-capacity of this channel. We distinguish between two cases: a general Y-channel, and a restricted Y-channel. In the general case, the transmit signals of the users can depend on the previously received symbols, while in the restricted case it can not. In addition to the cut-set bounds, new bounds are derived that are shown to be tighter than the cut-set bounds at moderate to high transmit power.
In [@OngKellettJohnson], the so-called “functional decode and forward" scheme was used as an achievable scheme for the multi-way relay channel. However, in [@OngKellettJohnson], the case where each user has only one message to be delivered to all other users was considered. This is different from our model, where each user has 2 independent message, one for each other user. Thus, we modify the “functional decode-and-forward" scheme accordingly to obtain a lower bound for the sum-capacity using lattice alignment. Other lower bounds are obtained by using complete decode and forward, or by operating the Y-channel as a bi-directional relay channel where only two users are active at the same time.
Comparing the upper bounds and lower bounds, we bound the gap between them for the case of equal power at all nodes. This gap is shown to be less than 5/2 bits for all values of channel coefficients. Moreover, this gap is shown to approach 3/2 bits as power increases. We also bound the multiplicative gap between the bounds by 3. For the symmetric Y-channel where all channel gains are equal, we show that the gap between these bounds is less than one bit.
For the restricted Y-channel, the bounds are further tightened, and we characterize the sum-capacity within 2 bits for all values of channel coefficients when all nodes have equal power. This gap is shown to approach 1 bit as power increases.
The rest on the paper is organized as follows. The system model is described in section \[Model\]. The general Y-channel is considered first, and upper bounds for its sum-capacity are given in section \[UpperBounds\] and lower bounds in sections \[LowerBound1\] and \[LowerBound2\]. The gap between upper and lower bounds is calculated in section \[GapCalculation:General\]. The restricted Y-channel is considered in section \[Section:RYC\] and we summarize in section \[Summary\]. Throughout the paper, we use $x^n$ to denote a sequence of $n$ symbols $(x_1,\dots,x_n)$, we use $C(x)=\frac{1}{2}\log(1+x)$, and $[x]^+=\max\{0,x\}$.
System Model {#Model}
============
The Y-channel models a setup where 3 users want to communicate with each other in a bi-directional manner, and this communication is only possible via a relay as shown in Figure \[Fig:Model\]. Each user has an individual message to each other users. Consequently, each user wants to broadcast 2 messages via the relay, and wants to decode 2 messages. We assume that all nodes are full duplex, and that there is an AWGN channel between each node and the relay, where the noise is of zero-mean and unit-variance.
User $j$ has messages $$\begin{aligned}
m_{jk}&\in\mathcal{M}_{jk}\triangleq\{1,\dots,2^{nR_{jk}}\}, \text{and }\\ m_{jl}&\in\mathcal{M}_{jl}\triangleq\{1,\dots,2^{nR_{jl}}\}\end{aligned}$$ to users $k$ and $l$ respectively where $R_{jk},R_{jl}\in\mathbb{R}_+$, for all distinct $j,k,l\in\{1,2,3\}$. The messages of user $j$ are encoded into a sequence $x_j^n$ using an encoder $f_j$, where for $i=1,\dots,n$, $x_{ji}$ is a realization of a real random variable $X_{ji}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\mathbb{E}[X_{ji}^2]\leq P.\end{aligned}$$ The codeword $x_j^n$ can be generated in different ways according to the following cases [@Shannon_TWC]:
- General encoding: $x_j^n$ is a function of $m_{jk}$, $m_{jl}$, and the previously received symbols at node $j$, thus $$\begin{aligned}
\label{SourceEncoder}
x_{ji}=f_j(m_{jk},m_{jl},y_j^{i-1}).\end{aligned}$$
- Restricted encoding: $x_j^n$ is a function of $m_{jk}$ and $m_{jl}$ only, thus $$\begin{aligned}
\label{SourceEncoder_R}
x_{j}^n=f_j(m_{jk},m_{jl}).\end{aligned}$$
In the Y-channel with general encoding, which we call a general Y-channel, the transmit signals of different users are dependent. This is not the case with restricted encoding in what we call a restricted Y-channel.
The received signal at the relay at time instant $i$ can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
y_{ri}=h_1x_{1i}+h_2x_{2i}+h_3x_{3i}+z_{ri},\end{aligned}$$ where $z_{ri}$ is a realization of an i.i.d. Gaussian noise $Z_r\sim\mathcal{N}(0,1)$ and $h_1,h_2,h_3\in\mathbb{R}$ are the channel coefficients from the users to the relay. We assume without loss of generality that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Ordering}
h_1^2\geq h_2^2\geq h_3^2.\end{aligned}$$ The relay sends a sequence $x_r^n$ of random variables $X_{ri}$ that satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\mathbb{E}[X_{ri}^2]\leq P_r,\end{aligned}$$ which depends on the past received symbols at the relay, i.e. $$\begin{aligned}
\label{RelayEncoder}
X_{ri}=f_r(Y_r^{i-1}).\end{aligned}$$ Then, the received signal at user $j$ and time $i$ can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{ReceivedSignal}
y_{ji}=h_jx_{ri}+z_{ji},\end{aligned}$$ where $z_{ji}$ is a realization of an i.i.d. Gaussian noise $Z_j\sim\mathcal{N}(0,1)$. We have assumed that the channel is reciprocal, i.e. the channel gain from user $j$ to the relay is the same as that from the rely to user $j$. Each node $j$ uses a decoding function $g_j$ to decode $m_{kj}$ and $m_{lj}$, i.e. $$\begin{aligned}
(\hat{m}_{kj},\hat{m}_{lj})=g_j(y_j^n,m_{jk},m_{jl}).\end{aligned}$$
We denote the vector of all rates by ${\ensuremath{\mathbf{R}}}$ and that of all messages by ${\ensuremath{\mathbf{m}}}$ $$\begin{aligned}
{\ensuremath{\mathbf{R}}}&=(R_{12},R_{13},R_{21},R_{23},R_{31},R_{32})\\
{\ensuremath{\mathbf{m}}}&=(m_{12},m_{13},m_{21},m_{23},m_{31},m_{32})\end{aligned}$$ We also define $R_\Sigma({\ensuremath{\mathbf{R}}})$ to be the sum of the components of ${\ensuremath{\mathbf{R}}}$ or $$\begin{aligned}
R_\Sigma({\ensuremath{\mathbf{R}}})=\sum_{j=1}^3\sum_{\substack{k=1\\ k\neq j}}^3R_{jk},\end{aligned}$$
The message sets $\mathcal{M}_{jk}$, encoding functions $f_j$, $f_r$, and decoding functions $g_j$ define a code $({\ensuremath{\mathbf{R}}},n)$ for the Y-channel. An error occurs if $(\hat{m}_{kj},\hat{m}_{lj})\neq({m}_{kj},{m}_{lj})$, for distinct $j,k,l\in\{1,2,3\}$. A rate tuple ${\ensuremath{\mathbf{R}}}\in\mathbb{R}_+^6$ is achievable if there exist a sequence of $({\ensuremath{\mathbf{R}}},n)$ codes with an average error probability that approaches zero as $n$ increases. The set of all achievable rate tuples is the capacity region $\mathcal{C}$ of the Y-channel. An achievable sum-rate is $R_\Sigma({\ensuremath{\mathbf{R}}})$ where ${\ensuremath{\mathbf{R}}}\in\mathcal{C}$ or simply $R_\Sigma$ and the sum-capacity is the maximum achievable sum rate given by $$\begin{aligned}
C=\max_{{\ensuremath{\mathbf{R}}}\in\mathcal{C}}R_\Sigma.\end{aligned}$$
![The Y-channel: User 1 wants to send two messages, $m_{12}$ to user 2, and $m_{13}$ to user 3. User 1 also wants to decode two messages, $m_{21}$ from user 2, and $m_{31}$ from user 3. Similarly at users 2 and 3.[]{data-label="Fig:Model"}](Y_Channel.eps){width="0.8\columnwidth"}
In the following sections, we will deal with the sum-capacity of the Y-channel, by deriving upper and lower bounds. Then we bound the gap between the upper and lower bounds. We consider both the general Y-channel where the encoding functions are as given in (\[SourceEncoder\]) whose sum-capacity will be denoted $C_g$, and the restricted Y-channel where the encoding functions are as given in (\[SourceEncoder\_R\]) whose sum-capacity will be denoted $C_r$. Clearly, $C_r\leq C_g$.
General Y-channel: Upper bounds {#UpperBounds}
===============================
We start by considering the general Y-channel, and give sum-capacity upper bounds for this case. One way to obtain upper bounds for the Y-channel is by using the cut-set bounds [@CoverThomas]. If we label the set of nodes in the Y-channel by $\mathcal{S}\triangleq\{U_1,U_2,U_3,R\}$ where $U_j$ denotes user $j$, $j\in\{1,2,3\}$ and $R$ denotes the relay, then the cut-set bounds provide upper bounds on the rate of information flow from a set $\mathcal{T}\subset\mathcal{S}$ to its complement $\mathcal{T}^c$ in $\mathcal{S}$ (see Figure \[Cut\]). The cut-set bounds for this setup yield the following upper bounds.
\[CutSetBounds\] The achievable rates in the Y-channel are upper bounded by $$\begin{aligned}
\label{CS1}
&\hspace{-0.3cm}R_{jk}+R_{jl}\leq\min\left\{I(X_j;Y_r|X_k,X_l,X_r),\right.\nonumber\\
&\hspace{4.5cm}\left.I(X_r;Y_k,Y_l|X_k,X_l)\right\}\\
\label{CS2}
&\hspace{-0.3cm}R_{jl}+R_{kl}\leq\min\left\{I(X_j,X_k;Y_r|X_l,X_r),I(X_r;Y_l|X_l)\right\}\end{aligned}$$ for all distinct $j,k,l\in\{1,2,3\}$, where $(X_1,X_2,X_3,X_r)$ is a zero-mean Gaussian random vector with joint distribution $p(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_r)$, such that $\mathbb{E}[X_j^2]\leq P$ and $\mathbb{E}[X_r^2]\leq P_r$.
The first bound (\[CS1\]) in Theorem \[CutSetBounds\] is obtained by considering the cuts $\mathcal{T}=\{U_j\}$ and $\mathcal{T}=\{U_j,R\}$, respectively for the first and second arguments of the $\min$ operation. These cuts are shown for the case of $j=1$ in Figure \[Cut\] labeled as cut 1 and cut 2 respectively. The last bound (\[CS2\]) in Theorem \[CutSetBounds\] is obtained by considering the complementary cuts. Namely, the first and the second arguments of the $\min$ operation are obtained by considering $\mathcal{T}=\{U_j,R\}^c$ and $\mathcal{T}=\{U_j\}^c$ respectively. The following bounds are obtained as a corollary from Theorem \[CutSetBounds\].
![A cut in the Y-channel. Cut 1 splits the set $\mathcal{S}=\{U_1,U_2,U_3,R\}$ into $\mathcal{T}=\{U_1\}$ and $\mathcal{T}^c$. This can be used to obtain a bound on $R_{12}+R_{13}$ if we consider information flow from $\mathcal{T}$ to $\mathcal{T}^c$, and on $R_{21}+R_{31}$ if we consider information flow from $\mathcal{T}^c$ to $\mathcal{T}$. Similarly, using cut 2 we can obtain one more bound on both $R_{12}+R_{13}$ and $R_{21}+R_{31}$.[]{data-label="Cut"}](Y_Channel_Cut.eps){width="0.8\columnwidth"}
\[CSG\] The achievable rates in the Y-channel must satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
\label{CSG1}
R_{jk}+R_{jl}&\leq C\left(\min\left\{h_j^2P,h_k^2P_r+h_l^2P_r\right\}\right)\\
\label{CSG2}
R_{jl}+R_{kl}&\leq C\left(\min\left\{(|h_j|+|h_k|)^2P,h_l^2P_r\right\}\right),\end{aligned}$$ for all distinct $j,k,l\in\{1,2,3\}$.
See Appendix \[CSGProof\].
In the following theorem, we give other bounds on the achievable rates in the Y-channel based on a degraded broadcast channel bound.
\[BCBounds\] The achievable rates in the Y-channel must satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
R_{12}+R_{13}&\leq C(h_2^2P_r),\\
R_{21}+R_{23}&\leq C(h_1^2P_r),\\
R_{31}+R_{32}&\leq C(h_1^2P_r).\end{aligned}$$
Let us give the relay all the messages as side information, i.e. the relay knows ${\ensuremath{\mathbf{m}}}$ apriori. And let us also give $(m_{31},m_{32})$ and $(m_{21},m_{23})$ as side information to receivers 2 and 3 respectively (see Figure \[GA\_BC\]). Now receivers 2 and 3 share the knowledge of $m_{21}$, $m_{23}$, $m_{31}$ and $m_{32}$ which are also known at the relay. The relay knows $m_{12}$ and $m_{13}$ which should be delivered to receivers 2 and 3 respectively. The resulting setup is a degraded broadcast channel (BC) whose sum-capacity is [@CoverThomas] $$\begin{aligned}
R_{12}+R_{13}\leq C(\max\{h_2^2,h_3^2\}P_r).\end{aligned}$$ Similarly, we can obtain bounds on $R_{21}+R_{23}$ and $R_{31}+R_{32}$. Using (\[Ordering\]), we obtain the statement of the theorem.
![Genie aided Y-Channel as a degraded broadcast channel.[]{data-label="GA_BC"}](Y_Channel_ga_bc.eps){width="0.8\columnwidth"}
The bounds in Corollary \[CSG\] and Theorem \[BCBounds\], in addition to $R_{jk}\geq0$ and the single user bounds $$\begin{aligned}
R_{jk}\leq \min\{C(h_j^2P),C(h_k^2P_r)\}\end{aligned}$$ for all distinct $j,k\in\{1,2,3\}$ form a region $\overline{\mathcal{C}}$ in the 6-dimensional space which is an outer bound on the capacity region $\mathcal{C}$ of the Y-channel. In order to find an upper bound on the sum capacity $C_g$, we have to solve $$\begin{aligned}
\max_{{\ensuremath{\mathbf{R}}}\in\overline{\mathcal{C}}} R_\Sigma,\end{aligned}$$ or otherwise, we can add any three bounds from Corollary \[CSG\] and Theorem \[BCBounds\] whose left hand side terms add to $R_\Sigma$. However, such an upper bound will depend on the relative value of $P_r$ compared to $P$. If we specialize these results to the Y-channel with $P=P_r$ we get a simpler representation for a sum-capacity upper bound. By combining the bounds in Corollary \[CSG\] and the bounds in Theorem \[BCBounds\], we obtain the following corollary.
\[Corollary:CutSetBounds\] If $P=P_r$, then the sum-capacity of the Y-channel is upper bounded by $\overline{C}_{\Sigma}$, i.e. $$\begin{aligned}
C_g\leq\overline{C}_{\Sigma}&\triangleq 2C(h_2^2P)+C( h_3^2P).\end{aligned}$$
By evaluating the bounds in corollary \[CSG\] for $P=P_r$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{CSBnd1}
R_{12}+R_{13}&\leq C(\min\{h_1^2,h_2^2+h_3^2\}P),\\
\label{CSBnd2}
R_{21}+R_{23}&\leq C(\min\{h_2^2,h_1^2+h_3^2\}P),\\
\label{CSBnd3}
R_{31}+R_{32}&\leq C(\min\{h_3^2,h_1^2+h_2^2\}P).\end{aligned}$$ Moreover, from Theorem \[BCBounds\], we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{BCBnd1}
R_{12}+R_{13}&\leq C(h_2^2P),\end{aligned}$$ if $P=P_r$, which is more binding than (\[CSBnd1\]) due to (\[Ordering\]). Adding (\[CSBnd2\]), (\[CSBnd3\]), and (\[BCBnd1\]) and using (\[Ordering\]) we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
R_\Sigma&\leq C(h_2^2P)+C(h_2^2P)+C(h_3^2P)\end{aligned}$$ and the statement of the corollary follows.
The upper bound in Corollary \[Corollary:CutSetBounds\] is independent of $h_1$ due to the assumption in (\[Ordering\]).
In [@GunduzYenerGoldsmithPoor] and [@OngKellettJohnson], the multi-cast setting of the multi-way relay channel was considered, where each node has one message intended to all other nodes. In that case, it was shown that the cut-set bounds are sufficient to obtain an asymptotic characterization of the sum-capacity. Interestingly however, in our broadcast setting this is not the case. We can notice that the bound of Corollary \[Corollary:CutSetBounds\], which is based on the cut-set bounds in Theorem \[CutSetBounds\], provides a sum-capacity upper bound of the form $$\begin{aligned}
C_g\leq\frac{3}{2}\log(P)+o(\log(P)).\end{aligned}$$ Thus, this corollary gives a sum-capacity upper bound with a pre-log of 3/2. The reason behind this is that Theorems \[CutSetBounds\] and \[BCBounds\] bound the sum of two rates by $\frac{1}{2}\log(P)+o(\log(P))$. Next, we develop more upper bounds, and show that the Y-channel has a sum-capacity pre-log of 1, $$\begin{aligned}
C_g\leq\log(P)+o(\log(P)).\end{aligned}$$ This means that, while the bound in Corollary \[Corollary:CutSetBounds\] might be useful at lower $P$, it can not give a tight sum-capacity upper bound as $P$ increases. Thus, contrary to the multi-cast setting, the cut-set bounds are not sufficient in the broadcast setting and more bounds are required for an asymptotic characterization of the sum-capacity. A bounds with a capacity pre-log of 1 is given in Theorem \[SRUBG\]. Before we state this theorem, we need the following lemmas.
\[FromRelay\] The achievable rates in the Y-channel must satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
R_{kj}+R_{lj}+R_{kl}&\leq C(h_j^2P_r+h_l^2P_r)\end{aligned}$$ for all distinct $j,k,l\in\{1,2,3\}$.
We use a genie aided approach to bound the sum of three rates, e.g. $R_{21}+R_{31}+R_{23}$, by giving $m_{32}$ and $(Y_1^n,m_{21},m_{12},m_{13})$ as additional information to receivers 1 and 3 respectively. Details are given in Appendix \[ProofFromRelay\].
\[GUB\] The achievable rates in the Y-channel must satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
R_{kj}+R_{lj}+R_{kl}&\leq C((|h_k|+|h_l|)^2P)\end{aligned}$$ for all distinct $j,k,l\in\{1,2,3\}$.
We use a genie aided approach to bound the sum of three rates such as $R_{21}+R_{31}+R_{23}$ by giving $(Y_r^n,m_{32})$ and $(Y_r^n,m_{21},m_{12},m_{13})$ as additional information to receiver 1 and 3 respectively. See Appendix \[GeneralProof\] for more details.
As a result of Lemmas \[FromRelay\] and \[GUB\], we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
&R_{kj}+R_{lj}+R_{kl}\nonumber\\
\label{3BoundG}
&\hspace{0.5cm}\leq \min\left\{C(h_j^2P_r+h_l^2P_r),C((|h_k|+|h_l|)^2P)\right\}.\end{aligned}$$ Now if the Y-channel has $P=P_r$, we obtain the following sum-capacity upper bound.
\[SRUBG\] The sum-capacity of the Y-channel with $P=P_r$ is upper bounded by $\overline{C}_{\Sigma g}$, i.e. $$\begin{aligned}
C_g\leq\overline{C}_{\Sigma g}&=C(h_2^2P+h_3^2P)\nonumber\\
&\quad+C(\min\{h_1^2P+h_3^2P,(|h_2|+|h_3|)^2P\}).\end{aligned}$$
By evaluating (\[3BoundG\]) for $(j,k,l)=(2,1,3)$, and for $(j,k,l)=(1,3,2)$ and adding the two obtained bounds, we obtain the desired result.
As we can see, the bound in Theorem \[SRUBG\] has a pre-log equal to 1. The slope of this bound is lower than that of the bound $\overline{C}_{\Sigma}$ obtained with the cut-set approach, which makes it tighter as $P$ increases.
Next, we provide achievability schemes for the Y-channel where we use complete decode-and-forward, and functional decode-and-forward.
Lower Bound: Complete Decode and Forward {#LowerBound1}
========================================
We describe a complete decode and forward scheme for the Y-channel. In this scheme, user $j$ encodes his messages $m_{jk}$ and $m_{jl}$ into an i.i.d. sequence $x_j^n(m_{jk},m_{jl})$ where $X_j\sim\mathcal{N}(0,P)$. Then, all users transmit their signals to the relay together. The relay decodes all messages in a MAC fashion, with a small probability of error if the rate tuple ${\ensuremath{\mathbf{R}}}$ is in the capacity region from the 3 users to the relay. Hence, we get the following sum-rate constraint in the uplink $$\begin{aligned}
\label{MACconstraint}
R_\Sigma\leq C(h_1^2P+h_2^2P+h_3^2P).\end{aligned}$$
The relay decodes ${\ensuremath{\mathbf{m}}}$ from its received signal. Then it uses a Gaussian codebook to encode ${\ensuremath{\mathbf{m}}}$ into an i.i.d. sequence $x_r^n({\ensuremath{\mathbf{m}}})$ where $X_r\sim\mathcal{N}(0,P_r)$. The relay then sends $x_r^n({\ensuremath{\mathbf{m}}})$. After receiving a noisy observation of $x_r^n({\ensuremath{\mathbf{m}}})$, user 1 knowing $m_{12}$ and $m_{13}$ can decode all other messages as long as [@GunduzYenerGoldsmithPoor] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{DFC1}
R_{21}+R_{23}+R_{31}+R_{32}\leq C(h_1^2P_r).\end{aligned}$$ Similarly at the other receivers, reliable decoding is guaranteed if the following rate constraints are fulfilled $$\begin{aligned}
R_{12}+R_{13}+R_{31}+R_{32}&\leq C(h_2^2P_r)\\
\label{DFC2}
R_{12}+R_{13}+R_{21}+R_{23}&\leq C(h_3^2P_r).\end{aligned}$$ In order to find the maximum achievable sum rate, we solve $$\begin{aligned}
\label{OptProb}
\text{maximize}\quad &\sum_{j=1}^3\sum_{\substack{k=1\\k\neq j}}R_{jk}\\
\text{subject to}\quad & R_{jk}\geq0 \quad\forall j,k\in\{1,2,3\},\ j\neq k\nonumber\\
& R_{21}+R_{23}+R_{31}+R_{32}\leq C(h_1^2P_r)\nonumber\\
&R_{12}+R_{13}+R_{31}+R_{32}\leq C(h_2^2P_r)\nonumber\\
&R_{12}+R_{13}+R_{21}+R_{23}\leq C(h_3^2P_r).\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Solving the linear program (\[OptProb\]) keeping (\[Ordering\]) in mind, we obtain (see Appendix \[LPMax\]) $$\begin{aligned}
\label{BCconstraints}
R_\Sigma\leq \min\left\{\sum_{j=2}^3C(h_j^2P_r),\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^3C(h_j^2P_r)\right\}.\end{aligned}$$
Hence, we obtain the following lower bound for the sum-capacity.
\[LowerBound:DF\] The sum-capacity of the Y-channel satisfies $C_g\geq\underline{C}^I$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\label{DFconstraint}
\underline{C}^I&=\min\left\{C\left(\sum_{j=1}^3h_j^2P\right),\sum_{j=2}^3C(h_j^2P_r),\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=1}^3C(h_j^2P_r)\right\}.\end{aligned}$$
The maximum achievable sum rate using complete decode and forward is given by the minimum of (\[MACconstraint\]) and (\[BCconstraints\]). Therefore (\[DFconstraint\]) is a lower bound for the sum-capacity.
Lower Bound: Functional Decode and Forward {#LowerBound2}
==========================================
In this section, we describe another achievable scheme that gives us a lower bound for the sum-capacity of the Y-channel. In this scheme, time is divided into frames of 3 time slots each, where in each slot, only 2 users and the relay are active. These blocks will be indexed as block $3f+s$ where $f\in\mathbb{N}$ denotes the frame index and $s\in\{1,2,3\}$ the slot index.
Briefly, in block $3f+s$, the two active users send, say $x_1^n(m_{12}(f))$ and $x_2^n(m_{21}(f))$ to the relay, $m_{12}(f),m_{21}(f)\in\{1,\dots,2^{nR_{12}}\}$. The relay decodes the superposition of $x_1^n(m_{12}(f))$ and $x_2^n(m_{21}(f))$ (in a way that will be explained next), maps it to $u_{12}(f)\in\{1,\dots,2^{nR_{12}}\}$ and sends $x_r^n(u_{12}(f))$ in block $3f+s+1$. Table \[Cycle\] illustrates the 3 main blocks used.
Block Node 1 2 3 relay
------- --------- ------------- ------------- ------------- --------------------------------------------------
sends $m_{12}(1)$ $m_{21}(1)$ - $u_{31}(0)$
decodes $m_{31}(0)$ - $m_{13}(0)$ $X_1^n(m_{12}(1))+X_2^n(m_{21}(1))\to u_{12}(1)$
sends - $m_{23}(1)$ $m_{32}(1)$ $u_{12}(1)$
decodes $m_{21}(1)$ $m_{12}(1)$ - $X_2^n(m_{23}(1))+X_3^n(m_{32}(1))\to u_{23}(1)$
sends $m_{13}(1)$ - $m_{31}(1)$ $u_{23}(1)$
decodes - $m_{32}(1)$ $m_{23}(1)$ $X_1^n(m_{13}(1))+X_3^n(m_{31}(1))\to u_{31}(1)$
These three blocks are of length $n$ symbols each. The procedure in block $3f+s$ is the same as that in block $s$. Notice that each user transmits in only 2 out of 3 slots. In what follows, we illustrate the scheme for blocks $3f+1$, $3f+2$, and $3f+3$. We remove the frame index from the messages for readability.
Codebook generation
-------------------
The users use nested lattice codebooks. We start with some lattice preliminaries. An $n$-dimensional lattice $\Lambda$ is a subset of $\mathbb{R}^n$ such that $\lambda_1,\lambda_2\in\Lambda\Rightarrow\lambda_1+\lambda_2\in\Lambda$, i.e. it is an additive subgroup of $\mathbb{R}^n$. The fundamental Voronoi region $\mathcal{V}(\Lambda)$ of $\Lambda$ is the set of all points in $\mathbb{R}^n$ whose distance to the origin is smaller that that to any other $\lambda\in\Lambda$. Thus, by quantizing points in $\mathbb{R}^n$ to their closest lattice point, all points in $\mathcal{V}(\Lambda)$ are mapped to the all zero vector.
Two lattices are considered for nested lattice codes, a coarse lattice $\Lambda_c$ and a fine lattice $\Lambda_f$ where $\Lambda_c\subseteq\Lambda_f$. The codewords are chosen as the fine lattice points $\lambda_f\in\Lambda_f$ that lie in $\mathcal{V}(\Lambda_c)$. The power constraint is satisfied by an appropriate choice of $\Lambda_c$ and the rate of the code is defined by the number of fine lattice points in $\{\Lambda_f\cap\mathcal{V}(\Lambda_c)\}$ (codewords).
We denote the lattice corresponding to the message set $\mathcal{M}_{jk}$ by $\Lambda_{jk}$ with rate $R_{jk}$. Furthermore, we fix the rates such that $R_{jk}=R_{kj}$. Each message $m_{jk}$ is mapped into a codeword (lattice point) $x_j^n(m_{jk})=v_{jk}\in\Lambda_{jk}$. The lattices are constructed in such a way that the following alignment equations are satisfied: $$\begin{aligned}
h_1\Lambda_{12}&=h_2\Lambda_{21}\\
h_1\Lambda_{13}&=h_3\Lambda_{31}\\
h_2\Lambda_{23}&=h_3\Lambda_{32}\end{aligned}$$
The relay uses three Gaussian codebooks of rate $R_{12}$, $R_{23}$, and $R_{31}$. That is, e.g. it generates $2^{nR_{12}}$ i.i.d sequences $X_r^n$ where $X_r\sim\mathcal{N}(0,P_r)$. Each sequence is given an index $u_{12}\in\mathcal{U}_{12}\triangleq\{1,\dots,2^{nR_{12}}\}$. In this scheme, the relay communicates with two users at a time, we use $u_{ij}$ to indicate that the message sent carries information to both users $i$ and $j$.
Encoding at the sources
-----------------------
The encoding at the sources in block $3f+1$ is done as follows. Users 1 and 2 map $m_{12}$ and $m_{21}$ to codewords (lattice points) $x_1^n(m_{12})=v_{12}$ and $x_2^n(m_{21})=v_{21}$ respectively, with $v_{12}\in\Lambda_{12}$ and $v_{21}\in\Lambda_{21}$. Then they transmit these codewords. Users 2 and 3 transmit $x_2^n(m_{23})$ and $x_3^n(m_{32})$ respectively in block $3f+2$, and users 3 and 1 transmit $x_3^n(m_{31})$ and $x_1^n(m_{13})$ respectively in block $3f+3$.
Processing at the relay
-----------------------
The received signal at the relay in block $3f+1$ is $$\begin{aligned}
y_r^n&=h_1x_1^n+h_2x_2^n+z_r^n\nonumber\\
&=h_1v_{12}+h_2v_{21}+z_r^n.\end{aligned}$$ Notice that $h_1v_{12}+h_2v_{21}$ is also a lattice point $h_1v_{12}+h_2v_{21}\in h_1\Lambda_{12}$. The relay can decode the superposition $h_1v_{12}+h_2v_{21}$ with arbitrarily small probability of error if [@NarayananPravinSprintson; @NamChungLee] $$\begin{aligned}
R_{12}&=R_{21}\leq\left[C\left(h_1^2P'-\frac{1}{2}\right)\right]^+\\
R_{12}&=R_{21}\leq\left[C\left(h_2^2P'-\frac{1}{2}\right)\right]^+,\end{aligned}$$ where $P'$ is the transmit power. Since each user transmits in 2 blocks out of 3, we can set $P'=3P/2$ without violating the power constraint of the users. Thus, the following rates are achievable $$\begin{aligned}
R_{12}=R_{21}\leq\left[C\left(\frac{3h_2^2P}{2}-\frac{1}{2}\right)\right]^+,\end{aligned}$$ since $h_2\leq h_1$. At the end of block $3f+1$, the relay knows $h_1v_{12}+h_2v_{21}\in h_1\Lambda_{12}$, and maps it to an index $u_{12}\in\mathcal{U}_{12}$. Then, it maps $u_{12}$ into a codeword $x_r^n(u_{12})$, and transmits $x_r^n(u_{12})$ in the next block, block $3f+2$[^2]. Keep in mind that this message $u_{12}$ is meant for users 1 and 2.
In block $3f+2$, the relay decodes $h_2v_{23}+h_3v_{32}$, maps it to $u_{23}\in\mathcal{U}_{23}$ and sends $x_r^n(u_{23})$, and in block $3f+3$ the relay decodes $h_1v_{13}+h_3v_{31}$, maps it to $u_{31}\in\mathcal{U}_{31}$ and sends $x_r^n(u_{31})$ (cf. Table \[Cycle\]).
Decoding at the destinations
----------------------------
At the end of the block $3f+1$, the first and third users have $y_1^n=h_1x_r^n+z_1^n$ and $y_3^n=h_3x_r^n+z_3^n$ and aim to decode $u_{31}$. This can be done with an arbitrarily small probability of error if $$\begin{aligned}
R_{31}=R_{13}&\leq C\left(h_1^2P_r\right)\\
R_{13}=R_{13}&\leq C\left(h_3^2P_r\right).\end{aligned}$$ Knowing $u_{31}$, users 1 and 3 are able to calculate $h_1v_{13}+h_3v_{31}$ and since each knows his own message $m_{13}$ and $m_{31}$ respectively, they can obtain $m_{31}$ and $m_{13}$. Similarly, users 1 and 2 decode $m_{21}$ and $m_{12}$ in block $3f+2$, and users 2 and 3 decode $m_{32}$ and $m_{23}$ in block $3f+3$.
As a result, the achievable rate using this scheme is bounded by $$\begin{aligned}
R_{12}&\leq\min\left\{\left[C\left(\frac{3h_2^2P}{2}-\frac{1}{2}\right)\right]^+,C\left(h_2^2P_r\right)\right\}\\
R_{13}&\leq\min\left\{\left[C\left(\frac{3h_3^2P}{2}-\frac{1}{2}\right)\right]^+,C\left(h_3^2P_r\right)\right\}\\
R_{23}&\leq\min\left\{\left[C\left(\frac{3h_3^2P}{2}-\frac{1}{2}\right)\right]^+,C\left(h_3^2P_r\right)\right\},\end{aligned}$$ and $R_{12}=R_{21}$, $R_{13}=R_{31}$, $R_{23}=R_{32}$. Since we have used 3 blocks to transmit all messages, we obtain the following theorem.
\[LowerBound:FDF\] The sum-capacity of the Y-channel satisfies $C_g\geq\underline{C}^{II}$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\underline{C}^{II}&=\frac{2}{3}\min\left\{\left[C\left(\frac{3h_2^2P}{2}-\frac{1}{2}\right)\right]^+,C\left(h_2^2P_r\right)\right\}\\
&+\frac{4}{3}\min\left\{\left[C\left(\frac{3h_3^2P}{2}-\frac{1}{2}\right)\right]^+,C\left(h_3^2P_r\right)\right\}.\end{aligned}$$
Functional decode and forward with two active users
---------------------------------------------------
We can also obtain a sum-capacity lower bound by letting two out of three users communicate all the time as in a two-way relay channel. By choosing the strongest two users to communicate all the time, i.e. users 1 and 2, the following rates can be achieved [@NamChungLee] $$\begin{aligned}
R_{12}=R_{21}\leq\min\left\{\left[C\left(h_2^2P-\frac{1}{2}\right)\right]^+,C(h_2^2P_r)\right\}\end{aligned}$$ Thus, we can bound the sum-capacity as follows.
\[LowerBound:FDF\_2User\] The sum-capacity of the Y-channel satisfies $C_g\geq\underline{C}^{III}$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\underline{C}^{III}&=2\min\left\{\left[C\left(h_2^2P-\frac{1}{2}\right)\right]^+,C\left(h_2^2P_r\right)\right\}.\end{aligned}$$
Figure \[sum\_rate\_asymmetric\] shows a plot of the obtained upper and lower bounds for the case $P=P_r$ versus the signal to noise power ratio $\mathsf{SNR}$. Namely, the plotted bounds are: the upper bound obtained with the cut-set approach $\overline{C}_{\Sigma}$, the upper bound obtained with the genie aided approach $\overline{C}_{\Sigma g}$, the complete decode-and-forward lower bound $\underline{C}^I$, the functional decode-and-forward lower bound $\underline{C}^{II}$, and the functional decode-and-forward lower bound with two active users $\underline{C}^{III}$, for a Y-channel with $h_1=1$, $h_2=0.8$, $h_3=0.7$. It can be seen that $\overline{C}_{\Sigma g}$ is tighter than $\overline{C}_{\Sigma}$ at moderate to high $\mathsf{SNR}$. It can also be seen that the gap between $\overline{C}_{\Sigma g}$ and $\underline{C}^{II}$, $\underline{C}^{III}$ becomes constant as $\mathsf{SNR}$ increases. In the following section, we characterize this constant gap. Notice that the lower bound $\underline{C}^{III}$ is simpler than $\underline{C}^{II}$. For this reason, we will use $\underline{C}^{III}$ to characterize that gap between the upper and lower bounds. However, it must be noted that $\underline{C}^{II}$ can be larger than $\underline{C}^{III}$ in some cases, e.g. if $h_3=h_2$.
\[t\][$\mathsf{SNR}$(dB)]{} \[b\][Sum Rate (Bits/channel use)]{} \[l\] \[l\] \[l\] \[l\] \[l\] \[l\] ![A plot of the upper and lower bounds for a Y-channel with $P=P_r$, $h_1=1$, $h_2=0.8$, and $h_3=0.7$.[]{data-label="sum_rate_asymmetric"}](sum_rate_asymmetric_g.eps "fig:"){width="\columnwidth"}
Bounding the Gap between the Upper and Lower Bounds {#GapCalculation:General}
===================================================
The functional decode and forward scheme achieves the DoF of the Y-channel. This can be seen from the pre-log in the lower bound in Theorem \[LowerBound:FDF\] and the upper bounds in Theorem \[SRUBG\]. Now we bound the gap between the upper and lower bounds. We consider two kinds of gaps, additive gap and multiplicative gap.
We bound the multiplicative gap $\Gamma_m$ first. That is, we bound the ratio of the upper bound to the lower bound. For this purpose, we use the bounds $\overline{C}_\Sigma$ and $\underline{C}^I$. Notice that we can always write $$\begin{aligned}
C_g&\geq\underline{C}^{I}\geq C\left(h_2^2P\right).\end{aligned}$$ Therefore $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_{m}&=\frac{\overline{C}_\Sigma}{\underline{C}^I}\\
&\leq\frac{3C(h_2^2P)}{C(h_2^2P)}\\
&\leq 3.\end{aligned}$$
Now we calculate the additive gap, which we split into two cases: $h_2^2P\leq1/2$ and $h_2^2P>1/2$.
Case $h_2^2P\leq1/2$
--------------------
In this case, we call the gap $\Gamma_{a1}$. Consider the lower bound $\underline{C}^I$ and the upper bound $\overline{C}_\Sigma$. These bounds can be used to obtain the following. $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_{a1}&=\overline{C}_\Sigma-\underline{C}^{I}\\
&\leq C(h_2^2P)+C(h_3^2P)\\
&\leq 2C(h_2^2P)\\
&\leq \log(3/2)\end{aligned}$$ where we used $h_3^2P\leq h_2^2P\leq1/2$. Therefore, if $h_2^2P\leq1/2$ we can write (by combining $\Gamma_m$ and $\Gamma_{a1}$) $$\begin{aligned}
\max\left\{\overline{C}_\Sigma-\log\left(\frac{3}{2}\right),\frac{\overline{C}_\Sigma}{3}\right\}&\leq C_g\leq\overline{C}_\Sigma.\end{aligned}$$
Case $h_2^2P>1/2$
-----------------
We call the gap for this case $\Gamma_{a2}$. Notice that using $h_2^2P>1/2$ in $\underline{C}^{III}$ leads to $$\begin{aligned}
C_g&\geq\underline{C}^{III}=2C\left(h_2^2P-\frac{1}{2}\right).\end{aligned}$$
Now we bound $\Gamma_{a2}$ by bounding the difference between the upper bound $\overline{C}_{\Sigma g}$ and the lower bound $\underline{C}^{III}$. We obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_{a2}&= \overline{C}_{\Sigma g}-\underline{C}^{III}\\
&\leq C(h_2^2P+h_3^2P)+C((|h_2|+|h_3|)^2P)\nonumber\\
&\quad-2C\left(h_2^2P-1/2\right)\\
&\leq C(2h_2^2P)+C(4h_2^2P)-2C\left(h_2^2P-1\right)\\
&\leq 2C(2h_2^2P)+1/2-2C\left(h_2^2P-1\right)\\
&= \log\left(2+\frac{1}{h_2^2P}\right)+\frac{1}{2}\triangleq\overline{\Gamma}_{a2}\end{aligned}$$ where we used $h_3^2\leq h_2^2$. Thus the gap is upper bounded by $\overline{\Gamma}_{a2}$ which approaches 3/2 as $P\to\infty$. Moreover, using $h_2^2P>1/2$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_{a2}&\leq \frac{5}{2}.\end{aligned}$$ As a result, for $h_2^2P>1/2$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\max\left\{\overline{C}_{\Sigma g}-\frac{5}{2},\frac{\overline{C}_\Sigma}{3}\right\}\leq C_g\leq \min\{\overline{C}_{\Sigma g},\overline{C}_\Sigma\}.\end{aligned}$$
Thus, we have bound the gap between our sum-capacity upper and lower bounds by a constant independent of the channel coefficients. Notice that the multiplicative gap is important for the case of low power, especially when the additive gap becomes larger than the upper bound. Let us now consider the symmetric Y-channel, where $h_1=h_2=h_3=1$. In this case, given $P=P_r$, we can show that the gap between the upper and lower bounds is always less than 1 bit.
Gap Calculation for the symmetric Y-Channel
-------------------------------------------
In the symmetric Y-channel, $h_1=h_2=h_3=1$. In this case, we can rewrite the bounds we have in a simpler form. Starting from Corollary \[CSG\], we can show that the following bound holds $$\begin{aligned}
C_g\leq\overline{C}_{cs}&\triangleq3\min\{C(P),C(P_r)\}.\end{aligned}$$ Moreover, for the symmetric Y-channel we have the following upper bounds from Lemmas \[FromRelay\] and \[GUB\] respectively $$\begin{aligned}
C_g&\leq\overline{C}_{s}\triangleq2C(2P_r)\\
C_g&\leq\overline{C}_{g}\triangleq2C(4P).\end{aligned}$$ The following lower bounds are achievable in the symmetric Y-channel (Theorems \[LowerBound:DF\], \[LowerBound:FDF\] and \[LowerBound:FDF\_2User\]) $$\begin{aligned}
C_g\geq\underline{C}^{i}&=\min\left\{C(3P),\frac{3}{2}C(P_r)\right\}\\
C_g\geq\underline{C}^{ii}&=2\min\left\{\left[C\left(\frac{3P}{2}-\frac{1}{2}\right)\right]^+,C(P_r)\right\}\\
C_g\geq\underline{C}^{iii}&=2\min\left\{\left[C\left(P-\frac{1}{2}\right)\right]^+,C(P_r)\right\},\end{aligned}$$ where we used small letters in the superscript to distinguish these achievable sum rates from their counterparts in the asymmetric Y-channel. Now that we have upper and lower bounds for the sum-capacity of the symmetric Y-channel, we can upper bound the gap between them, which we denote by $\Delta_g$ $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Dg}
\Delta_g=\min\{\overline{C}_{cs},\overline{C}_s,\overline{C}_g\}-\max\{\underline{C}^i,\underline{C}^{ii},\underline{C}^{iii}\}.\end{aligned}$$ To simplify the calculation, we assume that $P=P_r$ and bound the gap for this case. The gap for arbitrary $P$ and $P_r$ is calculated numerically and plotted in Figure \[Gap3Dg\].
\[t\][$P_r$(dB)]{} \[b\][$P$(dB)]{} \[b\][$\Delta_g$]{} ![The gap $\Delta_g$ between the upper bound and lower bound for the general symmetric Y-channel. It can be seen that the gap is always less than 1.5 bits.[]{data-label="Gap3Dg"}](gap_general.eps "fig:"){width="\columnwidth"}
In the symmetric Y-channel with $P=P_r$, then we can show that $\underline{C}^{iii}\leq\underline{C}^{ii}$ and thus $\underline{C}^{iii}$ will be excluded. The upper bound $\overline{C}_g$ can also be excluded. Then, the sum-capacity is bounded as follows $$\begin{aligned}
\underline{C}\triangleq\max\{\underline{C}^i,\underline{C}^{ii}\}\leq C_g\leq\min\{\overline{C}_{cs},\overline{C}_s\}\triangleq\overline{C}.\end{aligned}$$ Now, bounding the difference between $\overline{C}$ and $\underline{C}$ is a simple task, and we can show that $$\begin{aligned}
\overline{C}-\underline{C}\leq1,\end{aligned}$$ for any value of $P$. Figure \[Bounds\_R\] shows the upper and lower bounds for a symmetric Y-channel with $P=P_r$, where it can be seen that the gap is always less than 1 bit.
\[t\][$P$(dB)]{} \[b\][Sum Rate]{} \[bl\][[$\overline{C}$]{}]{} \[Bl\][[$\underline{C}$]{}]{} ![A plot of the upper and lower bounds for the symmetric Y-channel showing the 4 cases difference cases (1-4)[]{data-label="Bounds_R"}](sum_rate2.eps "fig:"){width="\columnwidth"}
Upper Bounds for the Restricted Y-channel {#Section:RYC}
=========================================
In this section, we impose an additional constraint on the Y-channel. That is, we consider the Y-channel with a restricted encoder (\[SourceEncoder\_R\]). Recall that the difference between the restricted Y-channel and the general one is that the transmit signals are independent in the former while they can be dependent in the later.
The independence of the transmit signals can lead to tighter upper bound. Namely, the upper bound in Theorem \[SRUBG\] can be tightened leading to a smaller gap to the lower bound. We start with the following lemma.
\[RUB\] The achievable rates in the restricted Y-channel must satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
R_{kj}+R_{lj}+R_{kl}&\leq C(h_k^2P+h_l^2P)\end{aligned}$$ for all distinct $j,k,l\in\{1,2,3\}$.
We use a genie aided approach to bound the sum of three rates such as $R_{21}+R_{31}+R_{23}$ by giving $(Y_r^n,m_{32})$ and $(Y_r^n,m_{21},m_{12},m_{13})$ as additional information to receiver 1 and 3 respectively. Details are given in Appendix \[ProofRestricted\].
Combining Lemma \[FromRelay\] and \[RUB\] we get for the restricted Y-channel $$\begin{aligned}
&R_{kj}+R_{lj}+R_{kl}\nonumber\\
\label{3BoundR}
&\hspace{1cm}\leq \min\left\{C(h_j^2P_r+h_l^2P_r),C(h_k^2P+h_l^2P)\right\}\end{aligned}$$ from which we have the following theorem.
\[SRUBR\] The sum-capacity of the restricted Y-channel with $P=P_r$ is upper bounded by $\overline{C}_{\Sigma r}$, i.e. $$\begin{aligned}
\label{RSCUB}
C_r\leq\overline{C}_{\Sigma r}&=2C(h_2^2P+h_3^2P).\end{aligned}$$
By evaluating (\[3BoundR\]) for $(j,k,l)=(1,2,3)$, and for $(j,k,l)=(2,1,3)$ and adding the two obtained bounds, we obtain the desired result.
Gap Calculation
---------------
Keep in mind that all upper bounds for the general Y-channel continue to hold for the restricted one. This is true since $C_r\leq C_g$. However, we need not to consider $\overline{C}_{\Sigma g}$ (Theorem \[SRUBG\]) since $\overline{C}_{\Sigma r}$ in (\[RSCUB\]) is clearly tighter than $\overline{C}_{\Sigma g}$. Moreover, the lower bounds also hold since all achievable schemes considered above have independent transmit signals.
While all calculated gaps hold true, the gap $\Gamma_{a2}$ can be made smaller by using $\overline{C}_{\Sigma r}$. We denote this gap for $h_2^2P>1/2$ by $\Gamma_{a2}^r$ and we bound it as follows $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_{a2}^r&=\overline{C}_{\Sigma r}-\underline{C}^{III}\\
&\leq2C(2h_2^2P)-2C\left(h_2^2P-1\right)\\
&= \log\left(2+\frac{1}{h_2^2P}\right)\triangleq \overline{\Gamma}_{a2}^{r},\end{aligned}$$ where we used $h_3^2\leq h_2^2$ (\[Ordering\]). Notice that $\overline{\Gamma}_{2a}^{r}\to1$ as $P\to\infty$ (while $\overline{\Gamma}_{2a}\to3/2$) and using $h_2^2P>1/2$ $$\begin{aligned}
\Gamma_{2a}^{r}&\leq\overline{\Gamma}_{2a}^{r}\leq2,\end{aligned}$$ instead of 5/2. As a result, for $h_2^2P\leq1/2$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\max\left\{\overline{C}_\Sigma-\log\left(\frac{3}{2}\right),\frac{\overline{C}_\Sigma}{3}\right\}&\leq C_r\leq\overline{C}_\Sigma.\end{aligned}$$ and for $h_2^2P>1/2$ we have $$\begin{aligned}
\max\left\{\overline{C}_{\Sigma r}-2,\frac{\overline{C}_\Sigma}{3}\right\}\leq C_r\leq \min\{\overline{C}_{\Sigma r},\overline{C}_\Sigma\}.\end{aligned}$$
For the symmetric restricted Y-channel with $P=P_r$, the same gap of 1 bit holds as that in the asymmetric one.
Summary {#Summary}
=======
We have studied the Y-channel, a system with three users and one relay where each user sends 2 messages, one to each other user via the relay. The users do not hear each other’s transmission and hence the relay is essential for the communication. We studied the sum-capacity of the Y-channel by giving sum-capacity upper and lower bounds. We considered two variants: the restricted case where the transmit signal is not allowed to depend on previously received symbols, and the general case where the transmit signal is allowed to depend on previously received symbols. These bounds are derived for the Y-channel with different channel gains. The gap between the bounds is evaluated for the case of equal power at the relay and the other nodes and we have shown that this gap is less than a constant independent of the channel coefficients for both the general and the restricted setup. Hence, we characterized the sum capacity within a constant gap. For the symmetric Y-channel, where channel gains between all users and the relay are equal, we characterized the sum-capacity within one bit.
Proof of Corollary \[CSG\] {#CSGProof}
==========================
From the first cut-set bound (\[CS1\]), we have $$\begin{aligned}
R_{jk}+R_{jl}&\leq I(X_j;Y_r|X_k,X_l,X_r)\\
&=h(Y_r|X_k,X_l,X_r)-h(Z_r)\\
&\leq h(h_jX_j+Z_r)-h(Z_r)\\
\label{FCSB1}
&\leq C(h_j^2P),\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
R_{jk}+R_{jl}&\leq I(X_r;Y_k,Y_l|X_k,X_l)\\
&=h(Y_k,Y_l|X_k,X_l)-h(Y_k,Y_l|X_k,X_l,X_r)\\
&\leq h(Y_k,Y_l)-h(Z_k,Z_l)\\
\label{FCSB2}
&\leq C(h_k^2P_r+h_l^2P_r).\end{aligned}$$ From (\[FCSB1\]) and (\[FCSB2\]) we obtain (\[CSG1\]). Using (\[CS2\]), we have $$\begin{aligned}
R_{jl}+R_{kl}&\leq I(X_j,X_k;Y_r|X_l,X_r)\\
&= h(Y_r|X_l,X_r)-h(Y_r|X_l,X_r,X_j,X_k)\\
&\leq h(h_jX_j+h_kX_k+Z_r)-h(Z_r)\\
&\leq C(h_j^2P+h_k^2P+2h_jh_k\rho_{jk}P)\\
\label{SCSB1}
&\leq C((|h_j|+|h_k|)^2P)\end{aligned}$$ where $\rho_{jk}=\mathbb{E}[X_jX_k]/P\in[-1,1]$, and $$\begin{aligned}
R_{jl}+R_{kl}&\leq I(X_r;Y_l|X_l)\\
&= h(Y_l|X_l)-h(Y_l|X_l,X_r)\\
&\leq h(Y_l)-h(Z_l)\\
\label{SCSB2}
&\leq C(h_l^2P_r).\end{aligned}$$ From (\[SCSB1\]) and (\[SCSB2\]) we obtain (\[CSG2\]).
Proof of Lemma \[FromRelay\] {#ProofFromRelay}
============================
Starting from Fano’s inequality, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Fano1}
n(R_{21}+R_{31})&\leq I(m_{21},m_{31};Y_1^n,m_{12},m_{13})+n\epsilon_{1n}\\
\label{Fano2}
nR_{23}&\leq I(m_{23};Y_3^n,m_{31},m_{32})+n\epsilon_{2n},\end{aligned}$$ where $\epsilon_{1n},\epsilon_{2n}\to0$ as $n\to\infty$. We give $m_{32}$ to receiver 1, and $(Y_1^n,m_{21},m_{12},m_{13})$ to receiver 3 as additional information as shown in Figure \[GAYC\_FR\] to obtain $$\begin{aligned}
n(R_{21}+R_{31}-\epsilon_{1n})&\leq I(m_{21},m_{31};Y_1^n,m_{12},m_{13})\nonumber\\
&\leq I(m_{21},m_{31};Y_1^n,m_{12},m_{13},m_{32})\nonumber\\
\label{FP}
&= I(m_{21},m_{31};Y_1^n|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32}),\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
n(R_{23}-\epsilon_{2n})&\leq I(m_{23};Y_3^n,m_{31},m_{32})\nonumber\\
&\leq I(m_{23};Y_3^n,m_{31},m_{32},Y_1^n,m_{21},m_{12},m_{13})\nonumber\\
&= I(m_{23};Y_1^n|m_{31},m_{32},m_{21},m_{12},m_{13})\nonumber\\
\label{SP}
&\quad+I(m_{23};Y_3^n|m_{31},m_{32},m_{21},m_{12},m_{13},Y_1^n).\end{aligned}$$ where (\[FP\]) and (\[SP\]) follow by using the chain rule and from the independence of the messages. Adding (\[FP\]) and (\[SP\]) and using the chain rule and the non-negativity of mutual information, we get $$\begin{aligned}
&n(R_{21}+R_{31}+R_{23}-\epsilon_{n})\nonumber\\
&\leq I(m_{21},m_{31},m_{23};Y_1^n|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32})\nonumber\\
&\quad+I(m_{23};Y_3^n|m_{31},m_{32},m_{21},m_{12},m_{13},Y_1^n)\\
&\leq I(m_{21},m_{31},m_{23},X_r^n;Y_1^n|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32})\nonumber\\
&\quad+I(m_{23},X_r^n;Y_3^n|m_{31},m_{32},m_{21},m_{12},m_{13},Y_1^n)\end{aligned}$$ We continue $$\begin{aligned}
&n(R_{21}+R_{31}+R_{23}-\epsilon_{n})\nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(a)}{\leq} h(Y_1^n)-h(Y_1^n|X_r^n)+h(Y_3^n|Y_1^n)-h(Y_3^n|Y_1^n,X_r^n)\\
&= h(Y_1^n,Y_3^n)-h(Z_1^n,Z_3^n)\\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} \sum_{i=1}^n\left[h(Y_{1i},Y_{3i}|Y_1^{i-1},Y_3^{i-1})-h(Z_{1i},Z_{3i})\right]\\
&\stackrel{(c)}{\leq} \sum_{i=1}^n\left[h(Y_{1i},Y_{3i})-h(Z_{1i},Z_{3i})\right]\\
&= \sum_{i=1}^n\left[h(Y_{1i},Y_{3i})\right]-n\log(2\pi e)\\
&\stackrel{(d)}{\leq} \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^n\log(1+(h_1^2+h_3^2)P_{ri})\\
&\stackrel{(e)}{\leq} \frac{n}{2}\log(1+(h_1^2+h_3^2)P_r),\end{aligned}$$ where $\epsilon_{n}=\epsilon_{1n}+\epsilon_{2n}\to0$ as $n\to\infty$ and
- follows since conditioning does not increase entropy and since $Y_1^n$ and $Y_3^n$ are independent of all messages given $X_r^n$,
- follows since the noises $Z_1$ and $Z_3$ are i.i.d.
- follows since conditioning does not increase entropy,
- follows since the Gaussian distribution maximizes the differential entropy under a covariance constraint, and
- follows by using Jensen’s inequality.
Thus, $$\begin{aligned}
R_{21}+R_{31}+R_{23}\leq C((h_1^2+h_3^2)P_r).\end{aligned}$$ In a similar way, we can obtain the other bounds and this completes the proof.
![The Y-channel with side information[]{data-label="GAYC_FR"}](Y_Channel_ga_fr.eps){width="0.8\columnwidth"}
Proof of Lemma \[GUB\] {#GeneralProof}
======================
We start from Fano’s inequality, $$\begin{aligned}
n(R_{21}+R_{31})&\leq I(m_{21},m_{31};Y_1^n,m_{12},m_{13})+n\epsilon_{1n}\\
nR_{23}&\leq I(m_{23};Y_3^n,m_{31},m_{32})+n\epsilon_{2n},\end{aligned}$$ and proceed as follows $$\begin{aligned}
n(R_{21}+R_{31}-\epsilon_{1n})&\leq I(m_{21},m_{31};Y_1^n,m_{12},m_{13})\nonumber\\
&\leq I(m_{21},m_{31};Y_1^n,m_{12},m_{13},Y_r^n,m_{32})\nonumber\\
&= I(m_{21},m_{31};m_{12},m_{13},m_{32})\nonumber\\
&\quad+I(m_{21},m_{31};Y_r^n|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32})\nonumber\\
&\quad+I(m_{21},m_{31};Y_1^n|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32},Y_r^n)\nonumber\\
\label{CFP}
&= I(m_{21},m_{31};Y_r^n|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32}),\end{aligned}$$ where (\[CFP\]) follows since the messages $m_{ij}$ are all independent, and from the Markov chain $(m_{21},m_{31})\to Y_r^n\to Y_1^n$. $$\begin{aligned}
n(R_{23}-\epsilon_{2n})&\leq I(m_{23};Y_3^n,m_{31},m_{32})\nonumber\\
&\leq I(m_{23};Y_3^n,m_{31},m_{32},Y_r^n,m_{21},m_{12},m_{13})\nonumber\\
&= I(m_{23};m_{31},m_{32},m_{21},m_{12},m_{13})\nonumber\\
&\quad +I(m_{23};Y_r^n|m_{31},m_{32},m_{21},m_{12},m_{13})\nonumber\\
&\quad +I(m_{23};Y_3^n|m_{31},m_{32},m_{21},m_{12},m_{13},Y_r^n)\nonumber\\
\label{CSP}
&= I(m_{23};Y_r^n|m_{31},m_{32},m_{21},m_{12},m_{13}),\end{aligned}$$ where (\[CSP\]) follows since the messages $m_{ij}$ are all independent, and from the Markov chain $m_{23}\to Y_r^n\to Y_3^n$. Adding these inequalities, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
&\hspace{-1cm}n(R_{21}+R_{31}+R_{23}-\epsilon_{n})\nonumber\\
&\quad\leq I(m_{21},m_{31};Y_r^n|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32})\nonumber\\
&\quad\quad+I(m_{23};Y_r^n|m_{31},m_{32},m_{21},m_{12},m_{13})\nonumber\\
\label{Multi_Letter_UB}
&\quad=I(m_{21},m_{31},m_{23};Y_r^n|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32}),\end{aligned}$$ where $\epsilon_{n}=\epsilon_{1n}+\epsilon_{2n}$. In what follows, we will use the following notation $$\begin{aligned}
{\ensuremath{\mathbf{Z}}}^n&\triangleq(Z_1^n,Z_2^n,Z_3^n),\\
{\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}}^n&\triangleq(Y_1^n,Y_2^n,Y_3^n).\end{aligned}$$ We proceed as follows $$\begin{aligned}
&n(R_{21}+R_{31}+R_{23}-\epsilon_{n})\\
&\leq I(m_{21},m_{31},m_{23};Y_r^n|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32})\\
&\leq I(m_{21},m_{31},m_{23};Y_r^n,{\ensuremath{\mathbf{Z}}}^n|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32})\\
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} I(m_{21},m_{31},m_{23};Y_r^n|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32},{\ensuremath{\mathbf{Z}}}^n)\end{aligned}$$ where $(a)$ follows since the messages and $\underline{Z}^n$ are independent. Then $$\begin{aligned}
&n(R_{21}+R_{31}+R_{23}-\epsilon_{n})\\
&\leq \sum_{i=1}^n I(m_{21},m_{31},m_{23};Y_{ri}|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32},{\ensuremath{\mathbf{Z}}}^n,Y_{r}^{i-1})\\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} \sum_{i=1}^n I(m_{21},m_{31},m_{23};Y_{ri}|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32},{\ensuremath{\mathbf{Z}}}^n,Y_{r}^{i-1},X_r^i)\\
&\stackrel{(c)}{=} \sum_{i=1}^n h(Y_{ri}|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32},{\ensuremath{\mathbf{Z}}}^n,Y_{r}^{i-1},X_r^i,{\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}}^{i},X_{1i})\\
&\quad-\sum_{i=1}^n h(Y_{ri}|{\ensuremath{\mathbf{m}}},{\ensuremath{\mathbf{Z}}}^n,Y_{r}^{i-1},X_r^i,{\ensuremath{\mathbf{Y}}}^{i},X_{1i},X_{2i},X_{3i})\\
&\stackrel{(d)}{\leq} \sum_{i=1}^n \left[h(Y_{ri}|X_{1i})-h(Y_{ri}|X_{1i},X_{2i},X_{3i})\right]\\
&\leq \sum_{i=1}^n \left[h(h_2X_{2i}+h_3X_{3i}+Z_{ri})-h(Z_{ri})\right],\end{aligned}$$ where
- follows since $X_r^i=f_r(Y_r^{i-1})$ (\[RelayEncoder\]),
- follows since $Y_j^i=h_jX_r^i+Z_j^i$ with $j\in\{1,2,3\}$ (\[ReceivedSignal\]) and since in the general Y-channel (\[SourceEncoder\]) $$\begin{aligned}
X_{1i}&=f_1(m_{12},m_{13},Y_1^{i-1}),\\
X_{2i}&=f_2(m_{21},m_{23},Y_2^{i-1}),\\
X_{3i}&=f_3(m_{31},m_{32},Y_3^{i-1}), \text{ and}\end{aligned}$$
- follows since conditioning does not increase entropy, and since the channel is memoryless.
This upper bound is maximized by Gaussian $X_{2i}$ and $X_{3i}$ since the circularly symmetric Gaussian distribution maximizes the differential entropy under a covariance constraint. Since in the general Y-channel, the transmit symbols are allowed to depend on past received symbols, the transmit symbols at different users can be correlated. Let $(X_{2i},X_{3i})$ be a Gaussian vector with zero mean and covariance matrix $$\Sigma(X_{2i},X_{3i})=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
P_{2i} &\rho_{23}\sqrt{P_{2i}P_{3i}}\\
\rho_{23}\sqrt{P_{2i}P_{3i}} & P_{3i}
\end{array}\right),$$ with $\rho_{23}\in[-1,1]$. Then, $\mathbb{E}[(h_2X_{2i}+h_3X_{3i})^2]=h_2^2P_{2i}+h_3^2P_{3i}+2h_2h_3\rho_{23}\sqrt{P_{2i}P_{3i}}$. Therefore $$\begin{aligned}
&n(R_{21}+R_{31}+R_{23}-\epsilon_{n})\\
&\leq \sum_{i=1}^n h(h_2X_{2i}+h_3X_{3i}+Z_{ri})-h(Z_{ri})\\
&\leq \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{2}\log\left(1+h_2^2P_{2i}+h_3^2P_{3i}+2h_2h_3\rho_{23}\sqrt{P_{2i}P_{3i}}\right)\\
&\stackrel{(e)}{\leq} \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{2}\log\left(1+\left(\sqrt{h_2^2P_{2i}}+\sqrt{h_3^2P_{3i}}\right)^2\right)\\
&\stackrel{(f)}{\leq} \frac{n}{2} \log\left(1+(|h_2|+|h_3|)^2P\right),\end{aligned}$$ where $(e)$ follows by using $h_2h_3\rho_{23}\leq|h_2||h_3|$ since $\rho_{23}$ with 1, and $(f)$ follows by using Jensen’s inequality on a function that can be proved to be concave[^3]. Letting $n\to\infty$, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\label{BG1}
R_{21}+R_{31}+R_{23}\leq C((|h_2|+|h_3|)^2P).\end{aligned}$$ The other bounds can be obtained in a similar way, and this ends the proof.
Solution of the linear program in (\[OptProb\]) {#LPMax}
===============================================
Let us use the following notation $A=C(h_1^2P_r)$, $B=C(h_2^2P_r)$, $C=C(h_1^2P_r)$, $$\begin{aligned}
\label{x}
x&=R_{21}+R_{23}\\
y&=R_{31}+R_{32}\\
\label{z}
z&=R_{12}+R_{13}. \end{aligned}$$ Notice from (\[Ordering\]) that $A\geq B\geq C$. We then solve the following linear program $$\begin{aligned}
\label{LP2}
\text{maximize}\quad &x+y+z\\
\text{subject to}\quad & x,y,z\geq0\nonumber\\
&x+y\leq A\nonumber\\
&y+z\leq B\nonumber\\
&z+x\leq C.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$
The conditions $x,y,z\geq0$ are less stringent than $R_{jk}\geq0,\forall j,k\in\{1,2,3\},\ j\neq k$, hence the solution of (\[LP2\]) is not smaller than that of (\[OptProb\]). Moreover, for every feasible point $(x,y,z)$ in (\[LP2\]), there exist $R_{jk}\geq0$ satisfying (\[x\])-(\[z\]). Therefore, the solution of (\[LP2\]) is equal to the solution of (\[OptProb\]), thus solving this linear program leads to the solution of the original problem in (\[OptProb\]). The feasible set in (\[LP2\]) forms a polyhedron that can have two different forms:
- [(a)]{} if $A<B+C$ then the feasible set is the polyhedron in Figure \[LPFig1\],
- [(b)]{} if $A\geq B+C$, then the feasible set is the polyhedron in Figure \[LPFig2\].
Using the simplex method, the point that maximizes $x+y+z$ is the corner point $$N=\frac{1}{2}(A-B+C,A+B-C,-A+B+C),$$ in case (a), and is the corner point $M=(C,B,0)$ in case (b).
Therefore, the solution of (\[LP2\]) is $$\begin{aligned}
\left\{
\begin{array}{lr}
\frac{1}{2}(A+B+C)& \text{if } A< B+C\\
B+C& \text{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.\end{aligned}$$ which can also be written as $$\begin{aligned}
\min\left\{\frac{1}{2}(A+B+C),B+C\right\}.\end{aligned}$$
Proof of Lemma \[RUB\] {#ProofRestricted}
======================
We start from inequality (\[Multi\_Letter\_UB\]) which also holds for the restricted Y-channel. Now we can write $$\begin{aligned}
&n(R_{21}+R_{31}+R_{23}-\epsilon_{n})\\
&\leq I(m_{21},m_{31},m_{23};Y_r^n|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32})\\
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} h(Y_r^n|m_{12},m_{13},m_{32},X_1^n)-h(Y_r^n|{\ensuremath{\mathbf{m}}},X_1^n,X_2^n,X_3^n)\\
&\stackrel{(b)}{\leq} h(h_2X_2^n+h_3X_3^n+Z_r^n)-h(Z_r^n)\\
&\stackrel{(c)}{\leq} \sum_{i=1}^n h(h_2X_{2i}+h_3X_{3i}+Z_{ri})-\frac{n}{2}\log(2\pi e)\\
&\stackrel{(d)}{\leq} \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{2}\log(1+h_2^2P_{2i}+h_3^2P_{3i})\\
&\stackrel{(e)}{\leq} \frac{n}{2}\log(1+h_2^2P+h_3^2P),\end{aligned}$$ where
- follows since the Y-channel is restricted, i.e. $X^n_j=f_1(m_{jk},m_{jl})$, $\{j,k,l\}=\{1,2,3\}$ (\[SourceEncoder\]), and by denoting $(m_{12},m_{13},m_{32},m_{21},m_{31},m_{23})$ by ${\ensuremath{\mathbf{m}}}$,
- follows since conditioning does not increase entropy, and since $Z_r^n$ is independent of the messages and the transmit signals,
- follows by using the chain rule and the fact that conditioning does not increase entropy,
- follows since the Gaussian distribution maximizes the differential entropy under a covariance constraint, and since the channel is restricted, thus the signals $X_{2i}$ and $X_{3i}$ are not correlated, and
- follows by using Jensen’s inequality on a function that can be proved to be concave.
Letting $n\to\infty$ we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\label{B1}
R_{21}+R_{31}+R_{23}\leq C((h_2^2+h_3^2)P).\end{aligned}$$ Similarly we can obtain the other bounds and this completes the proof.
[^1]: The work of A. Chaaban and A. Sezgin is supported by the German Research Foundation, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), Germany, under grant SE 1697/3. The work of A. S. Avestimehr is partly supported by NSF CAREER award 0953117.
[^2]: At the beginning of transmission, the relay does not send anything. This results in a loss in the achievable rate. However, this loss becomes negligible as $b$ increases.
[^3]: Since the function $f(x)=\log(1+x)$ is concave and non-decreasing, $f((\sqrt{x}+\sqrt{y})^2)$ is concave if the function $g(x)=(\sqrt{x}+\sqrt{y})^2$ is concave as well. Thus it is sufficient to show that $(\sqrt{x}+\sqrt{y})^2$ is concave which can be shown to be true by checking its Hessian for example.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Recent deep surveys have unravelled a population of faint active galactic nuclei (AGN) in the high redshift Universe, leading to various discussions on their nature and their role during the Epoch of Reionization. We use cosmological radiation-hydrodynamics simulations of a bright galaxy at $z \sim 6$ (${\ifmmode {M_\star} \else $M_{\star}$\xspace\fi}\gtrsim \SI{e10}{\Msun}$) hosting an actively growing super-massive black hole to study the properties of these objects. In particular, we study how the black hole and the galaxy co-evolve and what is the relative contribution of the AGN and of the stellar populations to the luminosity budget of the system. We find that the feedback from the AGN has no strong effect on the properties of the galaxy, and does not increase the total ionizing luminosity of the host. The average escape fraction of our galaxy is around $f_{\rm esc} \sim 5\%$. While our galaxy would be selected as an AGN in deep X-ray surveys, most of the UV luminosity is originating from stellar populations. This confirms that there is a transition in the galaxy population from star forming galaxies to quasar hosts, with bright Lyman-Break Galaxies (LBGs) with [ ${\rm M}_{\rm UV}$]{}around -22 falling in the overlap region. Our results also suggest that faint AGN do not contribute significantly to reionizing the Universe.'
author:
- |
Maxime Trebitsch,$^{1,2,3}$[^1] Marta Volonteri$^{1}$ and Yohan Dubois$^{1}$\
$^{1}$Sorbonne Université, CNRS, UMR 7095, Institut d’Astrophysique de Paris, 98 bis bd Arago, 75014 Paris, France\
$^{2}$Max-Planck-Institut f[ü]{}r Astronomie, K[ö]{}nigstuhl 17, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany\
$^{3}$Zentrum f[ü]{}r Astronomie der Universität Heidelberg, Institut f[ü]{}r Theoretische Astrophysik, Albert-Ueberle-Str. 2, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
bibliography:
- 'fesc\_agnrt.bib'
date: 'Accepted 2020 April 06. Received 2020 April 03; in original form 2019 July 16'
title: Modelling a bright $z=6$ galaxy at the faint end of the AGN luminosity function
---
\[firstpage\]
dark ages, reionization, first stars – galaxies: high-redshift – galaxies: active
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
Cosmic reionization is the process through which the initially neutral intergalactic medium (IGM) becomes ionized by sources of hard ultraviolet (UV) radiation during the first billion years of the Universe ($z \sim 20-6$). The bulk of these photons is thought to be predominantly produced by massive stars in faint star forming galaxies [e.g. @Robertson2015; @Finkelstein2019]. In this picture, quasars mainly maintain the post-reionization UV background [e.g. @Becker2013; @Kulkarni2019], with some additional role in determining the patchiness of the end of the process of reionization [@Chardin2015; @Chardin2017; @Kakiichi2018]. This is for instance supported by observations of faint lensed galaxies behind clusters, indicating that the faint-end of the galaxy UV luminosity function (LF) might be steep, with no sign of any turn-over brighter than ${\ifmmode {{\rm M}_{\rm UV}} \else ${\rm M}_{\rm UV}$\xspace\fi}\lesssim -15$ [e.g. @Bouwens2017; @Livermore2017; @Ishigaki2018 but see also @Atek2018 for a detailed analysis of the model uncertainties], and therefore that the number of faint galaxies able to produce ionizing radiation is large enough to reionize the Universe. In the meantime, modern radiation hydrodynamics (RHD) cosmological simulations suggest that actively star-forming galaxies hosted in low-mass dark matter (DM) haloes can provide enough ionizing radiation to reionize the Universe by $z\sim 6$ [e.g. @Gnedin2014; @Ocvirk2016; @Rosdahl2018].
In the recent years, a lot of work has been dedicated to identify faint active galactic nuclei (AGN) in the high-redshift Universe and determine their contribution to the reionization of the Universe [e.g. @Giallongo2015; @Ricci2017; @Boutsia2018; @Parsa2018; @Matsuoka2018; @Stevans2018]. These AGN, while less luminous than bright quasars, could in principle be far more numerous. For this reason, they have been suggested as an additional source of ionizing photons that could potentially play a significant role in reionizing the Universe. Understanding the properties of these objects is therefore highly relevant to the study of the sources of reionization: if, like bright quasars, faint AGN have a very high escape fraction as postulated e.g. by @Giallongo2015, they could significantly contribute to the reionization of the Universe. Conversely, if they are heavily obscured, or if a non-negligible fraction of their UV and ionizing luminosities is produced by the stellar populations of their host, their relevance to the reionization history would be greatly diminished.
In this work, we aim at studying objects in the intermediate regime between galaxies (fainter than ${\ifmmode {{\rm M}_{\rm UV}} \else ${\rm M}_{\rm UV}$\xspace\fi}\gtrsim -22$) and quasars (brighter than ${\ifmmode {{\rm M}_{\rm UV}} \else ${\rm M}_{\rm UV}$\xspace\fi}\lesssim -26$). The properties of faint AGN and their host are still unclear. For instance, while the observations of @Cristiani2016 suggest that the AGN escape fraction [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\rm AGN}$]{}can reach high values for bright quasars, it is virtually unknown at the faint end. @Grazian2018 find a high relative [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\rm AGN}$]{}for their sample at $z \sim 4$, while the analysis of a sample of faint AGN selected in the SSA22 protocluster by @Micheva2017 is suggestive of [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\rm AGN}$]{}being below unity at $z\sim 3$ (although the sample size is small). @Guaita2016 report the observation of one object with high [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\rm AGN}$]{}, but several other objects in their sample have only only upper limits. Overall, while this could be suggestive that [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\rm AGN}$]{}in the low-luminosity regime is well below unity, this is clearly not a solved problem. Independently of the value of [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\rm AGN}$]{}, nuclear activity has been proposed as a solution to enhance the (stellar) escape fraction from the galaxy [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}[@Seiler2018]. This scenario would be very challenging to test directly through observations, but can be investigated through dedicated RHD simulations.
The number density of faint AGN is close to that of the brightest Lyman-break galaxies (LBGs) observed, with the faint end of the AGN LF overlapping with the bright end of the galaxy LF as found by the SHELLQs [e.g. @Matsuoka2018], GOLDRUSH [@Ono2018] or SHELA survey [@Stevans2018]. This overlap happens just around the luminosity regime probed by the objects investigated by @Giallongo2015 at $z \sim 4$, who found in the COSMOS field a larger than expected number of AGN candidates of this magnitude or fainter. This echoes the results of @Volonteri2017, who found that in this regime, both the stellar populations and the nuclear activity contribute to the (UV) luminosity. The brightest of the $z\sim 6$ [ ${\rm Ly}\alpha$]{}emitters (LAEs) known to this date, such as *Himiko* [@Ouchi2009] or CR7 and VR7 [@Matthee2017], all have UV luminosities comparable to these faint AGN. Their observed properties are sometimes hard to explain with standard stellar populations or even population III stars [see e.g. @Sobral2015; @Hartwig2016 for CR7], but can be more consistent with an hidden AGN [@Bowler2017]. This would be consistent with the results of @Hatfield2018, who suggest that the bright LBGs observed at high-$z$ are not just particularly star forming but otherwise low mass galaxies, but are intrinsically massive objects hosted in $M_{\rm halo} \sim \SI{e11.5}{\Msun}$ haloes: galaxies in such haloes are expected to host a massive black hole (MBH) growing at their centre.
In this paper, we perform a series of high resolution radiation-hydrodynamical cosmological zoom simulations of a massive galaxy around the knee of the galaxy mass function at $z \sim 6$, with the goal of studying the properties of massive black holes living in actively growing galaxies. In particular, we aim at connecting the growth of the MBH to that of the galaxy, and conversely assessing how the active galactic nuclei (AGN) powered by the accretion onto the MBH affects the star formation history of the galaxy. In the context of the contribution of AGN to cosmic reionization, we want to quantify how the radiation produced by the AGN escapes in the IGM, and how the nuclear activity affects the escape of (stellar) ionizing radiation. We first describe the simulations used in this work in Sect. \[sec:method\]. We then go on to present the properties of the galaxy and its central BH (Sect. \[sec:BH-galaxy-coevolution\]), how much ionizing radiation is produced by the system (Sect. \[sec:effect-agn-escape\]), and whether the object should be classified as a galaxy or an AGN (Sect. \[sec:galaxy-agn-lumin\]).
Galaxy simulations {#sec:method}
==================
We use a set of zoom-in simulations performed with [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Ramses-RT</span>]{}, the RHD version of the public adaptive mesh refinement (AMR) code [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Ramses</span>]{}[^2] [@Teyssier2002; @Rosdahl2013; @Rosdahl2015], already partially described in @Trebitsch2019. In this section, we briefly summarize the main features of the code and sub-grid models employed, and we refer the interested reader to @Trebitsch2019 for a more detailed description.
{width=".9\linewidth"}
The collisionless particles (stars and dark matter) are evolved using a particle-mesh method with a cloud-in-cell interpolation. For the gas, [<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Ramses</span>]{}solves the Euler equations with the second-order MUSCL scheme [@vanLeer1979] using the HLLC Riemann solver from @Toro1994 and a MinMod total variation diminishing scheme to reconstruct the intercell-fluxes. For all simulations, we impose a Courant factor of 0.8 to define the timestep.
The AMR grid is refined using a quasi-Lagrangian criterion: a cell is selected for refinement if $\rho_{\rm DM} \Delta x^3 + (\Omega_{\rm DM}/\Omega_b)\rho_{\rm gas} \Delta x^3+ (\Omega_{\rm DM}/\Omega_b) \rho_* \Delta x^3 > 8\ m_{\rm DM}^{\rm HR}$, where $\rho_{\rm DM}$, $\rho_{\rm gas}$ and $\rho_*$ are respectively the DM, gas and stellar densities in the cell, $\Omega_{\rm DM}$ and $\Omega_b$ respectively the cosmic DM and baryon mass density, $\Delta x$ is the cell size, and $m_{\rm DM}^{\rm HR}$ is the mass of the highest resolution DM particle. In a DM-only run, this criterion would allow refinement as soon as there are at least 8 high-resolution DM particles in a cell.
Initial conditions {#sec:sims:ics}
------------------
We zoom on the galaxy described in @Trebitsch2019, which lives in a halo reaching a mass of $\sim \SI{3e11}{\Msun}$ at redshift $z \sim 5.7$ embedded in a cosmological volume of $40 h^{-1}$ comoving Mpc on a side. The initial conditions for both the initial DM-only run and the zoom region have been generated with <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Music</span>[^3] [@Hahn2011], assuming a flat $\Lambda$CDM cosmology consistent with the *Planck* results [dark energy density $\Omega_\Lambda = 0.692$, total matter density $\Omega_m = 0.308$, Hubble parameter $h = 0.6781$ and baryon matter density $\Omega_b = 0.048$, @Planck2015]. We select the target halo in the final output with <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">HaloMaker</span> [@Tweed2009], which uses the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">AdaptaHOP</span> algorithm [@Aubert2004].
The zoom region has an effective resolution of $4096^3$ elements (level $\ell = 12$), which translates in a mass resolution of $m_{\rm DM}^{\rm HR} \simeq \SI{e5}{\Msun}$ for the high-resolution particles. For the RHD run, we then allow for refinement down to a minimum cell size of $\Delta x = 40 h^{-1}\mbox{Mpc}/2^{23} \simeq 7\,\mbox{pc}$. The gas in the initial conditions is assumed to be neutral and homogeneously metal poor, with an initial gas phase metallicity $Z = 5\times 10^{-3} Z_\odot = 10^{-4}$.
Radiative transfer {#sec:sims:radiative-transfer}
------------------
The RT module propagates the radiation emitted by both stars and BHs in three frequency intervals, accounting for the [ H<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">i</span> ]{}-, [ He<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">i</span> ]{}- and [ He<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">ii</span> ]{}-ionizing radiation fields. The radiation is then evolved on the AMR grid using a first-order Godunov method to solve the first two moments of the RT equation and assuming the M1 closure [@Levermore1984; @Dubroca1999] for the Eddington tensor. We use the reduced speed of light approximation [@Gnedin2001; @Rosdahl2013] to limit the cost of the simulation, with a reduced speed of light of $\tilde{c} = 0.01 c$. The radiation is coupled to the gas through non-equilibrium thermochemistry for hydrogen and helium, assuming the on-the-spot approximation, and we ignore the radiation pressure exerted by the ionizing radiation on the gas. We discuss this assumption in Sect. \[sec:ccl\]. Radiation is emitted by each star particle as a function of its age and metallicity following the models of @Bruzual2003, and from each AGN as a function of the BH mass and accretion rate. For the AGN radiation, we only release photons when the AGN is in “quasar mode” (see Sect. \[sec:sims:bhagn\]), and the spectrum follows a piecewise power-law corresponding to a @Shakura1973 thin disc extended by a power-law at high energy, with slope $\alpha = -1.7$ [@Lusso2015]. We normalize the spectrum by assuming that only a fraction $(1-f_{\rm IR})$ of the bolometric luminosity [ $L_{\rm bol}$]{}escapes the inner dusty region, so that $f_{\rm IR} = 30\%$ of [ $L_{\rm bol}$]{}is absorbed by dust and re-emitted as IR radiation, that we do not model here.
Star formation and feedback {#sec:sims:sffb}
---------------------------
At the resolution of our simulation, we describe the stars as particles with mass $m_\star \sim \SI{1.8e4}{\Msun}$ representing a single stellar population. Star formation is modelled with a Schmidt-like law [@Schmidt1959], with an approach similar to that @Rasera2006, but assuming a local star formation efficiency $\epsilon(\rho, c_s, \mathcal{M})$ computed the following ‘multi-ff PN’ model of @Federrath2012 [@Padoan2011], where $\rho$ is the local density, $c_s$ the local sound speed, and $\mathcal{M}$ the local turbulent Mach number. We only consider cells to be star forming when the local density $\rho$ exceeds a threshold[^4] $\rho_0 = 1\,\mbox{cm}^{-3}$ (chosen as the typical ISM density), and when the local turbulent Mach number exceeds $\mathcal{M} \geq 2$.
We include feedback from massive stars through radiative feedback resulting from photoionization heating and type II supernovae (SNe). Photoionization heating is directly modelled in the simulation through the coupling between the ionizing photon field and the gas (see Sect. \[sec:sims:radiative-transfer\]). For the SN feedback, we use the model of @Kimm2014 [@Kimm2015], which deposits mass and momentum in every cell around a star particle in a single event $t_{\rm SN} = 5\,\mbox{Myr}$ after it is formed. The amount of momentum released depends on the local density and metallicity of each neighbouring cell in order to capture correctly the momentum transfer at all stages of the Sedov blast wave. Following @Kimm2017, we increase the final radial momentum from SNe when the Strömgren sphere of a star particle is unresolved, as suggested by @Geen2015.
BH model {#sec:sims:bhagn}
--------
The BH seeding, growth and associated feedback follow the fiducial implementation of @Dubois2012. We represent SMBHs using sink particles with initial mass $M_{\bullet,0} = \SI{3e4}{\Msun}$. These sink particles are created in cells where both the gas and stellar density exceeds a threshold that we choose to be $\rho_{\rm sink} = 100\,\mbox{cm}^{-3}$, where the gas is Jeans-unstable, and where there is enough gas in the cell to form the sink particle. Additionally, if there is a SMBH within $r_{\rm excl} = 40\,\mbox{kpc}$ of a selected cell, we block BH formation to exclude the formation of multiple SMBH in the same galaxy. Each sink particle is then surrounded by tracers in the form of massless ‘cloud’ particles equally spaced by $\Delta x/2$ within a sphere of radius $4 \Delta x$ and moving with the SMBH, providing a convenient way to probe the gas properties around the BH.
BHs accrete gas following the classical Bondi-Hoyle-Lyttleton prescription [@Bondi1952], $\dot{M}_{\rm BHL} = 4\pi G^2 {\ifmmode {M_\bullet} \else $M_{\bullet}$\xspace\fi}^2 \bar{\rho}/(\bar{c}_s^2 + \bar{v}_{\rm rel}^2)^{3/2}$, where ${\ifmmode {M_\bullet} \else $M_{\bullet}$\xspace\fi}$ is the BH mass, $\bar{\rho}$, $\bar{c}_s$, and $\bar{v}_{\rm rel}$ are respectively the average gas density, sound speed, and relative velocity between the BH and the surrounding gas. The bar notation denotes an averaging over the cloud particles. We do not use any artificial boost for the gas accretion onto the BH. The accretion rate is limited to the value that produces the Eddington luminosity assuming a radiative efficiency of $\epsilon_r = 0.1$, with $L_{\rm Edd} = 4\pi G {\ifmmode {M_\bullet} \else $M_{\bullet}$\xspace\fi}m_p c/\sigma_{\rm T}$ where $m_p$ is the proton mass, $\sigma_{\rm T}$ is the Thompson cross section, $c$ is the speed of light, so that $\dot{{\ifmmode {M_\bullet} \else $M_{\bullet}$\xspace\fi}} = \min\left(\dot{M}_{\rm BHL}, L_{\rm Edd}/(\epsilon_r c^2)\right)$.
{width=".9\linewidth"}
The accretion onto a BH results in AGN feedback, modelled here using the dual mode implementation of @Dubois2012: at low Eddington ratio $\lambda_{\rm Edd} = \dot{M}_{\rm BHL} / \left(L_{\rm Edd}/(\epsilon_r c^2)\right) < 0.01$, the AGN is in “radio mode”, and in “quasar mode” when $\lambda_{\rm Edd} \geq 0.01$. The details of the feedback implementation are given in @Trebitsch2019, but we sketch here the main elements of the model. For both feedback modes, the AGN injects energy at a rate $\dot{E}_{\rm AGN} = \epsilon_f \epsilon_r \dot{{\ifmmode {M_\bullet} \else $M_{\bullet}$\xspace\fi}} c^2$, proportional to the accretion rate $\dot{{\ifmmode {M_\bullet} \else $M_{\bullet}$\xspace\fi}}$. Quasar mode feedback is modelled by releasing purely thermal energy in a sphere of radius $\Delta x$ centred on the BH with a coupling efficiency $\epsilon_f = 0.15$, For the radio mode, we deposit energy and momentum as a bipolar outflow aligned with the total angular momentum of the accreted gas with a coupling efficiency is assumed to be $\epsilon_f = 1$. The jet velocity[^5] is fixed to be with a mass loading factor of the jet 100. The feedback efficiencies $\epsilon_f$ in both the radio and quasar modes have been empirically determined in @Dubois2012 in order to reproduce the BH-to-bulge mass relations at $z=0$.
Finally, we take particular care of the detailed dynamics of the BH in this simulation. Indeed, given the fairly low mass of our BH seed compared e.g. to the DM mass resolution, we need to ensure that the dynamical friction force on the BH is taken into account below the grid [see e.g. @Tremmel2015; @Pfister2017]. For this, we follow the approach of @Pfister2019 to model the dynamical friction exerted both by the gas and by the collisionless particles (stars and DM), which we do not resolve directly in our simulation. For the dynamical friction exerted by the gas, the matter lagging behind the BH induces a drag force [@Ostriker1999], that we model following @Dubois2013. This frictional force is proportional to $F_{\rm DF} = \alpha f_{\rm gas} 4\pi \rho (G {\ifmmode {M_\bullet} \else $M_{\bullet}$\xspace\fi}/ \bar{c_s}^2)$, with $\alpha = (\rho/\rho_{\rm DF, th})^2$ if $\rho > \rho_{\rm th}$ and 1 otherwise is an artificial boost, and $f_{\rm gas}$ is a fudge factor varying between 0 and 2 and which depends on the BH Mach number, given by the ratio of the relative velocity between the BH and the gas $\bar{v}_{\rm rel}$ and the sound speed $c_s$, $\mathcal{M}_\bullet = \bar{v}_{\rm rel}/\bar{c}_s$ [e.g. @Chapon2013]. In this work, we take $\rho_{\rm DF, th} = 50\,\mbox{cm}^{-3}$. For the dynamical friction caused by the collisionless particles (stars and DM), we use the implementation of @Pfister2019: the (negative) acceleration of the gas is again caused by matter lagging behind the BH, and is a function of the BH mass, velocity, and of the detailed distribution of stars and DM within $4\Delta x$ of the BH. We note that the implementation for collisionless particles is similar to that of @Tremmel2015.
Gas cooling and heating {#sec:sims:cooling}
-----------------------
[<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Ramses</span>]{}features non-equilibrium cooling for hydrogen and helium by tracking the abundances of H, H$^+$, He, He$^+$, He$^{++}$, as well as metal cooling implemented by a set of tabulated cooling rates computed with <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Cloudy</span>[^6] [[last described in @Ferland2017]]{} above . Below , we account for energy losses via metal line cooling following @Rosen1995 and scaling the metal cooling enhancement linearly with the gas metallicity, assuming solar abundance pattern for the metals. We currently do not take into account the impact of the local ionizing flux on metal cooling, but instead assume photo-ionization equilibrium with a redshift dependent @Haardt1996 UV background for the metals. We stress that this UV background is not used for the hydrogen and helium non equilibrium photo-chemistry, for which we use the local photon field transported self-consistently by the RT solver.
Results {#sec:results}
=======
Throughout this work, we will discuss three flavours of our simulation: our fiducial run (“AGNRT”), which includes all the physics described in Sect. \[sec:method\]; a run where the feedback from the AGN is purely thermal/mechanical (as in e.g. @Dubois2012) and where the radiation is only produced by stellar populations (“AGN”); and a third control run where we include no BH at all (“no AGN”). Fig. \[fig:all\_galaxies\] presents a face-on view of the main galaxy of the simulation for each run (AGNRT, AGN and with no AGN, from left to right), showing the distribution of stars on the upper row and SFR surface density on the lower row. There is no significant difference in terms of size or morphology between each run.
A growing black hole in a growing galaxy {#sec:BH-galaxy-coevolution}
----------------------------------------
We illustrate in Fig. \[fig:mstar\_vs\_time\] the assembly of the main galaxy as a dotted red line for the AGNRT run, a solid orange line for the AGN run, and a dashed blue line for the run without AGN, and we will keep this colour coding for all other figures unless specified otherwise. In all three simulations, the main galaxy (illustrated at $z\sim 5.7$ in Fig. \[fig:all\_galaxies\]) grows steadily from the dwarf regime (${\ifmmode {M_\star} \else $M_{\star}$\xspace\fi}\sim \SI{e7}{\Msun}$) at $z\sim 12$ to a mass of ${\ifmmode {M_\star} \else $M_{\star}$\xspace\fi}\sim \SI{3e10}{\Msun}$ by $z \sim 6$. The sudden increase followed by a drop of the stellar mass in the ‘AGN’ simulation is due to a mis-identification of the galaxy in the merger tree at early times. We also show on the left panel the range of stellar masses expected from the model of @Behroozi2013 give the growth of the main halo in our simulation: this gives a qualitative idea of how fast our galaxy is expected to grow given its host halo growth (we checked that others models, such as those of @Moster2018 [@Behroozi2019] give a similar growth). In all runs, the galaxy appears over-massive compared to its halo: we note however that abundance matching type techniques are still highly uncertain at high redshift, especially in the low mass regime [e.g. @Moster2018; @Behroozi2019]. At the end of our simulation, when the galaxy lives in a relatively massive halo, the stellar mass still appears higher than empirical models suggest: this suggests either that the star formation is not strongly enough regulated (e.g. by stellar feedback) in our simulation, or that the comparison of our stellar mass to observations is too indirect, or a combination of the two factors. Regarding this last point, @Behroozi2019 highlight that at $z\gtrsim 4$, the constraints on galaxy growth are predominantly relying on converting the UV luminosity to a stellar mass, which at very high redshift can be severely uncertain. Nevertheless, we still address the possibility that our stellar feedback might not be efficient enough at limiting the star formation in the galaxy. @Rosdahl2018 have shown that while the strength of the SN feedback directly affects the stellar-to-halo mass relation, it plays very little role in the reionization history of their simulation.
The star formation rate (SFR, right panel) evolution can be split in two epochs: first, at $z > 7.5$, the SFR increases quickly from below $\SI{1}{\Msun\per\year}$ up to around when the galaxy reaches ${\ifmmode {M_\star} \else $M_{\star}$\xspace\fi}\sim \SI{e10}{\Msun}$. After that, the galaxy reaches some form of self-regulation and the SFR remains constant with some fluctuations around this value. This behaviour is common to all three simulations: this strongly suggests that the feedback from the AGN is not playing a major role in setting the star formation properties of the host galaxy. This happens in spite of the fact that the central BH is actively growing, as shown in Fig. \[fig:BH\_growth\]: after an initial phase where the BH is not growing due to the strong SN feedback preventing gas from settling in the vicinity of the BH [e.g. @Dubois2015], accretion onto the BH becomes very efficient (with Eddington ratio $\lambda_{\rm Edd} \simeq 10\% - 100\%$) after the galaxy has reached ${\ifmmode {M_\star} \else $M_{\star}$\xspace\fi}\gtrsim \SI{e9}{\Msun}$, leading to a mass of ${\ifmmode {M_\bullet} \else $M_{\bullet}$\xspace\fi}\gtrsim \SI{e7}{\Msun}$ by $z \sim 6$. This transition happens at a similar stellar mass than found by previous studies [e.g. @Dubois2015; @Habouzit2017]. Combining this with the results of @Trebitsch2019, this points toward a picture where the galaxy and the SMBH are regulating their own mass growth once the galaxy is massive enough, independently of one another (albeit ultimately feeding from the same gas reservoir).
![BH growth history for the central BH of the main galaxy in the AGNRT and AGN runs. In both cases, the BH growth starts around the time the galaxy reaches ${\ifmmode {M_\star} \else $M_{\star}$\xspace\fi}\sim \SI{e9}{\Msun}$, accompanied by a few BH-BH mergers, and then grows rapidly to ${\ifmmode {M_\bullet} \else $M_{\bullet}$\xspace\fi}\sim \SI{e7}{\Msun}$ by $z \sim 6$[]{data-label="fig:BH_growth"}](Mbh_vs_time){width="\columnwidth"}
![Specific SFR (in red) and BHAR (in blue) for the AGNRT run around the time of the last galaxy merger, around $z \sim 6.3$. While the BH growth is increased, the duration of the boost is small ($\lesssim 50$ Myr).[]{data-label="fig:specific_rates_merger"}](AGNRT_merger_SFR_BHAR){width="\columnwidth"}
Fig. \[fig:mstar\_vs\_time\] and Fig. \[fig:BH\_growth\] show a distinctive feature around $t \sim \SI{900}{\mega\year}$: a sudden jump in stellar mass and BH mass accompanied by a sharp increase of the SFR. This corresponds to a major merger with mass ration $\sim 1\!:\!4$, followed by a BH-BH merger. This merger has a small but noticeable effect on the BH accretion rate (BHAR) and to some extent on the SFR, but the effect dissipates quickly. This is shown in Fig. \[fig:specific\_rates\_merger\]: right after the two galaxy merge into one (vertical grey line), both the specific SFR and the specific BHAR reach a peak (although this is less significant for the specific SFR).
Escape of ionizing radiation {#sec:effect-agn-escape}
----------------------------
We now turn our attention to the ionizing output of our simulated galaxies, with the goal of better quantifying the contribution of bright $\sim L^\star$ galaxies to the reionization.
### Contribution from stellar populations {#sec:fesc:stars}
We quantify the amount of ionizing radiation produced by the stellar populations in our galaxy and escaping into the IGM by measuring the luminosity-averaged escape fraction [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}: $$\label{eq:fescray}
{\ifmmode {f_{\rm esc}^{\star}} \else $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$\xspace\fi}= \frac{\sum_i L_{\rm ion}^i \bar{T}_i}{\sum_i L_{\rm ion}^i},$$ with $\bar{T}_i = \langle e^{-\tau_{{\ifmmode {\mathrm{H\,\textsc{i}}} \else H\,\textsc{i} \fi}}^{i,j}} \rangle_{j}$ the angle-averaged transmission for the $i^{\rm th}$ star particle, and $L_{\rm ion}^i$ its ionizing luminosity[^7]. We measure this quantity for our three runs by casting rays from each star particle within $0.3 {\ifmmode {R_{\rm vir}} \else $R_{\rm vir}$\xspace\fi}$ using the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Rascas</span> code (Michel-Dansac et al., submitted) and present the results in Fig. \[fig:fesc\_vs\_time\] with the same colour-coding as in Fig. \[fig:mstar\_vs\_time\]. The three dashes on the right axis indicate the average escape fraction measured after $t > \SI{750}{\mega\year}$, when the SFR remains constant.
![Ionizing escape fraction measured at the virial radius for the three runs. For all runs, [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}varies quickly, and the amplitude of the variations decreases as the galaxy settles, finally reaching ${\ifmmode {f_{\rm esc}^{\star}} \else $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$\xspace\fi}\sim 5\%$[]{data-label="fig:fesc_vs_time"}](fesc_vs_time){width="\columnwidth"}
On average, the three runs present a very similar behaviour, with a fairly low average escape fraction of ${\ifmmode {f_{\rm esc}^{\star}} \else $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$\xspace\fi}\sim 5-7\%$, consistent with the recent results of @Steidel2018 on a sample of LBGs at $z\sim 3$ and with the detailed simulation of @Yoo2020 of an isolated galaxy of similar mass. A striking feature of Fig. \[fig:fesc\_vs\_time\] is that as the galaxy grows, the variability in [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}decreases strongly: at $z\sim 10$, when the stellar mass of the galaxy is around ${\ifmmode {M_\star} \else $M_{\star}$\xspace\fi}\sim \SI{e8}{\Msun}$, the escape fraction can vary by up to two orders of magnitude in $\sim \SI{10}{\mega\year}$, while the fluctuations become milder at $z \lesssim 7$, when the galaxy reaches a more regulated state with ${\ifmmode {M_\star} \else $M_{\star}$\xspace\fi}\gtrsim \SI{e10}{\Msun}$. This is expected from the picture in which feedback processes associated to star formation create channels through which radiation can escape [e.g. @Wise2009; @Kimm2014; @Trebitsch2017]. Indeed, as star formation is extremely bursty in low mass systems, the number of simultaneously star forming regions is low, so that one Lyman-leaking channel is enough for a large fraction of the ionizing radiation produced to escape: the galaxy is either “on” or “off”. When the galaxies are more massive, this is no longer true, and the galaxy-averaged escape fraction will be lowered by the large number of star forming regions embedded in dense [ H<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">i</span> ]{}clouds. These results are consistent with the model of @Howard2018, who estimate the escape fraction of synthetic galaxies by averaging over populations of star forming clouds, finding that their dwarf models systematically yield higher average [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}and stronger fluctuations than their models for spiral galaxies.
![Evolution of the ionizing flux escaping the main halo ($\dot{N}_{\rm esc} = \dot{N}_{\rm int} {\ifmmode {f_{\rm esc}^{\star}} \else $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$\xspace\fi}$) for the three runs.[]{data-label="fig:Nesc"}](Nesc_vs_time){width="\columnwidth"}
We can now estimate the ionizing luminosity of our simulated galaxy in each run as $\dot{N}_{\rm esc} = \dot{N}_{\rm int} {\ifmmode {f_{\rm esc}^{\star}} \else $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$\xspace\fi}$, where $\dot{N}_{\rm int} = \sum_i L_{\rm ion}^i$ is the total intrinsic ionizing luminosity of the galaxy. We summarize this in Fig. \[fig:Nesc\], keeping the same colour-coding as before. Apart from the rapid fluctuations due to the quickly varying [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}, the evolution of the escaping flux $\dot{N}_{\rm esc}$ broadly follows that of the SFR: it rises until $z \sim 7.5$, and stay roughly constants after that. This behaviour is the same for all three runs, suggesting again that the AGN is not strongly affecting the gas distribution in and around star forming regions. Interestingly, we do not see a very clear sign of the major merger that occurs around $z \sim 6.3$ in the evolution of [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}, and only a marginal trend in the evolution of $\dot{N}_{\rm esc}$. This is partly due to the already important variations in [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}, and further confirms that the escape and production of ionizing radiation is a process very local to star forming clouds.
### Contribution of the AGN to the LyC leakage {#sec:fesc:agn}
As mentioned previously, the central BH in the main galaxy is actively growing, both in the AGN and AGNRT runs, suggesting that the AGN is an important source of ionizing radiation: this can be seen as the dotted line in Fig. \[fig:NdotAGN\], illustrating the [ H<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">i</span> ]{}-ionizing radiation produced by the AGN in the AGNRT run[^8]. This ionizing luminosity is lower than that of stellar populations by approximately one order of magnitude, but slightly higher than their escaped ionizing luminosity. When looking at the flux escaping the halo (solid line in Fig. \[fig:NdotAGN\]), we find a non-zero $\dot{N}_{\rm esc}^{AGN}$ only a small fraction of the time. In other words, the total escaping luminosity coming from the AGN is negligible most of the time.
![Comparison of the intrinsic (dotted line) and escaping (solid line) luminosity produced by the AGN in the AGNRT run. Only a tiny fraction of the ionizing photons produced can escape the halo, because most of the time the AGN is obscured.[]{data-label="fig:NdotAGN"}](AGNRT_NintNescAGN){width="\columnwidth"}
This might seem at odds e.g. with the study of @Grazian2018, who found that for their sample of AGN, the average escape fraction is of the order of $\sim 75\%$, thus extending the earlier work of @Cristiani2016 on bright quasars. Similarly, @Guaita2016 detected LyC flux with a relative escape fraction ${\ifmmode {f_{\rm esc}^{\rm AGN}} \else $f_{\rm esc}^{\rm AGN}$\xspace\fi}_{\rm rel} \sim 0.72 \pm 0.18$ for one object with ${\ifmmode {M_{1450}} \else $M_{1450}$\xspace\fi}\sim -21.9$ at $z\sim 3.46$, but they could only put upper limits on their other seven AGN.
A closer look at the selection criterion of @Grazian2018 can however largely explain this apparent discrepancy. As all the AGN selected in their sample have $-25 \lesssim {\ifmmode {M_{1450}} \else $M_{1450}$\xspace\fi}\lesssim -23$, they are not strongly obscured. Contrasting to this, we have shown in @Trebitsch2019 that the AGN in our simulation is most of the time surrounded by a column density of [ H<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">i</span> ]{}in excess of ${\ifmmode {N_{\rm H}} \else $N_{\rm H}$\xspace\fi}> \SI{e20}{\per\cm\squared}$, corresponding to an optical depth $\tau \gg 100$ for the ionizing radiation. This large column of [ H<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">i</span> ]{}is therefore enough to completely absorb all ionizing radiation produced by the AGN, except for rare episodes (corresponding to the spikes of $\dot{N}_{\rm esc}^{AGN}$ seen in Fig. \[fig:NdotAGN\]). This is qualitatively consistent with the results of e.g. @Cowie2009, who found that only their quasars displaying broad emission lines are seen in the ionizing UV, and that the ionizing luminosity of the rest of their sample is consistent with zero. We note that even if our estimate of the nuclear obscuration is uncertain, there is a large amount of neutral gas in the ISM of the galaxy that contributes to lowering [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\rm AGN}$]{}. This is well in line with the results of @Circosta2019, who found that for a sample of bright $z > 2.5$ quasars, the ISM of the host galaxy strongly contributes to the total obscuration.
Finally, our findings are qualitatively consistent with the observations of @Micheva2017, who found strong evidence for a low [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\rm AGN}$]{}from a sample at $z \sim 3$. Interestingly (but keeping in mind that it is hard to compare one simulated galaxy to a single observed one), they assess that for one of their AGN, the detected LyC flux is dominated by the stellar populations in the galaxy: this is exactly how our simulated galaxy would be classified.
Bright galaxy, faint AGN {#sec:galaxy-agn-lumin}
------------------------
We have shown that while the main galaxy in our simulation hosts an actively growing BH (at least for the runs with BH), the LyC flux is completely dominated by the stellar populations. We will now extend this analysis to other wavelengths, in order to determine if the object we are focusing on should rightfully be called a “star forming galaxy” or an AGN. We stress that we do not focus on any emission line properties (neither metal lines nor hydrogen recombination lines) in this study, which would require a more careful treatment, like post-processing the simulation with <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Cloudy</span> as in @Hirschmann2017. We therefore cannot determine where our galaxy would lie in various diagnostic diagrams, and only focus on the continuum emission. This way, we follow the approach of @Volonteri2017 and compare the relative contribution of the stellar populations and the AGN to the rest-frame UV and hard X-ray luminosity of the galaxy. This is particularly relevant in the context of understanding the nature of the X-ray selected sources observed by @Giallongo2015, as both the luminosity and the UV magnitude [ $M_{1450}$]{}of our simulated AGN are close to the typical values of their sample. In the following, we will only focus on the AGNRT run, which is well justified since we have shown that the global properties of the galaxy and AGN in all three runs are comparable.
### Hard X-rays {#sec:hard-x-rays}
We start by estimating the hard X-ray luminosity of our simulated galaxy in the band and the relative contribution of the AGN and stellar populations, displayed in Fig. \[fig:X\_galaxy\_agn\] (purple for the AGN, red for the galaxy). For the stellar population, we follow @Fragos2013 to estimate the X-ray luminosity of X-ray binaries (their model 245) as $L_X \propto \alpha\, ({\ifmmode {M_\star} \else $M_{\star}$\xspace\fi}/\SI{e10}{\Msun}) + \beta\, {\rm SFR}$, and we use the bolometric correction from @Hopkins2007 (H07, dotted line) for the AGN X-ray luminosity.
![Intrinsic X-ray luminosity of the AGN (in purple) and of the stellar populations in the galaxy (in red). Overall, the AGN dominates the X-ray emission of the system.[]{data-label="fig:X_galaxy_agn"}](AGNRT_galaxy_AGN_Xrays){width="\columnwidth"}
We also display in Fig. \[fig:X\_galaxy\_agn\] the AGN hard X-ray luminosity estimated using the bolometric correction of @Lusso2012 for Type 1 AGN (L12, dash-dotted line). Here, contrary to the UV, the luminosity is dominated by the AGN, except at very early times ($t \ll \SI{750}{\mega\year}$) when the BH is still not very massive. Overall, the total X-ray luminosity is comparable (or even a bit lower) to that of the systems probed by @Giallongo2015, suggesting that the X-ray emission in these objects is indeed powered by nuclear activity.
Comparing to *Himiko* as a prototypical bright galaxy in the reionization era, we find that at all times, the total X-ray luminosity of our system is below the lower-limit coming from non-detection of X-rays in Himiko [@Ouchi2013]: this means that with a similar survey, no X-ray would have been detected in a galaxy like the one we are discussing in this paper. We note that @Baek2013 have predicted that, based on its [ ${\rm Ly}\alpha$]{}properties, *Himiko* should not host an AGN: they however assume for this that the [ ${\rm Ly}\alpha$]{}is powered by the AGN, while we have no evidence for this at all in our simulation. Further studies are required to make any statement on the [ ${\rm Ly}\alpha$]{}emission and observability for our galaxy, but the large amount of dust surrounding the AGN and the fact that it does not dominate the ionizing budget of the system suggest that it would not be dominating the [ ${\rm Ly}\alpha$]{}output.
### UV properties {#sec:uv-properties}
![UV magnitude after $z=7.5$ for the galaxy (in red) and the AGN (in purple) in the main simulation of this study. The intrinsic emission is shown with dotted lines (upper panel), and the solid lines show the rest-frame UV magnitude after dust attenuation in the ISM (lower panel). The purple dashed line on the lower panel shows the UV magnitude of the AGN removing the attenuation in the inner 40 pc. Overall, the galaxy dominates the UV luminosity of the system.[]{data-label="fig:muv_galaxy_agn"}](AGNRT_galaxy_AGN_MUV_2panels){width="\columnwidth"}
We now turn to the (non-ionizing) UV properties of our simulated object, as illustrated in Fig. \[fig:muv\_galaxy\_agn\]: the purple (red) lines show the AGN (galaxy) rest-frame UV magnitude, with the dotted lines indicating the intrinsic emission and the solid lines taking into account the attenuation by dust. Additionally, the purple dashed line correspond to the AGN UV magnitude attenuated only by the ISM dust, not taking into account the innermost 40 pc surrounding the BH: this is effectively an upper limit on the AGN UV luminosity.
For the galaxy, the UV luminosity is derived directly from the properties of the stellar populations using the @Bruzual2003 stellar population synthesis model, and for the AGN we convert the bolometric luminosity in UV magnitude assuming the bolometric correction of @Runnoe2012. Both for the AGN and the galaxy, we take into account the dust obscuration as in @Trebitsch2019: we use again the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Rascas</span> tool [@MichelDansac2020] to cast rays from each star particle[^9] in the simulation and integrate the dust optical depth along each ray as $$\label{eq:taudust}
\tau_d(\lambda) = \int_{\rm ray} n_d(\ell) \sigma_d(\lambda) d\ell,$$ where $\sigma_d(\lambda)$ is the dust interaction cross section per hydrogen atom defined by the fits of @Gnedin2008 for their Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC) model and $n_d$ a pseudo-number density of dust grains, given by $n_d = (n_{{\ifmmode {\mathrm{H\,\textsc{i}}} \else H\,\textsc{i} \fi}} + f_{\rm ion} n_{{\ifmmode {\mathrm{H\,\textsc{ii}}} \else H\,\textsc{ii} \fi}})Z/Z_0$ [@Laursen2009], with $Z_0 = 0.005$ is the mean metallicity of the SMC. Following @Laursen2009, we take $f_{\rm ion} \sim 0.01$ as the typical dust to gas ratio in ionized gas. The stellar populations dominate the UV production of the galaxy most of the time, either prior or after dust attenuation: this is qualitatively consistent with our conclusions regarding the ionizing UV production. Even if we discard the circumnuclear region in our simulation to compute $\tau_d$ (dashed purple line), the AGN never really dominates the UV budget of the galaxy.
The total UV magnitude of our object, around ${\ifmmode {{\rm M}_{\rm UV}} \else ${\rm M}_{\rm UV}$\xspace\fi}\sim -22$, falls exactly within the range where @Volonteri2017 predicts that the AGN UV luminosity should be at most of the order of the galaxy UV luminosity: we illustrate this in Fig. \[fig:UVratios\], where we show the ratio of the AGN to galaxy luminosity, $L_{\rm AGN}/L_{\rm gal}$, as a function of the total UV magnitude of the object for successive timesteps of the simulation after $z\leq 7.5$. The vertical red line marks an equal contribution from both sources, and the horizontal green line correspond to the typical luminosity of typical $z \sim 6$ bright galaxies. The red squares and blue points correspond to the dust-attenuated UV emission including or not the circumnuclear region, respectively, while the intrinsic emission (pre-attenuation) is shown with orange crosses. As suggested by @Volonteri2017, we find that below ${\ifmmode {{\rm M}_{\rm UV}} \else ${\rm M}_{\rm UV}$\xspace\fi}\sim -22$ the AGN is always sub-dominant, and that there is a trend of increasing $L_{\rm AGN}/L_{\rm gal}$ in brighter systems.
![Evolution of the total UV luminosity of the system as a function of the ratio of the contributions from the AGN and the stellar populations taking into account different levels of AGN attenuation (orange crosses for no obscuration, blue dots for ISM obscuration, and red squares for ISM + nuclear obscuration). Each marker correspond to a distinct timestep of the simulation. The vertical red line indicating a similar luminosity for the AGN and the galaxy. When obscuration is taken into account, only when the total ${\ifmmode {{\rm M}_{\rm UV}} \else ${\rm M}_{\rm UV}$\xspace\fi}\lesssim -22$ does the AGN dominates in the UV.[]{data-label="fig:UVratios"}](AGNRT_galaxy_Lratio_MUV.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
Discussion and conclusions {#sec:ccl}
==========================
Interestingly, the typical value of the total UV luminosity of our object, ${\ifmmode {{\rm M}_{\rm UV}} \else ${\rm M}_{\rm UV}$\xspace\fi}\sim -22$, is very close to that of the brightest [ ${\rm Ly}\alpha$]{}emitters detected at $z \gtrsim 6$ such as *Himiko* or CR7 [e.g. @Matthee2017], and at the same time that it is just below the magnitude at which the AGN and galaxy UV LF overlap [e.g. @Matsuoka2018; @Ono2018; @Stevans2018]. While the nature of bright galaxies such as CR7 is still debated, it is comforting to note that the analysis of @Bowler2017 suggests it could be compatible with an (obscured) AGN, very similar to our object.
This paints a picture in which bright galaxies at $z \gtrsim 6$ are hosting actively growing black holes which are just not quite bright enough or too obscured to be dominating over the luminosity of their host. This offers a complementary insight to the results of @Sobral2018, who found that at $z \sim 2-3$, there is a sharp transition in the observed nature of bright sources around $L_{\rm UV} \sim 2 \times L^\star$, from star forming galaxies to AGN. Indeed, we suggest here that the transition is in part due to the AGN just not being dominating the UV light below that threshold, even if the BH is (almost) maximally growing. The fact that the UV is mostly coming from young stars rather than the faint AGN in our system is not without consequences: for instance, directly inferring the AGN ionizing emissivity from the faint end of the AGN UV LF as in e.g. @Giallongo2015 would significantly overestimate the contribution of AGN to the high-$z$ ionizing background. Indeed, even if ${\ifmmode {f_{\rm esc}^{\rm AGN}} \else $f_{\rm esc}^{\rm AGN}$\xspace\fi}\sim 100\%$ (which is not what we find here), converting the UV luminosity to the ionizing band using the AGN spectral shape would not be appropriate for the (large) fraction of the UV that is actually coming from stars.
Our simulation comes however with some caveats. For instance, we have not taken into account the effect of radiation pressure (RP) from the multi-scattering of infrared radiation. Dedicated work [e.g. @Bieri2017; @Costa2018] have shown that in massive galaxies, radiation from the AGN can launch winds through this process. In this work, we model these winds as the ‘quasar mode’ feedback, where winds are thermally driven. The simulation of @Costa2018 suggests that RP-driven winds affect the ISM differently from thermally driven winds by penetrating deeper in the ISM and significantly reducing the gas density in the inner regions of the galaxy. However, they do not model the growth of the BH self-consistently in their simulation: in our case, whenever winds reduce the gas density in the vicinity of the BH, the accretion rates drops, and the BH stops being UV-bright. Additionally, we note that our quasar mode feedback efficiency is significantly higher than theirs, by a factor $\gtrsim 5$: therefore, the (thermal) energy injection in our simulation will be much higher. Unfortunately, we cannot directly compare the effect of RP-driven versus thermally driven winds in our simulation: @Bieri2017 have shown that using the reduced speed of light approximation with $\tilde{c}$ similar to the ones we have used here can severely underestimate the mechanical advantage of the radiation-driven outflows. Nevertheless, using an isolated galaxy setup with a comparable halo and stellar mass than our target galaxy at $z \sim 6$, we found that at our resolution, the growth of the BH is not efficiently regulated by RP-driven feedback. Because of this, we need to rely on an effective description of the AGN winds, which efficiently regulates the growth of the BH [@Trebitsch2019]. Additionally, another key difference between the simulation of @Costa2018 and ours is that their AGN luminosity is typically 1000 times higher than that of our BH. The effect of the quasar luminosity on the strength of the radiative feedback has been explored by @Bieri2017 using very high resolution simulations. Their results indicate that for low luminosity quasars like ours, the radiation pressure driven winds do not create low-density channels through which ionizing radiation could escape.
We now summarize the main results of our study:
- Massive BH can grow actively in a bright LBG, but their feedback does not affect the galaxy very strongly, even at high masses (${\ifmmode {M_\star} \else $M_{\star}$\xspace\fi}\gtrsim \SI{e10}{\Msun}$).
- The ionizing output of bright LBGs is largely dominated by young stars rather than the AGN, and their typical ${\ifmmode {f_{\rm esc}^{\star}} \else $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$\xspace\fi}\sim 5\%$.
- The feedback from the AGN does not affect the escape of ionizing radiation produced by young massive stars.
- Deep X-ray surveys would detect the AGN in galaxies like the one we study, but the bulk of the UV luminosity (ionizing or not) would still be dominated by stellar populations.
To assess how general these conclusions are, it will be necessary to expand the number of simulated galaxies from one zoom to a large sample, which will be computationally expensive. In the meantime, the fact that our system shares many properties with bright LAEs observed at $z \sim 6$ gives a strong motivation to explore the [ ${\rm Ly}\alpha$]{}properties of our system, which requires dedicated radiative transfer modelling. We will explore both these leads in future works.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We wish to thank the referee for an insightful report that significantly improved the manuscript. MT thanks Harley Katz, Taysun Kimm and Joki Rosdahl for fruitful discussions and comments. MT and MV acknowledge funding from the European Research Council under the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013 Grant Agreement no. 614199, project ‘BLACK’). For part of this work, MT acknowledges support from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) under Germany’s Excellence Strategy EXC-2181/1 - 390900948 (the Heidelberg STRUCTURES Cluster of Excellence). This work has made use of the Horizon Cluster hosted by Institut d’Astrophysique de Paris; we thank St[é]{}phane Rouberol for running smoothly this cluster for us. This work was granted access to the HPC resources of CINES under the allocation A0040406955 made by GENCI. This work has made extensive use of the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Yt</span>[^10] analysis package [@Turk2011] and NASA’s Astrophysics Data System, as well as the <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Matplotlib</span> [@Hunter2007], <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Numpy/Scipy</span> [@Jones2001] and <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">IPython</span> [@Perez2007] packages.
Estimating [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}in the simulations {#sec:app:fesc}
=======================================================
In this appendix, we expand on footnote \[fn:fesc\] and explain why we choose to measure [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}with ray-tracing rather than simply use the radiation flux propagated in the simulation.
In principle, measuring the total outward flux integrated across the virial sphere normalized by the intrinsic total luminosity of the sources within the sphere should yield an exact estimate of the “escape fraction”, independently of the geometry of the sources within the sphere. Indeed, as (in the absence of absorption) the radiative flux decreases as $1/r^2$, the situation is essentially similar to the Gauss theorem in electrostatic: independently of the source position in a sphere, the integral of the flux will be the source luminosity. As previous studies showed that the escape of radiation is modulated on very local scales (cloud scale of a few pc, compared to the galaxy scale of a few kpc), we have $\int \bmath{F}\cdot\bmath{dS} = {\ifmmode {f_{\rm esc}^{\star}} \else $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$\xspace\fi}\dot{N}_{\rm int}$ independently of the position of the source.
![Escape fraction measured as the ratio of escaping to intrinsic flux for each run. Compared to Fig. \[fig:fesc\_vs\_time\], [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}exhibits a different behaviour in the $\sim \SI{100}{\mega\year}$ leading to the last major merger.[]{data-label="fig:fesc_flux"}](fesc_flux){width="\columnwidth"}
However, this neglects the fact that moments methods are famously known to fail when radiation from two sources overlap. This is because the fluid description of radiation is unable to describe properly the crossing of two beams (they “collide”, which is unphysical for radiation). This is in principle not a problem for the study of radiation escaping from galaxies, when we look at the radiation far away from a central, isolated sources. Indeed, @Trebitsch2017 compared the values of [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}measured using ray-tracing and the ratio of the flux to the source luminosity and found an excellent agreement between the two methods. However, when a second bright source is found close to the central galaxy (e.g. a bright satellite), this assumption of isolation is bound to fail. For example, Fig. \[fig:fesc\_flux\] shows the escape fraction measured as the ratio of the outward flux to the intrinsic luminosity of the galaxies for all three runs. The three lines show a clear feature around , coincidental with the period between the main halo and galaxy mergers, i.e. the time during which the secondary galaxy is travelling across the central halo. The exact behaviour (increase or decrease) is only dependent on the detailed orbital configuration of the merger: we have run a test case where the AGN feedback and radiation is turned off right before the merger (at $t \sim \SI{750}{\mega\year}$), in which case the [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}estimate follows closely the AGNRT run.
We stress that this only affects the measure of [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}close to the galaxy: when the distance between the two sources is very small compared to the distance at which the flux is measured, the two sources can effectively be considered as one. This means that it is only the estimate of [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}that is affected rather than the ionizing output of the galaxy itself. In practice, this means that the ray-traced measurement of [ $f_{\rm esc}^{\star}$]{}is more robust and behaves more closely to the expectations for the “escape fraction” than a flux-based estimator.
\[lastpage\]
[^1]: E-mail: [email protected]
[^2]: <https://bitbucket.org/rteyssie/ramses/>
[^3]: <https://bitbucket.org/ohahn/music/>
[^4]: Our choice of $m_\star$ forces cells at the highest level to only form stars if $\rho \gtrsim \SI{1000}{\per\cubic\cm}$. The threshold prevents stars to form out of the high-resolution region, as the star formation is regulated by the local efficiency.
[^5]: While this velocity is high than the reduced speed of light, we have checked that this does not affect our results, for two main reasons. First, as the jet propagates, it will very quickly decelerate below $\tilde{c}$. Second, as discussed in @Trebitsch2019, the BH spends most of its lifetime at $z\lesssim 7.5$ in a high accretion state. As a result, only a very small fraction of the timesteps are affected by this.
[^6]: <http://www.nublado.org/>
[^7]: \[fn:fesc\]As we perform RHD simulations, we could in principle measure the ratio of the total ionizing flux crossing the virial radius divided by the intrinsic ionizing production, as e.g. in @Kimm2014 [@Trebitsch2017]. This however does not work when galaxies regularly experience mergers, as we discuss in detail in Appendix \[sec:app:fesc\].
[^8]: Note that the axes on Fig. \[fig:Nesc\] and Fig. \[fig:NdotAGN\] are different.
[^9]: For the AGN, we directly use <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Yt</span> to cast rays from the sink particle.
[^10]: \[fn:yt\]<https://yt-project.org/>
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In this paper, we study the problem of learning vision-based dynamic manipulation skills using a scalable reinforcement learning approach. We study this problem in the context of grasping, a longstanding challenge in robotic manipulation. In contrast to static learning behaviors that choose a grasp point and then execute the desired grasp, our method enables closed-loop vision-based control, whereby the robot continuously updates its grasp strategy based on the most recent observations to optimize long-horizon grasp success. To that end, we introduce QT-Opt, a scalable self-supervised vision-based reinforcement learning framework that can leverage over [[580k]{}]{} real-world grasp attempts to train a deep neural network Q-function with over [[1.2M]{}]{} parameters to perform closed-loop, real-world grasping that generalizes to 96% grasp success on unseen objects. Aside from attaining a very high success rate, our method exhibits behaviors that are quite distinct from more standard grasping systems: using only RGB vision-based perception from an over-the-shoulder camera, our method automatically learns regrasping strategies, probes objects to find the most effective grasps, learns to reposition objects and perform other non-prehensile pre-grasp manipulations, and responds dynamically to disturbances and perturbations.[^1]'
author:
- 'Dmitry Kalashnikov$^1$, Alex Irpan$^1$, Peter Pastor$^2$, Julian Ibarz$^1$,\'
- '**Alexander Herzog$^2$, Eric Jang$^1$, Deirdre Quillen$^3$, Ethan Holly$^1$,**\'
- |
**Mrinal Kalakrishnan$^2$, Vincent Vanhoucke$^1$, Sergey Levine$^{1,3}$**\
{dkalashnikov, alexirpan, julianibarz, ejang, eholly, vanhoucke, slevine}@google.com,\
{peterpastor, alexherzog, kalakris}@x.team, {deirdrequillen}@berkeley.edu
bibliography:
- 'references.bib'
title: |
QT-Opt: Scalable Deep Reinforcement Learning\
for Vision-Based Robotic Manipulation
---
Introduction
============
Manipulation with object interaction represents one of the largest open problems in robotics: intelligently interacting with previously unseen objects in open-world environments requires generalizable perception, closed-loop vision-based control, and dexterous manipulation. Reinforcement learning offers a promising avenue for tackling this problem, but current work on reinforcement learning tackles the problem of mastering individual skills, such as hitting a ball [@peters_2008], opening a door [@kalakris11; @yahya17], or throwing [@kth17]. To meet the generalization demands of real-world manipulation, we focus specifically on scalable learning with off-policy algorithms, and study this question in the context of the specific problem of grasping. While grasping restricts the manipulation problem, it still retains many of its largest challenges: a grasping system should be able to pick up previously unseen objects with reliable and effective grasps, while using realistic sensing and actuation. It thus serves as a microcosm of the larger robotic manipulation problem, providing a challenging and practically applicable model problem for experimenting with generalization and diverse object interaction. Much of the existing work on robotic grasping decomposes the task into a sensing, planning, and acting stage: the robot first perceives the scene and identifies suitable grasp locations, then plans a path to those locations [@zeng2018; @juxi18; @dexnet30_2017; @platt_gpd_17]. This stands in contrast to the kinds of grasping behaviors observed in humans and animals, where the grasp is a dynamical process that tightly interleaves sensing and control at every stage [@rodriguez2018icra; @bohg2014]. This kind of dynamic closed-loop grasping is likely to be much more robust to unpredictable object physics, limited sensory information (e.g., monocular camera inputs instead of depth), and imprecise actuation. A closed-loop grasping system trained for long-horizon success can also perform intelligent pre-grasping manipulations, such as pushing or repositioning objects for an easier grasp. However, a major challenge with closed-loop grasp control is that the sensorimotor loop must be closed on the visual modality, which is very difficult to utilize effectively with standard optimal control methods in novel settings.
[r]{}[0.5]{} {width="50.00000%"}
We study how off-policy deep reinforcement learning can acquire closed-loop dynamic visual grasping strategies, using entirely self-supervised data collection, so as to generalize to previously unseen objects at test time. The value of low-level end-effector movements is predicted directly from raw camera observations, and the entire system is trained using grasp attempts in the real world. While the principles of deep reinforcement learning have been known for decades [@sutton98; @tesauro94], operationalizing them in a practical robotic learning algorithm that can generalize to new objects requires a stable and scalable algorithm and large datasets, as well as careful system design.
[l]{}[0.5]{} {width="50.00000%"}
The implementation in our experiments makes very simple assumptions: observations come from a monocular RGB camera located over the shoulder (see Fig. \[fig:robot\_setup\_and\_objects\]), and actions consist of end-effector Cartesian motion and gripper opening and closing commands. The reinforcement learning algorithm receives a binary reward for lifting an object successfully, and no other reward shaping. This general set of assumptions makes the method feasible to deploy at large scale, allowing us to collect [[580k]{}]{} grasp attempts on 7 real robotic systems. Unlike most reinforcement learning tasks in the literature [@machado17arcade; @gym16], the primary challenge in this task is not just to maximize reward, but to generalize effectively to previously unseen objects. This requires a very diverse set of objects during training. To make maximal use of this diverse dataset, we propose an off-policy training method based on a continuous-action generalization of Q-learning, which we call QT-Opt. Unlike other continuous action Q-learning methods [@hafner11; @lillicrap15], which are often unstable due to actor-critic instability [@duan16; @deeprlthatmatters17], QT-Opt dispenses with the need to train an explicit actor, instead using stochastic optimization over the critic to select actions and target values [@gcg; @quillen]. We show that even fully off-policy training can outperform strong baselines based on prior work, while a moderate amount of on-policy joint finetuning with offline data can improve performance to a success rate of 96% on challenging, previously unseen objects.
Our experimental evaluation demonstrates the effectiveness of this approach both quantitatively and qualitatively. We show that our method attains a high success rate across a range of objects not seen during training, and our qualitative experiments show that this high success rate is due to the system adopting a variety of strategies that would be infeasible without closed-loop vision-based control: the learned policies exhibit corrective behaviors, regrasping, probing motions to ascertain the best grasp, non-prehensile repositioning of objects, and other features that are feasible only when grasping is formulated as a dynamic, closed-loop process.
Related Work
============
Reinforcement learning has been applied in the context of robotic control using both low-dimensional [@peters_2008; @kalakris11] and high-dimensional [@hafner11; @lillicrap15] function approximators, including with visual inputs [@levine2015; @yahya17]. However, all of these methods focus on learning narrow, individual tasks, and do not evaluate on broad generalization to large numbers of novel test objects. Real-world robotic manipulation requires broad generalization, and indeed much of the research on robotic grasping has sought to achieve such generalization, either through the use of grasp metrics based on first principles [@weisz2012] or learning [@lenz2015; @bohg2014], with the latter class of methods achieving some of the best results in recent years [@platt_gpd_17; @dexnet30_2017]. However, current grasping systems typically approach the grasping task as the problem of predicting a *grasp pose*, where the system looks at the scene (typically using a depth camera), chooses the best location at which to grasp, and then executes an open-loop planner to reach that location [@zeng2018; @juxi18; @dexnet30_2017; @platt_gpd_17]. In contrast, our approach uses reinforcement learning with deep neural networks, which enables dynamic closed-loop control. This allows our policies to perform pre-grasp manipulation and respond to dynamic disturbances and, crucially, allows us to learn grasping in a generic framework that makes minimal assumptions about the task.
While most prior grasping methods operate in open-loop, a number of works have studied closed-loop grasping [@yu2018icra; @platt17; @hausman17; @levine16]. In contrast to these methods, which frame closed-loop grasping as a servoing problem, our method uses a general-purpose reinforcement learning algorithm to solve the grasping task, which enables long-horizon reasoning. In practice, this enables our method to autonomously acquire complex grasping strategies, some of which we illustrate in Section \[sec:experiments\]. Our method is also entirely self-supervised, using only grasp outcome labels that are obtained automatically by the robot. Several works have proposed self-supervised grasping systems [@pinto16; @levine16], but to our knowledge, ours is the first to incorporate long-horizon reasoning via reinforcement learning into a generalizable vision-based system trained on self-supervised real-world data. Related to our work, @zeng2018 recently proposed a Q-learning framework for combining grasping and pushing. Our method utilizes a much more generic action space, directly commanding gripper motion in 3D, and exhibits substantially better performance and generalization in our experiments. Finally, in contrast to many current grasping systems that utilize depth sensing [@dexnet30_2017; @morrison18] or wrist-mounted cameras [@platt17; @morrison18], our method operates on raw monocular RGB observations from an over-the-shoulder camera, and the performance of our method indicates that effective learning can achieve excellent grasp success rates even with very rudimentary sensing.
Overview
========
[rb]{}[0.5]{}
{width="50.00000%"}
Our closed-loop vision-based control framework is based on a general formulation of robotic manipulation as a Markov Decision Process (MDP)[^2]. At each time step, the policy observes the image from the robot’s camera (see Fig. \[fig:robot\_setup\_and\_objects\]) and chooses a gripper command, as discussed in Section \[sec:grasping\_system\]. This task formulation is general and could in principle be applied to a wide range of robotic manipulation tasks. The grasping task is defined simply by providing a reward to the learner during data collection: a successful grasp results in a reward of $1$, and a failed grasp a reward of $0$. A grasp is considered successful if the robot holds an object above a certain height at the end of the episode.
The framework of MDPs provides a general and powerful formalism for such decision-making problems, but learning in this framework can be challenging. Generalization requires diverse data, but recollecting experience on a wide range of objects after every policy update is impractical, ruling out on-policy algorithms. Instead, we devise a scalable off-policy reinforcement learning framework based around a continuous generalization of Q-learning. While actor-critic algorithms are a popular approach in the continuous action setting, we found that a more stable and scalable alternative is to train only a Q-function, and induce a policy implicitly by maximizing this Q-function using stochastic optimization. We describe the resulting algorithm, which we call QT-Opt, in Section \[sec:qtopt\], and describe its instantiation for robotic grasping in Section \[sec:grasping\_system\]. To handle the large datasets and networks in our approach, we devise a distributed collection and training system that asynchronously updates target values, collects on-policy data, reloads off-policy data from past experiences, and trains the network on both data streams within a distributed optimization framework (see Fig. \[fig:distributed\_infra\_sketch\]).
Scalable Reinforcement Learning with QT-Opt {#sec:qtopt}
===========================================
In this section, we describe the reinforcement learning algorithm that we use for our closed-loop vision-based grasping method. The algorithm is a continuous action version of Q-learning adapted for scalable learning and optimized for stability, to make it feasible to handle large amounts of off-policy image data for complex tasks like grasping.
Reinforcement Learning and Q-Learning {#sec:rlql}
-------------------------------------
We first review the fundamentals of reinforcement learning and Q-learning, which we build on to derive our algorithm. We will use $\bs \in \states$ to denote the state, which in our case will include image observations (see Appendix \[sec:appendix\_state\_action\_reward\] for details). $\ba \in \actions$ denotes the action, which will correspond to robot arm motion and gripper command. At each time step $t$, the algorithm chooses an action, transitions to a new state, and receives a reward $r(\bs_t,\ba_t)$. The goal in RL is to recover a policy that selects actions to maximize the total expected reward. One way to acquire such an optimal policy is to first solve for the optimal Q-function, which is sometimes referred to as the state-action value function. The Q-function specifies the expected reward that will be received after taking some action $\ba$ in some state $\bs$, and the optimal Q-function specifies this value for the optimal policy. In practice, we aim to learn parameterized Q-functions $Q_\theta(\bs,\ba)$, where $\theta$ might denote the weights in a neural network. We can learn the optimal Q-function by minimizing the Bellman error, given by $$\literallabel{eq:bellman}{
\bellman(\theta) = \E_{(\bs,\ba,\bs') \sim p(\bs,\ba,\bs')} \left[ D \left(
Q_\theta(\bs,\ba) ,Q_T(\bs,\ba,\bs') \right)
\right],}$$ where $Q_T(\bs,\ba,\bs') = r(\bs,\ba) + \gamma V(\bs')$ is a *target value*, and $D$ is some divergence metric. We use the cross-entropy function for $D$, since total returns are bounded in $[0,1]$, which we found to be more stable than the standard squared difference (see Appendix \[sec:appendix\_ablations\_sim\]). The expectation is taken under the distribution over all previously observed transitions, and $V(\bs')$ is a target value. In our implementation, we use two target networks [@hafner11; @mnih2015; @gu16] to improve stability, by maintaining two lagged versions of the parameter vector $\theta$, $\bar{\theta}_1$ and $\bar{\theta}_2$, where $\bar{\theta}_1$ is the exponential moving averaged version of $\theta$ with an averaging constant of 0.9999, and $\bar{\theta}_2$ is a lagged version of $\bar{\theta}_1$, which is lagged by about 6000 gradient steps. We then compute the target value according to . This corresponds to a combination of Polyak averaging [@polyak1992acceleration; @lhph-ccdrl-16] and clipped double Q-learning [@hasselt10; @hasselt16; @td3], and we discuss this design decision further in Appendix \[sec:appendix\_ablations\_sim\]. Once the Q-function is learned, the policy can be recovered according to $\pi(\bs) = \arg\max_{\ba} Q_{\bar{\theta}_1} (\bs,\ba)$. Practical implementations of this method collect samples from environment interaction and then perform off-policy training on all samples collected so far [@hafner11; @mnih2015; @gu16]. For large-scale learning problems of the sort tackled in this work, a parallel asynchronous version of this procedure substantially improves our ability to scale up this process, as discussed in Section \[sec:rl\_system\].
QT-Opt for Stable Continuous-Action Q-Learning {#sec:qtopt-details}
----------------------------------------------
Q-learning with deep neural network function approximators provides a simple and practical scheme for RL with image observations, and is amenable to straightforward parallelization. However, incorporating continuous actions, such as continuous gripper motion in our grasping application, poses a challenge for this approach. Prior work has sought to address this by using a second network that amortizes the maximization [@hafner11; @lillicrap15], or constraining the Q-function to be convex in $\ba$, making it easy to maximize analytically [@gu16; @amos2017icnn]. Unfortunately, the former class of methods are notoriously unstable [@deeprlthatmatters17], which makes it problematic for large-scale RL tasks where running hyperparameter sweeps is prohibitively expensive. Action-convex value functions are a poor fit for complex manipulation tasks such as grasping, where the Q-function is far from convex in the input. For example, the Q-value may be high for actions that reach toward objects, but low for the gaps between objects.
We therefore propose a simple and practical alternative that maintains the generality of non-convex Q-functions while avoiding the need for a second maximizer network. The image $\bs$ and action $\ba$ are inputs into our network, and the $\operatorname*{arg\,max}$ in Equation (\[eq:bellman\]) is evaluated with a stochastic optimization algorithm that can handle non-convex and multimodal optimization landscapes, similarly to [@gcg] and [@quillen]. Let $\pi_{\bar{\theta}_1}(\bs)$ be the policy implicitly induced by the Q-function $Q_{\bar{\theta}_1}(\bs,\ba)$. We can recover Equation (\[eq:bellman\]) by substituting the optimal policy $\pi_{\bar{\theta}_1}(\bs) = \arg\max_{\ba} Q_{\bar{\theta}_1}(\bs,\ba)$ in place of the $\arg\max$ argument to the target Q-function. In our algorithm, which we call QT-Opt, $\pi_{\bar{\theta}_1}(\bs)$ is instead evaluated by running a stochastic optimization over $\ba$, using $Q_{\bar{\theta}_1}(\bs,\ba)$ as the objective value. We use the cross-entropy method (CEM) to perform this optimization, which is easy to parallelize and moderately robust to local optima for low-dimensional problems [@rk-cem-04]. CEM is a simple derivative-free optimization algorithm that samples a batch of $N$ values at each iteration, fits a Gaussian distribution to the best $M < N$ of these samples, and then samples the next batch of $N$ from that Gaussian. In our implementation, we use $N=64$ and $M=6$, and perform two iterations of CEM. This is used both to compute targets at training time, and to choose actions in the real world.
Distributed Asynchronous QT-Opt {#sec:rl_system}
-------------------------------
Learning vision based policies with reinforcement learning that generalizes over new scenes and objects requires large amounts of diverse data, in the same way that learning to generalize on complex vision tasks with supervised learning requires large datasets. For the grasping task in our experiments, we collected over [[580k]{}]{} grasps over the course of several weeks across 7 robots. To effectively train on such large and diverse RL dataset, we develop a distributed, asynchronous implementation of QT-Opt. Fig. \[fig:distributed\_infra\_sketch\] summarizes the system. Transitions are stored in a distributed replay buffer database, which both loads historical data from disk and can accept online data from live ongoing experiments across multiple robots. The data in this buffer is continually labeled with target Q-values by using a set of 1000 “Bellman updater” jobs, which carry out the CEM optimization procedure using the current target network, and then store the labeled samples in a second training buffer, which operates as a ring buffer. One consequence of this asynchronous procedure is that some samples in the training buffer are labeled with lagged versions of the Q-network. This is discussed in more detail in the supplement, in Appendix \[sec:appendix\_bellman\_update\]. Training workers pull labeled transitions from the training buffer randomly and use them to update the Q-function. We use 10 training workers, each of which compute gradients which are sent asynchronously to parameter servers. We found empirically that a large number of gradient steps (up to 15M) were needed to train an effective Q-function due to the complexity of the task and large size of the dataset and model. Full details of the system design are provided in Appendix \[sec:appendix\_distributed\_rl\_infra\].
Dynamic Vision-Based Grasping {#sec:grasping_system}
=============================
In this section, we discuss how QT-Opt can be applied to enable dynamic vision-based grasping. An illustration of our grasping setup is shown in Fig. \[fig:teaser\]. The task requires a policy that can locate an object, position it for grasping (potentially by performing pre-grasp manipulations), pick up the object, potentially regrasping as needed, raise the object, and then signal that the grasp is complete to terminate the episode. To enable self-supervised grasp labeling in the real world, the reward only indicates whether or not an object was successfully picked up. This represents a fully end-to-end approach to grasping: no prior knowledge about objects, physics, or motion planning is provided to the model aside from the knowledge that it can extract autonomously from the data.
#### MDP for grasping.
The state observation $\bs \in \states$ includes the robot’s current camera observation, an RGB image with a resolution of 472x472, recorded from an over-the-shoulder monocular camera (see Fig. \[fig:teaser\]). We also found it beneficial to include the current status of the gripper in the state, which is a binary indicator of whether the gripper is open or closed, as well as the vertical position of the gripper relative to the floor (see comparisons in Appendix \[sec:appendix\_ablations\_sim\]). The action $\ba \in \actions$ consists of a vector in Cartesian space $\mathbf{t} \in \reals^3$ indicating the desired change in the gripper position, a change in azimuthal angle encoded via a sine-cosine encoding $\mathbf{r} \in \reals^2$, binary gripper open and close commands $g_\text{open}$ and $g_\text{close}$, and a termination command $e$ that ends the episode, such that ${\ba = (\mathbf{t}, \mathbf{r}, g_\text{open}, g_\text{close}, e)}$. Full details of the grasping MDP formulation are provided in Appendix \[sec:appendix\_state\_action\_reward\].
#### Reward function.
The reward is 1 at the end of the episode if the gripper contains an object and is above a certain height, and 0 otherwise. Success is determined by using a background subtraction test after dropping the picked object, as discussed in Appendix \[sec:grasp\_success\]. Note that this type of delayed and sparse reward function is generally quite challenging for reinforcement learning systems, but it is also the most practical reward function for automated self-supervision. To encourage the robot to grasp more quickly, we also provide a small penalty $r(\bs_t,\ba_t) = -0.05$ for all time steps prior to termination, when the model either emits the termination action or exceeds the maximum number of time steps (20). This penalty may in principle result in target values outside of $[0,1]$, though we found empirically that this does not happen.
#### Q-Function representation.
The Q-function $Q_{\bar{\theta}_1}(\bs,\ba)$ is represented in our system by a large convolutional neural network with [[1.2M]{}]{} parameters, where the image is provided as an input into the bottom of the convolutional stack, and the action, gripper status, and distance to floor are fed into the middle of the stack. The full neural network architecture is discussed in Appendix \[sec:appendix\_arch\].
#### Data collection.
In order to enable our model to learn generalizable strategies that can pick up new objects, perform pre-grasp manipulation, and handle dynamic disturbances with vision-based feedback, we must train it on a sufficiently large and diverse set of objects. Collecting such data in a single on-policy training run would be impractical. Our off-policy QT-Opt algorithm makes it possible to pool experience from multiple robots and multiple experiments. The full dataset used to train our final model was collected over the course of four months, with a total of about 800 robot hours. This data was collected during multiple separate experiments, and each experiment reused the data from the previous one. This reduces our ability to provide rigidly controlled experimental results in the real-world system, but we provide more rigidly controlled results in simulation in the supplement, in Appendix \[sec:appendix\_ablations\_sim\]. Since a completely random initial policy would produce a very low success with such an unconstrained action space, we use a weak scripted exploration policy to bootstrap data collection. This policy is randomized, but biased toward reasonable grasps, and achieves a success rate around 15-30%. We switched to using the learned QT-Opt policy once it reached a success rate of 50%. The scripted policy is described in the supplementary material, in Appendix \[sec:appendix\_exploration\]. Data was collected with 7 LBR IIWA robots, with 4-10 training objects per robot. The objects were replaced every 4 hours during business hours, and left unattended at night and on weekends. The objects used during testing were distinct from those in the training data.
Allocate persistent dataset $D_{e2e}=\emptyset$. Keep replaying data from $D_{e2e}$ to the $off\_policy$ Replay Buffer. Keep training the model concurrently utilizing distributed RL infrastructure and data pulled from $on\_policy$ and $off\_policy$ Replay Buffers. Pick $p_{scripted}$ with probability $p$ or $p_{noisy}$ with probability $1-p$ to generate an episode $E$. Push episode $E$ to the $on\_policy$ Replay Buffer. Append episode $E$ to $D_{e2e}$ and save to disk. Update $p_{noisy}$ model every $N$ steps.
Experimental Results {#sec:experiments}
====================
Our experiments evaluate our learned closed-loop vision-based grasping system to answer the following research questions: (1) How does our method perform, quantitatively, on new objects that were never seen during training? (2) How does its performance compare to a previously proposed self-supervised grasping system that does not explicitly optimize for long-horizon grasp success? (3) What types of manipulation strategies does our method adopt, and does it carry out meaningful, goal-directed pre-grasp manipulations? (4) How do the various design choices in our method affect its performance? The first two questions are addressed through a set of rigorous real-world quantitative experiments, which we discuss in Section \[sec:quantitative\], question (3) is addressed through qualitative experiments, which are discussed in Section \[sec:qualitative\] and shown in the supplementary video and online, and the last question is addressed through a detailed set of ablation studies in both simulation and the real world, which are discussed in Appendix \[sec:appendix\_ablations\_sim\] and \[sec:appendix\_ablations\_real\]. The experiments in the appendices also study the impact of dataset size and off-policy training on final performance.
Quantitative Performance Evaluation {#sec:quantitative}
-----------------------------------
In this section, we present a quantitative evaluation of our grasping system. The physical setup for each robot is shown in Fig. \[fig:teaser\] (left): the robots are tasked with grasping objects in a bin, using an over-the-shoulder RGB camera and no other sensing.[^3] We use two separate evaluation protocols, which use challenging objects that were not seen at training time. In the first protocol, each of the 7 robots make 102 grasp attempts on a set of test objects. The grasp attempts last for up to 20 time steps each, and any grasped object is deposited back into the bin. Although a policy may choose to grasp the same object multiple times, we found in practice that each robot made grasp attempts on a variety of objects, without fixating on a single one. However, to control for potential confounding effects due to replacement, we also conducted experiments with a second protocol, which we refer to as bin emptying. Here, a single robot unloads a cluttered bin filled with 28 test objects, using 30 grasp attempts. This is repeated 5 times. Grasp success is reported over the first 10, 20, and 30 grasp attempts, corresponding to grasps on increasingly difficult objects.
The performance of our method is shown in Table \[tbl:quantitative\_results\]. The results show both a variant of our method that is trained entirely using off-policy data, without any additional data collection from the latest policy, as well as the performance after joint finetuning with additional on-policy data, which is collected simultaneously with the policy training (details of the joint finetuning procedure in Appendix \[sec:policy\_fine\_tuning\]). The success rate of our method in both cases is very high. Effective off-policy training is valuable as it allows for rapid iteration on hyperparameters and architecture design without any data collection. However, additional on-policy joint finetuning consistently provides a quantifiable increase in performance with only about 28,000 additional grasps, reaching 96% grasp success. Although the on-policy dataset does not observe the same data diversity as seen in the off-policy dataset, it likely affords the policy a kind of “hard negative mining” mechanism, letting it quickly correct erroneous and over-optimistic extrapolations. Further ablations are discussed in Appendix \[sec:appendix\_ablations\_real\].
To compare our method to prior work, we evaluated the technique proposed by @levine16. This prior method is also self-supervised, and previously attained good results on a similar visual grasping setup. This prior method does not reason about long-horizon rewards: although it can be used in closed-loop, the policy greedily optimizes for grasp success at the next grasp, does not control the opening and closing of the gripper, and does not reason about pregrasp manipulation. Since the format of the data for the two methods is different due to the different action representations, we compare to two versions of this prior approach: a variant that is trained on all of the data described by @levine16, and a variant that adapts the same data used for our method, discarding grasp attempts where the gripper was not closed. The comparison in Table \[tbl:quantitative\_results\] indicates a very large gap in performance between our method and both variants of the prior approach. On the bin emptying experiment, our method emptied the bin in 30 grasps or less in 2 of the 5 trials, while the prior method emptied the bin in 1 of the 5 trials. The lower success rate for 30 grasps is due to the policy trying to grasp the last few objects, which are usually very small and often get stuck in an unreachable corner of the bin. Examples are shown in Appendix \[sec:appendix\_ablations\_real\].
Analysis of Grasping Strategies with Qualitative Experiments
------------------------------------------------------------
\[sec:qualitative\]
Our QT-Opt grasping policy has a success rate of 96% on previously unseen test objects. What types of strategies does this policy adopt? In contrast to most grasping systems, our method performs general closed-loop control with image observations, and can choose to reposition, open, or close the gripper at any time. This flexibility, combined with training for long-horizon success with reinforcement learning, enables it to perform behaviors that are usually not observed with standard grasping systems. We encourage the reader to watch the supplementary video, as well as the extended video, both provided at [<https://goo.gl/ykQn6g>]{}, and discuss some examples here. Notably, all of these examples emerge automatically from training the policy to optimize grasp success.
- For *motions* $v_t$, SL executes greedy supervised actions, with their z-component projected to the bottom of the bin. Hence the arm was effectively controlled along just the X and Y axes. The RL policy controls all the XYZ axes. Full control over actions allows to yield adaptive close-loop controller.
- For *servoing*, SL used engineered servoing heuristics, like “go up if probability of grasp success below a threshold”. RL execution removes these heuristics, the robot executes commands inferred by the policy. There is a potential to learn rich behaviours, which might be superior to the fragile heuristics.
- The *gripper action* is engineered in SL, and is not controlled by the policy. In RL it is controlled by the policy, which lets the model learn complex gripper behaviors, such as automatic retry behavior if the gripper was closed at an inappropriate time, or if the object fell out of the gripper.
- The *ascent phase* is also engineered in SL, whereas in RL it is controlled by the policy. The policy raises the arm carefully, utilizing visual feedback that the object was successfully grasped. If it was, the arm ascends further. Otherwise the policy might retry the grasp.
- For *indication of episode termination*, SL is engineered to terminate after the gripper is closed. RL is engineered to terminate after raising a closed gripper 13cm above the bottom of the bin, or termination is a learned action. For both engineered and learned episode termination, the RL policy determines if it holds an object at a certain height, which provides much richer visual feedback, comparing to SL which attempts to extract similar feedback for an object sitting in the bin.
\[table:sl-rl-comparison\]
Category SL RL Conclusion
------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Task-motion $v_{t}$ Greedy supervised actions projected to the bottom of the bin. The z-component of the action was hardcoded to be at the bottom of the bin, hence the arm was effectively controlling the arm along the X and Y axes. Intrinsically trained on actions in full 3D space, where different actions are devoted for different phases. Full control over actions allows to yield adaptive close-loop controller.
Servoing Engineered servoing heuristics, like ‘go up’ if probability of grasp success below a threshold. The servoing is trivial, the robot just executes commands inferred by the policy There is a potential to learn rich behaviours, which might be superior to the fragile heuristics.
Gripper-action Engineered, outside of control by the policy Controlled by the policy RL has a greater potential to close the gripper at the right time. If the gripper was closed at an inappropriate time, or the object fell out of the gripper, the policy might open the gripper and retry.
Ascent phase Engineered, the controller just raises the arm after gripper closure. Controlled by the policy The policy raises the arm carefully, utilizing visual feedback that the object was successfully grasped. If it was, the arm ascends further. Otherwise the policy might retry the grasp.
Indication of the end of an episode Engineered heuristic, when the grasp success of not moving an arm is higher than to move anywhere else. Engineered, or learned. For both engineered and learned episode termination, the RL policy determines if it holds an object at a certain height, which provides much richer visual feedback, comparing to SL which attempts to extract similar feedback for an object sitting in the bin.
: Difference in the policies-CHANGE MY CAPTION
#### Singulation and pregrasp manipulation.
Since our policies optimizes for the success of the entire episode, they can carry out pregrasp manipulations that reposition objects to make them easier to grasp. In Fig. \[fig:qualitative\] (a), we show an example object singulation sequence performed by the learned policy on a previously unseen blocks puzzle, and in Fig. \[fig:qualitative\] (b), we show an example where the policy chooses to knock down a ketchup bottle to make it easier to pick up.
#### Regrasping.
The policy can open and close the gripper at any time, which allows it to detect early signs of an unstable grasp and regrasp the object more securely. In Fig. \[fig:qualitative\] (c), we show examples where the policy repeatedly regrasps a slippery object on the floor, while in Fig. \[fig:qualitative\] (d), we show an example where the object slips out of the gripper during the load phase, and the policy repositions the gripper for a more secure grasp.
#### Handling disturbances and dynamic objects.
The reactive policy can also grasp objects that move dynamically during the grasping process. In Fig. \[fig:qualitative\] (e), we show examples where the policy attempts to pick up a ball, which rolls out of the gripper forcing the robot to follow. In Fig. \[fig:qualitative\] (f), we also show examples where the object is intentionally pushed out of the gripper during grasping. The policy is still able to correct and grasp another object successfully.
#### Grasping in clutter.
Although the training data included no more than ten objects at a time, the policy can still grasp in dense clutter, as shown in Fig. \[fig:qualitative\] (g).
#### Failure cases.
Although the policy was usually successful, we did observe a few failure cases. Especially in dense clutter, the policy was sometimes prone to regrasp repeatedly among cluttered objects, as shown in Fig. \[fig:qualitative\] (h). While this strategy often does produce a successful grasp, it is somewhat time consuming and not as goal-directed as the behavior observed in less cluttered scenes.
Discussion and Future Work {#sec:conclusion}
==========================
We presented a framework for scalable robotic reinforcement learning with raw sensory inputs such as images, based on an algorithm called QT-Opt, a distributed optimization framework, and a combination of off-policy and on-policy training. We apply this framework to the task of grasping, learning closed-loop vision-based policies that attain a high success rate on previously unseen objects, and exhibit sophisticated and intelligent closed-loop behavior, including singulation and pregrasp manipulation, regrasping, and dynamic responses to disturbances. All of these behaviors emerge automatically from optimizing the grasp success probability via QT-Opt. Although our policies are trained on a large amount of robot experience ([[580k]{}]{} real-world grasps), all of this experience is collected autonomously with minimal human intervention, and the amount of data needed is substantially lower than comparable prior self-supervised techniques (e.g., [@levine16]). Our results demonstrate that reinforcement learning with vision-based inputs can scale to large datasets and very large models, and can enable policies that generalize effectively for complex real-world tasks such as grasping. Our framework is generic with respect to the task, and extending the approach to other manipulation skills would be an exciting direction for future work.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
We would like to give special thanks to I[ñ]{}aki Gonzalo and John-Michael Burke for overseeing the robot operations, and Chelsea Finn, Timothy Lillicrap, and Arun Nair for valuable discussions.
Real World Ablation Experiments: State, Action, and Reward Design {#sec:appendix_ablations_real}
=================================================================
Exploration and Dataset Bootstrapping {#sec:appendix_exploration}
=====================================
Simulated Experiments: Dataset Size, Off-Policy Training, MDP Design {#sec:appendix_ablations_sim}
====================================================================
Grasping MDP: State Space, Action Space, and Reward Evaluation {#sec:appendix_state_action_reward}
==============================================================
Q-Function Neural Network Architecture {#sec:appendix_arch}
======================================
QT-Opt Distributed Reinforcement Learning System Design {#sec:appendix_distributed_rl_infra}
=======================================================
[^1]: Supplementary experiment videos can be found at [<https://goo.gl/ykQn6g>]{}.
[^2]: While a partially observed (POMDP) formulation would be most general, we assume that the current observation provides all necessary information. In practice, the resulting policy still exhibits moderate robustness to occlusions, and a more general extension to recurrent policies and Q-functions would be straightforward.
[^3]: Though some of the figures show a wrist-mounted camera, this camera is not used in the experiments.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We investigate chaos synchronization of small-scale motions in the three-dimensional turbulent energy cascade, via pseudo-spectral simulations of the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations. The modes of the turbulent velocity field below about 20 Kolmogorov dissipation lengths are found to be slaved to the chaotic dynamics of larger-scale modes. The dynamics of all dissipation-range modes can be recovered to full numerical precision by solving small-scale dynamical equations with the given large-scale solution as an input, regardless of initial condition. The synchronization rate exponent scales with the Kolmogorov dissipation time-scale, with possible weak corrections due to intermittency. Our results suggest that all sub-Kolmogorov length modes should be fully recoverable from numerical simulations with standard, Kolmogorov-length grid resolutions.'
author:
- Cristian C Lalescu
- Charles Meneveau
- Gregory L Eyink
title: 'Synchronization of Chaos in Fully-Developed Turbulence'
---
Chaos synchronization (CS) [@pecora_carroll_1990] is an intriguing phenomenon which has been defined as “a process wherein two (or many) chaotic systems …adjust a given property of their motion to a common behavior due to a coupling or to a forcing” [@boccaletti_review]. The simplest example is a chaotic dynamics $\dot{{\mathbf{x}}}={\mathbf{f}}({\mathbf{x}})$ whose phase vector ${\mathbf{x}}$ is projected onto two orthogonal components ${\mathbf{x}}_1=P_1{\mathbf{x}}$ and ${\mathbf{x}}_1'=Q_1{\mathbf{x}}={\mathbf{x}}-{\mathbf{x}}_1$ satisfying two coupled equations $$\begin{aligned}
\tfrac{d}{dt} {\mathbf{x}}_1&= P_1 {\mathbf{f}}({\mathbf{x}}_1 + {\mathbf{x}}_1'), \\
\tfrac{d}{dt} {\mathbf{x}}_1' &= Q_1{\mathbf{f}}({\mathbf{x}}_1 + {\mathbf{x}}_1').
\end{aligned}\label{original}$$ Chaos implies sensitive dependence to initial data, with nearby trajectories diverging exponentially. However, consider another dynamical system in the $Q_1$-space given by a copy of the second equation: $$\frac{d}{dt} {\mathbf{w}}= Q_1{\mathbf{f}}({\mathbf{x}}_1(t)+ {\mathbf{w}})
\label{eq:slaved subdynamics}$$ with ${\mathbf{x}}_1(t)$ substituted from the solution of (\[original\]). *Chaos synchronization* occurs if the trajectories ${\mathbf{w}}(t)$ and ${\mathbf{x}}_1'(t)$ converge, $\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}\|{\mathbf{w}}(t)-{\mathbf{x}}_1'(t)\|=0,$ for an arbitrary choice of initial condition ${\mathbf{w}}_0$ in (\[eq:slaved subdynamics\]). Such a phenomenon requires that the leading Lyapunov exponent for the subdynamics (\[eq:slaved subdynamics\]) be negative. It is often the case that synchronization occurs, at least approximately, even when imperfect data $\tilde{{\mathbf{x}}}_1(t)$ is employed in (\[eq:slaved subdynamics\]), e.g. the exact ${\mathbf{x}}_1(t)$ contaminated with substantial errors. This effect was proposed in [@cuomo_etal_1993; @xiao_etal_1996; @argyris_etal_2005] as a basis for encrypted communications. CS has also been observed in neural networks [@schiff_etal_1996; @chen_etal_2004], with “hyper-synchronous” dynamics in the human brain associated to epileptic seizures [@stam_review_2005]. CS has been reported in spatio-temporal chaos , investigated for fluid models used in meteorology [@duane_tribbia_2001; @duane_etal_2007; @duane_oluseyi_2008], and proposed as a mechanism for turbulence control [@patnaik_wei_2002; @guan_etal_2004; @boccaletti_bragard_2006].
No previous numerical study of CS has been made, to our knowledge, for fully-developed three-dimensional Navier-Stokes (NS) turbulence with a Kolmogorov inertial range. Our goal in this Letter is to explore CS for 3D NS with $P_1$ taken to be the projection onto the finite number of velocity modes with wavenumber magnitudes less than a fraction $f$ of $\pi/\eta_K,$ where $\eta_K$ is the Kolmogorov disspation scale, and with $Q_1$ the orthogonal projection onto the modes with higher wavenumbers. Our principal motivation is experimental results [@anselmet_etal_1984], theoretical work [@paladin_vulpiani_1987; @yakhot_sreeni_2005], and numerical simulations [@schumacher_njp_2007; @schumacher_epl_2007] implying that spatial intermittency can lead to length scales far smaller than the Kolmogorov scale $\eta_K$. It has been argued on the basis of such tiny unresolved length scales “that the DNS \[direct numerical simulation\] based on the mesh equal to the Kolmogorov scale becomes quite inaccurate” [@yakhot_sreeni_2005]. If true, this would call into question the vast majority of current DNS studies of turbulent flow. A contrary argument is based on the idea that the sub-Kolmogorov scales should be “slaved” to the inertial-range modes and, thus, implicit and recoverable from DNS with grid resolution $\eta_K.$ A mathematical formalization of this idea closely related to CS is the notion of an [*inertial manifold*]{} (IM) [@temam_1990], which consists of an invariant, attractive manifold given by the graph of a mapping ${\mathbf{x}}_1'=\Phi({\mathbf{x}}_1)$ which recovers ${\mathbf{x}}_1'$ for given ${\mathbf{x}}_1.$ Existence of an IM with the property of “asymptotic completeness” [@robinson_1996] is one possible mechanism for CS (e.g. see [@xieetal_2007]). There are currently no proofs of existence of an IM for 3D NS dynamics, although “approximate IM” have been obtained for 2D NS [@titi_1990; @foias_etal_1993]. These have been proposed for use as nonlinear Galerkin approximations to the dynamics of “large” super-Kolmogorov scales in NS turbulence, whereas our goal is the opposite one to recover the sub-Kolmogorov scales and address the outstanding issue of the smallest length-scale in a turbulent flow [@schumacher_njp_2007; @schumacher_epl_2007]. Even when existence of an approximate IM can be established for NS, there are no sharp estimates of the smallest fraction $f$ of the Kolmogorov wavenumber sufficient for slaving. Thus our numerical investigation in this Letter is an important complement to existing mathematical results.
The incompressible NS equations with a solenoidal body force ${\mathbf{f}}$ have the form: $$\partial_t {\mathbf{u}}+ P({\mathbf{u}}\cdot \nabla {\mathbf{u}}-\nu \Delta {\mathbf{u}})= {\mathbf{f}},$$ where ${\mathbf{u}}$ is the fluid velocity, $\nu$ is the kinematic viscosity, and $P$ is the Leray projection to enforce the incompressibility condition $\nabla \cdot {\mathbf{u}}= 0.$ We employ the pseudospectral DNS method, which solves a Galerkin approximation to this system $$\partial_t {\mathbf{u}}_2 +P_2({\mathbf{u}}_2 \cdot \nabla {\mathbf{u}}_2 - \nu \Delta {\mathbf{u}}_2 )= {\mathbf{f}}, \label{u2eq}$$ with $P_2$ the Leray projection in a space spanned by a finite set $B_2$ of Fourier modes. For our purpose, this will represent the “fine-grained” NS dynamics. In order to study the possible presence of CS, we consider a further subset $B_1 \subset B_2$ and corresponding projections $P_1$ and $Q_1=P_2-P_1.$ The subdynamics for the evolution of ${\mathbf{w}}\equiv {\mathbf{u}}_2 - {\mathbf{u}}_1$ is given by the equation: $$\partial_t {\mathbf{w}}+ Q_1[ ({\mathbf{u}}_1+{\mathbf{w}}) \cdot \nabla ({\mathbf{u}}_1 + {\mathbf{w}}) - \nu \Delta {\mathbf{w}}]={\mathbf 0},
\label{eq:refinement field}$$ where we have assumed that ${\mathbf{f}}$ forces only the large scales, i.e. $Q_1{\mathbf{f}}={\mathbf 0}$. In our experiments we shall solve the fine-grained equation (\[u2eq\]) for ${\mathbf{u}}_2(t)$ and then solve the subdynamics (\[eq:refinement field\]) with ${\mathbf{u}}_1(t)=P_1{\mathbf{u}}_2(t).$ We shall investigate whether ${\mathbf{w}}(t)$ converges to $Q_1{\mathbf{u}}_2(t)$ for increasing $t,$ independent of the initial data ${\mathbf{w}}_0.$ Specifically, we will study the evolution of the normalized error defined as $$\epsilon(t) = \frac{\|{\mathbf{w}}(t) - Q_1{\mathbf{u}}_2(t)\|_2}{\|{\mathbf{w}}(t)\|_2},$$ where $\|\|_2$ is the usual $L^2$ norm. If synchronization occurs, this error should tend to zero exponentially fast, independent of the initial value ${\mathbf{w}}_0.$
The concrete system considered in this work is Kolmogorov flow with ${\mathbf{f}}= (A \sin (k_f y), 0, 0)$ for $A = 1$ and $k_f = 1$, in an elongated box $[0,L_x]\times [0, L_y]\times [0, L_z]$ with $L_x = 3L_y = 3L_z = 6 \pi$. The numerical simulation uses a space grid of $N = 3n \times n \times n$ points with isotropic mesh-spacing corresponding to maximum wavenumber $k_M=n/2.$ This particular configuration leads to a nontrivial turbulent flow, that is anisotropic and inhomogeneous in the large scales [@NS_KFlow_2007]. In the context of synchronization of chaos, it is relevant that strong bursts can be observed in Kolmogorov flow. In [@NS_KFlow_2007] very long integration times were used precisely because the time averages presented converge very slowly. Thus by studying the system at different times, significantly different regimes can be sampled. In terms of the kinetic energy $E$ and energy dissipation rate $\varepsilon$, the Kolmogorov units and the Reynolds number are $ \eta_K = \left(\frac{\nu^3 }{\varepsilon} \right)^{1/4},\
\tau_K = \left(\frac{\nu }{\varepsilon} \right)^{1/2},\
R_\lambda = \sqrt{\frac{5}{3}} \frac{2E}{(\nu \varepsilon)^{1/2}}
$ Five series of simulations are performed, with resolutions ranging from $144 \times 48 \times 48$ to $768 \times 256 \times 256$ grid points, and $R_\lambda$ going from $40$ up to $250$, keeping the minimum $k_M \eta_K$ around $1.5$. The energy spectra plotted in Fig. \[fig:spectra\] show a short Kolmogorov inertial range with approximate $-5/3$ power-law scaling.
![Energy spectra of the Kolmogorov flow simulations for $n=48,64,96,128,256$. The spectra are taken from instantaneous snapshots with no time-averaging. The moderate quality of the collapse in dissipation-scale units is likely due mostly to strong unsteadiness in the flow.[]{data-label="fig:spectra"}](spectra){width="\columnwidth"}
For our CS study a very long simulation of Kolmogorov flow is performed for each resolution, saving a few time series of the velocity fields from the quasi-stationary regime, each interval separated by relatively long times. Four time intervals of ${\mathbf{u}}_2$ are chosen for each resolution (three for the $768 \times 256 \times 256$ case). Next ${\mathbf{u}}_1$ is obtained by the projection $P_1$ of ${\mathbf{u}}_2$ onto modes with wavenumbers smaller than a cutoff value in each direction (i.e. $|k_x|, |k_y|, |k_z| < k_c$). Finally, ${\mathbf{w}}$ is evolved in time using . For each interval, two initial conditions ${\mathbf{w}}_0$ were chosen, so that each series consists of eight individual runs. In the experiments presented, initial data ${\mathbf{w}}_0$ with “natural” spectral scaling properties were created by applying random phase shifts to all Fourier modes of ${\mathbf{u}}_2 - {\mathbf{u}}_1$. Several alternative initialization methods for ${\mathbf{w}}_0$ were tested and yielded consistent results, not shown here. As observed in Fig. \[fig:error decay\], for the indicated values of $k_c$, $\epsilon(t)$ does indeed decrease exponentially fast, until it reaches a smallest possible value dictated by our single precision arithmetic. Thus ${\mathbf{w}}$ synchronizes to $Q_1{\mathbf{u}}_2$.
![Time evolution of normalized error $\epsilon(t)$ for the simulation on a grid of $308 \times 96 \times 96$ and $R_\lambda \approx 108$, using several cutoff-wavenumbers. The slope in these graphs yields the exponential decay rate $a,$ or rate of synchonization. \[fig:error decay\]](synch_example){width="\columnwidth"}
![Symbols: average of measured synchronization exponents (obtained by fitting the exponential range in results such as in Fig. \[fig:error decay\]) as function of cutoff-wavenumber for five different simulation sizes and Reynolds numbers, plotted in Kolmogorov units. Error bars are for maximum and minimum values of different runs and ranges used in the fit. \[fig:exponent stats\]](sim_2){width="\columnwidth"}
![Kinetic energies, taken for a fixed $z$ from a $768 \times 256 \times 256$ simulation ($x$ varies on the vertical and $y$ on the horizontal). Left: coarse grained field obtained with $k_c \eta_K \approx 1/4$. Right: refined version of coarse grained field. The values are normalized with the volume averaged kinetic energy of the original field. Note that these snapshots were taken after synchronization had taken place, so ${\mathbf{u}}_1 + {\mathbf{w}}$ is equal within numerical precision to the original field ${\mathbf{u}}_2$. The latter cannot be distinguished by eye from the reconstructed field. \[fig:coarse versus fine\]](tst1){width="\columnwidth"}
Fig. \[fig:error decay\] also shows that the exponential decay rate $a$ becomes greater at larger $k_c,$ a natural result since ${\mathbf{w}}$ then lives on smaller and hence faster scales. We have studied this effect quantitatively. The linear part of the trends in Fig. \[fig:error decay\] can be computed from the data by least-square error fitting $a t + b$ to the measured $\log_{10} \epsilon(t)$ in the region where the error is larger than the roundoff error floor, i.e. for $\epsilon$ between $1$ and $10^{-5}$. The behavior of the measured $a$ as function of $k_c$ depended on the various parameters of the simulations. To attempt to collapse the results, various non-dimensionalizations for $a$ and $k_c$ were tested. It was found that good collapse is observed when using Kolmogorov (viscous) scales for both the cutoff wavenumber as well as the synchronization exponent, i.e. to plot $a \tau_K$ versus $k_c \eta_K$. See Fig. \[fig:exponent stats\]. To document the scatter due to possible lack of statistical convergence, the duration of “exponential decay” was split in half for each individual run, the corresponding pair $(k_c \eta, a \tau_K)$ was computed for each of the resulting $\epsilon(t)$ histories, and then the average over all the simulations with the same resolution (or Reynolds number) was computed. These are the results that are presented as symbols in Fig. \[fig:exponent stats\]. Error bars are for maximum and minimum values. The results collapse reasonably well, although the lines seem to shift a little to the right with increasing resolutions. This hints at a slight Reynolds number dependence, which is expected due to intermittency [@paladin_vulpiani_1987; @yakhot_sreeni_2005]. The results of Fig. \[fig:exponent stats\] are parameterized well by a linear fit $a\tau_K \approx - \beta(k_c\eta_K-0.15)$, implying that synchronization of small scales to large scales occurs only if the cutoff wavenumber is such that $k_c \eta_K > 0.15$. Using the correspondence $r_c = \frac{\pi}{k_c}$, this denotes scales smaller than $r_c <20 \eta_K$, i.e. in the transition zone between the inertial and viscous ranges.
The key point to be taken from this study is that it is possible to reconstruct perfectly the small scales of a turbulent flow from coarse-grained data. If the velocity of a turbulent fluid is sampled on a spatial grid even as coarse as 10-15 times the Kolmogorov scale, these (time-dependent) data can be refined to their original resolution, in the sense that the subdynamics of small scales after a suitable time will synchronize with the large-scale dynamics. Figure \[fig:coarse versus fine\] shows what this refinement implies: fine details of small-scale structures that are smeared out in the coarse-grained field reappear, as if by magic, when refined by computing the subdynamics. Of course, synchronization takes time. For example, assuming that $k_c \eta_K \approx 1/4$ as in Fig. \[fig:coarse versus fine\], and assuming that a precision of $\epsilon = 10^{-3}$ is desired, an interval of about $50 \tau_K$ is needed. This translates into about $65 / R_\lambda$ in units of the integral time, significantly less then an integral time for moderately large values of $R_\lambda$. Doubling of this interval would lead to an error of order $10^{-6},$ at the lower limit for single precision computations.
Our results offer some support to the current practice of DNS with grid spacing of order $\eta_K,$ since they suggest that there may be an exact solution of 3D NS which, when coarse-grained to the grid scale, agrees with the finite-resolution simulation. Tiny scales much smaller than $\eta_K$ may be present, but completely slaved to the super-Kolmogorov scales. To more fully address these issues, numerical experiments on CS must be performed with approximate data for ${\mathbf{u}}_1$ which come not from a projection of a fine-grained solution ${\mathbf{u}}_2$ but instead from a pseudospectral DNS with cutoff wavenumber $k_c.$ Outstanding issues are whether CS will occur for such approximate ${\mathbf{u}}_1$ and whether the reconstructed field ${\mathbf{u}}_2={\mathbf{u}}_1+{\mathbf{w}}$ is then a solution of the fine-grained equations. These questions are currently under active investigation. The size of the smallest length-scale in turbulence is of interest not only for physical theory but also for fundamental mathematical theory of 3D incompressible NS. The Clay Millenium Prize problem on that equation concerns whether its solutions at sufficiently high Reynolds numbers may develop actual singularities, with velocities exploding to infinity at the singularity and smallest length scale going to [*zero*]{} [@fefferman_2006]. In nature, physical effects beyond incompressible NS would cut off the singularity at some tiny length-scale, but the observable manifestations should be striking. There is presently no empirical evidence whatsoever for such “Leray singularities”, but this may be due to limited resolution or statistics of current numerical and experimental studies. If such singularities occur anywhere at all, high Reynolds turbulent solutions are perhaps the most likely venue. Better understanding of the interactions between inertial range and far dissipation range modes in turbulent NS flows should help to illuminate this problem.
Acknowledgments
---------------
This work is supported by the National Science Foundation’s CDI-II program, project CMMI-0941530, with additional support through grant NSF-OCI-108849.
[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 @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} [****, ()](http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=246163) [****, ()](http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.4162) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1038/nature04275) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevE.54.6708) @noop [****, ()]{} [****, ()](\doibase 10.1016/j.clinph.2005.06.011) [****, ()](http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.65.1575) [****, ()](http://www.physik3.gwdg.de/~ulli/pdf/KTP97.pdf) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1063/1.166263) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.4298) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1016/j.physleta.2007.06.059) in [**](\doibase 10.1063/1.2905145), Vol. (, ) pp. [****, ()](http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.054502) [****, ()](http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.69.066214) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1098/rsta.2006.1830) [****, ()](http://journals.cambridge.org/production/action/cjoGetFulltext?fulltextid=3%
76861) @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{}, [****, ()](\doibase 10.1088/1367-2630/9/4/089) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1209/0295-5075/80/54001) @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} [****, ()](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0022247X9090061J) @noop [****, ()]{} @noop [****, ()]{} in @noop [**]{}, (, ) pp.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Networked applications interact with the TCP/IP stack through the socket API. Over the years, various extensions have been added to this popular API. In this paper, we propose and implement the [`TCPSnitch` ]{}software that tracks the interactions between Linux and Android applications and the TCP/IP stack. We collect a dataset containing the interactions produced by more than 120 different applications. Our analysis reveals that applications use a variety of API calls. On Android, many applications use various socket options even if the Java API does not expose them directly. [`TCPSnitch` ]{}and the associated dataset are publicly available.'
author:
- |
Gregory Vander Schueren^1^, Quentin De Coninck^2^ and Olivier Bonaventure^2^\
\
bibliography:
- 'tcpsnitch.bib'
title: 'TCPSnitch: Dissecting the Usage of the Socket API'
---
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
The endochronic theory, developed in the early seventies, allows the plastic behavior of materials to be represented by introducing the notion of intrinsic time. With different viewpoints, several authors discussed the relationship between this theory and the classical theory of plasticity. Two major differences are the presence of plastic strains during unloading phases and the absence of an elastic domain. Later, the endochronic plasticity theory was modified in order to introduce the effect of damage. In the present paper, a basic endochronic model with isotropic damage is formulated starting from the postulate of strain equivalence. Unlike the previous similar analyses, in this presentation the formal tools chosen to formulate the model are those of convex analysis, often used in classical plasticity: namely pseudo-potentials, indicator functions, sub-differentials, etc. As a result, the notion of *loading surface* for an endochronic model of plasticity with damage is investigated and an insightful comparison with classical models is made possible. A damage pseudo-potential definition allowing a very general damage evolution is given.
CE DATABASE SUBJECT HEADINGS: Plasticity, Thermodynamics, Damage, Constitutive models
author:
- Silvano Erlicher
- Nelly Point
title: 'Pseudo-potentials and loading surfaces for an endochronic plasticity theory with isotropic damage'
---
,
Introduction
============
In the early seventies, @Valanis71 proposed the *endochronic theory of visco-plasticity*, which postulates the existence of an *intrinsic time* governing the rate-independent evolution of stress and strains in materials, whereas the Newtonian time is exploited to model the viscous behavior; see also [@Schapery68; @Bazant76]. In the case of plasticity without viscous effects, the resulting constitutive laws are characterized by the absence of an elastic domain and the corresponding hysteresis loops are typically smooth and open. The flow rules of these models were not originally formulated in terms of pseudo-potentials, which made the direct comparison of this class of models with classical plasticity theories difficult [@Valanis80]. However, it was recently proven by @ErlicherPoint2006 that endochronic models do admit a representation based on pseudo-potentials and on the normality assumption, provided that pseudo-potentials be endowed with an additional dependence on state variables. This proof, given for the case of plastically incompressible models, showed the strong relationship between the endochronic theory and the generalized plasticity [@Phillips65; @Eisenberg71; @Lubliner93; @Auricchio95]. It was also shown that the non-linear kinematic hardening model, that is associated, but is not in a generalized sense, admits a representation in terms of a pseudo-potential. Recently, the same authors extended this analysis to other models, like the Mróz model [@PointErlicher2007] and the non-associated Drucker-Prager model [@ErlicherPoint2005]; see also @Ziegler87, @Houlsby2000. In summary, this thermodynamically well-posed approach can be used for a very large class of existing *classical* or *non-classical* plasticity models. Actually, a similar approach is used in geotechnical engineering, see e.g. @CollinsHoulsby1997, where pseudo-potentials have an additional dependence on the so-called *true stresses*, distinguished from the *generalized stresses*.
The standard endochronic theory was modified by several authors through the introduction of a damage variable. Using the strain equivalence postulate, @Xiaode1989 proposed an endochronic model with isotropic damage, while @Valanis1990 discussed an endochronic model with anisotropic damage, in the larger theoretical framework of fracture mechanics. Later, a different approach based on the postulate of energy equivalence was used, among others, by @ChowChen1992 and @WuNanakorn1998 [@WuNanakorn1999].
In the aforementioned works, the thermodynamic formulation of flow rules is not based on the notions of pseudo-potentials and loading surfaces, as it is typical for other classical plasticity models with or without damage. Hence, in this paper, a simple endochronic model of plasticity with isotropic damage similar to that discussed by @Xiaode1989 is presented: no generalization is introduced with respect to the previously cited models, but a new approach is suggested for their description. In detail, the postulate of strain equivalence is adopted; the Helmholtz energy is assumed to have a regular quadratic term and an additional singular term; the tools of the convex analysis such as indicator functions and sub-differentials [@Rockafellar69; @Moreau70; @Fremond2002] are used to define the flow rules starting from well-suited pseudo-potentials. This presentation leads to the proper definition of the plasticity loading surface for an endochronic model with damage and is a direct extension of the results concerning the endochronic model without damage already discussed in @ErlicherPoint2006. Only plastically incompressible models are considered here, since they permit to explain the main ideas, without introducing a too complex formalism. The extension to the general case is possible, but it is omitted for simplicity. The proposed analysis has an intrinsic interest, since it allows an easier comparison between endochronic models with damage and classical plasticity models with damage. Nonetheless, in the authors’ opinion, another important reason justifies the interest towards this class of models: they represent the suitable theoretical basis for the analysis of the thermodynamic admissibility of the Bouc-Wen models with strength and stiffness degradation; see among others [@Bouc71; @Wen76; @Baber81; @Casciati89; @Karray89]. This was one of the main motivation at the origin of the present study and the related developments about degrading Bouc-Wen models are presented in a companion paper [@ErlicherBursi2007].
After the introduction, the endochronic theory is presented in the second section: in the first part, standard endochronic models are described, while the second part concerns the definition of the flow rules of the extended endochronic theory, characterized by an additional scalar variable endowed with damage. The thermodynamic framework, with the definition of the suited pseudo-potentials, is discussed in the following section and is supplemented by numerical examples. Then, a brief discussion about stability and uniqueness is made and the concluding remarks are given, where the topics dealt with in the companion paper [@ErlicherBursi2007] are pointed out.
Endochronic models {#SecEMs}
==================
Flow rules of plastically incompressible ND-EC models
-----------------------------------------------------
The endochronic theory was first formulated by @Valanis71, who suggested the use of a positive scalar variable $\vartheta $, called the *intrinsic time scale*, in the definition of constitutive plasticity models. The evolution laws are described by convolution integrals involving past values of the strain $\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}$ and suitable scalar functions $\mu $ depending on $\vartheta $, called *memory kernels*. When the memory kernel is exponential, the integral expressions can be rewritten as simple differential equations, the flow rules; in the case of an isotropic endochronic model without hardening or softening, called here ND-EC model (see Figure \[scheme\_Endo\]), fulfilling the plastic incompressibility assumption, they read: $$\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
tr\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}\right) =3K\ tr\left(
\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}\right) ,\text{ \ \ \ \ \ }dev\left(
\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}
\right) =\mathbf{z} \\
\mathbf{\dot{z}}=2G\ dev\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}\right) \mathbf{-}\beta \
\mathbf{z}\dot{\vartheta}
\end{array}
\right. \label{EndoFormulGen}$$ where $\beta >0$ (notice that $\beta$ different from zero is needed to have a non elastic behavior); the superposed dot indicates the time derivative; $ \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}$ is the small strain tensor; $\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}$ is the Cauchy stress tensor; $tr$ and $dev$ are the trace and deviatoric operators; $K$ is the bulk modulus while $G$ is the shear modulus. The simplest choice for the *intrinsic time scale* flow indicated in (\[EndoFormulGen\]) is $\dot{\vartheta}=\left\Vert dev\left(
\mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}\right) \right\Vert $. It is interesting to note that relationships (\[EndoFormulGen\]) are equivalent to $$\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$ }=\mathbf{C:}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$ }^{p}\right) \\
tr\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}\right) =0\text{ \
\ \ \ \ \ \ and \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}=\beta \frac{dev\left( \sigma \right) }{2G}\
\dot{
\vartheta}%
\end{array}%
\right. \label{EndoFormul2}$$where the trace of the plastic strain flow $\dot{%
\mbox{\boldmath$
\varepsilon$}}^{p}$ is zero, consistently with the assumption of plastic incompressibility. $\mathbf{C}=\left( K-2G/3\right) \mathbf{1\otimes 1}+2G%
\mathbf{I}$ is the elasticity fourth-order tensor for isotropic materials; $%
\mathbf{1}$ is the second-order identity tensor; $\mathbf{I}$ is the fourth-order identity tensor and $\mathbf{\otimes }$ represents the tensor product.
Flow rules of plastically incompressible D-EC and DD-EC models
--------------------------------------------------------------
An endochronic model with isotropic hardening or softening with plastically incompressible flow is defined as follows: $$\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
tr\left( \mathbf{\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$ }}\right) =3K\text{ }tr\left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon$ }\right) \text{ , \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }dev\left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\sigma$ }\right) =\mathbf{z} \\
\mathbf{\dot{z}}=2G\text{ }dev\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}\right) -\beta \text{ }\mathbf{z}\text{ }\dot{\vartheta}%
\text{ \ \ \ \ }\ \ \ \ \ \text{with }\dot{\vartheta}=\frac{\dot{\zeta}}{g}%
\end{array}%
\right. \label{EndoFormul1}$$where $g>0$ is called the *hardening-softening function* [@Bazant78]. As stated by its name, the function $g$ introduces isotropic hardening (or softening), which distinguishes this model (D-EC) from the basic ones presented in the previous section and indicated as ND-EC (see Figure \[scheme\_Endo\]). In the classical endochronic formulations, $g
$ is a function of $\zeta $, where $\zeta $ is the *intrinsic time measure*. A standard choice is $\dot{\zeta}=\left\Vert dev\left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}\right) \right\Vert $ according to @Valanis71. Another more general definition, leading to a cyclic behavior similar to that of the Prandtl-Reuss model [@Lemaitre90engl] when the positive parameter $n$ is large enough, reads $$\dot{\zeta}=\left( 1+\frac{\gamma }{\beta }sgn\left(
\mathbf{z}:dev\left(\mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}\right)
\right) \right) \left\vert \mathbf{z}:dev\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}\right) \right\vert \left\Vert
\mathbf{z}\right\Vert ^{n-2} \label{zetan}$$ with $\gamma \in \left[ -\beta ,\beta \right] $ in order to ensure the non-negativity of $\dot{\zeta}$; $sgn$ is the signum function. An important difference between (\[zetan\]) and the standard definition $\dot{\zeta}=\left\Vert dev\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}\right) \right\Vert $ is related to the product $\mathbf{z}:dev\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}\right)$, entailing $\dot{\zeta}=0$ when the deviatoric strain increment is orthogonal to the stress. However, $\dot{\zeta}$ can be different from zero during unloading, i.e. when $\mathbf{z}:dev\left(
\mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}\right)<0$. Eq. (\[zetan\]) shows that $\gamma $ affects the difference between the loading and unloading values of the intrinsic time increment at a given stress $\mathbf{z}$. In particular, when $\gamma =\beta $ these increments are zero during unloading, while $\gamma $ close to (and greater than) $-\beta $ leads to relatively small increments during loading, while $\dot{\zeta}$ is relatively large during unloading. The influence of $n$ on the endochronic model behavior is discussed in the last Section, with reference to the strain accumulation and the stress relaxation effects. According to (\[EndoFormul1\]) and (\[zetan\]) and assuming $\beta +\gamma
>0$, the norm of the tensor $\mathbf{z}\left( t\right) $ is bounded as follows: $$\left\Vert \mathbf{z}\left( t\right) \right\Vert =\left\Vert
dev\left(\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}\left(t\right)\right) \right\Vert
<\sigma _{u}=\left( \frac{2G}{\beta +\gamma }\right) ^{\frac{1}{n}}
\label{sigmau}$$ for $t>0$, provided that $\left\Vert \mathbf{z}\left( 0\right)
\right\Vert <\sigma _{u}$. This inequality proves that a limit strength value exists and only concerns the deviatoric part of the stress $\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}$, consistently with the plastic incompressibility requirement. Eq. (\[sigmau\]) also shows that this bounding stress depends on the parameters $ \beta ,$ $\gamma$ and $n$.
The expression (\[EndoFormul1\]) is equivalent to $$\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$ }=\mathbf{C:}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$ }^{p}\right) \\
tr\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}\right) =0\text{ \
\ \ \ \ \ \ and \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}=\frac{dev\left( \mathbf{\sigma }\right)
}{2G/\beta} \ \frac{\dot{\zeta}}{g}
\end{array}
\right. \label{EndoFormulGen1}$$ From the last relationship in (\[EndoFormulGen1\]), it appears that the parameters $\beta ,\gamma $ and $n$ introduced in (\[zetan\]) affect the amplitude of the plastic strain flow, while the direction is always that of $dev\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\sigma$}\right) $.
A larger class of endochronic models can be defined by the following relationships $$\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$ }=\left( 1-D\right) \mathbf{C:}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon -\varepsilon$ }^{p}\right) \\
tr\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}\right) =0\text{ \ \ \ \ \
\ \ and \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}=\frac{1}{1-D}\frac{dev\left( \mathbf{\sigma }%
\right) }{2G/\beta }\ \frac{\dot{\zeta}}{g}%
\end{array}%
\right. \label{endoGen1}$$where $D$ is a scalar variable introducing isotropic damage. The plasticity model with damage defined by (\[endoGen1\]) is named here the *extended endochronic model* and it belongs to the class of DD-EC models, as indicated in Figure \[scheme\_Endo\]. Note that the stress is defined by introducing the factor $\left( 1-D\right) $, consistently with the definition of *effective stress* and the *principle of strain equivalence* [@Lemaitre90engl]. Moreover, it can be observed that the relationships (\[endoGen1\]) are equivalent to $$\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
tr\left( \mathbf{\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}}\right) =\left( 1-D\right) 3K%
\text{ }tr\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}\right) \text{ , \ \ \ \ \ \
\ }dev\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\sigma$}\right) =\mathbf{z} \\
\mathbf{\dot{z}}=\left( 1-D\right) \text{ }2G\text{ }dev\left( %
\mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}\right) -\beta \text{ }\mathbf{z}\text{ }%
\dot{\vartheta}-\dot{D}\text{ }\frac{\mathbf{z}}{1-D}\text{ \ \ \ \ }\ \ \ \
\ \text{with }\dot{\vartheta}=\frac{\dot{\zeta}}{g}%
\end{array}%
\right. \label{sigDam}$$which can be compared with (\[EndoFormul1\]).
A possible choice for $\dot{\zeta}$ is given by $$\dot{\zeta}=\left( 1+\frac{\gamma }{\beta }sgn\left( \mathbf{z}:dev\left(%
\mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}\right) \right) \right) \left\vert
\mathbf{z}:dev\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}\right) \right\vert \left\Vert \mathbf{z}\right\Vert
^{n-2}\left( 1-D\right) ^{1-n} \label{zetanDam}$$ which represents a direct generalization of (\[zetan\]): the last factor depending on $D$ and $n$ is introduced in order to have an intrinsic time depending on the effective stress instead of the actual one, consistently with the strain equivalence postulate. An elastic with damage model can be defined by assuming $\dot{\zeta}=0$. In the authors’ knowledge, the notions of pseudo-potential and loading surface were never applied to the extended endochronic theory; therefore, these aspects are analyzed in detail in the next section.
A thermodynamic framework for the extended endochronic theory {#thermoEndo}
=============================================================
The aim of this section is to define the Helmholtz free energy and the pseudo-potential leading to the flow rules (\[endoGen1\]) or, equivalently, (\[sigDam\]). Under the assumption of isothermal and small transformations, the Helmholtz free energy density is chosen as follows: $$\Psi =\Psi \left( \mathbf{v}\right) =\psi \left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon$},\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}^{p}\mathbf{,}\zeta \mathbf{,}
D\right) +\mathbb{I}_{\mathbb{H}}\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon$},\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}^{p}\mathbf{,}\zeta \mathbf{,}
D\right) \label{pot0}$$ where $\mathbf{v}=\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon$},\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}^{p}\mathbf{,}\zeta \mathbf{,}
D\right) $ is the vector of state variables; $\mbox{\boldmath$ \varepsilon$}$, $\mbox{\boldmath$\varepsilon$}^{p}$ and $D$ were previously defined; $%
\zeta $ is a scalar internal variable associated with isotropic hardening. For all the state variables, an initial zero value is assumed. The choice of $\zeta $ to indicate an internal variable might seem misleading, since the symbol $\zeta $ was also used in (\[EndoFormul1\])-(\[sigDam\]) to define the *intrinsic time measure*. However, as it will be seen hereafter, this choice is the proper one, as for endochronic models, $\zeta $ has simultaneously both meanings; $\psi $ is the regular part of the Helmholtz energy; $\mathbb{I}_{\mathbb{H}}$ is the indicator function of the closed set $\mathbb{H}$: by definition, an indicator function is equal to $0$ inside $\mathbb{H}$ and equal to $+\infty $ outside [@Rockafellar69]; the set $\mathbb{H}$ indicates the admissibility domain for the state variables $\mathbf{v}$ and should be introduced every time some conditions on state variables are to be imposed: for instance, it is equal to the interval $D\in \lbrack 0,1]$ in order to impose the admissible values for the damage variable [@Fremond2002].
Once $\Psi $ is known, the *non-dissipative* thermodynamic forces $%
\mathbf{q}^{nd}=(\mbox{\boldmath
$\sigma$}^{nd},\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{nd},R^{nd},Y^{nd})$ are defined as the gradient of $\psi \left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon$},\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}^{p}\mathbf{,}\zeta \mathbf{,}
D\right) $: $$\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}^{nd}:=\frac{\partial \psi }{\partial %
\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}},\text{ \ \ }\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{nd}:=
\frac{\partial \psi }{\partial \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}^{p}},\text{ \
\ }R^{nd}:=\frac{\partial \psi }{\partial \zeta },\text{ \ \ }Y^{nd}:=\frac{
\partial \psi }{\partial D}$$ while the *non-dissipative reaction forces* $\mathbf{q}^{ndr}=( %
\mbox{\boldmath$\sigma$}^{ndr},\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{ndr},R^{ndr},Y^{ndr})$ are given by $$\left( \mbox{\boldmath$\sigma$}^{ndr},\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}
^{ndr},R^{ndr},Y^{ndr}\right) \in \partial \mathbb{I}_{\mathbb{H}}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon$},\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}^{p}\mathbf{,}\zeta \mathbf{,}
D\right)$$ where $\partial $ is the *sub-differential* operator [@Rockafellar69]. If the constraints imposed by $\mathbb{H}$ are fulfilled, the indicator function $\mathbb{I}_{\mathbb{H}}$ is zero and $%
\Psi \left( t\right) =\psi \left( t\right)$. This entails the identity of the time-derivatives, viz. $\dot{\Psi}\left( t\right) =\dot{\psi}\left(
t\right) +\mathbf{q}^{ndr}\cdot \mathbf{\dot{v}}=\dot{\psi}\left( t\right)$. In other words, one has $\mathbf{q}^{ndr}\cdot \mathbf{\dot{v}=}0$ for every instant $t$ [@Fremond2002].
Due to the assumptions of isothermal and small transformations, the expression of the second principle reads: $$\Phi _{1}\left( t\right) =\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma
:\dot{\varepsilon}$}-\dot{\psi}\geq 0 \label{2ndprinc}$$(\[2ndprinc\]) states that the *intrinsic* (or *mechanical*) *dissipation* $\Phi _{1}$ has to be non-negative. Introducing the *dissipative* thermodynamic forces $\mathbf{q}^{d}=(\mbox{\boldmath
$\sigma$}^{d},\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d},R^{d},Y^{d})$ as $$\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}^{d}:=\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma
-\sigma$}^{nd}-\mbox{\boldmath$\sigma$}^{ndr}\text{ ,\ \ \ \ \ } %
\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d}:=-\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{nd}-%
\mbox{\boldmath$
\tau$}^{ndr},\text{\ \ \ \ }R^{d}:=-R^{nd}-R^{ndr},\text{\ \ \ \ }
Y^{d}:=-Y^{nd}-Y^{ndr} \label{StateThermoForce}$$ and substituting (\[StateThermoForce\]) in (\[2ndprinc\]), one obtains: $$\Phi _{1}\left( t\right) =\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}^{d}:
\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}+\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d}:
\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}+R^{d}\dot{\zeta}+Y^{d}\text{ }\dot{D}\text{ }
\mathbf{\geq }\text{ }0 \label{2ndprinc1}$$
In order to fulfill (\[2ndprinc1\]), the flows of the state variables $%
\mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$},\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}\mathbf{,}\dot{\zeta}$ and $\dot{D}$ have to be suitably correlated with the *dissipative* thermodynamic forces $%
\mbox{\boldmath
$\sigma$}^{d},\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d},R^{d}$ and $Y^{d}$. Therefore, some additional *complementarity rules* need to be defined: usually, a scalar non-negative function called *pseudo-potential* $$\phi =\phi \left( \mathbf{\dot{v}}^{\prime };\mathbf{v};
\mbox{\boldmath$
\rho$}\right) \text{ \ \ such that \ \ \ \ \ \ }\phi \left( \mathbf{0};
\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) =0\text{ \ \ \ for all }\mathbf{v}
\text{ and }\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}$$is introduced and the dissipative forces $\mathbf{q}^{d}=(%
\mbox{\boldmath$\sigma$}^{d},\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d},R^{d},Y^{d})$ are derived imposing the so-called *generalized normality assumption* on it. Equivalently, one can define the flow rules $\mathbf{\dot{v}}$ by imposing the generalized normality assumption on the *dual* pseudo-potential $\phi ^{\ast }$, which is the Legendre-Fenchel transform of $\phi $ [@Rockafellar69]. This last method will be explicitly exploited herein. The generic flow $\mathbf{\dot{v}}^{\prime }$ is noted with “prime”, while the actual flow at the present state is noted with $\mathbf{\dot{v}}$. As a matter of fact, the pseudo-potential is assumed to vary with the present value of state variables $\mathbf{v}$ and with some additional parameters collected in the vector $\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}$. These parameters may be any quantity related to the past history of the material [@Fremond2002]. For instance, one may have $\mbox{\boldmath$ \rho$}(
\mathbf{x})=\left( e(\mathbf{x}),\left\Vert \mbox{\boldmath$
\varepsilon$}(\mathbf{x})\right\Vert _{\max }\right) =\left( e(\mathbf{x}
),\max_{0\leq t^{\prime }\leq t}\left\Vert \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}
\left( \mathbf{x},t^{\prime }\right) \right\Vert \right) $, where $e$ is the dissipated energy per unit volume at the point $\mathbf{x}$ of the body volume and $\left\Vert \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}\right\Vert_{\max }$ is the maximum (from $t^{\prime}=0$ to the present state $t^{\prime}=t$) of the strain norm at the same point. Observe that the parameters collected in $%
\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}$ could also be *non-local*, like $\rho \left(
\mathbf{x}\right) \mathbf{=}\int_{V_{0}\left( \mathbf{x}\right) }edV$ , i.e. the energy dissipated in a given volume $V_{0}\left( \mathbf{x}\right) $ around the point $\mathbf{x}$ of body volume.
When no viscous effect occurs, the case of plasticity with damage is recovered. This corresponds to choose a pseudo-potential $\phi $ independent from $\mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}$, entailing $%
\mbox{\boldmath
$\sigma$}^{d}=\mathbf{0}$; for a detailed derivation of these relationships, see, for instance, @ErlicherPoint2006. Moreover, “plastic flow may occur without damage and damage may occur without appreciable macroscopic plastic flow” [@Lemaitre90engl]. Therefore, (\[2ndprinc1\]) with $%
\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}^{d}=\mathbf{0}$ “must be split in two independent inequalities”: $$\dot{e}_{p}:=\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d}:\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}+R^{d}\text{ }\dot{\zeta}\geq 0,\text{ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ }\dot{e}_{D}:=Y^{d}\text{ }\dot{D}\geq 0 \label{doubleIneq}$$ The two scalar quantities $\dot{e}_{p}$ and $\dot{e}_{D}$ respectively define the rate of energy per unit volume dissipated by plasticity-related phenomena and by damage phenomena; see Figure \[Fig\_dissEn\]. Their sum $%
\dot{e}=\dot{e}_{p}+\dot{e}_{D}$ is the rate of the total dissipated energy per unit volume and coincides with the intrinsic dissipation $\Phi_{1}$. The restrictions imposed by these two inequalities are more severe than the original unique inequality of Clausius-Duhem (\[2ndprinc1\]). However, they are usually adopted as basic thermodynamic criterion for the formulation of plasticity models with damage [@Lemaitre90engl]. This assumption will be adopted hereafter. Taking into account (\[doubleIneq\]), the pseudo-potential is supposed to split into two pseudo-potentials $%
\phi _{D}$ and $\phi _{p}$, respectively related to damage and plastic flow: $$\phi \left( \mbox{\boldmath$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p^{\prime }},\dot{\zeta}
^{\prime },\dot{D}^{\prime };\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) =\phi
_{D}\left( \dot{D}^{\prime }; \mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right)+\phi
_{p}\left( \mbox{\boldmath$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p^{\prime }},\dot{\zeta}%
^{\prime };\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right)$$ In the following sections, the Helmholtz free energy, the pseudo-potentials $%
\phi _{D}$ and $\phi_{p}$, as well as their Legendre-Fenchel transforms [@Rockafellar69], are formulated for the endochronic model with damage (\[endoGen1\]).
The Helmholtz free energy
-------------------------
According to (\[pot0\]), for the DD-EC models one has the following Helmholtz free energy: $$\Psi \left( \mathbf{v}\right) =\psi \left( \mathbf{v}\right) +\mathbb{I}_{%
\mathbb{H}}=\left( 1-D\right) \frac{1}{2}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) \mathbf{:C:}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) +\mathbb{I}_{\mathbb{H}} \label{Helm}$$ In this paper, two cases are considered: $$\mathbb{H}=\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon,\varepsilon$}^{p},\zeta ,D\right) \ \
\text{such\ that \ \ }D\geq 0,\ D\leq 1 \\
\text{and \ \ }\left( 1-D\right) ^{s}R\left(\tilde{\mathbf{v}}, %
\mbox{\boldmath $\rho$}\right) -r_{0}\leq 0%
\end{array}
\right\} \label{H1}$$ where $s$ and $r_{0}$ are positive parameters; $\tilde{\mathbf{v}}=\left(%
\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon,\varepsilon$} ^{p},\zeta\right)$ collects all state variables except $D$ and $R=R\left(\tilde{\mathbf{v}},%
\mbox{\boldmath
$\rho$}\right)$ is a non-negative function called *source of damage*. The first two conditions on $D$ impose the minimum and the maximum values for this variable. As it will be seen, the third condition in (\[H1\]) is strictly related to the definition of the damage limit surface. The second case is characterized by a different assumption: $$\mathbb{H}=\left\{ \left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon,\varepsilon$}
^{p},\zeta ,D\right) \ \ \text{such\ that \ }D\geq 0,\ D\leq 1\right\}
\label{H2}$$ where only the two basic inequalities on $D$ are retained.
Making use of (\[StateThermoForce\]), (\[Helm\]), (\[H1\]) and of the pseudo-potential (\[phi D\]), i.e. the Definition 1 of $\phi _{D}$ given in the following section, it is possible to prove that the assumption $%
\mathbf{q}^{ndr}=\mathbf{0}$ is admissible. The same holds for the model defined by (\[Helm\]),(\[H2\]) and (\[pseudoDamMod\]) (Definition 2 of $\phi_D$). For brevity, the details of this proof, are omitted. As a result, the non-dissipative thermodynamic forces fulfill the following relationships: $$\begin{array}{l}
\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}^{nd}=\frac{\partial \psi }{\partial %
\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}}=\left( 1-D\right) \text{ }\mathbf{C:}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) =\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}-
\mbox{\boldmath
$\sigma$}^{d}=\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$} \\
\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{nd}=\frac{\partial \psi }{\partial
\mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon$}^{p}}=\mathbf{-}\left( 1-D\right) \text{ }\mathbf{C:}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon -\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) =-\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d} \\
R^{nd}=\frac{\partial \psi }{\partial \zeta }=0=-R^{d} \\
Y^{nd}=\frac{\partial \psi }{\partial D}=-\frac{1}{2}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon-\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) \mathbf{:C:}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon-\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) =-Y^{d}%
\end{array}
\label{nondissThermForces}$$ Moreover using (\[nondissThermForces\]) and supposing $D<1$, the energy dissipation rate reads $$\begin{array}{l}
\dot{e}=\dot{e}_{p}+\dot{e}_{D}=\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}:
\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}+\frac{1}{2}\mbox{\boldmath
$\sigma$}:\frac{\mathbf{C}^{-1}:\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}}{\left( 1-D\right)
^{2}}\dot{D} \\
=dev\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}\right) :dev\left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}\right) +\frac{tr\left( \sigma \right) }{3}tr\left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}\right) +\frac{1}{2}\left( \frac{dev\left( \sigma
\right) \mathbf{:}dev\left( \sigma \right) }{2G}\mathbf{+}\frac{\left(
tr\left( \mathbf{\sigma }\right) \right) ^{2}}{9K}\right) \text{ }\frac{\dot{
D}}{\left( 1-D\right) ^{2}}%
\end{array}
\label{dissEner}$$ Taking the time-derivative of (\[nondissThermForces\])$_{1}$ and recalling that no viscous effect is considered ($\mbox{\boldmath$\sigma$}^{d}=\mathbf{0%
}$), one obtains $$\mbox{\boldmath$\dot{\varepsilon}$}=\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}+\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{e}=\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}+\mathbf{C}^{-1}:\frac{
\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\sigma}$}}{1-D}+\mathbf{C}^{-1}:\frac{\mbox{\boldmath
$\sigma$}\dot{D}}{\left( 1-D\right) ^{2}}:=
\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}+\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{e,\sigma }+\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{e,D}$$ where $\mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{e,\sigma }$ is an elastic strain flow at constant damage and $\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{e,D}$ is an elastic strain flow at constant stress. It follows that $\dot{e}_{D}=1/2\left(\mbox{\boldmath
$\sigma$}:\mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{e,D}\right)$. Note that in general the endochronic theory may present non-zero energy rates $\dot{e}%
_{p} $ and $\dot{e}_{D}$ also during unloading phases; see Figure [Fig\_dissEn]{}b in this respect.
The pseudo-potential for the damage flow
----------------------------------------
The formalism of the loading function $f_{D}$, as well as the pseudo-potential $\phi_{D}^{\ast }=\mathbb{I}_{f_{D}\leq 0}$ , can be used to express the damage evolution [@Lemaitre90engl; @Salari2004; @Nedjar2001; @Fremond2002]. We present herein a well-known damage evolution rule by using both pseudo-potentials $\phi_{D}$ and its dual $%
\phi_{D}^{\ast}$. Then, a discussion is done about a novel pseudo-potential leading to a damage evolution where $\dot{D}$ may be different from 0 also during unloading phases. In detail, the main difference between the two cases is related to the role of the damage limit surface. Standard damage evolution rules, viz. Definition 1, are characterized by the possibility for the actual state point to be inside the damage domain delimited by this limit surface; in this situation and in particular during unloading phases, damage increments are null. Conversely, in the damage evolution which we propose here, i.e. Definition 2, the present state point is forced to be always on the damage limit surface also during unloading phases.
### Definition 1 of $\protect\phi _{D}$
Let us begin with the following pseudo-potential, associated with the Helmholtz free energy (\[Helm\])-(\[H1\]): $$\phi _{D}\left( \dot{D}^{\prime };\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) = %
\left[ \frac{1}{2}\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon -\varepsilon$}
^{p}\right) :\mathbf{C:}\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon-\varepsilon$} ^{p}\right) -\left( 1-D\right) ^{s}R\left( \tilde{
\mathbf{v}}, \mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) +r_{0}\right] \text{ }\dot{D}%
^{\prime }+ \mathbb{I}_{\mathbb{D}_{D}}\left( \dot{D}^{\prime }\right)
\label{phi D}$$ and $$\mathbb{D}_{D}=\left\{ \dot{D}^{\prime }\text{ such that }\dot{D}^{\prime
}\geq 0\right\} \label{effectiveDd}$$ The pseudo-potential $\phi _{D}$ is the sum of a *regular* part, proportional to $\dot{D}^{\prime }$ and of the indicator function $\mathbb{I}
_{\mathbb{D}_{D}}$. The term multiplying $\dot{D}^{\prime }$ in the regular part of $\phi _{D}$ is always non-negative, by virtue of the third condition defining $\mathbb{H}$ in (\[H1\]). The regular part of $\phi _{D}$, considered for the actual flow $\dot{D}^{\prime }=\dot{D}$, represents the rate of dissipated energy $\dot{e}_{D}$. (\[phi D\])-(\[effectiveDd\]) allow a large number of standard damage evolution rules to be represented, according to the specific definition of $R\left(\tilde{\mathbf{v}},%
\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) $. An interesting example is $$R=R\left( \mbox{\boldmath$\varepsilon$}\right) =\frac{1}{2}\left( 2G %
\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}^{e,+}:\mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon$}^{e,+}+\lambda \left( \left[ tr\left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon$}^e\right) \right]^{+}\right) ^{2}\right) \label{FreDam}$$ where $\lambda =K-2G/3$ is the Lamé constant. For a scalar $x$, $\left[x%
\right] ^{+}:=\left\langle x\right\rangle $, where $\left\langle
{}\right\rangle $ are the McCauley brackets. The positive part $%
\mbox{\boldmath$\varepsilon$}^{e,+}$ of the tensor $%
\mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon$}^{e}$ is obtained after diagonalisation. Other definitions for $R$ can be adopted; see, among others, @Nedjar2001 and @Salari2004.
In order to derive the damage flow, it is convenient to consider the Legendre-Fenchel transform of $\phi_{D}$, which reads: $$\begin{array}{l}
\phi _{D}^{\ast }\left( Y^{d^{\prime
}};\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$} \right) =\sup_{\dot{D}^{\prime
}\in \mathbb{D}_{D}}\left[ \left( Y^{d^{\prime }}-\frac{1}{2}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon -\varepsilon$} ^{p}\right)
:\mathbf{C:}\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) +\left( 1-D\right) ^{s}R\left(
\tilde{\mathbf{v}},
\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) -r_{0}\right) \dot{D}^{\prime }\right] \\
=\mathbb{I}_{\mathbb{E}_{D}}\left( Y^{d^{\prime }};\mathbf{v};
\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right)
\end{array}
\label{phi D star}$$ where $\mathbb{E}_{D}\mathbb{=}\left\{ Y^{d^{\prime }}\text{ such
that \ \ } f_{D}\left( Y^{d^{\prime
}};\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) \leq 0\right\} $ is the damage loading domain and the corresponding loading function is: $$f_{D}\left( Y^{d^{\prime }};\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right)
=Y^{d^{\prime }}-\frac{1}{2}\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) :\mathbf{\ C:}\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon -\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) +\left( 1-D\right)
^{s}R\left( \tilde{\mathbf{v}},\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right)
-r_{0}:=Y^{d^{\prime }}-Y_{\max }^{d^{\prime }} \label{fD}$$ By using the normality assumption, the relevant damage flow rule reads $$\begin{array}{l}
\dot{D}=\dot{\lambda}_{D}\frac{\partial f_{D}\left( Y^{d}\right) }{\partial
Y^{d^{\prime }}}=\dot{\lambda}_{D} \\
\text{with }f_{D}\left(
Y^{d};\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) \dot{
\lambda}_{D}=0,\text{ \ \ }\dot{\lambda}_{D}\geq 0,\text{ \ \ \ \ }
f_{D}\left( Y^{d};\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) \leq 0.
\end{array}
\label{dam1KuhnTuck}$$ At the actual state, it holds $Y^{d^{\prime }}=Y^{d}=-Y^{nd}$, and therefore: $$f_{D}=f_{D}\left( Y^{d};\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) =\left(
1-D\right) ^{s}R\left( \tilde{\mathbf{v}},\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right)
-r_{0}\leq 0,$$ which is the damage limit surface, but also is one of the conditions defining the set $\mathbb{H}$. It becomes evident that the positive constant $r_{0}$ is the initial damage threshold. The Kuhn-Tucker conditions state that $f_{D}<0$ implies no damage increment, while $f_{D}\left( Y^{d};\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) =0$ corresponds to a damage increment which can be computed by enforcing the consistency condition: $$\dot{f}_{D}=\left( 1-D\right) ^{s}\left( \frac{\partial R\left(
\tilde{ \mathbf{v}},\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) }{\partial
\tilde{\mathbf{v}}} \mathbf{\dot{\tilde{v}}+}\frac{\partial R\left(
\tilde{\mathbf{v}}, \mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) }{\partial
\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}} \mbox{\boldmath$\dot{\rho}$}\right) -R\left(
\tilde{\mathbf{v}}, \mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) s\left( 1-D\right)
^{s-1}\dot{D}=0$$ leading to the explicit expression of the damage flow $$\dot{D}=H\left( f_{D}\right) \left( \frac{\partial R\left(
\tilde{\mathbf{v}} ,\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) }{\partial
\tilde{\mathbf{v}}}\mathbf{\dot{ \tilde{v}}+}\frac{\partial R\left(
\tilde{\mathbf{v}},\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$} \right) }{\partial
\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}}\mbox{\boldmath$\dot{\rho}$} \right)
\frac{1-D}{s\text{ }R\left(
\tilde{\mathbf{v}},\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$} \right) },
\label{damageFlowGen}$$ where $H$ is the Heaviside function. The presence of the Heaviside function in the damage flow definition indicates that damage increments are zero during unloading phases. Note that (\[damageFlowGen\]) entails that the limit condition $D=1$ is never reached.
Figure \[Fig\_DamFremEl11\] illustrates some loading-unloading cycles of an elastic with damage model ($\dot{\zeta}=0$). The uniaxial stress is considered, viz. all the components of the Cauchy tensor are supposed to be null, except $\sigma _{11}$. The parameter values represent a hypothetical material for which the Young modulus $E=35000$ $MPa$ and the Poisson ratio $\nu =0.18$ are close to those of concrete; damage is defined by (\[H1\]) and (\[FreDam\]), with $s=2.5$ and $r_{0}=1.2e-05$ $MJ/m^{3}$; see also the numerical examples in [@Nedjar2001]. Together with the stress-strain and damage evolution of this model, Figure \[Fig\_DamFremEl11\] depicts the evolution of $Y^{d}=1/2\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$} ^{p}\right) :\mathbf{C:}\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon -\varepsilon$ }^{p}\right) $, i.e. the actual value of $Y^{d^{\prime }}$, and of the quantity $Y_{\max }^{d^{\prime
}}=1/2\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon-\varepsilon$ }^{p}\right)
:\mathbf{C:}\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon -\varepsilon$
}^{p}\right) +r_{0}-(1-D)^{s}R\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon$}\right) $, defining the upper limit of $Y^{d^{\prime
}}$ according to (\[fD\]). When these two curves are superposed, the damage increases.
### Definition 2 of $\protect\phi _{D}$
Unfortunately, a definition of $\dot{D}$ of the type (\[damageFlowGen\]), deriving from the pseudo-potential (\[phi D\]) and the condition (\[H1\]), is not able to represent the case of damage increasing during both loading and unloading phases, owing to the condition $f_{D}\leq 0$. We recall that the case of damage increasing during unloading may occur in Bouc-Wen models with stiffness degradation [@ErlicherBursi2007]. A damage pseudo-potential, simpler than (\[phi D\]), is more suited: $$\phi _{D}\left( \dot{D}^{\prime };\mathbf{v}\right) =\left[
\frac{1}{2} \left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon -\varepsilon$
}^{p}\right) :\mathbf{C:}\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) \right] \text{ }\dot{D}^{\prime
}+\mathbb{I}_{\mathbb{D}_{D}}\left( \dot{D}^{\prime }\right)
\label{pseudoDamMod}$$with $\mathbb{D}_{D}$ still provided by (\[effectiveDd\]) and with the conditions on the damage state variable defined in (\[H2\]). As already observed, it is possible to prove that the assumption $\mathbf{q}^{ndr}=\mathbf{0}$ is admissible also for this Definition 2 of the damage pseudo-potential. The dual pseudo-potential becomes $\phi _{D}^{\ast }\left( Y^{d^{\prime }};\mathbf{v}\right)
=\mathbb{I}_{\mathbb{E}_{D}}\left( Y^{d^{\prime }};\mathbf{\ \ \
v}\right) $ where $\mathbb{E}_{D}\mathbb{=} \left\{ Y^{d^{\prime
}}\text{ such that \ }f_{D}\left( Y^{d^{\prime }}; \mathbf{v}\right)
\leq 0\right\} $ is the corresponding damage loading domain, with the damage loading function $$f_{D}\left( Y^{d^{\prime }};\mathbf{v}\right) =Y^{d^{\prime
}}-\frac{1}{2} \left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon -\varepsilon$
}^{p}\right) :\mathbf{C:}\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$ }^{p}\right):=Y^{d^{\prime}}-Y^{d^{\prime}}_{max}
\label{fD1}$$ At the actual state, $Y^{d^{\prime }}=Y^{d}=-Y^{nd}$ and therefore $f_{D}\left( Y^{d};\mathbf{v}\right) =0$ at every instant. Therefore, the relationships (\[dam1KuhnTuck\]) reduce to $\dot{D}=\dot{\lambda} _{D}\partial f_{D}/\partial Y^{d^{\prime
}}=\dot{\lambda}_{D}$, with $\dot{\lambda}_{D}\geq 0$. Moreover, $\dot{D}=\dot{\lambda}_{D}$ can no longer be computed by the consistency condition, fulfilled as an identity at every instant. Hence, it must be rather defined by an additional condition. Any definition ensuring rate-independence, consistent with (\[H2\]) and fulfilling $\dot{D}=\dot{\lambda}_{D}\geq 0$ is admissible, even though is characterized by non-zero damage increments during unloading phases.
The pseudo-potential for the plastic flow
-----------------------------------------
The usual method to define associated plastic flows is based on the notion of *loading function*, indicated here by $f_{p}$, as well as on the normality assumption. Another equivalent formalism is based on the use of the dual pseudo-potential $\phi _{p}^{\ast}= \mathbb{I}_{f_{p}\leq 0}$ [@Moreau70]. A third way to formulate plasticity models is based on the pseudo-potential $\phi _{p}$, Legendre-Fenchel conjugate of $\phi_{p}^{\ast
} $ [@Fremond2002; @Ziegler87; @Houlsby2000; @ErlicherPoint2006]. The advantage of using the formalism based on $f_{p}$ (or $\phi _{p}^{\ast }=
\mathbb{I}_{f_{p}\leq 0}$) is essentially simplicity. Moreover, when a non-associated flow is to be defined, the simple introduction of a second function $g_p$ called plastic potential matches this purpose. Nonetheless, for some non-classical plasticity theories, like endochronic theory and generalized plasticity [@Lubliner93], it is not straightforward to provide a proper definition of the loading function $f_{p}$. It was proved by @ErlicherPoint2006 that for these plasticity theories (without damage) a way to define the loading function is to start from the definition of the pseudo-potential $\phi_{p}$, to compute the dual potential $\phi
_{p}^{\ast }$ and then to derive $f_{p}$. An important point is the additional dependence of $\phi_p$, and therefore of $\phi_p^{\ast}$ and the loading function too, on the *state variables*. This dependence is only optional for standard plasticity theories but is essential both for the endochronic theory and the generalized plasticity. Moreover, we notice that some models with non-associated flow also admit a representation based on the definition of a suited pseudo-potential $\phi _{p}$, depending on state variables. The example of a non-associated Drucker-Prager model can be found in @ErlicherPoint2005; in particular, it is shown that a suited pseudo-potential $\phi _{p}$ leads to a *modified* loading function which plays both roles of the traditional loading function and of the plastic potential.
For the endochronic models with damage, the plasticity pseudo-potential is defined as follows: $$\phi _{p}\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p^{\prime }},\dot{\zeta%
}^{\prime };\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$ }\right) =\left( 1-D\right)
\frac{\left\Vert dev\left( \mathbf{C:}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) \right) \right\Vert ^{2}}{2G/\beta }\frac{\dot{%
\zeta}^{\prime }}{g\left( \mathbf{v},\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$
}\right) }+\mathbb{I}_{\mathbb{D}}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p^{\prime }},\dot{\zeta}^{\prime };\mathbf{v};%
\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$ }\right) \label{phi p}$$where $\mathbb{I}_{\mathbb{D}}$ is the indicator function of the convex set $$\mathbb{D=}\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p^{\prime }},\dot{\zeta}%
^{\prime }\right) \text{ such that } \\
tr\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p^{\prime }}\right) =0,\text{
\ }\dot{\zeta}^{\prime }\geq 0\text{ and } \\
\mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p^{\prime }}=\frac{dev\left( \mathbf{C:%
}\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) \right) }{2G/\beta }\frac{\dot{\zeta}^{\prime }}{%
g\left( \mathbf{v},\rho \right) }%
\end{array}%
\right\}$$(see Figure \[Fig\_domains\]a). The first equality in $\mathbb{D}$ imposes the plastic incompressibility of the flow. Moreover, since $D$ is supposed to be less or equal to one and $g=g\left( \mathbf{v},\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}%
\right) $, the hardening-softening function, is positive by assumption, the second condition in $\mathbb{D}$ ensures the positivity of $\phi _{p}$. Therefore, the standard properties of $\phi _{p}$, viz. non-negativity, convexity and positive homogeneity of order 1, are matched. The third condition in $\mathbb{D}$ gives the plastic flow and is consistent with ([endoGen1]{}). It can be proven that when $%
\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p^{\prime }}=\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}$ and $\dot{\zeta}^{\prime }=\dot{\zeta}$, i.e. when the actual flows are considered, the first term of the sum in (\[phi p\]) represents the rate of energy $\dot{e}_{p}$ dissipated by the plastic flow, defined in (\[doubleIneq\]) for the general case. Note that the pseudo-potential has an additional dependence on the state variables *and* on the past-history dependent parameters collected in $%
\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}$.
The dual dissipation potential $\phi _{p}^{\ast }$ is obtained by the Legendre-Fenchel transformation of $\phi _{p}$ [@Rockafellar69]. Since $%
\phi _{p}$ is positively homogeneous of order 1, then $\phi _{p}^{\ast }$ is an indicator function: $$\begin{array}{l}
\phi _{p}^{\ast }\left( \mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d^{\prime }},R^{d^{\prime }};%
\mathbf{\ v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) =\underset{\left( \dot{\varepsilon%
}^{p^{\prime }},\dot{\zeta}^{\prime }\right) \in \mathbb{D}}{\sup }\left( %
\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d^{\prime }}:\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p^{\prime }}+R^{d^{\prime }}\dot{\zeta}^{\prime }-\phi
_{p}\left( \mathbf{\dot{v}}^{\prime };\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}%
\right) \right) \\
\text{ \ \ \ }=\underset{\left( \dot{\varepsilon}^{p^{\prime }},\dot{\zeta}%
^{\prime }\right) \in \mathbb{D}}{\sup }\left( dev\left( \mathbf{\tau }%
^{d^{\prime }}\right) \mathbf{:}\frac{dev\left( \mathbf{C:}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) \right) }{2G\text{ }g\left( \mathbf{v},\rho
\right) \text{ }/\beta }\dot{\zeta}^{\prime }+R^{d^{\prime }}\dot{\zeta}%
^{\prime }-\left( 1-D\right) \frac{\left\Vert dev\left( \mathbf{C:}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon -\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) \right) \right\Vert ^{2}}{2Gg\left(
\mathbf{v},\rho \right) /\beta }\dot{\zeta}^{\prime }\right) \\
\text{ \ \ \ }=\mathbb{I}_{\mathbb{E}}\left( \mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}%
^{d^{\prime }},R^{d^{\prime }};\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right)%
\end{array}
\label{phi p star}$$The indicator function $\mathbb{I}_{\mathbb{E}}$ is associated with the convex set $\mathbb{E=}\left\{ \left( \mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d^{\prime }},R^{d^{\prime
}}\right) \text{ such that }f_{p}\left( \mbox{\boldmath$
\tau$}^{d^{\prime }},R^{d^{\prime }};\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}%
\right) \leq 0\right\} $ (see Figure \[Fig\_domains\]b) with $$f_{p}\left( \mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d^{\prime }},R^{d^{\prime }};\mathbf{v};%
\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) =dev\left( \mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d^{\prime
}}\right) \mathbf{:}\frac{dev\left( \mathbf{C:}\left(
\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) \right) }{2Gg\left( \mathbf{v},\mbox{\boldmath$%
\rho$}\right) /\beta }-\left( 1-D\right) \frac{\left\Vert dev\left( \mathbf{%
C:}\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon-\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) \right) \right\Vert ^{2}}{2Gg\left(
\mathbf{v},\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}\right) /\beta }+R^{d^{\prime }} \label{fp}$$The function $f_{p}$ is the *loading function* for an endochronic model with plastic incompressibility and with isotropic damage. It is associated with the loading domain $\mathbb{E}$. If the past-history parameter $%
\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$}$ is a scalar equal to $e_{p}$, the plastic dissipated energy, then a *work-hardening* behavior is defined, in the sense that the loading function evolves with the plastic dissipated energy. A different approach to define work-hardening plasticity models was proposed by @Ristinma1999.
The generalized normality conditions imposed on $\phi _{p}^{\ast}$ leads to: $$\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\mbox{\boldmath $\dot{\varepsilon}$}^{p}=\dot{\lambda}\frac{\partial
f_{p}\left( \mathbf{\tau }^{d},R^{d};\mathbf{v};\rho \right) }{\partial
\mathbf{\tau }^{d^{\prime }}}=\dot{\lambda}\frac{dev\left( \mathbf{C:}\left(
\mathbf{\varepsilon -\varepsilon }^{p}\right) \right) }{2Gg\left( \mathbf{v}%
, \rho\right) /\beta } \\
\dot{\zeta}=\dot{\lambda}\frac{\partial f_{p}\left( \mathbf{\tau }%
^{d},R^{d}; \mathbf{v};\rho \right) }{\partial R^{d^{\prime }}}=\dot{\lambda}
\\
\dot{\lambda}f_{p}\left( \mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d},R^{d};\mathbf{v};
\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$
}\right) =0\text{ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }f_{p}\left( \mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}
^{d},R^{d};\mathbf{v};\mbox{\boldmath$\rho$ }\right) \leq 0,\text{ \ \ \ \ \
\ }\dot{\lambda}\geq 0%
\end{array}
\right.$$ where the last three inequalities are the Kuhn-Tucker conditions. The plastic flow defined in (\[endoGen1\]) is retrieved. Note that the derivatives are taken with respect to the generic variables $%
\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d^{\prime }}$ and $R^{d^{\prime }}$, but they are computed at the present state $\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d^{\prime }}=%
\mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}^{d}$ and $R^{d^{\prime }}\mathbf{=}R^{d}$. In summary, the usual notions of plastic multiplier and loading surface have been defined for an endochronic model with damage. This kind of thermodynamic formulation for endochronic models is quite innovative and has been first presented in @ErlicherPoint2006, for the case of no damage. As was pointed out in that paper, an important property characterizing endochronic models is the fact that at the actual state, the loading function $f_{p}$ is always zero: for this reason, the consistency condition $\dot{f}_{p}=0$ is always fulfilled as an identity and cannot be used to compute the plastic multiplier $\dot{\lambda}$. This is also true in this case, where the actual state is $\left( \mbox{\boldmath$\tau$}
^{d},R^{d}\right) =\left( \left( 1-D\right) \mathbf{C:}\left(%
\mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon-\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) ,0\right) .$ As a result, the Kuhn-Tucker conditions reduce to $\dot{\lambda}=\dot{\zeta}\geq 0 $, where $%
\dot{\zeta}$ is the flow of the internal variable associated with $R^{d}$ and, using the language of the endochronic theory, is also the flow of the intrinsic time measure; it can be freely defined, provided that it is non-negative and that rate-independence is guaranteed. As already observed, the standard choice is $\dot{\zeta}=\left\Vert dev\left(
\mbox{\boldmath
$\dot{\varepsilon}$}\right) \right\Vert$.
Figure \[Fig\_DamFremEl-Pl11\] illustrates an example of uniaxial behavior of an endochronic plasticity model with damage. The parameters of the elastic phase and of damage (Definition 1) are the same as those of Figure \[Fig\_DamFremEl11\]. In addition, $g=1$, $\dot{\zeta}$ is given by ( \[zetanDam\]) with $n=5$ , $\beta
=2834.9$ $MPa^{1-n}$ and $\gamma/\beta=-0.5$ ; as a result, $\sigma
_{u}=\left( 2G/\left(\beta +\gamma\right)\right) ^{1/n}=2.25\ast
\sqrt{2/3}=1.8371$ $MPa$, where $\sigma_{u}$ is the upper limit of $\Vert dev\left( \mbox{\boldmath$\tau$} ^{d}/\left(1-D\right)%
\right) \Vert =\Vert dev\left( \mbox{\boldmath$\sigma$} /\left(1-D\right)%
\right) \Vert =\sqrt{2/3}\ \sigma_{11}/\left(1-D\right)$ when $g=1$.
In the example of Figure \[Fig\_EC11\], the damage is defined by the rule $%
D=1-1/\left( 1+c_{\eta }e_{p}\right) $, with $c_{\eta }=1500$ $m^{3}MJ^{-1}$ (Definition 2). The parameter $c_{\eta }$ indicates the sensitivity of damage to the energy $e_{p}$ dissipated by plasticity. If $c_{\eta }$ is large, the damage increment at a given $e_{p}$-value is larger than in the case of small $c_{\eta }$. The Young modulus and the Poisson ratio are the same as in the previous figures. The parameters defining the intrinsic time flow (\[zetanDam\]) are: $n=15$, $\beta =16.1846$ $MPa^{1-n}$ and $\gamma /\beta =-0.8$ ; as a result, $\sigma _{u}=\left( 2G/\left(
\beta +\gamma \right) \right) ^{1/n}=2.25\ast \sqrt{2/3}=1.8371$ $MPa$. Moreover, the hardening function is defined as $g=\left(
1+\Vert dev\left( \mbox{\boldmath$ \varepsilon$}\left( t^{\prime
}\right) \right) \Vert _{max_{t^{\prime }\in \lbrack
0,t]}}/\varepsilon _{u}\right) ^{n}$, where $t$ is the present time and $\varepsilon _{u}=0.0002$. Figure \[Fig\_EC11\]d depicts the evolution of $Y^d=1/2\left( \mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon
-\varepsilon$ }^{p}\right) :\mathbf{C:}\left( \mbox{\boldmath
$\varepsilon -\varepsilon$}^{p}\right) $, i.e. the actual value of $Y^{d^{\prime }}$. According to (\[fD1\]), this quantity is also equal to $Y_{\max }^{d^{\prime }}$, which is the upper limit of $Y^{d^{\prime }}$. The typical endochronic behavior with plastic strains increasing during unloading phases is highlighted in Figure \[Fig\_EC11\]b. As a result, owing to the damage rule depending on the dissipated plastic energy, also the damage slightly increases during the unloading phases: observe the damage evolution after t=0.3 and t=0.5, which are the instants where unloading phases begin.
A brief discussion about stability and uniqueness
=================================================
It is well-known that standard endochronic models violate the Drucker’s postulate and the Ilyushin’s postulate, see e.g. [@Sandler78]. As a result, inelastic strains may continuously increase if a cyclic stress of constant and arbitrarily small amplitude is imposed around a given static stress (Figure \[Fig\_Drucker\]a). Dually, a stress relaxation occurs when cycling straining is imposed (Figure \[Fig\_Ilyushin\]a). The parameters used for the numerical simulations of Figures \[Fig\_Drucker\] and [Fig\_Ilyushin]{} are: $E=35000$ $MPa$, $\nu=0.18$, $g=1$, $\gamma/\beta=-0.5$, while $\beta$ has a value such that $\left( 2G/\left(\beta
+\gamma\right)\right) ^{1/n}=1.8371$ $MPa$, for the given $n$ values used in the figures. The strain accumulation entails a violation of a Lyapunov-type stability condition. For this reason, endochronic theory have been repeatedly criticized in the past years. However, @Bazant78 [p.705] showed that endochronic models do fulfil some weaker physically motivated stability conditions. Moreover, there are materials that are stable in the Drucker’s sense and others that are not. Hence, for these materials, a proper model cannot fulfil the postulate of Drucker. All the aspects concerning this subject have been explored in detail in the previously cited references [@Sandler78; @Bazant78] for endochronic models without damage. A detailed analysis for the case of models with damage would deserve further studies, but this is beyond the purposes of this paper. Figures [Fig\_Drucker]{}a and \[Fig\_Ilyushin\]a simply show the influence of the parameter $n$ on the strain accumulation and the stress relaxation for an endochronic model without damage. When $n$ tends to infinity, a plastic behavior of Prandtl-Reuss type is retrieved, where neither strain accumulation nor stress relaxation occur. Figures \[Fig\_Drucker\]b and [Fig\_Ilyushin]{}b concern models with damage.
Another important topic concerning plasticity and/or damage models is the loss of uniqueness due to strain-softening; see e.g. [@JirasekBazant02]. An exhaustive treatment of this subject for endochronic models with damage requires further analyses. However, for illustrative purposes, a simple analytical study of a uniaxial model is presented hereafter. Let $\sigma $, $%
\varepsilon $ and $\varepsilon ^{p}$ be the stress, the total strain and the plastic strain in the axial direction, respectively. Then, the uniaxial behavior can be represented by the following law: $\sigma =\left( 1-D\right)
E\left( \varepsilon -\varepsilon ^{p}\right) =\left( 1-D\right) E\varepsilon
^{e}$, where $E$ is the Young modulus. The incremental form reads $$d\sigma =\left( 1-D\right) E\left( d\varepsilon -d\varepsilon ^{p}\right)
-\sigma \frac{dD}{1-D}=\left( 1-D\right) Ed\varepsilon -\beta \sigma \frac{%
d\zeta }{g}-\sigma \frac{dD}{1-D} \label{dsig0}$$where the intrinsic time increment is $$d\zeta =\left( 1+\frac{\gamma }{\beta }sign\left( \sigma d\varepsilon
\right) \right) \left\vert \sigma \right\vert ^{n-1}\left( 1-D\right)
^{1-n}\left\vert d\varepsilon \right\vert \label{dzeta}$$and the damage increment writes $$dD=H\left( f_{D}\right) \frac{dR}{d\varepsilon ^{e}}d\varepsilon ^{e}\frac{%
1-D}{s\text{ }R\left( \varepsilon ^{e}\right) } \label{dD}$$with $R\left( \varepsilon ^{e}\right) =E\left\langle \varepsilon
^{e}\right\rangle ^{2}/2$ and $f_{D}=\left( 1-D\right) ^{s}R\left(
\varepsilon ^{e}\right) -r_{0}\leq 0$. Assume $\sigma >0$ and $d\varepsilon
>0$ (loading); the case $\sigma <0$, $d\varepsilon <0$ is analogous. Then, the condition to avoid strain-softening is $$d\sigma \geq 0 \label{dsig>0}$$The generic damage increment when $f_{D}=0$ is given by $$dD=\frac{2}{s}\frac{1-D}{\varepsilon ^{e}}d\varepsilon ^{e}=\frac{2}{s}E%
\frac{\left( 1-D\right) ^{2}}{\sigma }\left( d\varepsilon -d\varepsilon
^{p}\right)$$Moreover, from (\[dsig0\]) one has $d\varepsilon ^{p}=\beta \sigma d\zeta /%
\left[ E\left( 1-D\right) g\right] .$ Hence, the condition (\[dsig>0\]) assumes the following form$$\left( \left( 1-D\right) Ed\varepsilon -\beta \sigma \frac{d\zeta }{g}
\right) \left( 1-\frac{2}{s}\right) \geq 0 \label{productSoft}$$The first factor is always positive provided that $g\geq 1$. This can be proven using the definition of $d\zeta $ given in (\[dzeta\]) with $\sigma
>0,d\varepsilon >0$ and observing that the non-negativity of the first factor in (\[productSoft\]) is equivalent to the condition $\sigma /\left(
1-D\right) \leq \left( E/\left( \beta +\gamma \right) \right) ^{1/n}\left(
g\right) ^{1/n}=\sigma _{y}\left( g\right) ^{1/n}$, stating that the effective stress is always less or equal than the bounding axial stress $%
\sigma _{y}$, modified by the hardening function $g$. If $g\geq 1$, this inequality is always strictly fulfilled. Hence, strain-softening can be avoided if $s\geq 2$ . The same result can be obtained using the tensor expressions ([endoGen1]{}), (\[zetanDam\]), (\[FreDam\]) and (\[damageFlowGen\]) and imposing that all the stress components are zero except $\sigma
_{11}:=\sigma $. This proof is omitted for brevity. The same condition on $s$ has been found for the case of elasticity with damage [@Nedjar2001]. Note that $g<1$ induces strain-softening also when there is no damage. The analysis of the unloading case is not necessary, since at a given stress-strain state with $\sigma \neq 0$, the unloading stiffness is always greater than the loading one. A more complex analysis, not considered here, is needed for the multi-axial case, where the fourth-order tensor of tangential moduli for the endochronic model with damage should be computed. If strain-softening is avoided, the uniaxial behavior in what concerns the strain accumulation and the stress relaxation is analogous to that of standard endochronic models.
Conclusions
===========
An extended endochronic theory with a scalar damage variable was developed, based on the postulate of strain equivalence and by using pseudo-potentials depending on state variables and on parameters related to the past history of the material. The relevant loading surfaces, for damage and for plasticity, were defined. Two different damage pseudo-potentials were discussed and a formalization of the conditions on state variables affecting the definition of damage was provided, by an additional indicator function in the Helmholtz free energy. In a companion paper [@ErlicherBursi2007] , a link between this extended endochronic theory and the Bouc-Wen type models with both strength and stiffness degradation is established. This will permit to prove the thermodynamic admissibility of these Bouc-Wen models and to highlight a constraint for the relevant stiffness degradation rules.
Appendix: Notations
===================
*The following symbols are used in this paper:*
$\mathbf{C}=$ fourth-order elasticity tensor
$D=$ internal variable associated with isotropic damage
$e_{D}=$ energy per unit volume dissipated through damage
$e_{p}=$ energy per unit volume dissipated through plasticity
$f_{D}=$ loading function for damage
$f_{p}=$ loading function for plasticity
$G=$ shear modulus
$g=$ hardening-softening function
$H(\cdot)=$ Heaviside function
$\mathbf{I}=$ fourth-order identity tensor
$\mathbb{I}_{\mathbb{H}}=$ indicator function of the set $\mathbb{H}$
$K=$ bulk modulus
$\mathbf{q}^{d}=$ dissipative thermodynamic forces vector
$\mathbf{q}^{nd}=$ non-dissipative thermodynamic forces vector
$R^{d}=$ dissipative part of the thermodynamic force introducing isotropic hardening(softening)
$R^{nd}=$ non-dissipative part of the thermodynamic force introducing isotropic hardening(softening)
$\mathbf{v}=$ state variables vector
$Y^{d}=$ dissipative part of the thermodynamic force dual to the damage variable
$Y^{nd}=$ non-dissipative part of the thermodynamic force dual to the damage variable
$\mathbf{z}=$ *hysteretic* part of the stress tensor
$\beta =$ coefficient defining the plastic flow of Endochronic models
$\gamma =$ coefficient defining the plastic flow of Endochronic models
$\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}=$ total small strain tensor
$\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$ }^{p}=$ plastic small strain tensor
$\zeta =$ intrinsic time *measure* for Endochronic models. Moreover, it is the internal variable associated with isotropic hardening/softening of Endochronic models
$\vartheta =$ intrinsic time *scale* for Endochronic models
$\dot{\lambda} =$ plastic multiplier
$\dot{\lambda_{D}}=$ damage multiplier
$\mu =$ hereditary kernel
$\mbox{\boldmath $\rho$}=$ history-dependent parameters vector
$\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}=$ Cauchy stress tensor
$\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}^{d}=$ dissipative part of the Cauchy stress tensor
$\mbox{\boldmath $\sigma$}^{nd}=$ non-dissipative part of the Cauchy stress tensor
$\mbox{\boldmath $\tau$}^{d}=$ dissipative part of the thermodynamic force dual to the plastic strain tensor
$\mbox{\boldmath $\tau$}^{nd}=$ non-dissipative part of the thermodynamic force dual to the plastic strain tensor
$\Phi _{1}=$ mechanical or intrinsic dissipation
$\phi =$ pseudo-potential or dissipation potential for plasticity
$\phi ^{\ast }=$ dual pseudo-potential for plasticity
$\phi _{D}=$ pseudo-potential or dissipation potential for damage
$\phi _{D}^{\ast }=$ dual pseudo-potential for damage
$\Psi =$ Helmholtz free energy volume density
$\mathbf{1}=$ second-order identity tensor
$\langle\rangle$=McCauley brackets
[Jirásek and Bažant, 2002]{} Auricchio, F., and Taylor, R.L. (1995). “Two material models for cyclic plasticity: nonlinear kinematic hardening and generalized plasticity.” *Int. J. Plast.*, 11(1), 65-98.
Baber, T.T., and Wen, Y.-K. (1981). “Random vibrations of hysteretic, degrading systems.” *J. Engrg. Mech. Div. ASCE*, 107(6), 1069-1087.
Bažant, Z.P., and Bath, P.D. (1976). “Endochronic theory of inelasticity and failure of concrete.” *J. Engrg. Mech. Div. ASCE*, 102, 701-722.
Bažant, Z.P. (1978). “Endochronic inelasticity and incremental plasticity.” *Int. J. Solids Struct.*, 14, 691-714.
Bouc, R. (1971). “Modèle mathématique d’hystérésis.” *Acustica*, 24, 16-25 (in French).
Casciati, F. (1989). “Stochastic dynamics of hysteretic media.” *Struct. Safety*, 6, 259-269.
Chow, C.L., Chen, X.F. (1992). “An anisotropic model of damage mechanics based on endochronic theory of plasticity.” *Int. J. Fracture*, 55, 115-130.
Collins, I.F., and Houlsby, G.T. (1997). “Application of thermomechanical principles to the modelling of geotechnical materials.” *Proc. Royal Society of London*, Series A, 453, 1975–2001.
Eisenberg, M.A., and Phillips, A. (1971). “A theory of Plasticity with non-coincident yield and loading surfaces.” *Acta Mechanica*, 11, 247-260.
Erlicher, S., and Bursi, O.S. (2007). “Bouc-Wen type models with stiffness degradation: thermodynamic analysis and applications.”, *J. Engrg. Mech.*, accepted.
Erlicher, S., and Point, N. (2005). “On the associativity of the Drucker-Prager model.” *Proc. VIII Int. Conf. on Computation Plasticity COMPLAS VIII.* Eds: E. Oñate, D.R.J. Owen., ECCOMAS-IACM, Barcelona, Spain.
Erlicher, S., and Point, N. (2006). “Endochronic theory, non-linear kinematic hardening rule and generalized plasticity: a new interpretation based on generalized normality assumption.” *Int. J. Solids Struct.*, 43(14-15), 4175-4200.
Frémond, M. (2002). *Non-Smooth Thermomechanics*, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Houlsby, G.T., and Puzrin, A.M. (2000). “A thermomechanical framework for constitutive models for rate-independent dissipative materials.” *Int. J. Plast.*, 16(9), 1017-1047.
Jirásek, M., and Bažant, Z.P. (2002). *Inelastic analysis of structures*, Wiley, Chichester.
Karray, M.A., and Bouc, R. (1989). “Étude dynamique d’un système d’isolation antisismique.” *Annales ENIT*, 3(1), 43-60 (in French).
Lemaitre, J., and Chaboche, J.-L. (1990). *Mechanics of solid materials*, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Lubliner, J., Taylor, R.L., and Auricchio, F. (1993). “A new model of generalized plasticity.” *Int. J. Solids Struct.*, 30, 3171-3184.
Moreau, J.J. (1970). “Sur les lois de frottement, de plasticité et de viscosité.” *C.R. Acad. Sci., Série II*, 271, 608-611 (in French).
Nedjar, B. (2001). “Elastoplastic-damage modelling including the gradient of damage: formulation and computational aspects.” *Int. J. Solids Struct.*, 38, 5421-5451.
Phillips, A., and Sierakowski, R.L. (1965). “On the concept of yield surface.” *Acta Mechanica*, 1, 29-65.
Point, N., and Erlicher, S. (2007). “Application of the orthogonality principle to the endochronic and Mróz models of plasticity.” *Mat. Sci. Engrg. A*, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 18 May 2007.
Ristinmaa, M. (1999). “Thermodynamic Formulation of Plastic Work Hardening Materials.” *J. Engrg. Mech.*, 125(2), 152-155.
Rockafellar, R.T. (1969). * Convex Analysis*, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Sandler, I.S. (1978). “On the uniqueness and stability of endochronic theories of material behavior.” *J. Appl. Mech.*, 45, 263-266.
Salari, M.R., Saeb, S., Willam, K.J., Patchet, S.J., and Carrasco, R.C. (2004). “A coupled elastoplastic damage model for geomaterials.” *Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engrg.*, 193, 2625-2643.
Schapery, R.A. (1968). “On a thermodynamic constitutive theory and its applications to various nonlinear materials.” *Proc. IUTAM Symp. East Kilbride*, Ed.: B.A. Boley, Springer, New York.
Valanis, K.C. (1971). “A theory of viscoplasticity without a yield surface.” *Arch. Mech. Stossowanej*, 23(4), 517-551.
Valanis, K.C. (1980). “Fundamental consequences of a new intrinsic time measure. Plasticity as a limit of the endochronic theory.” *Arch. Mech. Stossowanej*, 32(2), 171-191.
Valanis, K.C. (1990). “A theory of damage in brittle materials.” *Engrg. Fracture Mech.*, 36(3), 403-416.
Wen, Y.-K. (1976). “Method for random vibration of hysteretic systems.” *J. Engrg. Mech. Div. ASCE*, 102, 249-263.
Wu, H.C., and Nanakorn, C.K. (1998). “Endochronic theory of continuum damage mechanics.” *J. Engrg. Mech*, 124(2), 200-208.
Wu, H.C., and Nanakorn, C.K. (1999). “A constitutive framework of plastically deformed damaged continuum and a formulation using the endochronic concept.” *J. Engrg. Mech.*, 124(2), 200-208.
Xiaode, N. (1989). “Endochronic plastic constitutive equations coupled with isotropic damage and damage evolution models.” *Eur. J. Mech., A/Solids*, 8(4), 293-308.
Ziegler, H. and Wehrli, C. (1987). “The derivation of constitutive relations from the free energy and the dissipation function.” *Avd. Appl. Mech.*, 25, 183-238.
![Classification of Endochronic models and most relevant references. The black square indicates that a thermodynamic formulation based on a suited pseudo-potential was found for the associated group of models.[]{data-label="scheme_Endo"}](1_Scheme_Endo_mod.eps){width="8.5cm"}
![The increment $de_{p}$ of the energy dissipated by plastic strain (1) and the increment $de_{D}$ of the energy dissipated by damage (2). The increments of the elastic and plastic strain as well as of the stress are also schematically illustrated for a) the loading phase; and b) the unloading phase.[]{data-label="Fig_dissEn"}](2_energies1.eps){width="13cm"}
![Elastic with damage model. Uniaxial behavior. (a) The stress-strain evolution. The dotted line indicates the effective stress $\protect\sigma%
_{11}/(1-D)$. (b) The damage evolution, with the damage increasing only during loading phases. (c) Time-evolution of $Y^d$, i.e. the actual value of the thermodynamic force $Y^{d^{\prime}}$, and of $Y^{d^{\prime}}_{max}$, i.e. the upper bound of $Y^{d^{\prime}}$ defined in (\[fD\]).[]{data-label="Fig_DamFremEl11"}](3_DamFremEl11quat_mod_bis.eps){width="11cm"}
![Endochronic model with damage in the uniaxial stress regime. (a) Several configurations of the effective domain $\mathbb{D}$ of the pseudo-potential $\protect\phi_p$. (b) Corresponding configurations of the loading domain $\mathbb{E}$, associated with the loading function $f_p$. The actual stress point always occurs at $R^{d^{\prime}}=R^d=0$ and, at this point, the flows $\dot{\mbox{\boldmath $\varepsilon$}}^{p}$ and $\dot{%
\protect\zeta}$ are defined by the normality condition.[]{data-label="Fig_domains"}](4_domains2_mod.eps){width="14cm"}
![Uniaxial behavior of an endochronic plasticity model with damage (Definition 1). (a) The stress-strain evolution. The dotted line indicates the effective stress $\protect\sigma_{11}/(1-D)$. (b) Damage evolution. (c) See Figure \[Fig\_DamFremEl11\]c.[]{data-label="Fig_DamFremEl-Pl11"}](5_DamFremEl-Pl11quat_mod_bis.eps){width="17.78cm"}
![Uniaxial behavior of an endochronic plasticity model with damage (Definition 2). (a) The stress-strain evolution. The dotted line indicates the effective stress $\protect\sigma_{11}/(1-D)$. (b) The stress as function of the plastic strain. Observe that the plastic strain increases during unloading phases. (c) The damage evolution, with damage slightly increasing also during unloading phases. (d) Evolution of $Y^d$ vs. time.[]{data-label="Fig_EC11"}](6_EC_11New_bis_mod.eps){width="15cm"}
![Strain accumulation, uniaxial behavior with stress varying between $%
1.05$ and $1.24$ $MPa$. (a) Endochronic model without damage, with the intrinsic time (\[zetan\]). (b) Endochronic model with damage, with the intrinsic time (\[zetanDam\]) and the damage evolution given by (\[FreDam\]) and (\[damageFlowGen\]), with $%
r_0=0.000012$ and $s=6$.[]{data-label="Fig_Drucker"}](7_Drucker_bis.eps){width="15cm"}
![Stress relaxation, uniaxial behavior with strain varying between 0.000075 and 0.00008. (a) Endochronic model without damage. (b) Endochronic model with damage, with the same damage parameters as in Figure \[Fig\_Drucker\]b.[]{data-label="Fig_Ilyushin"}](8_Ilyushin_bis.eps){width="15cm"}
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The current-carrying capacity of type-II superconductors is decisively determined by how well material defect structures can immobilize vortex lines. In order to gain deeper insights into the fundamental pinning mechanisms, we have explored the case of vortex trapping by randomly distributed spherical inclusions using large-scale simulations of the time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau equations. We find that for a small density of particles having diameters of two coherence lengths, the vortex lattice preserves its structure and the critical current $j_c$ decays with the magnetic field following a power-law $B^{-\alpha}$ with $\alpha \approx 0.66$, which is consistent with predictions of strong-pinning theory. For a higher density of particles and/or larger inclusions, the lattice becomes progressively more disordered and the exponent smoothly decreases down to $\alpha \approx 0.3$. At high magnetic fields, all inclusions capture a vortex and the critical current decays faster than $B^{-1}$ as would be expected by theory. In the case of larger inclusions with a diameter of four coherence length, the magnetic-field dependence of the critical current is strongly affected by the ability of inclusions to capture multiple vortex lines. We found that at small densities, the fraction of inclusions trapping two vortex lines rapidly grows within narrow field range leading to a peak in $j_c(B)$-dependence within this range. With increasing inclusion density, this peak transforms into a plateau, which then smooths out. Using the insights gained from simulations, we determine the limits of applicability of strong-pinning theory and provide different routes to describe vortex pinning beyond those bounds.'
author:
- Roland Willa
- 'Alexei E. Koshelev'
- 'Ivan A. Sadovskyy'
- Andreas Glatz
bibliography:
- 'pinning\_regimes.bib'
title: 'Strong-pinning regimes by spherical inclusions in anisotropic type-II superconductors'
---
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
Magnetic flux-lines, or vortices, in type-II superconductors represent a unique exemplary system perfectly suited for studying periodic structures driven through a quenched random potential. The development of quantitative descriptions for vortex systems poses a long-standing challenge, the importance of which cannot be overemphasized: emerging high-current applications of superconductors strongly rely on efficient immobilization of flux lines by artificially-created defect structures. Incorporating self-assembled inclusions into high-temperature superconductors has been established as a very efficient route to enhance their critical currents. Depending on the fabrication process, these inclusions may be prepared in the form of almost spherical particles [@MacManusAPL04; @HauganNat04; @GutierrezNatMat07; @YamasakiSUST08; @PolatPhysRevB11; @MiuraPhysRevB11; @MiuraSUST13; @MeleSuST15; @Haberkorn2017; @JhaJAP17], nanorods [@GoyalSUST05; @KangSci06], or combinations thereof [@MaiorovNaMat09; @JhaSuST15]. This technology is implemented in today’s second-generation superconducting wires based on rare-earth barium copper oxide (REBa$_{2}$Cu$_{3}$O$_{7}$ or REBCO) coated conductors [@MalozemoffAnnRevMatRes12; @ObradorsSST2014], where the rare earth (RE) is mostly yttrium (Y) or gadolinium (Gd). More recently, similar approaches have been used to enhance pinning in another family of high-performance superconductors, namely in iron pnictides [@Tarantini2012; @MiuraNComm2013].
Despite the development of analytic models to capture the vortex dynamics through random disorder potentials, the complicated pinning landscape found in state-of-the-art superconductors remains out of reach for analytical descriptions. The rational optimization of pinscapes may then be facilitated by investigating vortex pinning with large-scale numerical simulations, laying a foundation for the critical-current by design paradigm [@SadovskyyAdMat2016]. In reciprocity, the gained insights may allow for a better understanding of the vortex pinning/depinning mechanisms.
Ultimately, the route towards largest possible critical currents lies in the constructive combination of different pinning centers. A natural first step on this journey consists of finding the optimal pinning configuration for a relatively simple model system with only one type of defects. In this work we limit ourselves to monodisperse spherical inclusions. While having in mind self-assembled nanoparticles in coated REBCO conductors, similar pinning centers—in the form of impurity clusters introduced by proton or ion irradiation—are known to further enhance the critical current in these materials [@Matsui2012; @JiaAPL13; @Haberkorn2015b; @LerouxAPL2015], as well as in iron-based superconductors [@TaenPRB2012; @HaberkornPRB2012; @KihlstromAPL2013; @TaenSST2015].
Even for such simple model systems, a *quantitative* description of the vortex dynamics, e.g., predicting the dependences of the critical current on the magnetic field as well as on the density and strength of pinning centers, poses a difficult problem. Indeed, vortex pinning is a complex collective phenomenon controlled by (i) the interaction of vortices with pinning sites, (ii) the elastic properties of the flexible vortex lines, and (iii) their mutual interactions. In the case of weak pinning by a large density of atomic impurities [@LarkinO1979], the analytical treatment of this problem is limited to qualitative estimates, providing scaling laws for the critical current. The situation improves when pinning is produced by a dilute distribution of strong defects interacting with an ordered vortex lattice [@OvchinnikovI1991; @BlatterGK2004]. In this case, the calculation of macroscopic quantities such as the critical current, or the Campbell length can be done at a quantitative level [@BlatterGK2004; @Thomann2012; @Willa2015a; @Willa2016]. Both pinning cases have been discussed in detail in several reviews [@BlatterFGLV1994; @Brandt1995; @BlatterG2008; @GurevichAnnRevCMP14; @KwokRoPP2016]. Despite the advantage of the strong-pinning formalism over the weak collective theory in the ability to classify pinning regimes, it should be noted that both approaches inevitably rely on simplifying assumptions and thereby miss important details.
The idea that numerical routines may give a more realistic insight into the dynamics of flux lines is not new [@BrandtJLTP83-1; @BrandtJLTP83-2]: over the last decades, several approaches have been used to model vortex states in superconducting materials. In the minimal approach, the problem is reduced to vortex degrees of freedom only. Hence, vortices are treated as particles (in thin films) or elastic strings (in bulk) and their dynamics is described by an overdamped equation of motion, which takes into account interaction with pinning centers and the thermal Langevin forces. This Langevin-dynamics approach provides a qualitative description of the vortex state in small fields, when the distance between vortices is much larger than the coherence length, and for small density of pinning centers. In particular, for the three-dimensional case, such simulations have been used to explore the vortex dynamics in Refs. [@ErtasK1996; @BustingorryCD2007; @LuoHu2007; @KoshelevK2011; @DobramyslEPJ2013; @AssiPRE16]. Due to a minimum number of degrees of freedom explored, this simple and physically transparent approach allows studying large systems with good statistics. This description, however, has several limitations: vortex-vortex and vortex-pin interactions can only be treated approximately, and the possibilities of vortex cutting and reconnection are completely neglected. Furthermore, this model fails to properly treat the most relevant case when pinning centers occupy a noticeable fraction of the superconducting volume. It is therefore desirable to probe the strong-pinning regime within a more sophisticated model.
All aforementioned limitations are overcome in the time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau (TDGL) model [@Schmid1966] describing the superconducting order parameter in a driven state. At finite magnetic fields, vortex lines appear spontaneously as singularities in the phase of the complex order parameter. Despite its physical transparency, the TDGL model is also subject to several limitations regarding a realistic description of the vortex dynamics. Notwithstanding this note of caution, the TDGL model is well suited for studying static pinning problems, where an accurate description of dynamics is not essential. In the past, the TDGL model has proven itself to be very useful for exploring numerous properties of the vortex state [@Doria1990; @Machida1993; @Crabtree1996; @Aranson1996; @Crabtree2000; @WinieckiA2002; @Vodolazov2013; @Berdiyorov2014]. Recent developments of a high-performance, parallel TDGL solver [@SadovskyyJComp2015], enabled the meaningful exploration of the parameter space for sufficiently large three-dimensional superconductors. This solver, implemented for GPUs, has been used to tackle various problems, including the study of pinning in realistic sample geometries, which reconstructed from a 3D STEM tomogram of [Dy-doped]{} YBCO [@SadovskyyPRAppl2016], vortex dynamics in ordered and hyperuniform patterned thin films [@SadovskyyPRB2017], the process of vortex cutting and reconnection [@GlatzVKC2016; @vlasko+prb15], the effect of geometrical pinning in nanobridges [@Papari2016], and the optimization of pinning configurations [@KoshelevPRB16; @SadovskyyPRE2017], see also Ref. [@KwokRoPP2016].
In this paper, we explore the regimes of strong vortex pinning within the TDGL framework. For this purpose, we investigate the pinning capability of a low density of strong defects (in our case spherical, normal inclusions). Contrasting the numerical results with existing theoretical predictions will provide limits of applicability of the latter. At the same time, the computational efforts will provide useful feedback to improve the analytical description beyond today’s limits which, in turn, will facilitate a better interpretation of experimental data.
The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. \[sec:estimates\] we review established analytical results for the critical current at small pin densities and their limits of applicability. Supported by our numerical results, we discuss various approaches to go beyond those limits. A brief description of the TDGL model used for our numerical calculations is given in Sec. \[sec:model\] (for details on the technical realization of the numerical solver, we refer the reader to Ref. [@SadovskyyJComp2015]). In order to characterize the properties of the elemental contributor to vortex pinning, we investigate isolated inclusions with TDGL simulations in section \[sec:single\_inclusion\]. In Sec. \[sec:field\_dependence\], we study the dependence of the critical current on the magnetic field strength and inclusion density in detail for two different particle sizes (two and four coherence lengths in diameter). Different parameters, extracted from the simulations, help us better understand and quantify the mechanisms of vortex pinning. For this analysis, field-induced vortex lines are extracted from the complex order-parameter function by means of a routine described in Ref. [@PhillipsPRE2015]. The numerical results are compared with theoretical expectations.
Strong-pinning theory for different magnetic-field regimes {#sec:estimates}
==========================================================
![ Illustration of pinned vortex configurations for the single-line (1D) and lattice (3D) regimes obtained using TDGL simulation. The extent of length scales $u$, ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$, $L$, and $L_{h}$ defines the relevant pinning volumes, shown as gray boxes. []{data-label="fig:vortices_1d_3d"}](vortices_1d_3d.pdf){width="47.00000%"}
The theory of strong vortex pinning describes the interaction of vortices with a low density $n_{p}$ of strong defects.[^1] The defect strength guarantees that each inclusion is capable of pinning a vortex even if isolated from all the others [@Labusch1969]. In the low defect density limit, the problem reduces to pinning of vortex segments trapped between two defects. These trapped segments are characterized by their typical length $L$ along the field direction $z$, displacement $u$ in the direction $x$ of vortex motion, and displacement ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$ transverse to that motion (along $y$), see Fig. \[fig:vortices\_1d\_3d\]. Since each of these vortex segments is unpinned inside a volume $L u {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$, the three lengths are related through the geometric constraint $$n_{p} L u {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}\approx 1.
\label{eq:geom-relation}$$ Let $f_{p}$ denote the maximal pinning (or pin-breaking) force an isolated defect can exert on the vortex line. The critical current $j_{c}$ necessary to detach the vortex from the pinning site is then determined by the length of the trapped segment and the pin-breaking force $f_{p}$ via $$\frac{\Phi_{0}}{c}j_{c}\approx \frac{f_{p}}{L}.
\label{eq:CritCurrTrapSegm}$$ While the pin-breaking force $f_{p}$ is mostly a property of the defect (at least, for small magnetic fields), the typical segment length $L$ results from the complex interplay between the vortex-pin interaction, the line tension, and the interactions between different vortex lines [@OvchinnikovI1991; @BlatterGK2004; @KoshelevK2011]. In the following subsections we will review specific cases of the strong-pinning theory.
1D strong-pinning theory {#sec:1D}
------------------------
At very small magnetic fields, the interaction between vortices is irrelevant and flux lines can be treated as independent entities. When applied to isolated vortices, the strong-pinning theory describes the competition between the energy gain provided by interaction with material defects and the energy cost associated with the deformation of the vortex line from its unperturbed straight configuration. Consider a vortex oriented along $z$ (crystallographic $c$-axis) and brought to rest upon decreasing the external current $j$ (applied along $y$) below a critical value $j_{c}$, as illustrated in the upper part of Fig. \[fig:vortices\_1d\_3d\]. In this dynamic pinning scenario, the typical longitudinal displacements $u$ between neighboring pins is determined by the pin-breaking condition $$\frac{{\varepsilon_{1}}}{L} u \approx f_{p}.
\label{eq:force-balance-equation-u-vs-f}$$ where ${\varepsilon_{1}}\approx \varepsilon_{0}/\gamma^{2}$ (up to logarithmic corrections) denotes the vortex line tension in an anisotropic system, with the uniaxial anisotropy parameter $\gamma$ and the vortex energy scale $\varepsilon_{0} = (\Phi_{0}/4\pi \lambda)^{2}$. Solving Eqs. and for $u$ and $L$, one arrives at $$u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{1D}} \approx\Bigl(\frac{f_{p}}{n_{p}{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}{\varepsilon_{1}}}\Bigr)^{1/2}
\quad \mathrm{and} \quad
L_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{1D}} \approx \Bigl(\frac{{\varepsilon_{1}}}{n_{p}{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}f_{p}}\Bigr)^{1/2}.
\label{eq:u-L-1D}$$ Here, the subscript ‘$\mathrm{1D}$’ indicates the limiting case of isolated vortices,[^2]i.e., where $B \to 0$. Substituting Eq. into Eq. , we find the following expression for the critical current $$j_{c}^{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{1D}}
\approx \frac{c f_{p}}{\Phi_{0}} (n_{p}{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}})^{1/2} \Big(\frac{f_{p}}{{\varepsilon_{1}}}\Big)^{1/2}.
\label{eq:jc-1D}$$ In the simplest case, one may assume the transverse trapping length ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$ to be of the order of the defect’s lateral diameter $a$, i.e., ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}\approx a$. This results in a critical current growing with the square-root of the defect density, $j_{c} \propto n_{p}^{1/2}$, a result obtained earlier in Refs. [@OvchinnikovI1991; @BlatterGK2004]. By construction, the critical current is independent of the field strength $B$. Langevin-dynamics simulations [@KoshelevK2011] provide the following quantitative result $$j_{c} \approx 1.9 \frac{c}{\Phi_{0}} \frac{\sqrt{n_{p} a}f_{p}^{3/2}}{\sqrt{{\varepsilon_{1}}}}.
\label{eq:IsolVortCritCurr}$$ A more careful treatment [@KoshelevK2011] suggests that the length ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$ is determined by the distance at which the vortex undergoes a trapping instability. This instability depends on the pinning potential and yields the weak correction ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}\approx a (\varepsilon_{0}^{2} / {\varepsilon_{1}}f_{p} n_{p} a^{3})^{1/9}$ for a single flux line.
![ Strong-pinning regimes and their applicability boundaries, see Eqs. and , for an anisotropic ($\gamma$) superconductor. The horizontal-axis scale primarily features the dependence on field $B \propto a_{0}^{-2}$ and defect concentration $n_{p}$, while the vertical axis captures the dependence on the defect strength $f_{p}$. At small pinning forces the prerequisite of strong vortex pinning is not given and the system is described within the theory of weak collective pinning. For illustrative purposes we have neglected the weak field-dependence of ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}\approx a$. []{data-label="fig:phase_boundaries"}](phase_boundaries.pdf){width="47.00000%"}
The single-vortex regime holds until interactions between the vortices start to influence the pinned configuration. The typical vortex-vortex interaction force per unit length amounts to $\varepsilon_{0}/a_0$, where $a_0=(\Phi_0/B)^{1/2}$ is the intervortex spacing. This interaction can be treated as a small perturbation only if the force $\varepsilon_{0} L_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{1D}}/a_0$ acting on the pinned segment from other vortices is smaller than $f_{p}$, giving the condition $$a_0 > \frac{\varepsilon_{0} \sqrt{{\varepsilon_{1}}}}{f_p^{3/2} \sqrt{n_p {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}}}.
\label{eq:cond1D}$$ An additional condition follows from the requirement that the pin-to-pin displacement $u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{1D}}$ has to be smaller than the intervortex spacing $a_0$, yielding $$a_0 > \frac{\sqrt{f_p}}{\sqrt{{\varepsilon_{1}}n_p {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}}}.
\label{eq:cond1Du}$$ For $f_p < \sqrt{{\varepsilon_{1}}\varepsilon_{0}}$, the last requirement is less restrictive than the previous one. Since $\sqrt{\varepsilon_{0} {\varepsilon_{1}}}$ defines an upper limit for the pin-breaking force $f_{p}$, Eq. never limits the applicability of the 1D strong-pinning regime, meaning that this regime breaks down when the condition in Eq. is met, i.e., when $B/\Phi_{0} \approx (f_{p}^{3}/\varepsilon_{0}^{2} {\varepsilon_{1}}) n_{p} {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$. A phase diagram marking the boundary line in Eq. is shown in Fig. \[fig:phase\_boundaries\]. Other boundaries in this diagram will be discussed below.
3D strong-pinning theory {#sec:3D}
------------------------
At moderately high magnetic fields vortices form an ordered Abrikosov lattice, weakly deformed by separated material defects, see bottom of Fig. \[fig:vortices\_1d\_3d\]. This case is described by the theory of 3D strong pinning[^3] [@Labusch1969; @LarkinO1979; @OvchinnikovI1991]. Defects are assumed to be (i) sufficiently strong to produce a non-zero average pinning force while (ii) not yet strong enough to trap more than one flux line at a time. Consider a straight vortex line (along $z$) separated from the defect by ${\boldsymbol}{r} = (x,y)$. Its interaction with the defect deforms the flux line; a deformation that is uniquely characterized by its maximum value ${\boldsymbol}{u}$ at the height of the defect. In the resulting planar problem, the deformation ${\boldsymbol}{u}$ generates an elastic restoring force $-{\bar{C}}{\boldsymbol}{u}$, where the effective spring constant ${\bar{C}}$ can be expressed through the elastic Green’s function $G({\boldsymbol}{r})$ [@BlatterGK2004] and includes contributions from both the vortex line tension and its interaction with the rest of the lattice, ${\bar{C}}\approx 3\sqrt{{\varepsilon_{1}}\varepsilon_{0}}/a_{0} \approx (B / H_{c2})^{1/2} ({\varepsilon_{1}}\varepsilon_{0} / \xi^{2})^{1/2}$, where $H_{c2} = \Phi_{0}/2\pi \xi^{2}$ is the upper critical field and $\xi$ is the coherence length. For a given (asymptotic) vortex position ${\boldsymbol}{r}$, the displacement ${\boldsymbol}{u}$ is determined by the balance condition between the restoring and pinning forces, $${\bar{C}}{\boldsymbol}{u}({\boldsymbol}{r}) = {\boldsymbol}{f}_{p} \bigl[ {\boldsymbol}{r} + {\boldsymbol}{u}({\boldsymbol}{r}) \bigr].
\label{eq:non-linearfb}$$ The necessary ingredient for the existence of a finite average pinning force is that the function ${\boldsymbol}{u}({\boldsymbol}{r})$ is multivalued in the range ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}< |{\boldsymbol}{r}|< u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$. Such multivalued region exists if the Labusch parameter [@Labusch1969] $\kappa \equiv \max_{x}[f_{p}'(x)]/{\bar{C}}$ is larger than unity. Among the multiple solutions, the one that is realized ${\boldsymbol}{u}^{\mathrm{o}}({\boldsymbol}{r})$ determines the pinning force ${\boldsymbol}{f}_{\!\mathrm{pin}}({\boldsymbol}{r}) \equiv {\boldsymbol}{f}_{\!p}[{\boldsymbol}{r} + {\boldsymbol}{u}^{\mathrm{o}}({\boldsymbol}{r})]$. Due to the appearance of multiple solutions in Eq. , this force function has jumps.
![ Illustration of trapping areas $S_{t}$ around the ideal lattice positions at the depinning transition. In the critical state only defects within these trapping areas capture vortex lines. []{data-label="fig:trap_area"}](trap_area.pdf){width="35.00000%"}
In the dynamic scenario, a vortex line gets pinned when passing near a defect along $x$ at impact distance $y$ smaller than ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$. The defect holds the vortex as long as the force $f_{\mathrm{pin}}({\boldsymbol}{r})$ is smaller than the pin-breaking force $f_{p}$ providing the condition for the maximum possible deformation $$u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}} = f_{p}/{\bar{C}}.
\label{eq:u-3D}$$ As $u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}} > {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$, the vortex lines are stronger deformed in the direction of motion, $|u_x|> |u_y|$. Only defects located within a so-called trapping area $S_{\mathrm{t}}$ capture vortex lines, see Fig. \[fig:trap\_area\]. In the critical state, this area is defined by the conditions $|y|<{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$, $r< u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$ for $x>0$ and $r< {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$ for $x<0$. As a result, the fraction of occupied pins can be estimated as $\nu_{\mathrm{fill}} = S_{t}B / \Phi_{0} \approx u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}/a_0^2$. Defects located outside the trapping area are empty, i.e., do not capture a vortex, and hence do not contribute to the bulk pinning force (density) $F_{c}$. The latter results from averaging $f_{\mathrm{pin},x}({\boldsymbol}{r})$ over the trapping area, resulting in $$F_{c} = \frac{B}{c}j_{c}^{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}
= n_{p}\frac{B}{\Phi_{0}}\int_{S_{\mathrm{t}}}f_{\mathrm{pin},x}({\boldsymbol}{r})d{\boldsymbol}{r}.
\label{eq:Fp-3D}$$ Deeply in the strong-pinning regime where $u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}\gg {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$, the above integral simplifies and the critical current can be estimated as $$j_{c}^{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}} \approx \frac{c}{\Phi_{0}} n_{p}f_{p}{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}
\approx \frac{c}{\Phi_{0}} n_{p}{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}\frac{f_{p}^2}{{\bar{C}}}.
\label{eq:jc-3D}$$ Alternatively, combining the geometric constraint, Eq. , with the strong-pinning deformation, Eq. , one finds $$L_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}} = \frac{{\bar{C}}}{n_{p} {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}f_{p}}
\label{eq:L-3D}$$ for typical length of pinned segment, which—when inserted into Eq. —provides the same estimate for $j_{c}^{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$ as that given in Eq. . Let us highlight here that the critical current grows linearly with the defect density $n_{p}$ and decreases with the field strength as $B^{-1/2}$ (through ${\bar{C}}$). This scaling is again based on the simplest assumption that the transverse trapping length is determined by the defect diameter, ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}\approx a$. In reality, however, the situation is more complicated. A pinning potential typically decays as $-\mathcal{K} r^{-2}$ away from the defect. The coefficient $\mathcal{K}$ can be estimated as $\mathcal{K} \approx f_{p}\xi^{3}$ for small defects $a < \xi$ and as $\mathcal{K} = A\varepsilon_0 V_p$ for large (insulating) inclusions with $a > \xi$, where $V_p$ is the inclusion volume and $A$ is the geometrical factor (for spherical inclusions in anisotropic superconductors $A \approx 2/\pi$). This long-range tail leads to a trapping instability and the field-dependent trapping distance ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}= 4[4\mathcal{K}/(27{\bar{C}})]^{1/4} \approx [(\mathcal{K}^{2} \xi^{2}/\varepsilon_{0} {\varepsilon_{1}}) (H_{c2}/B)]^{1/8}$. In that case, the critical current is expected to scale as $B^{-5/8}$ [@OvchinnikovI1991].
Due to the confinement by neighboring vortices, the distortion $u$ imposed on the pinned vortex at the height of the defect decays along the flux line on a typical healing length $L_{h} = a_0\sqrt{{\varepsilon_{1}}/\varepsilon_{0}}$. The 3D strong-pinning approach is justified when this healing length is shorter than the vortex segment length $L_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$ providing the following criterion $$a_0 < \frac{\sqrt{\varepsilon_{0}} }{\sqrt{f_p n_p {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}}}.
\label{eq:cond3D}$$ When this condition is violated, the vortex line wanders from one defect to the next without returning to its equilibrium position in the lattice and consequently, the defects do not act independently any more. This defines the boundary of the 3D pinning regime, see Fig. \[fig:phase\_boundaries\]. For pin-breaking forces $f_p < \sqrt{{\varepsilon_{1}}\varepsilon_{0} }$, the condition differs from the break-down condition of the single-vortex (1D) regime, Eq. , suggesting the existence of an intermediate field range, see Fig. \[fig:phase\_boundaries\], defined by $$\frac{f_p^{3}}{\varepsilon_{0}^{2} {\varepsilon_{1}}}n_p {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}< \frac{B}{\Phi_{0}} < \frac{f_p}{\varepsilon_{0}} n_p {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}},
\label{eq:interm}$$ where interactions between vortices are already essential but not yet strong enough to form an ordered lattice. These inequalities define the transition region shown in the phase diagram sketched in Fig. \[fig:phase\_boundaries\]. Currently, no simple estimate for the critical current exists in this regime.
In order to fill this gap, we consider corrections to the 3D strong-pinning result, Eq. , arising from events where multiple defects are found within the same healing volume $V_{h} = L_{h} u {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$. These events are rare when $n_{p}V_{h}$ is small. For the present analysis, we limit ourselves to those cases where two defects (a so-called doublet) share the same healing volume, an event that occurs with probability $(n_{p} V_{h})^{2}$. Any larger number $M > 2$ of multiplets occurs with a parametrically smaller probability $(n_{p}V_{h})^{M}$ and shall therefore be neglected here.
We expect a ‘typical’ doublet to be stronger than one but weaker than two isolated defects, and hence the correction to the critical current, $\delta j_{c}=j_{c} - j_{c}^{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$, to be negative. On general grounds, we estimate this correction as $\delta j_{c} = -\eta_{d} n_p V_h j_{c}^{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$, with $\eta_{d}$ a positive number of order unity.
A more rigorous analysis requires averaging over different doublet realizations. In the following we derive a general framework to address this problem. Working in the reference frame of one defect, let the in-plane coordinate ${\boldsymbol}{r} = (x,y)$ define the distance to nearest (undeformed) vortex directed along $z$. With ${\boldsymbol}{R}_{s}=(X_{s}, Y_{s}, Z_{s})$ the position of the second defect, the in-plane distance of the latter to the vortex reads ${\boldsymbol}{r}-{\boldsymbol}{R}_{s}^{\perp} = (x-X_{s},\ y-Y_{s})$. While two defects—when considered isolated from each other—act on the vortex with forces $f_{\mathrm{pin}} ({\boldsymbol}{r})$ and $f_{\mathrm{pin}}({\boldsymbol}{r}-{\boldsymbol}{R}_{s}^{\perp})$, the defect doublet will act with a force $f_{d}({\boldsymbol}{r},{\boldsymbol}{R}_{s})$. Therefore this particular doublet leads to a correction of the total pinning force $F_{c} V$ \[see Eq. \] by $\delta f_{d}({\boldsymbol}{r},{\boldsymbol}{R}_{s}) = f_{d}({\boldsymbol}{r}, {\boldsymbol}{R}_{s}) - [f_{\mathrm{pin}} ({\boldsymbol}{r}) + f_{\mathrm{pin}}({\boldsymbol}{r}-{\boldsymbol}{R}_{s}^{\perp})]$. Averaging over the two free coordinates ${\boldsymbol}{r}$ and ${\boldsymbol}{R}_{s}$, we obtain the correction to the critical current $$\begin{gathered}
\delta j_{c}=\frac{2c}{\Phi_{0}}n_{p}^{2}\int d^{2}{\boldsymbol}{r}\int d^{3}{\boldsymbol}{R}_{s} [f_{d}({\boldsymbol}{r},{\boldsymbol}{R}_{s}) \\
- f_{\mathrm{pin}}({\boldsymbol}{r})-f_{\mathrm{pin}}({\boldsymbol}{r}-{\boldsymbol}{R}_{s}^{\perp})].
\label{eq:Corrjc}\end{gathered}$$ The evaluation of this double integral within an elastic model, see Appendix \[sec:doublet\], yields the quantitative estimate $$\delta j_{c} \approx - \frac{2}{3} j_{c}^{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}} n_{p}V_{h},
\label{eq:doublet-correction}$$ following our expectation with $\eta_{d} = 2/3$. As $V_h \propto B^{-1}$, this correction scales with field roughly as $B^{-3/2}$ and becomes important at lower fields.
High fields: full-occupation regime {#sec:high_fields}
-----------------------------------
At large fields $B > B_{\mathrm{hf}}$, each inclusion—independently of its position—captures a vortex line. The criterion $$a_{0} = 2{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}},
\label{eq:bare-hf-criterion}$$ translates into a crude estimate for $B_{\mathrm{hf}} \approx \Phi_{0}/4{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}^{2}$, marking the break-down of the 3D strong-pinning theory. In Fig. \[fig:trap\_area\], the entire area is now covered in red. Since all particles are occupied by (at least) one vortex, the critical current assumes the simplified form $$j_{c}^{\mathrm{hf}} = \beta \frac{c f_{p}}{B} n_{p},
\label{eq:jc-hf}$$ where $\beta < 1$ is a numerical factor appearing due to averaging over the pin positions. If the field dependence of $f_{p}$ is weak, $j_{c}$ decays inversely proportional to the field strength $B$ while growing linearly with the defect density $n_{p}$. This scaling is also obtained from the 3D strong-pinning result, Eq. , after substituting both longitudinal and transverse trapping lengths by the intervortex distance, i.e., $u = {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}\approx a_{0}/2$.
It occurs, however, that the high-field regime cannot be characterized by the simple $1/B$ law suggested Eq. . In fact, when the intervortex distance $a_{0}$ becomes comparable to the full longitudinal length of the trapping area $u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}} + {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$, the pin-breaking force acquires a significant field dependence. Indeed, once the nearest unpinned vortex approaches the defect to a distance comparable to ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$, it may undergo a pinning instability even if the defect is already occupied. This instability can be quantified by studying a set of coupled force-balance equations similar to Eq. for two neighboring vortices (see Appendix \[sec:double\_occupation\] for more details). At the second trapping instability, the already pinned vortex leaves the defect due to the arrival of the newly pinned flux line and before reaching its ’bare’ critical state. The quantitative criterion for the appearance of the instability-limited critical state can be expressed through $$a_{0} = {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}+ (1-\Gamma)u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$$ and is derived in Appendix \[sec:double\_occupation\]. Here, $\Gamma = G(a_{0})^{-1}/G(0)^{-1}$ denotes an elastic coupling coefficient. A quantitative analysis provides us with the estimate $\Gamma \approx 0.23$. Neglecting the weak field-dependence of ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}\approx a$, this instability arises when $$a_{0} = \frac{a}{1- (1-\Gamma)f_{p}/3\sqrt{\varepsilon_{0} {\varepsilon_{1}}}} = \beta_{c} a,$$ with $\beta_{c} > 1$. Simulations, discussed below, suggest that $2 < \beta_{c} < 3$. Although distinct, the closeness of this instability to the criterion makes it technically difficult to separate these two transitions. Most prominently, this phenomenon will lead to a decreasing $f_{p}(B)$ (upon increasing $B$) and hence the critical current will decay faster than $B^{-1}$.
Another, yet more spectacular effect occurs when the defect traps two (or even more) vortices, i.e., when the pinning instability of the second vortex is not accompanied by the departure of the first one. At this moment the pin-breaking force $f_{p}(B)$ experiences a strong revival leading to a novel type of peak effect. This case is briefly discussed in Sec. \[sec:single\_inclusion\] below and appears (empirically) when the intervortex distance falls below $2a$, i.e., for $B > \Phi_{0}/4a^{2}$.
Time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau model for numerical simulations {#sec:model}
==============================================================
The numerical results presented in this paper are obtained using an iterative, massive-parallel solver for the time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau (TDGL) equation suitable for large three-dimensional systems with typical sizes of $100$ coherence lengths in all three directions. The technical details of the numerical algorithm and a benchmark analysis for its implementation on graphics procession units (GPUs) are described in Ref. [@SadovskyyJComp2015]. Here we only present the used dimensionless form and notations of the TDGL equations. The dynamics of the superconducting order parameter $\psi({\boldsymbol}{r},t)$ is described by the TDGL equation $$\begin{gathered}
\mathfrak{u}(\partial_t + i \mu)\psi = \epsilon({\boldsymbol}{r})\psi- |\psi|^2\psi \\
+ \sum_{k=x,y,z} \tilde{\xi}_k^2(\nabla_k - i A_k)^2\psi + \zeta({\boldsymbol}{r},t).
\label{eq:TDGL}\end{gathered}$$ Here, all lengths are measured in units of the in-plane coherence length $\xi$ at the simulated temperature, such that $\tilde{\xi}_x = \tilde{\xi}_y = 1$ and $\tilde{\xi}_z = 1/\gamma$, with $\gamma$ being the uniaxial anisotropy factor. The time $t$ is measured in units of $t_{0} = 4\pi \sigma_{n} \lambda^{2} / c^{2}$, where $\sigma_{n} = 1/\rho_{n}$ is the normal state conductivity, $\lambda$ the in-plane penetration depth, and $c$ the speed of light. The function $\epsilon({\boldsymbol}{r})$ captures the local critical temperature of the sample. By changing its value from unity in the bulk[^4] to $\epsilon({\boldsymbol}{r})=-1$ in specific regions, we can model normal inclusions. We use the infinite-$\lambda$ approximation which describes superconductors at high magnetic fields when the penetration depth $\lambda$ is much larger than the distance between the vortex lines $a_0=\sqrt{\Phi_0/B}$. In this approximation the vector potential is fixed by the external field. In the Landau gauge, the dimensionless vector potential takes the form ${\boldsymbol}{A} = [0, (B_{z}/H_{c2}) x ,0]$, for an external magnetic field applied along the $c$-axis, and $H_{c2}=\Phi_{0}/(2\pi\xi^2)$ being the corresponding upper critical field.
The system’s temporal evolution depends on the reduced relaxation rate $\mathfrak{u}$ and the scalar electric potential $\mu$, while thermal noise is accounted for by the $\delta$-correlated Langevin term $\zeta ({\boldsymbol}{r},t)$, $$\langle\zeta^*({\boldsymbol}{r},t) \zeta({\boldsymbol}{r}',t') \rangle
= \mathfrak{u} T \, \delta({\boldsymbol}{r} - {\boldsymbol}{r}' ) \delta(t - t').
\label{eq:noise_zeta}$$ In the above expression, $T$ is the reduced temperature measured in units of $H_c^2\xi^3/8\pi$, with $H_c = \Phi_{0} / 2\sqrt{2} \pi \lambda \xi$ the thermodynamic critical field. In a generic simulation setting, the magnetic field is aligned along the $z$-axis (or $c$-axis) and the current applied along the $y$ direction (full-force configuration). The electric current is measured in units of $j_0=2c\varepsilon_0/(\Phi_0\xi) $ (cgs), which gives for the depairing current $j_{\mathrm{dp}}=(2/3\sqrt{3}) j_{0} \approx 0.385 j_{0}$. The total dimensionless current along $y$ reads $$j = \mathrm{Im} [ \psi^*(\nabla_{\!y} -i A_y)\psi ]
- \partial_t A_y - \nabla_{\!y} \mu,
\label{eq:Jgen}$$ where the first term describes the supercurrent and the normal current is given by the last two terms. The dimensionless electric field (along $y$) $E = -\partial_t A_y - \nabla_y \mu$, generated by the flux motion, is measured in units of $E_{0}=\xi H_{c2}/ct_{0}$. For the simulations discussed here, we used periodic boundary conditions in $x$ and $y$ direction, while the system had open boundaries along $z$. The implementation of a fixed current in the case of periodic boundary conditions is discussed in Ref. [@SadovskyyJComp2015].
Pin-breaking force from an isolated inclusion {#sec:single_inclusion}
=============================================
The key quantity characterizing a defect’s pinning capability is its pin-breaking force $f_p$, i.e., the maximal force with which an isolated inclusion can act on the vortex system. In order to facilitate a quantitative comparison between theory and simulations, we directly compute this parameter at different fields for the two particle sizes studied in this paper, i.e., $a = 2\xi$ and $4\xi$. A detailed investigation of pinning properties of isolated inclusions will be published elsewhere.
Figure \[fig:pin\_breaking\_force\] shows the magnetic-field dependence of the pin-breaking force $f_{p}$ for an isolated inclusion inside an ideal vortex lattice for two diameters. Simulation were done with 36 vortex lines by adjusting the system sizes $L_x$ and $L_{y}$ so that the $6 \times 6$ vortex lattice ideally fits into the system. Traditionally, it is assumed that $f_{p}$ is an intrinsic property of the defect, and hence independent of the field strength $B$. We observe, however, that $f_{p}$ does have a substantial field dependence, especially for $a = 4\xi$. Moreover, this dependence is nonmonotonic. Several effects cause variation of $f_{p}$ with the magnetic field. For a single vortex, the pin-breaking force $f_{p}(0)$ is reached when the two branches of the pinned vortex tip form a critical angle. At small fields, $a_0 = (\Phi_{0}/B)^{1/2} \gg {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$, neighboring vortices will rectify the pinned vortex and enhance the angle between the tips meaning that the critical angle is reached at higher currents. As a consequence, at low fields the pin-breaking force *increases* with increasing $B$, as observed for $a = 2\xi$. At intermediate fields, $a_0 \gtrsim {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$, the vortex approaching the defect along the force direction will compete with the pinned vortex and *reduce* the pin-breaking force of the latter, see Appendix \[sec:double\_occupation\] for a quantitative criterion. At sufficiently high fields, empirically for $a_0 \approx 2a$, the inclusion will accommodate two pinned vortices. The transition from the single-occupied to double-occupied ground state for $a = 4\xi$ can be seen as a kink in the $f_p(B)$ curve at $B \approx 0.23H_{c2}$. It is remarkable that at the kink $f_p$ drops below the pin-breaking force for $a = 2\xi$. Above this point, the $f_p(B)$ sharply increases again. Pushing to even higher fields, when the competition with more unpinned vortices becomes relevant, the pin-breaking force will eventually decrease again. Further revivals of the pin-breaking force are observed each time the defect pins one more vortex (inclusions with diameter $a \geqslant 5\xi$, not shown here).
It is important to note that randomly distributed defects *do not* act with the upper bound force $n_{p} f_{p}$ on the vortex system. Instead, each defect realizes a certain force $f_{\mathrm{pin}}({\boldsymbol}{r})$, which is determined by the smallest pin-to-defect vector ${\boldsymbol}{r}$. Therefore, the maximal pinning force $n_{p} \langle f_{\mathrm{pin}}({\boldsymbol}{r})\rangle$ results from proper averaging over all realized states. The simulations presented here allow us to calculate the average force $\langle f_{\mathrm{pin}}(x)\rangle \equiv (1/a_{0}) \int_{0}^{a_{0}} dx \, f_{\mathrm{pin}}(x)$ for a specific impact parameter $y = 0$. Indeed, for a system in the quasistatic regime, $j/j_{c} - 1 \ll 1$, we can rewrite the dynamic equation $f_{\mathrm{pin}} = N_{v} L_{z} (\eta v - \Phi_{0} j / c)$ in the form $$f_{\mathrm{pin}}[x(t)]/\varepsilon_{0}
= 2 N_{v} L_{z} [E(t) / \rho_\mathrm{ff} - j]/j_{0},$$ where, $\eta \approx \Phi_0 H_{c2} / \rho_n c^2$ denotes the single-vortex viscosity and $\rho_n$ the normal-state resistivity. The relation between the viscous force $\eta v$ and electric field $E$ associated with the vortex motion is obtained from independent simulations of a defect-free system, as reported in Ref. [@KoshelevPRB16]. In this case one has $\eta v = \Phi_{0}j/c = \Phi_{0} E / \rho_\mathrm{ff} c$ and the flux-flow resistivity $\rho_\mathrm{ff}$ has been numerically evaluated as $\rho_\mathrm{ff} = 1.689 (B/H_{c2}) \rho_{n}$. All ingredients necessary to evaluate the above expression, i.e., the coordinate $x$, the electric field $E$ and the applied current $j$, can be extracted at given simulation times[^5] $t$. The averaged pinning force for $a = 4\xi$ extracted in this way is plotted in Fig. . We observe that its behavior is different from the maximum pinning force; $\langle f_{\mathrm{pin}}(x)\rangle$ does not have maximum at small fields and its minimum near the double-occupation transition is rather shallow. While deep in the strong-pinning limit, the theory of strong vortex pinning predicts $\langle f_{\mathrm{pin}}({\boldsymbol}{r})\rangle / f_{p} \approx u_{\mathrm{3D}}{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}/a_{0}^{2} \propto B^{1/2}$, simulations for $a$ from $2\xi$ to $4\xi$ suggest that the ratio $\langle f_{\mathrm{pin}}({\boldsymbol}{r})\rangle/f_{p}$ is in the range $[1/9, 1/3]$, lacking a simple field-dependence due to the non-monotonicity of $f_{p}(B)$.
{width="\textwidth"}
Whereas this procedure works for large inclusions $a = 4\xi$, it does not provide reliable output for small defects $a = 2\xi$. In the latter case the average pinning force turns out to be close to zero. In order to analyze this situation further, we have extracted the vortex lattice’s center-of-mass coordinates at which the pinned vortex line leaves the inclusion, $x = u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$, and at which the next vortex is captured again, $x = a_{0} - {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$. The obtained values, shown in Fig. , suggest that the small inclusion transits from strong ($u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}} > {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$) pinning to weak ($u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}} = {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$) pinning at high fields $B\approx 0.4 H_{c2}$. This transition has been predicted [@Willa2016] for metallic defects in the vicinity of $H_{c2}$. Near the transition to weak pinning [@Koopmann2004], the (Labusch) parameter $\kappa \geqslant 1$ relates to the pinning lengths via $\kappa - 1 \propto (u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}} - {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}})^{2/3} \ll 1$, see inset of Fig. , and the critical current (in its simplest form) is expected [@BlatterGK2004; @Koopmann2004] to scale as $j_{c} \propto (\kappa-1)^{2}$. Approaching the Labusch point $\kappa = 1$, may therefore have a much stronger effect on the critical current than the field dependence of $f_{p}(B)$.
Pinning regimes and magnetic field dependences of the critical currents {#sec:field_dependence}
=======================================================================
We systematically explored the evolution of the current-voltage ([$I\mbox{-}V$]{}) dependences for different magnetic fields, particle sizes, and particle densities. All numerical results presented below are obtained for a system of size $V = 100\xi \times 100\xi \times 50\xi$ with $256 \times 256 \times 128$ mesh points. The pinning landscape is modeled as a random distribution of $N_{p}$ of identical (metallic) spherical inclusions with diameter $a$ and $\epsilon = -1$ inside \[see Eq. \]. The defect density $n_{p} = N_{p}/V$ or the ‘nominal’ defect volume fraction $\nu_{\mathrm{vol}}^{0} = (\pi/6)n_{p} a^{3}$ are independent of the system size and therefore more appropriate than $N_{p}$ to characterize the defect landscape. Notice that due to partially overlapping defects (which is noticeable for $\nu_{\mathrm{vol}}^{0} \gtrsim 0.2$), the true volume fraction occupied by inclusions $\nu_{\mathrm{vol}}$ is somewhat smaller and well described by the expression $\nu_{\mathrm{vol}} \approx \nu_{\mathrm{vol}}^{0} - (\nu_{\mathrm{vol}}^{0})^{2}/2$. A selection of pinned vortex configurations near criticality is illustrated in Fig. \[fig:vortex\_configs\].
A typical simulation run consists of two phases. The system is initialized with (i) a random order parameter, (ii) an external current $j > j_{c}$, and (iii) a relatively high thermal noise level. In a first phase the Langevin noise is slowly reduced and the system condenses into a dynamic vortex state moving over the pinning landscape. In a second phase, the noise level is kept small and the system is ramped through decreasing current values. At each new current value, the system is given time to find a ‘steady state’ (typically $N_{t} = 5 \times 10^{5}$ time iterations) after which the electric field (or voltage) across the sample is recorded for the same time ($N_{t} = 5 \times 10^{5}$). Each pair of current $j$ and averaged electric field $\langle E \rangle_{N_{t}}$ then represents one data point of the current-voltage characteristic. Typically, we did not observe significant history effects, i.e., [[$I\mbox{-}V$]{}]{} curves differing by the starting current and/or the current step size are close. Only at smallest magnetic fields/smallest defect densities [[$I\mbox{-}V$]{}]{} dependences become noisy and slightly history-dependent. In the case of low fields $B < 0.01 H_{c2}$, the reason lies in the insufficient number of vortex lines $N_{v} < 16$ to form a lattice. In the case of low defect densities, the critical current gets small, and the flux-line motion within the simulation time drops below a few coherence lengths $\xi$ leading to an ill-defined temporal averaging. We extract the critical current $j_{c}$ from the [[$I\mbox{-}V$]{}]{} curve using as a criterion the intersection of current-voltage characteristic with 2% of the free flux-flow electric field $E(j_{c}) = 0.02 \rho_\mathrm{ff} j_c$.
In order to deepen our understanding of the pinning mechanisms, we have extracted the vortex lines from the order-parameter distributions using algorithm from Ref. [@PhillipsPRE2015], filtered out only field-induced vortices, and performed a detailed analysis of trapped vortex configurations. Typical snapshots of these configurations are illustrated in Fig. \[fig:vortex\_configs\]. Once extracted, the vortex lines are split into line segments localized inside the metallic inclusions and threading superconducting regions. We then used this information to compute several parameters characterizing trapped configurations. These are (i) the fraction $\nu_{\mathrm{fill}}$ of particles occupied by vortices, (ii) the fractions $\nu_{>n}$ of particles occupied by more than $n$ vortices ($\nu_{>0}\equiv\nu_{\mathrm{fill}}$), (iii) the average length $L$ of trapped segments, and (iv) the average particle-to-particle displacements $u$ (${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$) along (transverse to) the direction of vortex motion. The definitions of $L$, $u$, and ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$ are illustrated in the upper right picture of Fig. \[fig:vortices\_1d\_3d\].
Small-size particles: comparison with strong-pinning theory {#sec:a2xi}
-----------------------------------------------------------
![ The inclusion-density dependences of the critical current for selected magnetic fields. Lines show predictions from strong-pinning theory for (i) the 1D case (dashed) at low fields, (ii) the 3D case (dotted) at intermediate fields, and (iii) the high-field case (dash-dotted) when all defects are occupied. The vortex lattice’s order-disorder transition is accompanied by a jumplike increase in $j_{c}$, see also Fig. . []{data-label="fig:a2_jc_np"}](a2_jc_np.pdf){width="47.00000%"}
In this section we present results for small spherical particles with diameter $a = 2\xi$. A representative set of current-voltage characteristics used to determine $j_{c}$, is shown in Fig. for $n_{p}\xi^{3} = 4 \times 10^{-3}$. Performing simulations for multiple field values in the range $2 \times 10^{-3} \leqslant B/H_{c2} \leqslant 0.5$ and for a wide range of defect densities, $0.25 \times 10^{-3} \leqslant n_{p}\xi^{3} \leqslant 16 \times 10^{-3}$ (corresponding to volume fraction $0.001 \leqslant \nu_{\mathrm{vol}} \leqslant 0.064$), we have mapped out the critical current as a function of these two parameters, see Fig. . A visual impression of vortex arrangements in the critical state is given in Fig. \[fig:vortex\_configs\] (left column).
Figure \[fig:a2\_jc\_np\] shows the dependence of the critical current on the defect density for four magnetic fields representing different scalings regimes of $j_c(n_p)$. At low fields, $j_{c}$ grows as $n_{p}^{1/2}$ (dashed line) as expected from 1D strong-pinning theory, see Eq. . At intermediate fields, the growth is linear in $n_{p}$ with a weak downwards correction at larger densities. This effect is well captured by the 3D strong-pinning result, Eq. , including the doublet contribution from Eq. , which we rewrite in a form convenient for comparison with simulations, $$\label{eq:jc-comp-with-theory}
\frac{j_{c}}{j_{0}} = \eta_{0} \gamma n_{p} \xi {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}a_{0} \frac{f_{p}^2}{\varepsilon_{0}^2}
\Big( 1 - \frac{\eta_{d}}{3} n_{p}{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}a_{0}^2 \frac{f_{p}}{\varepsilon_{0}} \Big),$$ where $\eta_{0}$ and $\eta_{d}$ are the numerical constants. Our simulations agree best with the theory when using $\eta_{0} \approx 1/6$ and a numerical coefficient for the doublet correction $\eta_{d}\approx 1$, close to the value 2/3 evaluated using a simple model in Appendix \[sec:doublet\]. Here we used ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}= (\gamma f_{p} a_{0} / 3\varepsilon_{0} a)^{1/4} a$ for the trapping instability length. We also observe that for intermediate fields at largest defect densities the critical current approximately grows again as $\sqrt{n_p}$. At the largest fields, the critical current grows linearly over the entire range of defect densities.
The magnetic-field dependences of the critical current for different densities $n_{p}$ are shown in Fig. \[fig:a2\_jc\_B\]. We can make several qualitative observations. The critical current does not saturate at the lowest fields as naively expected from the theory of 1D strong pinning. Estimates for the limiting value (solid horizontal lines at $B < 0.0015 H_{c2}$) indicate that simulations need to be pushed to even lower fields before reaching that saturation. The intermediate field range is well captured by the 3D strong-pinning result, again augmented by doublet corrections, see Eqs. and . At higher field we find a crossover to a new regime characterized by the faster decay of $j_c(B)$. Further analysis shows that in this regime all inclusions are occupied with vortex lines. We find, however, that the critical current clearly deviates from the expected $B^{-1}$ scaling. We attribute this fast decay to two distinct effects. On the one hand, the pin-breaking force acquires a field dependence, reducing the pinning capability of each inclusion upon increasing the magnetic field, see Fig. and discussion in Sec. \[sec:high\_fields\]. On the other hand, the simulations of a single inclusion suggest, see Sec. \[sec:single\_inclusion\], that defects of size $a = 2\xi$ reach the Labusch point $\kappa = 1$ near $B = 0.4 H_{c2}$.[^6] When the defect becomes weak, the isolated-defects theory predicts [@BlatterGK2004; @Koopmann2004] a fast drop of the critical current $j_{c} \propto (\kappa - 1)^{2}$. In reality, the critical current, of course, does not vanish at $\kappa = 1$ because of defect doublets and collective-pinning effects.
For a fixed number of particles, we empirically note that the critical current follows a power-law $j_{c} \propto B^{-\alpha}$ over a large field range for $B < 0.1 H_{c2}$. The exponent $\alpha$ increases for decreasing particle number from $\alpha = 0.29$ when $n_{p}\xi^{3} = 16 \times 10^{-3}$ up to $\alpha = 0.66$ for $n_{p}\xi^{3} = 0.25 \times 10^{-3}$. The latter is close to the expected value $\alpha = 5/8\approx 0.625$ from the 3D strong-pinning theory, see inset of Fig. \[fig:a2\_jc\_B\].
The deviations of the exponent from the theoretical value is most likely related to disorder in the vortex arrays. To characterize degree of this disorder, we performed a Delaunay triangulation for selected $xy$ cross sections of the trapped vortex lattice and evaluated the coordination defect density $(1/N_{v})\sum_{k=1}^{N_{v}} |c_{k} - c_{0}|$, where with $c_{k}$ the coordination number of the $k$th vortex and $c_{0} = 6$ is the coordination number for an ideal lattice. Figure shows the field dependences of this parameter for several inclusion densities. We can see, surprisingly, that even for very small densities the lattice is already moderately disordered. It transforms into the practically ideal lattice at distinct magnetic field which rapidly increases with the inclusion density. This transformation is accompanied by pronounced downward jump of the critical current, as emphasized by vertical lines in Fig. \[fig:a2\_jc\_B\]. For large defect densities $n_p\xi^3 > 4 \times 10^{-3}$ the vortex arrays remain strongly disordered in the whole field range.
Figure presents the magnetic-field dependence of the occupation fraction $\nu_{\mathrm{fill}}$ of inclusions by vortex lines, for three particle densities, $n_p\xi^3=0.5 \times 10^{-3}$, $10^{-3}$, and $2 \times 10^{-3}$. It should be noted that the occupation fraction weakly depends on the particle density, with only a slight tendency to decrease with increasing $n_p$. Almost all defects become occupied at $B\sim 0.2 H_{c2}$. This field marks the crossover in the $j_c(B)$ dependences in Fig. . At small fields the occupation fraction grows with field as $B^{\zeta}$, with the exponent $\zeta$ increasing with density from $0.65$ for $n_p\xi^3=0.5 \times 10^{-3}$ to $0.82$ for $n_p\xi^3=2 \times 10^{-3}$, and hence larger than the theoretical value $3/8$ expected in the case of an ordered lattice; remember $\nu_{\mathrm{fill}} \approx S_{t}/a_{0}^{2} \propto a_{0}^{-3/4}$. For $n_p\xi^3 = 0.5 \times 10^{-3}$, a small plateau around $B = 0.1H_{c2}$ is related to the ordering of the vortex lattice in this region. Although weaker, a similar plateau is visible for $n_p\xi^3= 10^{-3}$ near $B = 0.3H_{c2}$. Upon ordering the occupation fraction becomes smaller compared to a disordered configuration.
Having explored the strong-pinning regimes for small particles, we proceed in the next section with a similar analysis for larger inclusions $a = 4\xi$. Studying this defect type—known for its stronger (near optimal) pinning capability—will allow us to embed the current findings in a broader context and to draw comparisons between different defect properties.
Large-size particles: role of multiple occupations {#sec:a4xi}
--------------------------------------------------
In this section we present results for larger spherical particles with diameter $a = 4\xi$ which reveal qualitatively new features, not addressed by a conventional theory. These large inclusions have been explored in a similar field/density range as the small inclusions discussed in Sec. \[sec:a2xi\]. Expressed through the volume fraction occupied by the inclusions, $0.008 \leqslant \nu_{\mathrm{vol}} \leqslant 0.39$, the explored range is however significantly different than that for $a = 2\xi$. Snapshots of order-parameter isosurfaces and extracted vortex lines are illustrated in the right column of Fig. \[fig:vortex\_configs\]. In contrast to the case of smaller inclusions, the vortex arrays remain strongly disordered almost in the whole studied parameter range. Figure \[fig:a4\_iv\_jc\] shows representative series of current-voltage characteristics for a system with $N_p = 500$ inclusions ($n_{p} = 10^{-3}\xi^{-3}$). The dashed lines indicate [[$I\mbox{-}V$]{}]{} curves obtained from a faster ramping protocol, with $N_{t} = 5 \times 10^{4}$. Despite the shorter equilibration/average time, the [[$I\mbox{-}V$]{}]{} dependences are comparable with the ones for slower ramping. Only at low fields, the reduced equilibration time leads to an upwards shift of the current-voltage characteristic. The supplementary data includes several movies illustrating the vortex dynamics for representative magnetic fields at currents slightly exceeding the critical current and concentration $N_p = 500$ ($n_p\xi^3 = 10^{-3}$): for smaller particles with $a = 2\xi$ at [[[](https://youtu.be/aV4MZzUPYxs)]{}]{} and [[[](https://youtu.be/ae0oME77Pz0)]{}]{} well as for larger particles with $a = 4\xi$ at [[[](https://youtu.be/nTyTnmLOs5o)]{}]{} and [[[](https://youtu.be/YEFLqfXslQs)]{}]{}. [[[](https://youtu.be/P07FsRceVbQ)]{}]{} shows the vortex dynamics at applied current significantly larger than the critical current. These and additional movie clips are available at [[[](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjdQ4Ruhxma5pkxGrFxw3CA)]{}]{}.
![ The inclusion-density dependences of the critical current for $a=4\xi$ and four magnetic fields. []{data-label="fig:a4_jc_np"}](a4_jc_np.pdf){width="48.00000%"}
In Fig. \[fig:a4\_jc\_np\] we present the inclusion-density dependences of the critical current for several magnetic fields. We can see that at small fields $j_c$ grows at small densities approximately as $\sqrt{n_p}$ (1D law), while at high field it grows as $n_p$ (3D law). We also observe that there is a density of inclusions maximizing the critical current $j_c$ at a fixed field. This optimal density slowly increases with increasing $B$, consistent with the results reported in Ref. [@KoshelevPRB16]. Several factors cause a decrease of the critical current at large inclusion’s volume fractions [@KoshelevPRB16]. First, vortex lines acquire the ability to jump between neighboring inclusions. Second, a large non-superconducting volume fraction reduces the effective cross section for the supercurrent leading to an increase of the local current density, a suppression of the order parameter, and, as a consequence, a decrease of the average critical current.
Figure shows the magnetic-field dependences of the critical currents for several representative densities. Selected vortex-line configurations for $n_p\xi^3=10^{-3}$ at two fields are shown in Fig. \[fig:vortex\_configs\]. We identify several distinct regimes. At low fields, $j_c$ decreases slowly. Although not as wide as for $a = 2\xi$, this dependence also may be described by a power-law $j_c\propto B^{-\alpha}$ with $\alpha\approx 0.25$-$0.35$. The exponent slowly decreases with increasing $n_p$. These exponents are similar to ones we found for $a = 2\xi$ in the limit of *large* densities. Even for the smallest particle density the largest exponent $~0.35$ remains significantly smaller than the value $0.625$ suggested by the 3D strong-pinning theory. The plot in Fig. \[fig:alpha\_vf\] suggests that the exponent $\alpha$ is mostly determined by the *volume fraction* $\nu_{\mathrm{vol}}$ occupied by inclusions. While decreasing at a logarithmic rate $d\alpha/d\log(\nu_{\mathrm{vol}}) \approx -0.2$ for large and small volume fractions, the exponent appears to be weakly dependent on $\nu_{\mathrm{vol}}$ with $\alpha \sim 0.3$ over the wide (and experimentally relevant) range $0.01 < \nu_{\mathrm{vol}} < 0.1$. At intermediate/high fields, the critical current decays faster with an exponent $\alpha > 1$, as in the case of small-size particles. The typical field separating these two regimes slowly grows with the particle density; from $B \sim 0.08 H_{c2}$ for $n_p\xi^3 = 10^{-3}$ to $B \sim 0.12 H_{c2}$ for $n_p\xi^3 = 4.8 \times 10^{-3}$. We attribute this first crossover in the field dependences to full occupation of inclusions with vortex lines, i.e., when $\nu_{1}\equiv \nu_{>0} - \nu_{>1}$ approaches unity, see Fig. . This figure also illustrates that the occupation of inclusions only weakly depends on $n_{p}$. Faster then $1/B$ decay of $j_c$ in this region is caused by the strong $B$ dependence of the pin-breaking force, see Fig. \[fig:pin\_breaking\_force\].
![ Exponent $\alpha$ as a function of the volume fraction occupied by non-superconducting inclusions, $\nu_{\mathrm{vol}} = (\pi/6) n_{p} a^{3} [1 - (\pi/12) n_{p} a^{3}]$. []{data-label="fig:alpha_vf"}](alpha_vf.pdf){width="42.00000%"}
At higher fields, $B > 0.15H_{c2}$, we observe a distinct plateau in $j_c$ around $B = 0.2H_{c2}$, evolving into a non-monotonicity at low densities $n_{p}$. One can also see ‘crowding’ of the [$I\mbox{-}V$]{}curves in this field range in Fig. . This second crossover and peak effect are clearly caused by *double-occupied* particles. The fraction of such double-occupied inclusions $\nu_{2} = \nu_{>1} - \nu_{>2}$ rapidly grows in the plateau region, changing from $\sim 0.2$ to $\sim 0.9$ in a narrow field range, $0.1H_{c2} < B < 0.23H_{c2}$, see Fig. . This behavior is in agreement with the single-pin results presented earlier in Sec. \[sec:single\_inclusion\]. Note that the peak appears far from $H_{c2}$ at a position defined by the defect size; this distinct signature distinguishes the novel peak effect from the classical one. The force with which each inclusion can hold vortices goes down. At the same time, the capability to hold more than one vortex allows to compensate for this effect leading to an upturn in the field-dependence of $j_{c}$. Note that there is no field range of coexistence of unoccupied and double-occupied particles, i.e., the onset of $\nu_2$ at $B / H_{c2} \sim 0.1$ coincides with the saturation of $\nu_{\mathrm{fill}} \to 1$. Similar to the single-occupation fraction $\nu_{1}$, the double-occupation fraction $\nu_{2}$ only weakly depends on the particle density. The $j_{c}$-plateau ends when all particles are at least doubly occupied. Above this field some particles can capture three (or more) vortex lines, and another plateau-like feature may be expected.
In order to draw a direct comparison between the peak effect observed in the critical current of an ensemble of inclusions and the non-monotonic pin-breaking force of a single particle, we have extended the latter to calculate the position-dependent pinning force $f_{\mathrm{pin}}(x)$ and from there its average value $\langle f_{\mathrm{pin}}(x)\rangle$. Substituting $\beta f_{p} = \langle f_{\mathrm{pin}}(x)\rangle$ back into Eq. provides an expression for the critical current at high fields. The result for $n_{p}\xi^{3} = 0.25 \times 10^{-3}$ is shown as open triangles in Fig. \[fig:a4\_jc\_B\]. While the overall trend agrees with the simulation of 125 inclusions, the position of the maximum in the latter case is shifted to lower fields and produces a larger critical current. We attribute both effects to the disordered vortex state for 125 inclusions—as compared to the perfect vortex lattice from the simulations of single inclusions. The disordered state helps pins to capture two vortex lines at lower fields (starting from $0.1 H_{c2}$) and reaches its maximum when all inclusions are doubly occupied (near $0.3 H_{c2}$). Additional quantitative characterizations of the vortex configurations are presented in Appendix \[sec:trapped\_vortex\_a4\], where we discuss the field dependence of the trapping parameters and mean-square displacements of the vortex lines.
The predicted phenomena of pinning by large inclusions, the strong suppression of the pinning force prior to the onset of defect double occupancy, as well as its revival once the inclusion accommodates two vortices, can be observed in systems with monodisperse particles. A finite distribution of inclusion sizes will lead to a smearing of these effects. For moderately dispersed particles, however, one can expect a plateau in the critical current which indicates the underlying peak effect.
Summary and discussion {#sec:discussion}
======================
We systematically investigated pinning properties of randomly distributed spherical inclusions in anisotropic superconductors using large-scale simulations of the TDGL equations. A detailed study and in-depth comparison are presented for two different inclusion diameters, $a=2$ and $4$ coherence length. Our main numerical results can be summarized as follows
- For both defect sizes we found the intermediate magnetic field regime where the vortex lattice is disordered and a finite fraction of inclusions is occupied with vortex lines. In this regime, the critical current decays with the magnetic field as a power-law $B^{-\alpha}$, where the exponent $\alpha$ decreases with increasing inclusion density (for $a=2\xi$ it drops from 0.66 to 0.3). We found that the exponent $\alpha$ is mostly determined by the volume fraction occupied by the inclusions.
- All inclusions become occupied when the magnetic field exceeds a certain value depending on the inclusion size. Above this field, the critical current decreases somewhat faster than the expected $1/B$-law due to the field dependence of the pin-breaking force.
- For $a=2\xi$ and low inclusion densities $n_p$, the lattice becomes ordered at a magnetic field which rapidly increases with $n_p$. The ordering transition—driven by increasing the magnetic field—is accompanied by a reduction of the particle fraction occupied by vortex lines and a sharp drop of the critical current.
- For large-size particles with $a = 4\xi$, the field dependence is strongly influenced by the occupation of particles with, multiple vortex lines. For small densities, we found a peak in the field dependence of the critical current in the range where the fraction of double-occupied particles rapidly increases with the magnetic field. This peak is smoothed out with increasing particle density. Given that the peak position (as a function of the magnetic field) depends on the defect size only, this feature is clearly distinct from the classical peak effect arising near $H_{c2}$ due to softening of the vortex lattice elasticity.
The conventional theory of strong vortex pinning, which we reviewed in Sec. \[sec:estimates\], explains these results only in a very limited range of parameters. We have identified several reasons for this insufficiency. First, in our simulations the vortex lattice is disordered in most of the parameter space. Contrary to our expectations, it only requires a small density of pins to destroy the vortex lattice order. In particular, for the lowest density $n_{p}\xi^{3} = 0.25 \times 10^{-3}$ of small inclusions, the lattice becomes disordered below $B = 0.1 H_{c2}$. This corresponds to $\sim 3.4 \times 10^{-3}$ inclusions per healing volume. Since the strong-pinning theory describes the elastic confinement of a vortex in the lattice by an effective spring constant ${\bar{C}}$, the latter may be significantly altered in the case of a pinned disordered environment. We can expect that the trapping area becomes significantly larger for disordered vortex configurations.
The simplest version of strong-pinning theory suggests that the trapping parameters obey parametric inequalities, i.e., ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}\ll u_{\mathrm{3D}} \ll a_{0}/2$. We find, however, that even for $a = 2\xi$ this situation is only realized at very small magnetic fields. The essential reason for the large trapping lengths is the large anisotropy factor $\gamma = 5$, which enhances both ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$ and $u_{\mathrm{3D}}$ making them comparable with $a_0$. The generalization of the theory for the case ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}\lesssim u_{\mathrm{3D}} \sim a_{0}/2$ is yet to be done.
Furthermore, our estimates suggest the existence of a wide crossover regime between 1D and 3D limits of strong-pinning theory for which no theoretical description is available. By evaluating the correction to the 3D theory due to close inclusion pairs, we took a first step aiming at closing this gap. With these calculations, we have demonstrated that the existence of such pairs gives rise to *negative* corrections to the critical current $j_{c}-j_{c}^{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}} = -\eta_{d} n_{p}V_{h}j_{c}^{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$. Including these corrections, the 3D strong-pinning theory reasonably describes our simulation data for $a = 2\xi$ within a finite field range and despite the vortex lattice disorder.
We found that in the crossover regime, the simulated field dependencies of critical currents are well-described by the power-law $\propto B^{-\alpha}$, where the exponent $\alpha$ is smaller that the theoretical value $5/8$ and decreases with increasing inclusion density. Such power-law fall-offs of the critical current are frequently observed in high-performance superconductors. For REBCO films at low temperatures the exponent $\alpha$ is typically in the range $0.5$–$0.7$ [@PolatPhysRevB11; @MiuraPhysRevB11; @Haberkorn2017]. Additional defects produced by proton [@JiaAPL13] or oxygen [@LerouxAPL2015] irradiation reduce the exponent (from 0.7 to 0.4–0.5). Such trends are consistent with our simulations, see inset in Fig. . Another family of materials which typically shows power-law decay of the critical currents is iron-based superconductors. In the pristine crystals of the 122 family, the exponent is close to $0.5$ indicating strong pinning by some dilute atomic defects [@Fang2012; @TaenPRB2012; @KihlstromAPL2013; @TaenSST2015]. The proton irradiation strongly increases the critical currents and somewhat reduces the exponent (from 0.54 to 0.47 in Ref. [@KihlstromAPL2013]). It was reported that in optimally-irradiated samples, the exponent is close to $0.3$ [@TaenPRB2012; @TaenSST2015]. Such a decay is consistent with our simulation results in the case of a disordered vortex lattice interacting with a high concentration of particles, see inset in Fig. . We also found that an exponent close to 0.3 is realized in a wide range of volume fractions occupied by inclusions, namely for $0.01 < \nu_{\mathrm{vol}} < 0.1$ for both inclusion sizes, see Fig. \[fig:alpha\_vf\].
The field dependence of the critical currents is noticeable down to the lowest simulated magnetic fields. While this may indicate that the true 1D strong-pinning regime has not yet been reached, we do observe the correct scaling of the critical current with respect to the inclusion density predicted for this regime, $j_{c}\propto \sqrt{n_{p}}$. Such a scaling is expected when vortices wander around to optimize their pinning energy with respect to the elastic line tension while intervortex interactions play a minor role. The field dependence of $j_c$, however, is a clear indicator that these interactions cannot be dismissed in a theoretical description. In our simulations, this field-dependence is further enhanced by the ‘infinite-$\lambda$’ approximation used in the numerical implementation; an approximation which leads to a long-range algebraic decay of intervortex interactions ($\propto 1/r$) at all distances instead of exponential ($\propto e^{-r/\lambda}$). However, a crossover to the 1D regime is expected for the infinite-$\lambda$ model as well.
Finally, the vortex pinning behavior dramatically changes with increasing inclusion size. For large-size inclusions, we have uncovered several new aspects which are not addressed by current theories. First, we have found that at intermediate fields a competition-mediated expulsion of the pinned vortex leads to a very strong field dependence of the pin-breaking force. Second, at higher fields the accommodation of two vortices in the same inclusion leads to a novel peak effect. Note that this peak effect is a property of *monodisperse* defects at small densities. Since the peak position (as a function of field) is determined by the particle size, a realistic situation with a size distribution of inclusions will smooth-out the peak. Nevertheless, given a sufficiently narrow distribution of pinning sites, one may expect a plateau-like feature in the magnetic-field dependence of $j_c$. These new phenomena, occurring at large, near-optimal-size defects urgently call for a generalization of today’s theories.
In conclusion, despite its half-century history, the rich and complex field of vortex pinning still bears many unanswered questions and surprises with new phenomena.
The authors thank L. Civale, V. B. Geshkenbein, W.-K. Kwok, M. Leroux, T. Tamegai, and U. Welp for fruitful discussions. We would like to address a special thank to C. L. Phillips for her technical assistance in extracting the vortex lines from the order-parameter configurations using the algorithm described in Ref. [@PhillipsPRE2015] and filtering out the field-induced flux lines. The work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Materials Sciences and Engineering Division. A. E. K., I. A. S., and A. G. were supported by the Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing (SciDAC) program, funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Advanced Scientific Computing Research and Basic Energy Science. R. W. acknowledges funding support from the Early Postdoc.Mobility fellowship of the Swiss National Science Foundation.
Corrections to 3D strong-pinning theory due to close pin pairs {#sec:doublet}
==============================================================
The theory of 3D strong pinning assumes that each defect acts independently and hence the total pinning force is proportional to their density $n_{p}$. This approximation is justified when the average number of pins within the healing volume $V_{h}$ is small, $n_{p}V_{h} \ll 1$. Even in this case, a random arrangement of inclusions will produce closely located pin pairs (doublets) which do not act independently. This event, occurring with a small probability $\sim(n_{p}V_{h})^{2}$, leads to corrections of the strong-pinning result which we will evaluate in the following.
![ Phase diagram for a pin doublet located in the plane $y = 0$ for a fixed separation $Z_{s}$ along $z$. In each region, the $2 \times 2$ table indicates the occupation of the defects. The first row indicates whether the first (left) or second (right) defect captures the vortex (if acting as isolated pin with coordinates $x$ and $x - X_{s}$); here $1$ stands for occupied and $0$ for unoccupied. The second row shows the same pin occupation for the doublet. Only the regions where $\delta f_{d} \neq 0$ are considered. []{data-label="fig:doublet_diagram"}](doublet_diagram.pdf){width="47.00000%"}
Starting from Eq. , we obtain the correction to the bulk pinning force $$\delta F_{c} = 2\frac{B}{\Phi_{0}}n_{p}^{2} \!\int\! d^{2}{\boldsymbol}{r} \!\int\! d^{3}{\boldsymbol}{R}_{s} \bigl[f_{d}({\boldsymbol}{r},{\boldsymbol}{R}_{s})
-f_{\mathrm{pin}}({\boldsymbol}{r})-f_{\mathrm{pin}}({\boldsymbol}{r}-{\boldsymbol}{R}_{s}^{\perp}) \bigr].
\label{eq:CorrFp}$$ Within the integration space, the two defects may either be occupied or empty. Furthermore the occupation will depend on whether the isolated ($f_{\mathrm{pin}}$) or the doublet ($f_{d}$) contribution is considered. A phase diagram marking the regions with different occupation numbers is shown in Fig. \[fig:doublet\_diagram\]. Note that, without loss of generality, we have assumed that the second pin is closer to the vortex position; in the particular case $Y_{s} = 0$, this assumption yields $0 < X_{s}$.
In general, the evaluation of $\delta F_{c}$ is rather complicated. In order to provide a quantitative estimate of the effect, we evaluate the above expression for a simple case. In particular, an exact expression shall be derived when the vortex and the two defects lie in the same $xz$-plane, ${\boldsymbol}{r} = (x,0)$, ${\boldsymbol}{R}_{s}^{\perp}=(X_{s},0)$, while the integration over the transverse coordinates $y$ and $Y_{s}$ will only be accounted for approximately. We consider the simplest case of small-size weakly-strong pins, which can be treated within linear elasticity theory, and approximate interaction of the pinned vortex with its surrounding neighbors by a cage potential. The total energy of the vortex line is then cast by $$\label{En-doublet}
E_{\mathrm{el}}=\int dz\bigg[\frac{{\varepsilon_{1}}}{2}\Big(\frac{du}{dz}\Big)^{2}+\frac{k}{2}u^{2}\bigg],$$ where $k$ measures the strength of the cage potential and $u(z)$ denotes the vortex deformation at the height $z$. When pinned at the first defect, the boundary conditions are $u(0)=-x$ and $u(z\rightarrow\pm\infty)\rightarrow 0$. The equilibrium deformation obeys the minimization condition $$\label{Eq-doublet}
\frac{d^{2}u}{dz^{2}} = \frac{u}{L_{h}^{2}}$$ with the healing length $L_{h}=({\varepsilon_{1}}/k)^{1/2}$. It is straightforward to evaluate the force $f={\varepsilon_{1}}\left[u'(0_{+})-u'(0_{-})\right]$ (with $u'\equiv du/dz$) with which the vortex line acts on the defect; a force that has to be smaller than the pin-breaking force $f_{p}$.
Within this framework, the first isolated pin (if trapping the vortex) deforms the flux line as $$\label{eq:isolated-pin-sol}
u(z) = -x \exp(-|z|/L_{h}),$$ and exerts a force $f_{\mathrm{pin}}(x) = 2 {\varepsilon_{1}}x/L_{h}$. Analogously, the second pin exerts a force $f_{\mathrm{pin}}(x-X_{s})=2{\varepsilon_{1}}(x-X_{s})/L_{h}$. The criterion for the first and second isolated inclusion being occupied reads $x < u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}} = L_{h}f_{p}/(2{\varepsilon_{1}})$ and $x-X_{s} < u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$ respectively.
The pin doublet may realize the simple state where the vortex line is trapped only by one (the first) defect site. In this case the displacement is given by Eq. , see region 2 in Fig. \[fig:doublet\_diagram\] and corresponding inset. The second defect is screened by the first one as long as $X_{s} > X_{m}(x,Z_{s}) \equiv x [1-\exp(-Z_{s}/L_{h})]$; translating into a phase boundary $x_{m}(X_{s},Z_{s}) \equiv X_{s} [1-\exp(-Z_{s}/L_{h})]^{-1}$. In all other cases both pins are occupied, adding another boundary condition $u(Z_{s}) = X_{s}$. In this case the solution reads[^7] $$u(z)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
- (x - X_{s}) \exp[-(z - Z_{s})/L_{h}], & \quad\mathrm{for}\: z > Z_{s}, \\
& \\
-x \cfrac{\sinh[-(z-Z_{s}) /L_{h}]} {\sinh(Z_{s}/L_{h})} - (x - X_{s}) \cfrac{\sinh(z/L_{h})}{\sinh(Z_{s}/L_{h})}, & \quad\mathrm{for}\: -Z_{s} < z < 0, \\
& \\
- x\exp(z/L_{h}), & \quad\mathrm{for}\: z < 0.
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:Displ2occ}$$ Evaluating the condition for depinning from the first pin, we arrive at $$\frac{{\varepsilon_{1}}}{L_{h}} \biggl[ x + \frac{x\cosh\left(Z_{s}/L_{h}\right)-(x-X_{s})}{\sinh(Z_{s}/L_{h})} \biggr] = f_{p}$$ gives the critical distance, see Fig. \[fig:doublet\_diagram\], $$x_{c}(X_{s},Z_{s}) = \bigl[1 + \exp(-Z_{s}/L_{h}) \bigr] u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}
-\cfrac{X_{s}}{\exp\left(Z_{s}/L_{h}\right)-1}$$ or, inversely, $X_{s,c}(x,Z_{s}) \equiv 2\sinh\left(Z_{s}/L_{h}\right)u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}-\left[\exp\left(Z_{s}/L_{h}\right)-1\right]x$. It is interesting to observe that the presence of the second pin *increases* the critical distance in comparison with an isolated pin, $x_{c} (X_{s}, Z_{s}) > u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$, and $x_{c}(X_{s},Z_{s})=u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$ at $X_{s}=X_{m,c}(Z_{s})=X_{m}(u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}},Z_{s})$. Correspondingly, in the region $u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}<x<x_{c}(X_{s},Z_{s})$, shown as regions 3 and 4 in Fig. \[fig:doublet\_diagram\], both defects contribute to the pinning force $f_{d}$ of the doublet while at least one isolated pin is unoccupied. In the region 4, i.e., beyond the line $X_{s} = x-u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$ both isolated pins are unoccupied. This boundary intersects with the critical line $X_{s,c}(x,Z_{s})$ at $X_{s} = X_{s,2} \equiv [1-\exp(-Z_{s}/L_{h})]\exp(-Z_{s}/L_{h}) u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$, defining $x_{c,2} = X_{s,2} + u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}$.
Evaluating the displacement derivatives $u'(z)$ at both defect heights, one arrives at an expression $$f_{d}(x;X_{s},Z_{s})=\frac{2{\varepsilon_{1}}}{L_{h}}\frac{2x-X_{s}}{1+\exp(-Z_{s}/L_{h})}.
\label{eq:frc-doubl}$$ for the force acting from the doublet on the vortex line. In the most generic region 1, see Fig. \[fig:doublet\_diagram\], where all three constituting terms of $\delta f_{d}$ are non-zero, we find $$\delta f_{d}(x,X_{s},Z_{s})=-\frac{2{\varepsilon_{1}}}{L_{h}}\frac{2x-X_{s}}{\exp(Z_{s}/L_{h})+1}.
\label{eq:frcCorr1}$$ In order to proceed, we decompose the correction to the bulk pinning force, Eq. , into $$\delta F_{c} = \frac{B}{\Phi_{0}}n_{p}^{2}f_{p}u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}^{2} \!\int\! dy \!\int\! dY_{s} \!\!\int\limits_{-\infty}^{\infty}\!\!dZ_{s}\mathcal{J}(y,Y_{s},Z_{s}),
\label{eq:dFpInt}$$ with $$\mathcal{J}(y,Y_{s},Z_{s}) = \!\int\! dx \!\int\! dX_{s} \bigl[ f_{d}({\boldsymbol}{r},{\boldsymbol}{R}_{s})
- f_{\mathrm{pin}}({\boldsymbol}{r})-f_{\mathrm{pin}}({\boldsymbol}{r}-{\boldsymbol}{R}_{s}^{\perp}) \bigr].$$ Using the above results, we accurately calculate $\mathcal{J}^{(0)}(Z_{s})=\mathcal{J}(0,0,Z_{s})$. This two-dimensional integration over $x$ and $X_{s}$ naturally splits into four domains[^8] shown in Fig. \[fig:doublet\_diagram\], $\mathcal{J}^{(0)}(Z_{s})=\sum_{j}\mathcal{J}_{j}^{(0)}(Z_{s})$, where each contribution $\mathcal{J}_{j}^{(0)}(Z_{s})$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{J}_{1}^{(0)}(Z_{s}) & = -\cfrac{2}{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}^{3}}\!\!\int\limits _{0}^{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}}\!\!dx \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! \int\limits_{0}^{\ \ \ X_{m}(x,Z_{s})} \!\!\!\!\! \!\!\!\! dX_{s} \cfrac{2x-X_{s}}{\exp(Z_{s}/L_{h})+1},\\
\mathcal{J}_{2}^{(0)}(Z_{s}) & = -\cfrac{2}{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}^{3}}\!\!\int\limits _{0}^{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}}\!\!dx \!\!\!\!\! \int\limits_{X_{m}(x,Z_{s})}^{x} \!\!\!\!\! dX_{s}\ (x-X_{s}),\\
\mathcal{J}_{3}^{(0)}(Z_{s}) & = \cfrac{2}{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}^{3}}\int\limits_{3}dX_{s}\ dx\ \bigg[\cfrac{2x-X_{s}}{1+\exp(-Z_{s}/L_{h})} - (x - X_{s})\bigg],\\
\mathcal{J}_{4}^{(0)}(Z_{s}) & = \cfrac{2}{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}^{3}}\int\limits _{4}dX_{s}\ dx\ \cfrac{2x-X_{s}}{1+\exp(-Z_{s}/L_{h})}.\end{aligned}$$ Here, we have used $$\int_{3}dX_{s}dx \equiv \int_{0}^{X_{s,2}}dX_{s}\int_{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}}^{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}+X_{s}}dx + \int_{X_{s,2}}^{X_{m,c}}dX_{s}\int_{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}}^{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}+X_{s}}dx,$$ as well as $$\int_{4}dX_{s}dx \equiv \int_{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}}^{x_{c2}}dx\int_{0}^{x-u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}}dX_{s}+\int_{x_{c2}}^{x_{c0}}dx\int_{0}^{X_{s,c}(x,Z_{s})}dX_{s},$$ and the relation $u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}} = L_{h}f_{p}/2{\varepsilon_{1}}$. Performing the integrations, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:J1}
\mathcal{J}_{1}^{(0)}(Z_{s}) & =-\frac{\zeta(1-\zeta)}{1+\zeta} \Bigl[1+\frac{1}{3}\zeta \Bigr], \\
\mathcal{J}_{2}^{(0)}(Z_{s}) & =-\frac{\zeta^{2}}{3}, \\
\mathcal{J}_{3}^{(0)}(Z_{s}) & =\frac{\zeta(1-\zeta)^{3}}{1+\zeta} \Bigl[ 1+\frac{2}{3}\zeta \Bigr], \\
\label{eq:J4}
\mathcal{J}_{4}^{(0)}(Z_{s}) & =\frac{\zeta^{2}(1-\zeta)}{1+\zeta} \Bigl[ 2+\zeta-\frac{\zeta^{2}}{3} \Bigr]\end{aligned}$$ with $\zeta \equiv \exp(-Z_{s}/L_{h}).$ Multiple cancellations in the sum $\mathcal{J}(0,0,Z_{s}) = \sum_{j}\mathcal{J}_{j}^{(0)}(Z_{s})$ lead to the remarkably simple result $$\mathcal{J}(0,0,Z_{s}) = -\frac{\zeta^{4}}{3}.
\label{eq:J0Result}$$ While the contributions – come with different signs, the negative sign of their sum implies that the doublet correction $\delta f_{p}$ *reduces* the overall pinning force. The correction in Eq. can also be cast into the form $$\delta F_{c}=-2\frac{B}{\Phi_{0}}n_{p}^{2}f_{p}L_{h}u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}^{2}\int dy\int dY_{s}\ r(y,Y_{s})$$ with $$r(y,Y_{s})=-\frac{1}{2L_{h}}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dZ_{s}\ \mathcal{J}(y,Y_{s},Z_{s}) > 0.$$ Evaluating the last expression using Eq. , we obtain $r(0,0)=1/12$. Simplifying transverse integration to $\int dy \int dY_{s} \approx 4{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}^{2}$, we arrive at the following estimate $$\delta F_{c}\approx-\frac{2}{3}\frac{B}{\Phi_{0}}n_{p}^{2}f_{p}L_{h}u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}}^{2}{u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}^{2}
\label{eq:rel-corr-3D-doublet}$$ for doublet corrections.
Trapping instability into already occupied pin {#sec:double_occupation}
==============================================
![ The vortex configuration near the double-occupation instability. []{data-label="fig:double_occupation_instability"}](double_occupation_instability.pdf){width="35.00000%"}
Let us consider the situation where two vortices compete for the same defect. Thereby, one vortex shall already occupy the defect while the second vortex is approaching it, see Fig. \[fig:double\_occupation\_instability\]. Asymptotically, the vortices are $a_{0}$ apart. The set of coupled force-balance equations, replacing Eq. , then read $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:coupled-1}
{\bar{C}}u(x) & = f_{p}[x + u(x)] + \Gamma f_{p}[x_{1} + u_{1}(x_{1})],\\
\label{eq:coupled-2}
{\bar{C}}u_{1}(x_{1}) & = f_{p}[x_{1} + u_{1}(x_{1})] + \Gamma f_{p}[x + u(x)],\end{aligned}$$ where $x_{1} = x - a_{0} <0$ ($u_{1}$) denotes the asymptotic position (displacement) of the following vortex, and $\Gamma$ measures the reduction in the elastic vortex-vortex interactions at one intervortex distance. Following the route described in Ref. [@BlatterGK2004; @Willa2016], both the effective elasticity ${\bar{C}}= G(0)^{-1}$ and the coupling coefficient $\Gamma = G(a_{0})^{-1}/G(0)^{-1}$ can be expressed through the lattice elastic Green’s function $G(r)$. As long as the second vortex is not pinned, i.e. when $|u_{1}| \ll |x_{1}|$, the second term on the right-hand side of Eq. may be neglected. One arrives at $$\begin{aligned}
{\bar{C}}u(x) & = f_{p}[x + u(x)],\\
{\bar{C}}[u_{1}(x_{1}) - \Gamma u(x) ] & = f_{p}[x_{1} + u_{1}(x_{1})].\end{aligned}$$ Since $x_{1}$ is coupled to $x$ through the trivial relation $ x_{1} = x - a_{0} < 0$, the second equation may be brought to the form of the first one with $\tilde{u} = u_{1} - \Gamma u$ and $\tilde{x} = x-a_{0} + \Gamma u$. Upon increasing $x$, this second equation reaches an instability at $\tilde{u} = {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$, or $$x + \Gamma u(x) = a_{0} - {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$$ In the strong-pinning regime, where $u(x) \approx -x$, we find that the instability occurs when $x = (a_{0} - {u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}) / (1-\Gamma)$. At this point, even if the first vortex has not reached yet its critical deformation $x = u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\mathrm{3D}} = f_{p}/{\bar{C}}$, the following vortex will get attracted into the defect. As a result, two vortices will co-occupy the same defect. Determining whether the entrance of the second vortex is associated with the immediate departure of the first one or whether the double occupancy of the inclusion is stable requires a separate calculation involving the local repulsion of the two pinned vortices. Phenomenologically, the former scenario will extend over a finite field range after which the defect will be doubly occupied. This picture is validated in the simulations, see Sec. \[sec:single\_inclusion\].
Properties of trapped vortex-line configurations for $a=4\xi$ {#sec:trapped_vortex_a4}
=============================================================
We have performed a parameter characterization of trapped vortex configurations for $a = 4\xi$, see Fig. \[fig:a4\_L\_B\]. The magnetic field dependences are shown for $n_p\xi^{3} = 10^{-3}$ and $1.6 \times 10^{-3}$. Figures and show the magnetic field evolution of the parameters characterizing geometry of free line segments: their average length $L$ and pin-to-pin displacements $u$ and ${u_{{\scriptscriptstyle}\! \perp}}$, see upper right part of Fig. \[fig:vortices\_1d\_3d\]. The length $L$ grows with the magnetic field in the region of partial occupation of the inclusions up to the crossover field $B / H_{c2} \sim 0.12$. At higher field the dependence $L(B)$ has a plateau, which is somewhat wider than the similar plateau in the $j_c(B)$ dependence, see Fig. . The trapping length resume growth when all particles become double-occupied. The pin-to-pin displacements weakly depend on the magnetic field and stay within the range 2–$3.5\xi$, somewhat smaller than the inclusion diameter. As expected, the longitudinal displacement, $u$, is always larger than the transversal one $u_{\perp}$. The difference, however, is not very significant. Surprisingly, the displacements have nonmonotonic field dependence and their maximum is realized roughly at the field of full inclusion occupation. At higher fields, the displacements approximately follow the behavior of the intervortex separation, $a_0$.
In order to characterize the long-range behavior of the vortex lines, we present in Fig. the (longitudinal/transverse) mean-squared line displacement $u_{x,y}^2(z) = \langle[u_{x,y}(z) - u_{x,y}(0)^2]\rangle$ as function of the vertical length $z$, for $n_p\xi^{3} = 10^{-3}$ and different magnetic fields. The displacements in the direction of motion $u_{x}^2(z)$ are always larger than the displacements in the transversal direction $u_{y}^2(z)$. We see that for all magnetic fields the displacements show diffusionlike linear growth $u_{x,y}^2(z)=S_{x,y}z$. Figure shows the $B$-dependence of the slopes $S_{x,y}$. We can see that the slopes mimic behavior of the trapping length: the rapidly decrease below the crossover field $B / H_{c2}\sim 0.12$ and become field independent at higher fields. Also, at high fields the line wanderings become mostly isotropic $S_x \approx S_y$.
[^1]: This *strong-pinning* regime has to be contrasted to the *weak collective limit* where only fluctuations of defect density provide a finite pinning force on the vortex system
[^2]: The term ‘1D strong-pinning theory’ should not be confused with ‘1D pinning centers’, where the latter denotes elongated defects that pin vortices over a large portion of their length.
[^3]: The 3D strong-pinning theory assumes that isolated defects locally deform the vortex lattice without destroying its periodicity. For the case when the lattice is strongly deformed (or even destroyed) by the defects, no estimate for the critical current exists.
[^4]: In Ref. [@SadovskyyJComp2015] a slightly different normalization is used, where $\epsilon$ has the value $T_c / T-1$ in the bulk and the unit of length is the zero-temperature coherence length $\xi(0)$. It is straightforward to show that this choice is equivalent to fixing $\epsilon = 1$ in the bulk, while normalizing all lengths to the coherence length $\xi(T) = \xi(0) / \sqrt{T_c/T-1}$.
[^5]: The extraction of $x$ requires an analysis of the order parameter state at a given time $t$. Due to limitations in the numerical capacity of generating/analyzing this output for each simulation time step $t$, we typically limit ourselves to times $t_{i}$ separated by $\delta N_{t} = 10^{4}$ simulation steps ($\delta N_{t}/N_{t} \approx 5 \times 10^{-3}$). In order to reduce numerical noise, we further average $E(t)$ over this time-window.
[^6]: Note that the scaling $j_c\propto n_p$ at field $B = 0.5 H_{c2}$, see Fig. \[fig:a2\_jc\_np\], shows that the weak collective model does not describe the behavior of the critical current in this field range yet.
[^7]: In order to keep the notation simple we have assumed $Z_{s} > 0$.
[^8]: It should be noted that the lines separating different regions mark a change in the occupation of either one of the isolated defects or of the doublet state, hence producing a discontinuity in $\delta f_{d}$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Gradient tree boosting is a prediction algorithm that sequentially produces a model in the form of linear combinations of decision trees, by solving an infinite-dimensional optimization problem. We combine gradient boosting and Nesterov’s accelerated descent to design a new algorithm, which we call `AGB` (for Accelerated Gradient Boosting). Substantial numerical evidence is provided on both synthetic and real-life data sets to assess the excellent performance of the method in a large variety of prediction problems. It is empirically shown that `AGB` is much less sensitive to the shrinkage parameter and outputs predictors that are considerably more sparse in the number of trees, while retaining the exceptional performance of gradient boosting.'
author:
- |
G. Biau\
Sorbonne Université, CNRS, LPSM\
Paris, France\
`[email protected]`\
B. Cadre\
Univ Rennes, CNRS, IRMAR\
Rennes, France\
`[email protected]`\
L. Rouvière\
Univ Rennes, CNRS, IRMAR\
Rennes, France\
`[email protected]`\
bibliography:
- 'biblio-agb.bib'
title: Accelerated Gradient Boosting
---
Introduction
============
Gradient boosting [@FrHaTi00; @Fr01; @Fr02] is a learning procedure that combines the outputs of many simple predictors in order to produce a powerful committee with performances improved over the single members. The approach is typically used with decision trees of a fixed size as base learners, and, in this context, is called gradient tree boosting. This machine learning method is widely recognized for providing state-of-the-art results on several challenging data sets, as pointed out for example in the introduction of @ChGu16. To get to the point, boosted decision trees are generally regarded as one of the best off-the-shell prediction algorithms we have today, with performance at the level of the Lasso [@Ti96] and random forests [@Brforests01], to name only two competitors.
Gradient boosting originates in Freund and Schapire’s work [@Sc90; @Fr95; @FrSc96a; @FrSc97] on weighted iterative classification. It was complemented by several analyses by @Br97 [@Br98; @Br99; @Br00; @Br04], who made the fundamental observation that Freund and Schapire’s AdaBoost is in fact a gradient-descent-type algorithm in a function space, thus identifying boosting at the frontier of numerical optimization and statistical estimation. Explicit regression and classification boosting algorithms were subsequently developed by @Fr01 [@Fr02], who coined the name “gradient boosting” and paid a special attention to the case where the individual components are decision trees. Overall, this functional view of boosting has led to the development of boosting algorithms in many areas of machine learning and statistics beyond regression and classification [e.g., @BlLuVa03; @BuYu03; @LuVa04; @ZhYu05; @BiRiZa06; @BuHo07].
In a different direction, the pressing demand of the machine learning community to build accurate prediction mechanisms from massive amounts of high dimensional data has greatly promoted the theory and practice of accelerated first-order schemes. In this respect, one of the most effective approaches among first-order optimization techniques is the so-called Nesterov’s accelerated gradient descent [@Ne83]. In a nutshell, if we are interested in minimizing some smooth convex function $f(x)$ over $\mathds R^d$, then Nesterov’s descent may take the following form [@BeTe09]: starting with $x_0=y_0$, inductively define $$\label{nesterov}
\begin{array}{lll}
x_{t+1} & = &y_{t}-w \nabla f(y_t)\\
y_{t+1} & = & (1-\gamma_t)x_{t+1}+\gamma_t x_t,
\end{array}$$ where $w$ is the step size, $$\lambda_0=0, \quad \lambda_t=\frac{1+\sqrt{1+4 \lambda_{t-1}^2}}{2}, \quad \mbox{and} \quad \gamma_t=\frac{1-\lambda_t}{\lambda_{t+1}}.$$ In other words, Nesterov’s descent performs a simple step of gradient to go from $y_t$ to $x_{t+1}$, and then it slides it a little bit further than $x_{t+1}$ in the direction given by the previous point $x_t$. As acknowledged by @Bu13, the intuition behind the algorithm is quite difficult to grasp. Nonetheless, Nesterov’s accelerated gradient descent is an optimal method for smooth convex optimization: the sequence $(x_t)_t$ recovers the minimum of $f$ at a rate of order $1/t^2$, in contrast to vanilla gradient descent methods, which have the same computational complexity but can only achieve a rate in ${\rm O}(1/t)$. Since the introduction of Nesterov’s scheme, there has been much work on first-order accelerated methods ([see, e.g., @Ne04; @Ne05; @Ne13; @SuBoCa16 for theoretical developments], and [@Ts08], for a unified analysis of these ideas). Notable applications can be found in sparse linear regression [@BeTe09], compressed sensing [@BeBoCa11], distributed gradient descent [@QuLi17], and deep and recurrent neural networks [@SuMaDaHi13].
In this article, we present `AGB` (for `A`ccelerated `G`radient `B`oosting), a new tree boosting algorithm that incorporates Nesterov’s mechanism (\[nesterov\]) into Friedman’s original procedure [@Fr01]. Substantial numerical evidence is provided on both synthetic and real-life data sets to assess the excellent performance of our method in a large variety of prediction problems. The striking feature of `AGB` is that it enjoys the merits of both approaches:
1. Its predictive performance is comparable to that of standard gradient tree boosting;
2. It takes advantage of the accelerated descent to output models which are remarkably much more sparse in their number of components.
Item $(ii)$ is of course a decisive advantage for large-scale learning, when time and storage issues matter. To make the concept clear, we show in Figure \[fig:err\_plusieurs\_shrink\] typical test error results by number of iterations and shrinkage (step size), both for the standard (top) and the accelerated (bottom) algorithms. As is often the case with gradient boosting, smaller values of the shrinkage parameter require a larger number of trees for the optimal model, when the test error is at its minimum. However, if both approaches yield similar results in terms of prediction, we see that the optimal number of iterations is at least one order of magnitude smaller for `AGB`.
![Adaboost exponential loss (estimated on a test data set) by number of iterations for standard gradient boosting (top) and `AGB` (bottom). The data are generated according to `Model 5` with $n=5\ 000$ observations (see page ).[]{data-label="fig:err_plusieurs_shrink"}](err_plusieurs_shrink){width="13cm" height="13cm"}
The paper is organized as follows. In Section \[(A)GB\], we briefly recall the mathematical/statistical context of gradient boosting, and present the principle of the `AGB` algorithm. Section \[NS\] is devoted to analyzing the results of a battery of experiments on synthetic and real-life data sets. We offer an extensive comparison between the performance of Friedman’s gradient tree boosting and `AGB`, with a special emphasis put on the influence of the learning rate on the size of the optimal models. The code used for the simulations and the figures is available at <https://github.com/lrouviere/AGB>.
(Accelerated) gradient boosting {#(A)GB}
===============================
Gradient boosting at a glance
-----------------------------
Let $\mathscr D_n=\{(X_1,Y_1), \hdots, (X_n,Y_n)\}$ be a sample of i.i.d. observations, all distributed as an independent generic pair $(X,Y)$ taking values in $\mathds R^d \times \mathscr Y$. Throughout, $\mathscr Y\subset \mathds R$ is either a finite set of labels (for classification) or a subset of $\mathds R$ (for regression). The learning task is to construct a predictor $F:\mathds R^d\to \mathds R$ that assigns a response to each possible value of the independent random observation $X$. In the context of gradient boosting, this general problem is addressed by considering a class $\mathscr F$ of elementary functions $f:\mathds R^d\to \mathds R$ (called the weak or base learners), and by minimizing some empirical risk functional $$\label{CNF}
C_n(F)=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\psi(F(X_i),Y_i)$$ over the linear combinations of functions in $\mathscr F$. Thus, we are looking for an additive solution of the form $F_n=\sum_{j=0}^J \alpha_jf_j$, where $(\alpha_0, \hdots, \alpha_J) \in \mathds R^{J+1}$ and each component $f_j$ is picked in the base class $\mathscr F$.
The function $\psi:\mathds R \times \mathscr Y \to \mathds R_+$ is called the loss. It is assumed to be convex and differentiable in its first argument, and it measures the cost incurred by predicting $F(X_i)$ when the answer is $Y_i$. For example, in the least squares regression problem, $\psi(x,y)=(y-x)^2$, and $$C_n(F)=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n(Y_i-F(X_i))^2.$$ In the $\pm1$-classification problem, the final classification rule is $+1$ if $F(x)>0$ and $-1$ otherwise. In this context, two classical losses are $\psi(x,y)=e^{-yx}$ (Adaboost exponential loss) and $\psi(x,y)=\ln_2(1+e^{-yx})$ (logit loss).
In the present document, we take for $\mathscr F$ the collection of all binary decision trees in $\mathds R^d$ using axis parallel cuts with $k$ (small) terminal nodes (or leaves). Thus, each $f \in \mathscr F$ takes the form $f=\sum_{j=1}^{k} \beta_j \mathds 1_{A_j}$, where $(\beta_1, \hdots, \beta_k) \in \mathds R^k$ and $\{A_1, \hdots, A_{k}\}$ is a tree-structured partition of $\mathds R^d$ [@DeGyLu96 Chapter 20]. An example of regression tree fitted with the `R` package `rpart.plot` with $k=3$ leaves in dimension $d=2$ is shown in Figure \[fig:reg\_tree\].
![A regression tree in dimension $d=2$ with $k=3$ leaves.[]{data-label="fig:reg_tree"}](simple_tree5){width="15cm" height="6cm"}
Let us get back to the minimization problem (\[CNF\]) and denote by ${\mbox{lin}(\mathscr F)}$ the set of all linear combinations of functions in $\mathscr F$, our basic collection of trees. So, each $F \in {\mbox{lin}(\mathscr F)}$ is an additive association of trees, of the form $F=\sum_{j=0}^J \alpha_j f_j$. Finding the infimum of the functional $C_n$ over ${\mbox{lin}(\mathscr F)}$ is a challenging infinite-dimensional optimization problem, which requires an algorithm. This is where gradient boosting comes into play by sequentially constructing a linear combination of trees, adding one new component at each step. This algorithm rests upon a sort of functional gradient descent, which we briefly describe in the next paragraph. We do not go to much into the mathematical details, and refer to @MaBaBaFr99 [@MaBaBaFr00] and @BiCa17 for a thorough analysis of the mathematical forces in action.
Suppose that we have at step $t$ a function $F_t \in \mbox{lin}(\mathscr F)$ and wish to find a new $f_{t+1}\in \mathscr F$ to add to $F_t$ so that the risk $C_n(F_t+wf_{t+1})$ decreases at most, for some small value of $w$. Viewed in function space terms, we are looking for the direction $f_{t+1} \in \mathscr F$ such that $C_n(F_t+wf_{t+1})$ most rapidly decreases. Observe that, for all $F \in \mbox{lin}(\mathscr F)$, $\nabla C_n (F)(X_i)=\partial_x\psi(F(X_i),Y_i)$, where the symbol $\partial_x$ means partial derivative with respect to the first component. Then the knee-jerk reaction is to take $f_{t+1}(\cdot)=-\nabla C_n (F_t)(\cdot)$, the opposite of the gradient of $C_n$ at $F_t$ (this is a function over $\mathds R^d$), and do something like $$F_{t+1}=F_t-w\nabla C_n (F_t).$$ However, since we are restricted to pick our new function in $\mathscr F$, this will in general not be a possible choice. The stratagem is to choose the new $f_{t+1}$ by a least squares approximation of the function $-\nabla C_n (F_t)(\cdot)$, i.e., to take $$f_{t+1}\in {\arg \min}_{f \in \mathscr F} \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n (-\nabla C_n (F_t)(X_i)-f(X_i))^2.$$ For example, when $\psi(x,y)=(y-x)^2/2$, then $-\nabla C_n(F_t)(X_i)=Y_i-F_t(X_i)$, and the algorithm simply fits $f_{t+1}$ to the residuals $Y_i-F_t(X_i)$ at step $t$. This is the general principle of Friedman’s gradient boosting [@Fr01], which after $T$ iterations outputs an additive expansion of the form $F_T=\sum_{t=0}^T\alpha_tf_{t}$. The operational algorithm includes several regularization techniques to reduce the eventual overfitting. Some of these features are incorporated in our accelerated version, which we now describe.
The AGB algorithm
-----------------
The pseudo-code of `AGB` is presented in the table below.
\[algorithm1\]
$T\geq 1$ (number of iterations), $k\geq 1$ (number of terminal nodes in the trees), $0<\nu<1$ (shrinkage parameter).
$F_0=G_0={\arg \min}_{z} \sum_{i=1}^n \psi(z,Y_i)$, $\lambda_0=0$, $\gamma_0=1$.
For $i=1, \hdots, n$, [**compute**]{} the negative gradient instances $$Z_{i,t+1}=-\nabla C_n (G_t)(X_i).$$ a regression tree to the pairs $(X_i,Z_{i,t+1})$, giving terminal nodes $R_{j,t+1}$, $1 \leq j \leq k$.
For $j=1, \hdots, k$, [**compute**]{} $$w_{j,t+1}\in{\arg \min}_{w>0} \sum_{X_i \in R_{j,t+1}} \psi(G_{t}(X_i)+w,Y_i).$$
1. $F_{t+1}=G_{t}+\nu\sum_{j=1}^{k} w_{j,t+1} \mathds 1_{R_{j,t+1}}$.
2. $G_{t+1}=(1-\gamma_{t})F_{t+1}+\gamma_t F_t$.
3. $\lambda_{t}=\frac{1+\sqrt{1+4 \lambda_{t-1}^2}}{2}$, $\lambda_{t+1}=\frac{1+\sqrt{1+4 \lambda_{t}^2}}{2}$.
4. $\gamma_{t}=\frac{1-\lambda_{t}}{\lambda_{t+1}}$.
$F_{T}$.
We see that the algorithm has two inner functional components, $(F_t)_t$ and $(G_t)_t$, which correspond respectively to the vectorial sequences $(x_t)_t$ and $(y_t)_t$ of Nesterov’s acceleration scheme (\[nesterov\]). Observe that the sequence $(G_t)_t$ is internal to the procedure while the linear combination output by the algorithm after $T$ iterations is $F_T$. Line 2 initializes to the optimal constant model. As in Friedman’s original approach, the algorithm selects at each iteration, by least-squares fitting, a particular tree that is in most agreement with the descent direction (the “gradient”), and then performs an update of $G_t$. The essential difference is the presence of the companion function sequence $(G_t)_t$, which slides the iterates $(F_t)_t$ according to the recursive parameters $\lambda_t$ and $\gamma_t$ (lines $7$ $(b)$-$(d)$).
Let $f_{t+1}=\sum_{j=1}^k{\beta_{j,t+1}}\mathds 1_{R_{j,t+1}}$ be the approximate-gradient tree output at line 6 of the algorithm. The next logical step is to perform a line search to find the step size and update the model accordingly, as follows: $$w_{t+1}\in {\arg \min}_{w>0}\,\sum_{i=1}^n\psi(G_{t}(X_i)+w f_{t+1}(X_i), Y_i), \quad F_{t+1}=G_{t}+w_{t+1} f_{t+1}.$$ However, following Friedman’s gradient tree boosting [@Fr01], a separate optimal value $w_{j,t+1}$ is chosen for each of the tree’s regions, instead of a single $w_{t+1}$ for the whole tree. The coefficients $\beta_{j,t+1}$ from the tree-fitting procedure can be then simply discarded, and the model update rule at epoch $t$ becomes, for each $j=1, \hdots, k$, $$w_{j,{t+1}} \in {\arg \min}_{w>0} \sum_{X_i \in R_{j,t+1}} \psi(G_{t}(X_i)+w,Y_i), \quad F_{t+1}=G_{t}+\nu\sum_{j=1}^k w_{j,t+1}\mathds 1_{R_{j,t+1}}$$ (lines 6 and 7 $(a)$). We also note that the contribution of the approximate gradient is scaled by a factor $0<\nu<1$ when it is added to the current approximation. The parameter $\nu$ can be regarded as controlling the learning rate of the boosting procedure. Smaller values of $\nu$ (more shrinkage) usually lead to larger values of $T$ for the same training risk. Therefore, in order to reduce the number of trees composing the boosting estimate, large values for $\nu$ are required. However, too large values of $\nu$ may break the gradient descent dynamic, as shown for example in @BiCa17 [Lemma 3.2]. All in all, both $\nu$ and $T$ control prediction risk on the training data and these parameters do not operate independently. This tradeoff issue is thoroughly explored in the next section.
Numerical studies {#NS}
=================
This section is devoted to illustrating the potential of our `AGB` algorithm and to highlighting the benefits of Nesterov’s acceleration scheme in the boosting process. Synthetic models and real-life data are considered, and an exhaustive comparison with standard gradient tree boosting is performed. For the implementation of Friedman’s boosting, we used the `R` package `gbm`, a description of which can be found in @Ri07. These two boosting algorithms are compared in the last subsection with the Lasso [@Ti96] and random forests [@Brforests01] methods, respectively implemented with the packages `glmnet` and `randomForest`.
Description of the data sets
----------------------------
The algorithms were benchmarked on both simulated and real-life data sets. For each of the simulated models, we consider two designs for $X=(X_1,\hdots,X_d)$: Uniform over $(-1,1)^d$ (“Uncorrelated design”) and Gaussian with mean $0$ and $d\times d$ covariance matrix $\Sigma$ such that $\Sigma_{ij}=2^{-|i-j|}$ ("Correlated design”). The five following models cover a wide spectrum of regression and classification problems. Models 1-3 and 5 come from [@BiFiGuMa16]. Model 4 is a slight variation of a benchmark model in [@HaTiFr09]. Models 1-3 are regression problems, while Model 4 and 5 are $\pm 1$-classification tasks. Models 2-4 are additive, while Models 1 and 5 include some interactions. Model 3 can be seen as a sparse high-dimensional problem. We denote by $Z_{\mu,\sigma^2}$ a Gaussian random variable with mean $\mu$ and variance $\sigma^2$.
#### Model 1.
$n=1\,000$, $d=100$, $Y=X_1X_2+X_3^2-X_4X_7+X_8X_{10}-X_6^2+Z_{0,0.5}$.
#### Model 2.
$n=800$, $d=100$, $Y=-\sin(2X_1)+X_2^2+X_3-\exp(-X_4)+Z_{0,0.5}$.
#### Model 3.
$n=1\,000$, $d=500$, $Y=X_1+3X_3^2-2\exp(-X_5)+X_6$.
#### Model 4.
$n=2\,000$, $d=30$, $$Y=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
2\ \mathds{1}_{\sum_{j=1}^{10}X_j^2> 3.5}-1 & \text{for uncorrelated design} \\
2\ \mathds{1}_{\sum_{j=1}^{10}X_j^2> 9.34}-1 & \text{for correlated design}.
\end{array}\right.$$
#### Model 5. {#def:model5}
$n=1\,500$, $d=50$, $Y=2\ \mathds{1}_{X_1+X_4^3+X_9+\sin(X_{12}X_{18})+ Z_{0,0.1}>0.38}-1$.
We also considered the following real-life data sets from the `UCI Machine Learning repository`: Adult, Internet Advertisements, Communities and Crime, Spam, and Wine. Their main characteristics are summarized in Table \[tab:descdonreelles\] (a more complete description is available at the address <https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets.html>).
[**Data set**]{} $n$ $d$ [**Output**]{} $Y$
------------------ ------- ------ --------------------
Adult 30162 14 binary
Advert. 2359 1431 binary
Crime 1993 102 continuous
Spam 4601 57 binary
Wine 1559 11 continuous
: Main characteristics of the five real-life data sets used in the experiments.[]{data-label="tab:descdonreelles"}
For each data set, simulated or real, the sample is divided into a training set (50%) $\mathscr D_{{\rm train}}$ to fit the method; a validation set (25%) $\mathscr D_{{\rm val}}$ to select the hyperparameters of the algorithms; and a test set (25%) $\mathscr D_{{\rm test}}$ on which the predictive performance is evaluated. We considered two loss functions for both standard boosting and `AGB`: the least squares loss $\psi(x,y)=(y-x)^2$ for regression and the Adaboost loss $\psi(x,y)=e^{-yx}$ for $\pm 1$-classification. We also tested the logit loss function $\psi(x,y)=\ln_2(1+e^{-yx})$. Since the results are similar to the Adaboost loss they are not reported.
In the boosting algorithms, the validation set is used to select the number of components of the model, i.e., the number of iterations performed by the algorithm. Thus, denoting by $F_T$ the boosting predictor after $T$ iterations fitted on $\mathscr D_{{\rm train}}$, we select the $T^\star$ that minimizes $$\label{eq:sel_iter_test}
\frac{1}{\sharp \mathscr D_{{\rm val}} }\sum_{i\in\mathscr D_{{\rm val}}}\psi(F_T(X_i),Y_i).$$ For both standard gradient tree boosting and `AGB`, we fit regression trees with two terminal nodes. We considered five fixed values for the shrinkage parameter $\nu$ ($1\mathrm{e}-05$, 0.001, 0.01, 0.1, and 0.5), and fixed an arbitrary (large) limit of $T=10\,000$ iterations for the standard boosting and $T=2\,500$ for `AGB`. All results are averaged over 100 replications for simulated examples, and over 20 independent permutations of the sample for the real-life data.
Gradient boosting vs accelerated gradient boosting
--------------------------------------------------
In this subsection, we compare the standard gradient tree boosting and `AGB` algorithms in terms of minimization of the empirical risk and selected number of components $T^{\star}$. Figure \[fig:sel\_nb\_iter\] shows the training and validation errors for Friedman’s boosting and `AGB` (bottom), as a function of the number of iterations.
![Training (solid lines) and validation (dashed lines) errors for Model 1 and Model 5. Shrinkage parameter $\nu$ is fixed to 0.01.[]{data-label="fig:sel_nb_iter"}](sel_nb_ite_v3.pdf){width="13cm" height="10cm"}
As it is generally the case for gradient boosting [e.g., @Ri07], the validation error decreases until predictive performance is at its best and then starts increasing again. The vertical blue line shows the optimal number of iterations $T^{\star}$, selected by minimizing . We see that the validation rates at the optimal $T^{\star}$ are comparable for `AGB` and the original algorithm. However, `AGB` outperforms gradient boosting in terms of number of components of the output model, which is much smaller for `AGB`. This is a direct consequence of Nesterov’s acceleration scheme.
This remarkable behavior is confirmed by Figures \[fig:box\_dev\_reg1\], \[fig:box\_dev\_reg2\], and \[fig:box\_dev\_reg3\], where we plotted the relationship between predictive performance, the number of iterations, and the shrinkage parameter. On the left side of each figure, we show the boxplots of the test errors of the selected predictors $F_{T^\star}$, i.e., $$\label{eq:dev_valid}
\frac{1}{\sharp \mathscr D_{{\rm test}}}\sum_{i\in\mathscr D_{{\rm test}}}\psi(F_{T^\star}(X_i),Y_i),$$ as a function of the shrinkage parameter $\nu$. The right sides depict the boxplots of the optimal number of components $T^\star$.
These three figures convey several messages. First of all, we notice that the predictive performances of the two methods are close to each other, independently of the data sets (simulated or real). Moreover, in line with the comments of @HaTiFr09 [Chapter 10], smaller values of the shrinkage parameter $\nu$ favor better test error. Indeed, for all examples we observe that the best test errors are achieved for $\nu$ smaller than 0.1. However, for such values of $\nu$, it seems difficult for standard boosting to reach the optimal $T^{\star}$ in a reasonable number of iterations, and 10 000 iterations are generally not sufficient as soon as $\nu$ is less than 0.01. The accelerated algorithm allows to circumvent this problem since, for each value of $\nu$, the optimal model is achieved after a number of iterations considerably smaller than with standard boosting. Besides, `AGB` is much less sensitive to the choice of $\nu$. These two features are clear advantages since, in practice, one has no or few a priori information on the reasonable value of $\nu$, and the usual strategy is to try several (often, small) values of the shrinkage parameter until the validation error is the lowest. Of course, this benefit is striking when we are faced with large-scale data, i.e., when iterations have a computational price.
![Boxplots of the test error (left) and selected numbers of iterations (right), as a function of the shrinkage parameter $\nu$ for standard gradient boosting (red, left) and `AGB` (blue, right). Results are presented for simulated models with uncorrelated design.[]{data-label="fig:box_dev_reg1"}](box_dev_Ite_uncor.pdf){width="15cm" height="20cm"}
![Boxplots of the test error (left) and number of selected iterations (right) as a function of the shrinkage parameter $\nu$, for standard gradient boosting (red, left) and `AGB` (blue, right). Results are presented for simulated models with correlated design.[]{data-label="fig:box_dev_reg2"}](box_dev_Ite_cor.pdf){width="15cm" height="20cm"}
![Boxplots of the test error (left) and number of selected iterations (right) as a function of the shrinkage parameter $\nu$, for standard gradient boosting (red, left) and `AGB` (blue, right). Results are presented for real-life data sets.[]{data-label="fig:box_dev_reg3"}](box_dev_Ite_dr.pdf){width="15cm" height="20cm"}
Comparison with the Lasso and random forests
--------------------------------------------
We compare in this last subsection the performance of the standard and accelerated boosting algorithms with that of the Lasso and random forests, respectively implemented with the `R` packages `glmnet` and `randomForest`. As above, the number of components $T^{\star}$ of the boosting predictors are selected by minimizing . The shrinkage parameter of the Lasso (parameter `lambda` in `glmnet`) and the number of variables randomly sampled as candidates at each split for the trees of the random forests (parameter `mtry` in `randomForest`) are selected by minimizing the mean squared error (regression) and the misclassification error (classification) computed on the validation set. The `R`-package `caret` was used to conduct these minimization problems. The prediction performance of each predictor $F$ were assessed on the test set by the mean squared error $\frac{1}{\sharp \mathscr D_{{\rm test}}}\sum_{i\in\mathscr D_{{\rm test}}}(Y_i-F(X_i))^2$ for regression problems, and $(i)$ the misclassification error $\frac{1}{\sharp \mathscr D_{{\rm test}}}\sum_{i\in\mathscr D_{{\rm test}}}\mathds 1_{F(X_i)\neq Y_i}$ and $(ii)$ the area under ROC curve (AUC) for classification problems (computed on the test set).
Table \[tab:quad\_risk\_10mod\] shows the test errors for the regression problems, while Tables \[tab:missclass\_10mod\] and \[tab:auc\_10mod\] display misclassification errors and AUC for classification tasks. All results are averaged over 100 replications for simulated examples and over 20 permutations of the sample for real-life data set.
As might be expected, the results depend on the data sets, with an advantage to boosting algorithms, which are often the first and perform uniformly well. Besides, even if there is no clear winner between traditional boosting and `AGB`, we still find that `AGB` is weakly sensitive to the choice of $\nu$ and leads to more parsimonious models ($T^{\star}$ in the tables) for both regression and classification problems, and independently of the data set. They are the take-home messages of our paper.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We compare strategies for evaporative and sympathetic cooling of two-species Fermi-Bose mixtures in single-color and two-color optical dipole traps. We show that in the latter case a large heat capacity of the bosonic species can be maintained during the entire cooling process. This could allow to efficiently achieve a deep Fermi degeneracy regime having at the same time a significant thermal fraction for the Bose gas, crucial for a precise thermometry of the mixture. Two possible signatures of a superfluid phase transition for the Fermi species are discussed.'
author:
- Carlo Presilla
- Roberto Onofrio
title: 'Cooling dynamics of ultracold two-species Fermi-Bose mixtures'
---
Recent studies of ultracold dilute matter are bridging a gap between the idealized descriptions of quantum degenerate Bose and Fermi gases and their actual counterpart in strongly-interacting condensed matter systems like liquid $^4$He and electrons in superconducting materials [@Pethick]. While experimental studies of interacting dilute Bose gases in the degenerate regime are ongoing since 1995 [@Wieman], Fermi gases have been explored only more recently. Non-interacting, purely quantum-mechanical features of dilute Fermi gases have been observed in the degenerate regime, namely Pauli blocking [@DeMarco] and Fermi pressure [@Truscott; @Schreck]. Phenomena involving their interacting nature are expected when fermions are highly degenerate. Important studies of strongly interacting degenerate Fermi gases have been recently reported for Fermi-Bose mixtures [@Inguscio], and for two-component Fermi gases [@Oharanew]. Moreover, BCS-based models are predicting a superfluid phase based on Cooper pairing already invoked for the understanding of low-temperature superconductivity and superfluidity of $^3$He [@Stoof].
Current efforts to cool fermions seem ultimately limited by intrinsic heating sources [@Timmermans] in the case of evaporative cooling of two hyperfine states of fermions [@DeMarco; @Granade], and by the decreasing cooling efficiency of bosons in experiments using sympathetic cooling [@Truscott; @Schreck; @Hadzibabic; @Roati]. Recently, we proposed the use of a two-color optical dipole trap to enhance the Fermi degeneracy temperature $T_\mathrm{F}$ with respect to the Bose-Einstein critical temperature $T_\mathrm{c}$ whenever a bosonic species is used to sympathetically cool a different fermionic species [@Onofrio]. This can be obtained by engineering different trapping potentials for the two species with proper detuning and intensities of two laser beams, as discussed in [@Onofrio] with particular regard to the static confinement features. In this Letter we analyze the dynamics of cooling and heating of the Fermi-Bose mixture in two-color optical dipole traps. It turns out that a deep Fermi degeneracy regime can be achieved, allowing at the same time for both precision thermometry and relatively simple signatures of fermion superfluidity.
In order to understand the efficiency limits of sympathetic cooling of a fermion-boson mixture let us consider the heat capacities $C(N,T)$ of the two species at a fixed number $N$ of particles as a function of temperature $T$. In the case of non-interacting gases confined into a harmonic potential $V(x,y,z) = \frac{1}{2} m \left( \omega_x^2 x^2 + \omega_y^2
y^2 + \omega_z^2 z^2 \right)$, the heat capacities can be evaluated numerically. In Fig. 1 we show the behavior of $C_\mathrm{b}(N_\mathrm{b},T)$ and $C_\mathrm{f}(N_\mathrm{f},T)$ for a mixture composed by the same number of bosons and fermions trapped in a crossed-beam optical dipole trap [@Adams; @Chapman]. Below the critical, $T_\mathrm{c} = \zeta(3)^{-1/3}\hbar \omega_\mathrm{b}
N_\mathrm{b}^{1/3} k_\mathrm{B}^{-1}$, and Fermi, $T_\mathrm{F} = 6^{1/3}\hbar \omega_\mathrm{f}
N_\mathrm{f}^{1/3} k_\mathrm{B}^{-1}$, temperatures, defined in terms of the average angular trap frequencies $\omega_\mathrm{b}=
(\omega_{\mathrm{b}x} \omega_{\mathrm{b}y} \omega_{\mathrm{b}z})^{1/3}$ and $\omega_\mathrm{f}=
(\omega_{\mathrm{f}x} \omega_{\mathrm{f}y} \omega_{\mathrm{f}z})^{1/3}$, the boson and fermion heat capacities vanish as $T^3$ and $T$, respectively. If $\omega_\mathrm{f}=\omega_\mathrm{b}$, the boson heat capacity becomes smaller than the fermion one below $T/T_\mathrm{F} \simeq 0.3$, strongly affecting the efficiency of sympathetic cooling for smaller $T/T_\mathrm{F}$. This explains qualitatively the difficulty in reaching temperatures lower than $T/T_\mathrm{F}\simeq 0.25$ in the experiments reported in [@Truscott; @Schreck] where $^7$Li-$^6$Li mixtures were used, and more in general in magnetically or single-color optically trapped Fermi-Bose mixtures.
![ Heat exchange for harmonically trapped Bose-Fermi mixtures. The single particle heat capacity of non-interacting fermions (dot-dashed) and bosons (solid) is shown versus temperature for two different values of the trap frequency ratio $\omega_\mathrm{f}/\omega_\mathrm{b}$. Arrows evidence the different $T/T_F$ values below which the boson heat capacity becomes smaller than the fermion one. We consider a case with $N_\mathrm{b}=N_\mathrm{f}=10^6$, $m_\mathrm{b}=m_\mathrm{f}$, and $\omega_x=\omega_y=\omega_z/\sqrt{2}$. []{data-label="fig1"}](cool.fig1.eps){width="0.95\columnwidth"}
Were we able to increase the ratio $\omega_\mathrm{f}/\omega_\mathrm{b}$, the cooling efficiency of a boson-fermion mixture could be extended to much lower temperatures. As an example, in Fig. 1 we show that for $\omega_\mathrm{f}/\omega_\mathrm{b}=10$, obtainable with bichromatic optical dipole traps [@Onofrio], the heat capacity inversion takes place at $T/T_\mathrm{F}\simeq 10^{-2}$. The discussion can be made more quantitative by considering the dynamics of the system during forced evaporation and comparing a bichromatic trap to the single-color case.
In optical dipole traps forced evaporative cooling is obtained by continuously decreasing the depth of the confining potential energy via proper control of the laser power. The detailed dynamics for a single-color optical dipole trap has been discussed in [@OHara], where scaling laws for all the relevant parameters of evaporative cooling were obtained. A fundamental quantity in forced evaporation is the ratio between the potential energy depth experienced by the trapped atoms and their temperature, $\Delta U/k_\mathrm{B}T \equiv \eta$. It has been shown that thermodynamic equilibrium is assured if $\eta$ is kept constant, even if $\Delta U$ and $T$ are time dependent [@Ketterle]. This implies that during cooling the temperature of the atomic cloud is always well-defined. The condition of constant $\eta$ determines the time dependence of the potential energy depth [@OHara] $$\label{scaling}
\frac{\Delta U(t)}{\Delta U_i} =
\left(1+\frac{t}{\tau}\right)^{\varepsilon_U},$$ where $\Delta U_i$ is the initial potential depth, $\varepsilon_U=-2(\eta^\prime-3)/\eta^\prime$, and $\tau^{-1}=(2/3) \eta^\prime(\eta-4)\exp(-\eta)\gamma_i$, with $\eta^\prime=\eta+(\eta-5)/(\eta-4)$ and $\gamma_i$ being the initial elastic collision rate. Once the time dependence of $\Delta U$ is known, all other relevant quantities, [*e.g.*]{} number of particles, temperature, phase space density, and elastic scattering rate, are obtained by scaling laws similar to (\[scaling\]) with possibly different exponents, $\varepsilon_N$, $\varepsilon_T$, $\varepsilon_\rho$, and $\varepsilon_\gamma$. In Table I we report the values of these exponents for three different values of $\eta$ realistically achievable in experimental situations, and the corresponding time constant $\tau$.
$\eta$ $\varepsilon_U$, $\varepsilon_T$ $\varepsilon_N$ $\varepsilon_\rho$ $\varepsilon_\gamma$ $(\gamma_i \tau)^{-1}$
-------- ---------------------------------- ----------------- -------------------- ---------------------- ------------------------
5 $-0.80$ $-0.60$ 0.60 $-1$ $2.2 \times 10^{-2}$
10 $-1.45$ $-0.28$ 1.89 $-1$ $2.0 \times 10^{-3}$
15 $-1.62$ $-0.19$ 2.25 $-1$ $3.6 \times 10^{-5}$
: Evaporative cooling scaling exponents for the potential energy depth $\varepsilon_U$, the temperature $\varepsilon_T$, the number of particles $\varepsilon_N$, the phase-space density $\varepsilon_\rho$, and the elastic collision rate $\varepsilon_\gamma$, for three values of the evaporation parameter $\eta$. We also report the time constant $\tau$ in terms of the initial elastic scattering rate $\gamma_i=N_\mathrm{b}m_\mathrm{b} \sigma \omega_\mathrm{b}^3/(2\pi^2
k_\mathrm{B} T)$, where $N_\mathrm{b}$, $\omega_\mathrm{b}$ and $T$ are the initial values of the number of bosons, their average angular trap frequency and temperature, respectively, and $\sigma$ the elastic cross-section.
In the case of a mixture of bosonic and fermionic species, Eq. (\[scaling\]) describes the potential energy depth of bosons $\Delta U_\mathrm{b}$ [@NOTE]. This quantity, in turns, fixes the laser power $P$ necessary to create the confining potential well. The potential energy depth of fermions $\Delta U_\mathrm{f}$ is then determined as a function of $P$. By using the scaling law (\[scaling\]), we have studied evaporative cooling strategies for single-color and two-color optical dipole traps with $^6$Li-$^{23}$Na mixtures, recently brought to quantum degeneracy for both species in a magnetic trap [@Hadzibabic]. Analogous considerations hold for all the combinations of the only two available stable Fermi alkali isotopes, $^6$Li and $^{40}$K, refrigerated through the largely available Bose coolers, $^{23}$Na and $^{87}$Rb. In the single-color case only a red-detuned laser beam is present and its power $P_1$ is decreased continuously as shown by the dashed line in the upper panel of Fig. 2. The ratio of the fermionic and bosonic average trapping frequencies has the constant value $\omega_\mathrm{f}/\omega_\mathrm{b} = 1.96$ determined by the masses of the two species and the different detunings of the atomic transition wavelengths with respect to the red-detuned laser wavelength. In the two-color situation a coaxial blue-detuned beam focused on the center of the existing optical dipole trap is turned on at time $t_0$ and for $t \geq t_0$ its power $P_2$ is maintained at a constant ratio with the red-detuned laser power, $P_2/P_1 = \mathrm{constant}$. By demanding a smooth time-dependence for $\Delta U_\mathrm{b}(t)$ as described by Eq. (\[scaling\]) - see central panel of Fig. 2 - together with the fact that $\Delta U_\mathrm{b} = \Delta U_\mathrm{b} (P_1,P_2)$, a discontinuity at $t=t_0$ also for the red-detuned laser power is required. For $t\geq t_0$ the ratio $\omega_\mathrm{f}/\omega_\mathrm{b}$ can be ideally increased to an arbitrary high value by choosing a proper ratio $P_2/P_1$.
![ Evaporative cooling strategies for an optically trapped $^6$Li-$^{23}$Na mixture. Time evolution of red-detuned and blue-detuned laser powers (upper panel), fermion and boson trap depths (central panel) and fermion and boson trap frequencies (lower panel) for a single-color optical dipole trap (dashed lines) and a two-color optical dipole trap (solid lines). The laser powers are fixed by the condition that $\Delta U_\mathrm{b}(t)$ follows Eq. (\[scaling\]) with $\eta=10$ and $P_2/P_1=0$ in the single-color case or $P_2/P_1=0.32$ (corresponding to $\omega_\mathrm{f}/\omega_\mathrm{b} = 13.15$) for $\gamma_i t \geq 400$ in the two-color case. The wavelengths of the laser beams are chosen at $\lambda_1=$1064 nm and $\lambda_2$=532 nm. []{data-label="fig2"}](cool.fig2.eps){width="0.95\columnwidth"}
The abrupt increase (decrease) of the fermionic (bosonic) average trapping frequency due to the turning-on of the blue-detuned laser determines a corresponding decrease (increase) of the Fermi (critical) temperature. As shown in the lower panel of Fig. 3, this produces an increase of $T/T_\mathrm{c}$ and a decrease of $T/T_\mathrm{F}$ with respect to their corresponding smooth evolutions in the case of a single-color trap. Therefore, the presence of the blue-detuned laser helps to both maintain the Bose gas in a non-condensed state and allow for a deeper degeneracy condition of the Fermi gas. At the same time, evaporative cooling is less efficient as a consequence of the weakening of the confinement caused by the blue-detuned beam. However, this is not an issue since in the latest stage of evaporation we estimate elastic scattering rates of order $\Gamma_\mathrm{el}\simeq 10^2~\mathrm{s}^{-1}$ even taking into account the suppression of scattering induced by Pauli blocking [@Holland0]. Also, the blue-detuned beam gives the dominant contribution to the heating of the mixture due to Rayleigh scattering of the sodium atoms, but this is largely compensated by the cooling power of the Bose gas even in the latest stage of the evaporation. Other sources of heating, like hole heating [@Timmermans] or technical laser noise [@Gehm], can be made negligible with respect to the heating induced by Rayleigh scattering. In particular, fluctuations in the laser power ratio $P_2/P_1$ could induce instabilities and parametric heating especially in the interesting regime where the ratio $\omega_\mathrm{f}/\omega_\mathrm{b}$ is made large. For $\omega_\mathrm{f}/\omega_\mathrm{b}=10$, a power ratio stability of 0.1-1$\%$ is required, which is within the capability of current laser stabilization techniques.
In the upper panel of Fig. 3 we show the evolution of the ratio $C_\mathrm{b}/C_\mathrm{f}$ between the heat capacities of the bosonic and fermionic species - a figure of merit of the sympathetic cooling efficiency. The heat capacities have been evaluated numerically taking into account the time evolution of the relevant quantities, in particular the diminishing number of bosons during forced evaporation which strongly affects the time-dependence of $C_\mathrm{b}$ (while the effect of many-body interactions, evaluated in [@Giorgini], gives a much weaker time-dependence). The boson heat capacity in the single-color trap becomes smaller than the fermion one at times $\gamma_i t \gtrsim 6200$ when most of the bosons are condensed ($T/T_\mathrm{c} \simeq 0.25$, $T/T_\mathrm{F} \simeq 0.1$). On the other hand, in the two-color trap $C_\mathrm{b}/C_\mathrm{f}$ maintains values much larger than unity and it is possible to reach $T/T_\mathrm{F} \simeq 0.02$ while $T/T_\mathrm{c} \gtrsim 0.3$.
![Efficiency of sympathetic cooling in optical dipole traps. The time evolution of heat capacity ratio $C_\mathrm{b}/C_\mathrm{f}$ (upper panel) and temperature ratios $T/T_\mathrm{F}$ and $T/T_\mathrm{c}$ (lower panel) are depicted for a $^6$Li-$^{23}$Na mixture in which initially $N_\mathrm{f}=10^5$ and $N_\mathrm{b}=10^6$. The single-color (dashed lines) and two-color (solid lines) refer to the trapping configurations defined in Fig. 2. Unlike the latter, for the single-color case the heat capacity ratio approaches unity in the latest stage, and the equilibrium temperature of the mixture is no longer dominated by the bosonic component undergoing forced evaporation. []{data-label="fig3"}](cool.fig3.eps){width="0.95\columnwidth"}
The presence of a larger bosonic thermal cloud for the two-color case even at the latest stage of fermion cooling allows for a more precise thermometry. The estimate of the temperature for the Fermi-Bose mixture is indeed obtained by fitting the tail of the normal Bose component superimposed to the condensate fraction. As the temperature is lowered the thermal component shrinks in amplitude and size therefore lowering the accuracy of the measurement. This effect is mitigated in the two-color trap.
Superfluidity of the Fermi gas is expected below the critical temperature for the onset of atomic Cooper pairs [@Stoof] $T_\mathrm{BCS} \simeq 5/3 \exp(-\pi/2k_\mathrm{F}|a|-1) \,
T_\mathrm{F}$, where $k_\mathrm{F}$ is the Fermi wavevector and $a$ the elastic scattering length of fermions. Besides leaving freedom to apply arbitrary homogeneous magnetic fields to enhance the scattering length through tuning to a Feshbach resonance [@Timmermans2001; @Holland; @Ohashi], our bichromatic configuration allows also for an independent increase of $k_\mathrm{F}$ due to the higher achievable densities. The resulting $T_\mathrm{BCS}/T_\mathrm{F}$ are within the explorable range which corresponds, as seen in the lower panel of Fig. 3, to $T/T_\mathrm{F} \geq 2 \cdot 10^{-2}$. The presence of a superfluid state could be evidenced by using the same blue-detuned beam used to deconfine the bosons as a mechanical stirrer for the fermion cloud. Thus, in analogy to already performed experiments on Bose condensates, one could look at a finite threshold for the onset of a highly dissipative regime [@Raman] or of a drag force [@Onofrio1]. The stirring of the Fermi gas occurs in the presence of both a bosonic thermal cloud and a Bose condensed component. These last give rise to heating at all stirring velocities [@Raman1] and at a critical velocity lower than for the one expected for the Fermi superfluid, respectively. However, due to their low density in the latest cooling stage, the contributions to the heating induced by the stirring of the Bose components are much smaller than the Rayleigh heating. To discriminate against the bosonic cloud background one could take advantage of the recently proposed manipulations of an ultracold cloud with Raman beams by creating a directional critical velocity for the superfluid Fermi component [@Higbie]. An alternative signature for superfluidity consists in looking at the bulge in the density profile predicted below $T_\mathrm{BCS}$ [@Chiofalo]. Here, again, the presence of a thermal cloud for the bosons makes this background simpler to discriminate against any fermion superfluidity signature due to the well controllable Gaussian-shaped profile of the former, its weaker interactions with the Fermi gas [@Amoruso], and the broader Thomas-Fermi profile of the Bose-condensed component caused by the shallower confinement.
In conclusion, our analysis of evaporative and sympathetic cooling in a two-color optical dipole trap shows that a deep Fermi degeneracy regime can be achieved by efficiently exploiting the cooling capability of a Bose gas with large heat capacity. The fact that the cooler need not be in the condensed phase gives also larger flexibility for choosing the Bose species. One could reconsider the use of $^{133}$Cs which, due to its large mass and small recoil temperature, can be efficiently cooled to very low temperatures by purely optical means, therefore ensuring robust conditions in terms of temperature and heat capacity to start evaporative cooling [@Mudrich]. More generally, the presence of a larger thermal component for the Bose gas does not interfere significantly with the Fermi component, rather it allows for a more accurate thermometry and a more controllable background against possible signatures of the fermion superfluid phase.
We thank S. Gupta, Z. Hadzibabic, and L. Viola for useful discussions. This work was supported in part by Cofinanziamento MIUR protocollo MM02263577\_001.
C. J. Pethick and H. Smith, [*Bose-Einstein condensation in dilute gases*]{}, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002).
M. H. Anderson, J. R. Ensher, M. R. Matthews, C. E. Wieman, and E. A. Cornell, Science **269**, 198 (1995); K. B. Davis [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **75**, 3969 (1995); C. C. Bradley, C. A. Sackett, J. J. Tollett, and R. G. Hulet, Phys. Rev. Lett. **75**, 1687 (1995); *ibidem* **79**, 1170 (1997);
B. DeMarco and D. S. Jin, Science **285**, 1703 (1999).
A. G. Truscott, K. E. Strecker, W. I McAlexander, G. B. Partridge, and R. G. Hulet, Science **291**, 2570 (2001).
F. Schreck [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **87**, 080403 (2001).
G. Modugno, [*et al.*]{}, Science **297**, 2240 (2002).
K. M. O’Hara, [*et al.*]{}, Science Express, November 7 (2002).
H. T. C. Stoof, M. Houbiers, C. A. Sackett, and R. G. Hulet, Phys. Rev. Lett. **76**, 10 (1996).
E. Timmermans, Phys. Rev. Lett. **87**, 240403 (2001). The heating source discussed in this paper should not be a practical limitation if a background pressure in the trapping region $< 10^{-11}$Torr is achieved, a requirement already fulfilled in various apparatuses.
S. R. Granade, M. E. Gehm, K. M. O’Hara, and J. E. Thomas, Phys. Rev. Lett. **88**, 120405 (2002).
Z. Hadzibabic [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **88**, 160401 (2002).
G. Roati, F. Riboli, G. Modugno, and M. Inguscio, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**89**]{}, 150403 (2002).
R. Onofrio and C. Presilla, Phys. Rev. Lett. **89**, 100401 (2002).
C. S. Adams, H. J. Lee, N. Davidson, M. Kasevich, and S. Chu, Phys. Rev. Lett. **74**, 3577 (1995).
M. D. Barrett, J. A. Sauer, and M. S. Chapman, Phys. Rev. Lett. **87**, 010404 (2001).
K. M. O’Hara, M. E. Gehm, S. R. Granade, and J. E. Thomas, Phys. Rev. A **64**, 051403R (2001).
W. Ketterle and N. J. Van Druten, in [*Advances in Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics*]{}, edited by B. Bederson and H. Walther, Vol. 37 (Academic Press, San Diego, 1996), p. 181.
We assume that the presence of the Fermi gas does not affect significantly evaporative cooling of the Bose gas. This requires that the potential energy depth of fermions $\Delta U_\mathrm{f}$ is larger than that of bosons $\Delta U_\mathrm{b}$, and that $C_\mathrm{b}/C_\mathrm{f} \gg 1$.
M. J. Holland, B. DeMarco, and D. S. Jin, Phys. Rev. A [**61**]{}, 053610 (2000).
M. E. Gehm, K. M. O’Hara, T. A. Savard, and J. E. Thomas, Phys. Rev. A **58**, 3914 (1998).
S. Giorgini, L. P. Pitaevskii, and S. Stringari, Journ. Low Temp. Phys. **109**, 309 (1997).
E. Timmermans, V. Furuya, P. W. Milonni, and A. K. Kerman, Phys. Lett. A **285**, 228 (2001).
M. Holland, S.J.J.M.F. Kokkelmans, M. L. Chiofalo, and R. Walser, Phys. Rev. Lett. **87**, 120406 (2001).
Y. Ohashi and A. Griffin, Phys. Rev. Lett. **89**, 130402 (2002).
C. Raman [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **83**, 2502 (1999).
R. Onofrio [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **85**, 2228 (2000).
C. Raman, R. Onofrio, J. M. Vogels, J. R. Abo-Shaeer, and W. Ketterle, Journ. Low Temp. Phys. **122**, 99 (2001).
J. Higbie and D. M. Stamper-Kurn, Phys. Rev. Lett. **88**, 090401 (2002).
M.L. Chiofalo, S.J.J.M.F. Kokkelmans, J. N. Milstein, and M. J. Holland, Phys. Rev. Lett. **88**, 090402 (2002).
M. Amoruso, A. Minguzzi, S. Stringari, M. P. Tosi, and L. Vichi, Eur. Phys. J. D **4**, 261 (1998).
Recently, sympathetic cooling of $^7$Li through $^{133}$Cs has been demonstrated in a far-off resonance optical trap, see: M. Mudrich [*et al.*]{}, Phys. Rev. Lett. **88**, 253001 (2002). In this experiment the optical potential was created by a CO$_2$ laser obtaining a deeper confinement for the latter species and limitations in the sympathetic cooling of the former one. This problem could be circumvented with a two-color optical dipole trap based on the use of a Nd:YAG laser as the red-detuned laser, and a deconfining beam with wavelength in between the two atomic transition wavelengths.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We propose an alternative scenario for the generation of entanglement between rotational quantum states of two polar molecules. This entanglement arises from dipole-dipole interaction, and is controlled by a sequence of laser pulses simultaneously exciting both molecules. We study the efficiency of the process, and discuss possible experimental implementations with cold molecules trapped in optical lattices or in solid matrices. Finally, various entanglement detection procedures are presented, and their suitability for these two physical situations is analyzed.'
author:
- Eric Charron
- Pérola Milman
- Arne Keller
- Osman Atabek
title: Quantum phase gate and controlled entanglement with polar molecules
---
\#1[***\#1***]{}
Introduction
============
In the last years, the development of quantum information opened new perspectives for several physical systems displaying controllable quantum properties. While some low dimensional basic quantum information tools have been experimentally realized with cavity quantum electrodynamics[@HAROCHE], trapped ions[@BLATT_WINE], NMR[@NMR] and cold atoms[@NA], for example, the exploitation of other systems presenting potential advantages remains of great importance. In this paper, we focus our attention to polar diatomic molecules.
There is a growing recent interest in exploiting molecules for quantum information purposes, both from the theoretical and experimental points of view. This interest comes partly from the development of new methods for the generation of ultracold molecular gases[@Revue_Masnou]. Two techniques are now widely used for this purpose: photoassociation[@PA] and magnetic Feshbach resonances[@FR]. These methods, first applied to the formation of homonuclear molecules, were then used for the creation of ultracold polar heteronuclear molecules such as RbCs[@RbCs], LiNa[@LiNa], KRb[@KRb] or NaCs[@NaCs] in various trapping situations. Very high formation efficiencies were also obtained recently for homonuclear molecules in optical lattices, when two atoms are located in each lattice site[@Mol_OL]. This kind of trap presents several advantages since it allows for the control of both the internal rovibronic and external center of mass quantum states of the molecules, which can additionally be isolated from each other due to the tight confinement at the lattice sites. Finally, the controlled creation of cold heteronuclear molecules in optical lattices[@H_Mol_OL] would allow for the production of strong inter-molecular interactions which could be exploited for quantum computation[@Revue_Masnou].
Indeed, several proposals have been presented recently to benefit from the specificities of molecules for quantum information[@ERIC; @MOLQI; @MOLQI2; @MOLQI3; @ZOLLER]. Theoretically, it was shown that molecules can be used to store binary information in the phases of rotational wavepackets[@ERIC]. The implementation of simple quantum algorithms has also been proposed using femtosecond pulses acting on diatomic molecules[@MOLQI; @MOLQI2; @MOLQI3]. Additionally, it was shown that molecules in optical lattices can simulate topological order, generating topologically protected subspaces where a quantum bit (qubit) can be encoded[@ZOLLER].
The use of polar diatomic molecules in various kinds of traps was also proposed recently by different groups for quantum computation[@DEMILLE; @LEE; @KOTO; @Yelin]. DeMille[@DEMILLE] first proposed to use molecules oriented along an external electric field in a 1D trap array for the implementation C-NOT gates with a very large number of qubits. Lee and Ostrovskaya[@LEE] then proposed to use coherent Raman transitions between scattering and bound states of heteronuclear molecules trapped in optical lattices for the implementation of conditional dipole-dipole interactions. It was shown by Kotochigova and Tiesinga[@KOTO] that microwave fields can be used to induce a tunable dipole-dipole interaction between ground state rotationally symmetric molecules. Finally, Yelin [*et al*]{}[@Yelin] also proposed very recently different schemes for the implementation of molecular quantum gates. From the experimental point of view and in another context, evidences of quantum correlations caused by dipole interaction between two molecules separated by tens of nanometers in an organic crystal were observed by detection of photon bunching[@SCIENCE].
In the present work we address the question of controlled entanglement creation in cold polar diatomic molecular systems. In our proposal, pure states with any degree of entanglement can be created by laser assisted conditional dipole-dipole interaction. Compared to previous proposals, this process only involves two vibrational states in their three lowest rotational levels. A Raman transition is used to transfer the qubit state from a set of uninteracting levels used for the storage of information to a set of interacting levels used for the creation of entanglement. This ability to switch on and off the dipole interaction with simple optical pulses of relatively short duration allows for the implementation of conditional quantum logic. In this approach, the dipole interaction is sufficiently weak to be treated as a perturbation, but sufficiently strong to generate maximally entangled states in a relatively short duration as compared to the expected coherence time [@KOTO; @KOTO2]. One could therefore perform about $~10^4$ logical gates within this anticipated coherence time. In addition to this possible implementation with cold molecules trapped in optical lattices, other physical systems, such as molecules trapped in solid matrices, are also considered in the present work. In this case, entanglement is created in an uncontrolled way in a collection of $N$ molecules, two by two. Finally, we investigate some ways of detecting entanglement given the possibilities of each system, and describe how to perform non-locality tests.
In Section\[sec:creation\], we describe the basic principles for entanglement creation between the rotational levels of two polar molecules. The effects of dissipation are discussed in Section\[sec:exp\], together with possible experimental realizations. Finally, a direct detection test of this entanglement is described in Section\[sec:detect\].
Laser assisted creation of rotational entanglement {#sec:creation}
==================================================
General frame {#sec:GI}
-------------
We consider here two identical diatomic polar molecules, initially prepared in their ground electronic and rotational levels. For simplicity, and in order to describe the physical process on which relies this entanglement creation procedure, we ignore in this section the vibrational degree of freedom. The additional complexity introduced by the vibrational motion will be dealt with in Section\[sec:QPG\].
Since the mechanism proposed in the next Section for the implementation of a quantum phase gate is based on unitary transformations conserving the projection of the rotational quantum number of both molecules on the inter-molecular axis, this projection is fixed at zero in the following (see the justification given at the end of Sec.\[sec:QPG\] for details).
The rotational stationary states of each isolated molecule, with energies $$\label{En}
\varepsilon_N = B_{\mathrm{rot}}\, N(N+1)\,,$$ are denoted by ${\left| N \right\rangle}_{i}$, with $$\label{N}
\langle\theta_i,\phi_i|N\rangle_{i} = Y_{N,0}(\theta_i,\phi_i)\,,$$ where $Y_{N,0}(\theta_i,\phi_i)$ represents the spherical harmonic associated with the molecular rotational quantum number $N$ of projection zero on the inter-molecular axis. The index identifying each molecule is . The angular coordinates of the two molecules with respect to the relative inter-molecular coordinate $\vec{\mathbi{r}}\/$ are denoted by the polar and azimuthal angles $\theta_{i}$ and $\phi_{i}$ (see Fig.\[fig1\] for a schematic representation). The molecular rotational constant, $B_{\mathrm{rot}}$, corresponds to the rotational period $T_{\mathrm{rot}} = \hbar\pi/B_{\mathrm{rot}}$.
![(Color online) Schematic view of the molecular configuration. The quantization axis is chosen as the inter-molecular axis. The electric fields associated with the laser pulses are assumed to be linearly polarized along this same direction. The orientations of the permanent dipoles $\vec{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_1$ and $\vec{\boldsymbol{\mu}}_2$ of the two molecules are characterized by the angles and .[]{data-label="fig1"}](fig1.eps){width="8.6cm"}
For the two-molecule interacting system, the field free Hamiltonian reads $$\label{H}
\hat{\cal{H}} = \hat{\cal{H}}_{0} + V_{d}(\vec{\mathbi{r}})\,,$$ where the non-interaction Hamiltonian $\hat{\cal{H}}_{0}$ is written as the following sum of mono-molecular Hamiltonians $$\label{H0}
\hat{\cal{H}}_{0} = \sum_{i} \sum_{N} ~\varepsilon_{N}~{\left| N \right\rangle}_{i}~{{\vphantom{{\left\langle N\right |}}}_{i}{{\left\langle N\right |}}}\,,$$ and the dipole interaction potential takes the form $$\begin{aligned}
\label{Vd}
V_{d}(\vec{\mathbi{r}}) & = & \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\,\frac{\mu^2}{r^3}\,\big[ -2\cos\theta_1\cos\theta_2\nonumber\\
& & \qquad +\, \sin\theta_1\sin\theta_2\cos(\phi_1-\phi_2) \,\big]\,.\end{aligned}$$ In this equation, $\mu$ is the permanent dipole moment of the molecule.
The interaction of the two molecules with a sequence of linearly polarized laser pulses is described within the dipole approximation by the length-gauge laser interaction Hamiltonian $$\label{Hl}
\hat{\cal{H}}_{\mathrm{laser}} = -\mu\,E(t) \left( \cos\theta_1 + \cos\theta_2 \right)\,,$$ where we have assumed that the polarization of the electric field $\vec{E}(t)$ is parallel to the inter-molecular vector $\vec{\mathbi{r}}$.
Since in our scheme the projection of the rotational quantum number on the inter-molecular axis remains equal to zero, the second part of the dipole interaction potential in Eq.(\[Vd\]) averages to zero, and one is left with $$\label{Vdm=0}
V_{d}(\vec{\mathbi{r}}) = - \,\frac{1}{2\pi\epsilon_0}\,\frac{\mu^2}{r^3}\, \cos\theta_1\cos\theta_2\,.$$ This dipole interaction only couples angular momentum states $N$ which differ by one unit, and the selection rule applies for each molecule.
For the sake of simplicity let us first analyze the effect of the dipole interaction in the angular subspace spanned by the quantum numbers and 1 only. This subspace is entirely characterized by the tensorial product basis set , , and , that we can reference more simply as the states , , and . Note that out of these four eigenstates of the non-interacting Hamiltonian $\hat{\cal{H}}_0$, and are degenerate. The perturbation regime therefore applies when $$\label{perturb}
\left\langle 01 \left| V_{d} \right| 10 \right\rangle_{\theta_1,\theta_2} \ll 2B_{\mathrm{rot}}\,.$$ This criterion imposes a limit on the inter-molecular separation which is discussed in Section\[sec:exp\]. With such a small dipole interaction, the zero-order eigenstates of the interacting Hamiltonian $\hat{\cal{H}}$ are simply given by
\[psi\] $$\begin{aligned}
\psi_1 & = & {\left| 00 \right\rangle}\\
\psi_2 & = & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( {\left| 01 \right\rangle} + {\left| 10 \right\rangle} \right)\\
\psi_3 & = & \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( {\left| 01 \right\rangle} - {\left| 10 \right\rangle} \right)\\
\psi_4 & = & {\left| 11 \right\rangle}\end{aligned}$$
The first-order energies of $\psi_1$ and $\psi_4$ are obviously unaffected by the dipole interaction, while the degeneracy of the states and is removed at first-order, introducing the energy shifts $$\label{split}
\Delta E_{\pm} = \pm \frac{1}{6\pi\epsilon_0}\,\frac{\mu^2}{r^3}\,.$$
The probability distribution of state is shown in Fig.\[fig:fig2\](a). This state, which can be seen as the following combination of molecules pointing in the same direction $$\label{psi2}
\psi_2 \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( {\left| \rightarrow\rightarrow \right\rangle} - {\left| \leftarrow\leftarrow \right\rangle} \right)\,,$$ is maximally entangled in orientation[@NOTE_ENT]. This configuration is obviously stabilized by the dipole interaction. On the other hand, the entangled state , represented in Fig.\[fig:fig2\](b), corresponds to two molecules oriented in opposite directions $$\label{psi3}
\psi_3 \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( {\left| \rightarrow\leftarrow \right\rangle} - {\left| \leftarrow\rightarrow \right\rangle} \right)\,.$$ This state is, therefore, subjected to a repulsive interaction.
![ \[fig:fig2\] (Color online) Probability distributions of the zero-order eigenstates of the interacting Hamiltonian $\hat{\cal{H}}$ as a function of the polar angles $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$ defining the orientation of the two molecules with respect to the inter-molecular axis (see Fig.\[fig1\])[@Note]. The upper graph (a) corresponds to the state $\psi_2$, while the lower graph (b) is associated with the state $\psi_3$.](fig2.eps){width="8.6cm"}
The energy shifts of Eq.(\[split\]) lead to a temporal dephasing $\Delta E_{\pm} t / \hbar$ for a free evolution during a time $t$ of the bipartite rotational states as compared to the non-interacting single-molecule rotational levels. As we will show in the following, this dephasing can be used for entanglement creation and conditional quantum logic. We now turn to the description of the mechanism we propose to perform a quantum phase gate using the two lowest rotational levels of each molecule.
Quantum phase gate and entanglement creation {#sec:QPG}
--------------------------------------------
The physical implementation of quantum logic[@DIVIN] would put the predicted polynomial[@GROVER] and exponential[@SHOR] speed-up of various computational tasks of significant interest in concrete form. This achievement requires the physical implementation of a universal set of single and two-qubit quantum gates[@CHUANG]. Single-qubit operations, which consist of rotations in the qubit basis[@CHUANG], are relatively easily implemented using stimulated Raman transitions for instance[@Revue_Masnou; @PA; @RbCs; @Mol_OL] or using stimulated Raman adiabatic passage techniques with transform-limited laser pulses[@STIRAP]. We therefore present here a proposal for the implementation of a two-qubit quantum phase gate. This phase gate , defined by the unitary transformation $$\label{QPG}
\begin{array}{rcr}
{\left| 00 \right\rangle} & ~~\longrightarrow~~ & {\left| 00 \right\rangle}\\
{\left| 01 \right\rangle} & ~~\longrightarrow~~ & {\left| 01 \right\rangle}\\
{\left| 10 \right\rangle} & ~~\longrightarrow~~ & {\left| 10 \right\rangle}\\
{\left| 11 \right\rangle} & ~~\longrightarrow~~ & {\mathrm e}^{i\varphi}~{\left| 11 \right\rangle}
\end{array}
\,,$$ entangles the two-qubits by selectively changing the state ${\left| 11 \right\rangle}$ while leaving other states unchanged. In practice, it is often simpler to implement a phase gate which changes the different qubit states according to the adiabatic transformation $$\label{QPG2}
\begin{array}{rcr}
{\left| 00 \right\rangle} & ~~\longrightarrow~~ & {\mathrm e}^{i\varphi_{00}}~{\left| 00 \right\rangle}\\
{\left| 01 \right\rangle} & ~~\longrightarrow~~ & {\mathrm e}^{i\varphi_{01}}~{\left| 01 \right\rangle}\\
{\left| 10 \right\rangle} & ~~\longrightarrow~~ & {\mathrm e}^{i\varphi_{10}}~{\left| 10 \right\rangle}\\
{\left| 11 \right\rangle} & ~~\longrightarrow~~ & {\mathrm e}^{i\varphi_{11}}~{\left| 11 \right\rangle}
\end{array}
\,.$$ This last unitary operation can then be reduced to the conditional phase gate described in Eq.(\[QPG\]), with $$\label{phase}
\varphi=\varphi_{00}+\varphi_{11}-\varphi_{01}-\varphi_{10}\,,$$ by using additional single-qubit operations[@CHUANG; @LLOYD; @PHASE1; @PHASE2]. Its is clear that the dynamical phases acquired during the evolution of non-interacting eigenstates do not contribute to this global phase[@PHASE1], and they will, therefore, be ignored in the following.
The case is of clear interest since this particular operation can be used to transform a separable two-qubit state into a maximally entangled state. Several different implementations of this universal gate have already been proposed or implemented with various physical systems[@VARQPG; @VARQPG2]. In this study, we propose the implementation of such a conditional phase gate using both the vibrational and rotational molecular degrees of freedom.
The two rotational levels and 2 of a well-defined vibrational state $v_0$ are used for the storage of information. These two states have several advantages for this purpose. First, they are easily manipulated by two-photon Raman transitions relying on an intermediate level of rotational quantum number . These two-photon transitions may indeed be used to perform arbitrary one-qubit rotations. In addition, they are unaffected by the dipole interaction, which only couples, at first order, angular momentum states differing by one unit. Finally, their associated spontaneous decay rate $$\label{grot}
\gamma_{\mathrm{rot}} \simeq \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\,\frac{4\mu^2B_{\mathrm{rot}}^3}{3\hbar^4c^3}\,,$$ corresponding to the transition, is not limiting their coherence time for the heteronuclear alkali dimers considered in this study, with . It is interesting to note here that, in various experiments[@Mol_OL], cold diatomic molecules have already been prepared and trapped using optical lattices in their ground electronic and rotational levels and in a well-defined vibrational state.
![(Color online) Laser pulses and energy levels involved in the creation of the auxiliary state , defined in Eq.(\[state+\]). This transfer enables controlled dipole coupling between two neighboring molecules. The ${\left| 0 \right\rangle}$ and ${\left| 1 \right\rangle}$ qubit states are shown as two green dotted horizontal lines. The $\pi/2$ laser pulse (a) first creates the coherent superposition . The laser pulses (b) and (c) then transfer the remaining population of ${\left| 2,v_0 \right\rangle}$ to ${\left| 0,v_1 \right\rangle}$ in a two-photon process. Arbitrary coherent superpositions $\alpha{\left| 0,v_0 \right\rangle}+\beta{\left| 2,v_0 \right\rangle}$ can also be created from state ${\left| 0,v_0 \right\rangle}$ by a two-photon Raman process relying on a intermediate level.[]{data-label="fig3"}](fig3.eps){width="8.6cm"}
For the sake of simplicity, let us now denote the states of both molecules by labelling them according to the value of their rotational [*and*]{} vibrational quantum numbers as . Our qubit states are, therefore, now defined as being
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{qubit}
{\left| 0 \right\rangle} & \equiv & {\left| 0,v_0 \right\rangle}\\
{\left| 1 \right\rangle} & \equiv & {\left| 2,v_0 \right\rangle}\end{aligned}$$
To implement the conditional phase gate (\[QPG\]), the qubit state is selectively transferred, at time , to the coherent superposition $$\label{chi}
{\left| \Omega_0 \right\rangle} = \alpha\,{\left| 0,v_1 \right\rangle} + \beta\,{\left| 1,v_1 \right\rangle}$$ associated with a vibrational state , while the qubit state remains unchanged. The state ${\left| \Omega_0\Omega_0 \right\rangle}$ can be easily expressed in the eigenbasis of Eq.(\[psi\]), where its time-evolution is simply given by analytical phase factors. We now denote the state(\[chi\]) at any time by . A simple analysis then shows that the time-average dipole interaction $$\left\langle V_{d} \right\rangle = \frac{1}{T_{\mathrm{rot}}}\int_{0}^{T_{\mathrm{rot}}} \left\langle \Omega_t\Omega_t \left| V_{d} \right| \Omega_t\Omega_t \right\rangle_{\theta_1,\theta_2} \,dt$$ is maximized if the quantum superposition ${\left| \Omega_0 \right\rangle}$ is chosen as the state $$\label{state+}
{\left| \Omega_0 \right\rangle} = {\left| + \right\rangle} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left({\left| 0,v_1 \right\rangle}+{\left| 1,v_1 \right\rangle}\right)\,.$$
We will, therefore, transfer here the qubit state ${\left| 1 \right\rangle}$ to the coherent superposition . This transfer involves two transitions, which are represented schematically with the arrows shown in Fig.\[fig3\]. A first $\pi/2$ laser pulse (arrow (a) in Fig.\[fig3\]) transfers half of the population from state to state , thus creating the coherent superposition . A two-photon Raman process (arrows (b) and (c) in Fig.\[fig3\]) then transfers the remaining population of state to state ${\left| 0,v_1 \right\rangle}$, therefore completing the protocol and generating the ${\left| + \right\rangle}$ state of Eq.(\[state+\]). This transfer can be performed using stimulated Raman adiabatic passage techniques for instance[@STIRAP]. For practical reasons, it could also be preferable to operate this two-photon transition slightly detuned from the intermediate level . The efficiency of spontaneous Raman scattering, a mechanism possibly leading to trap losses in optical lattices, is indeed clearly decreased in this case[@Mol_OL]. In terms of pulse duration, it is necessary to work with pulses whose spectral bandwidth is much lower than the rotational energy spacing $2B_{\mathrm{rot}}$. With the polar molecules considered in this study (see Table\[table1\] for the rotational constants of RbCs, KCs, KRb, NaCs, NaRb and NaK), this requirement imposes a pulse duration much larger than $\Delta t \sim 200$ps. Since the gate durations obtained with these polar molecules belong to the $\mu$s time scale (see Sec.\[sec:exp\] hereafter), the transfer between the storage qubits and the interacting states proposed here is not limiting the total operation time of the gate. Re-establishing the initial state ${\left| 2,v_0 \right\rangle}$ is simply done by using the pulses which invert this unitary operation: a $\pi$-pulse for the transition , and a Raman pulse sequence similar to the one shown in Fig.\[fig3\] for the complete transfer . Note that, due to the choice of laser frequencies, the state ${\left| 2,v_0 \right\rangle}$ is the only one affected by the laser pulses, and the state ${\left| + \right\rangle}$ is produced conditioned to the fact that the molecules are in state ${\left| 2,v_0 \right\rangle}$ initially. Finally, we would like to stress that, as shown in Ref.[@VARQPG2], the fact that the interaction with the laser pulses is analyzed in terms of single-molecule states, while the overall two-qubit phase gate operation is based on the two-molecule interacting Hamiltonian, is not limiting the generality of our results.
When this sequence of laser pulses is applied to both molecules simultaneously, the complete molecular system ends up in state ${\left| ++ \right\rangle}$ if it was initially in state ${\left| 11 \right\rangle}$.
The probability distribution of state ${\left| ++ \right\rangle}$ is shown in Fig.\[fig:fig4\] as a function of $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$. This separable state clearly corresponds to two molecules oriented in the same direction, with $${\left| ++ \right\rangle}\equiv{\left| \rightarrow\rightarrow \right\rangle}\,.$$ Since the two coherent superpositions (\[state+\]) which are associated with each molecule evolve in phase, this parallel orientation is maintained at any time. As a consequence, this state is stabilized by the dipole interaction.
![ \[fig:fig4\] (Color online) Probability distribution associated with the interacting state corresponding to both molecules in the ${\left| + \right\rangle}$ state (\[state+\]) as a function of the polar angles $\theta_1$ and $\theta_2$ which define the orientation of the two molecules with respect to the inter-molecular axis (see Fig.\[fig1\])[@Note].](fig4.eps){width="8.6cm"}
This stabilization effect can also be easily deduced from a simple rewriting of state ${\left| ++ \right\rangle}$ as a function of the eigenstates (\[psi\]) of the interacting Hamiltonian $\hat{\cal{H}}$ $$\label{state++}
{\left| ++ \right\rangle} = \frac{1}{2}\left(\psi_1+\psi_4\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\,\psi_2\,.$$ This rewriting reveals the contribution of the stabilized eigenstate $\psi_2$, and a lack of contribution from the destabilized state $\psi_3$.
The quantum phase gate can, therefore, be implemented in three steps, following the sequence $$\label{QPG3}
\begin{array}{rccclcr}
{\left| 00 \right\rangle} & \longrightarrow & {\left| 00 \right\rangle} & \longrightarrow & \quad{\left| 00 \right\rangle} & \longrightarrow & {\left| 00 \right\rangle}\\
{\left| 01 \right\rangle} & \longrightarrow & {\left| 0+ \right\rangle} & \longrightarrow & \quad{\left| 0+ \right\rangle} & \longrightarrow & {\left| 01 \right\rangle}\\
{\left| 10 \right\rangle} & \longrightarrow & {\left| +0 \right\rangle} & \longrightarrow & \quad{\left| +0 \right\rangle} & \longrightarrow & {\left| 10 \right\rangle}\\
{\left| 11 \right\rangle} & \longrightarrow & {\left| ++ \right\rangle} & \longrightarrow & -{\left| ++ \right\rangle} & \longrightarrow & -{\left| 11 \right\rangle}
\end{array}
\,,$$ where the dynamical phases associated with the non-interacting evolution have been ignored. The sign change of state ${\left| ++ \right\rangle}$ is due to the free evolution of the dipole interacting two-molecule system. Indeed, because of the dipole interaction, this state gains a time dependent phase easily expressed as $\varphi(t) = (\delta/\hbar)\,t$, where $$\label{E_shift}
\delta = \left\langle ++ \left| V_d \right| ++ \right\rangle
=\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\,\frac{\mu^2}{3 r^3}$$ This step is, therefore, able to build up a maximal molecular entanglement in the duration $$\label{tau}
\tau=4\pi\epsilon_0\left(\frac{3 \hbar\pi r^3}{\mu^2}\right)$$ from an initially separable two-qubit wavefunction.
Since, from all accessible states in Eq.(\[QPG3\]), the state ${\left| ++ \right\rangle}$ is the only one in which the two molecules are coupled by dipole interaction at first order, by transforming the ${\left| + \right\rangle}$ states back to the “storage” qubit states ${\left| 1 \right\rangle}$, we stop the conditional interaction and transfer the quantum phase gate to the original subspace spanned by the levels ${\left| 00 \right\rangle}$, ${\left| 01 \right\rangle}$, ${\left| 10 \right\rangle}$ and ${\left| 11 \right\rangle}$.
It is important to notice that the quantum numbers $M_i$, projections of the rotational quantum numbers of the two molecules on the inter-molecular axis, remain unchanged in the protocol above. This happens thanks to the polarization chosen for the electric field (see Fig.\[fig1\]), and because the dipole interaction (\[Vdm=0\]) can be expressed as the $Y_{2,0}$ component of a second order spherical tensor. This interaction therefore conserves the total projection . In our scheme, the initial value of ${\cal{M}}$ is zero, and the dipole coupling affects the linear combination of state ${\left| ++ \right\rangle}$ only. In this linear combination, one of the molecule remains in the ground rotational level , and both projections $M_1$ and $M_2$ are, therefore, fixed at zero during the whole gate duration.
------ -------------------- ------- ------------------------- -------------------- --------------------
$B_{\mathrm{rot}}$ $\mu$ $\omega_{\mathrm{vib}}$ $r_{\mathrm{min}}$ $r_{\mathrm{max}}$
(cm$^{-1}$) (D) (cm$^{-1}$) (nm) (nm)
RbCs 1.65 10$^{-2}$ 1.21 49.4 52.8 1385
KCs 3.08 10$^{-2}$ 1.84 66.2 56.8 1033
KRb 3.80 10$^{-2}$ 0.59 75.5 24.8 906
NaCs 5.88 10$^{-2}$ 4.58 98.0 84.3 698
NaRb 7.02 10$^{-2}$ 3.30 107.0 63.8 639
NaK 9.81 10$^{-2}$ 2.76 124.1 50.7 551
------ -------------------- ------- ------------------------- -------------------- --------------------
: \[table1\] Optimal range of inter-molecular separations for the implementation of conditional quantum logic with polar molecules. The minimum and maximum distances $r_{\mathrm{min}}$ and $r_{\mathrm{max}}$ verify the inequalities (\[perturb2\]) and (\[decoherence\]), with a ratio between the left and right hand sides of these equations equal to 10$^3$. The molecular parameters $B_{\mathrm{rot}}$, $\mu$ and $\omega_{\mathrm{vib}}$ are taken from[@Aymar] and[@Herzberg].
Finally, we also would like to stress that, in the protocol described above, the auxiliary vibrational levels could as well be replaced by electronic states without substantially modifying the basic procedure of entanglement creation. In this case, it would however be required to implement the two-photon transition shown in Fig.\[fig3\] slightly detuned from the intermediate level in order to avoid spontaneous emission by electric dipole transitions[@Mol_OL].
Discussion on possible experimental implementations {#sec:exp}
===================================================
A practical implementation of the quantum phase gate described in Section\[sec:QPG\] must satisfy the following conditions:
- the molecules should be prepared initially in their rotational ground state,
- the molecules should be close enough for a fast operation time, but far enough to avoid strong non-linear interactions,
- the molecules should be individually addressable,
- the inter-molecular distance should remain constant during the whole gate duration,
- the gate operation time should be much shorter than the decoherence time.
Considering the five requirements above, trapped molecular systems seem to be interesting candidates for the implementation of the quantum phase gate protocol. We proceed now to a more quantitative investigation of the experimental parameters involved.
Let us take as an example cold molecules trapped in an optical lattice. In such systems, the molecules can be formed from an atomic Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC) by Feshbach resonance or by photoassociation. Since the molecules are then formed in $s$-wave collisions, the first criterion is necessarily fulfilled. In addition, the molecules could be addressed individually (criterion (iii)) as proposed by DeMille[@DEMILLE] by using an electric field gradient which shifts the transition frequencies of the different molecules as a function of their position. Finally, when the dipole interaction is weak, the molecules are not moving from their lattice site during the gate operation, and the criterion (iv) is also verified.
For the dipole interaction to be treated as a perturbation, one should require that the inequality (\[perturb\]) is verified. The two molecules should therefore be well separated, with $$\label{perturb2}
r^3\; \simeq \;\left(\frac{\lambda}{2}\right)^{\!\!3}\; \gg \;\frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\left(\frac{\mu^2}{3 B_{\mathrm{rot}}}\right)\,.$$ In this equation, $\lambda$ denotes the wavelength of the lattice laser light.
A link can be made between this requirement and the condition (v). In an optical lattice, among various sources of decoherence, one can cite spontaneous emission, decoherence due to the coupling to the black-body radiation of the room-temperature environment, and collisions with residual atoms or molecules. The black-body contribution leads to lifetimes which are much larger than the expected gate duration[@KOTO; @KOTO2]. For such cold and relatively isolated molecules, spontaneous emission from excited vibrational states should therefore present the highest contribution to decoherence. The spontaneous vibrational decay rate is then given by $$\gamma_{\mathrm{vib}} \simeq \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_0}\left(\frac{4\mu^2\omega_{\mathrm{vib}}^3}{3\hbar c^3}\right)\,,$$ where $\omega_{\mathrm{vib}}$ is the vibrational frequency and $c$ is the speed of light. The requirement (v), reformulated as $$\gamma_{\mathrm{vib}}\,\tau \ll 1\,,$$ therefore yields another criterion for the inter-molecular separation $$\label{decoherence}
r^3\; \simeq \;\left(\frac{\lambda}{2}\right)^{\!\!3}\; \ll \;\frac{c^3}{4\pi\omega_{\mathrm{vib}}^3}\,.$$
Combining Eqs. (\[perturb2\]) and (\[decoherence\]) yields an optimal range of inter-molecular separations for the implementation of the present conditional quantum logic scheme with polar molecules. This range of distances is given in Table\[table1\] for a set of alkali dimers which have been presented as potential candidates for quantum information[@DEMILLE; @LEE; @KOTO].
Clearly, all alkali dimers are well suited if one considers lattices in the optical or near infrared domain, around . In addition, a recent study[@KOTO] has shown the existence of two frequency windows for KRb and RbCs in which, in spite of the complex molecular internal structure, resonant excitation by the lattice light is very unlikely. The trapping potential of the lattice is then almost unaffected by this additional complexity.
The efficiency of the present entanglement procedure is finally analyzed in Fig.\[fig:fig5\] for the two dimers KRb and NaCs, which have the smallest and largest dipole moments and of the alkali molecules of Table\[table1\]. The upper and lower panels (a) and (b) of this figure show the expected gate duration $\tau$ (Eq.(\[tau\])) and the gate robustness as a function of the lattice site separation for these two molecules.
![ \[fig:fig5\] (Color online) Gate duration $\tau$ \[upper panel (a)\] and gate robustness $1/\gamma_{\mathrm{vib}}\tau$ \[lower panel (b)\] in logarithmic scales as a function of the average inter-molecular separation $r\simeq\lambda/2$ in an optical lattice of wavelength $\lambda$. The values corresponding to NaCs ($\mu=4.58\,$D) are shown as black solid lines and the one associated with KRb ($\mu=0.59\,$D) are represented as red dashed lines.](fig5.eps){width="8.6cm"}
In the domain (right part of Fig.\[fig:fig5\]), gate durations around and are obtained for NaCs and KRb respectively. As shown in Fig.\[fig:fig5\](b), in the same range of wavelengths, about $3 \times 10^3$ to $3 \times 10^4$ gates can be performed in the expected coherence time of the system. More specifically, the frequency window given in Ref.[@KOTO] for KRb yields the gate duration , with gates achievable in the expected coherence time. In addition, one should note that the gate duration $\tau$ is much larger than the molecular rotational period. The quantum phase gate therefore builds up in a very large number of molecular rotations.
The number of rotations necessary for the creation of entanglement can be decreased by using molecules closer to each other. This can be achieved in systems where the molecular density reaches higher values, as in solid matrices for instance. In such systems, the quantum phase gate protocol described above leads to [*uncontrolled*]{} entanglement creation between different molecules. Since in this system the molecules are randomly located in the matrix sites, one can usually not define rigorously a unique inter-molecular quantization axis. As a consequence, different values of ${\cal{M}}$ will appear during the implementation of the quantum phase gate protocol. For relatively low densities, an undetermined entangled state is, therefore, produced between pairs of molecules.
Let us now consider the specific case of DCl trapped in an fcc Ar crystal[@CLAUDINE], with an Ar-Ar distance equal to that in bulk Ar, [*i.e.*]{} . The DCl molecules are located at the center of the cubic Ar structure, and the closest molecules are separated from each other by only. In these conditions, a quantum phase gate may be performed in just .
The vibrational motion of these molecules is of course coupled to the vibrational modes of the crystal, and this is the main source of vibrational decoherence in this system. This decoherence time strongly depends on temperature, and for , it is of the order of 100ps[@CLAUDINE]. About 200 gates could therefore be performed within the system coherence time. By further cooling down this system, one can expect to dramatically increase these figures. An advantage of this type of system is its simplicity, and the fact that it is a tractable macroscopic system. It also allows, in principle, for a direct test of entanglement, as discussed in the next Section.
Entanglement detection and non-locality tests {#sec:detect}
=============================================
A possible way to completely characterize the entangled state generated by the procedure described in Section\[sec:creation\] is to perform a tomographic measurement of the rotational state. This can be done by detecting, by measurements of molecular alignment for instance [@Dooley], the complete density matrix of the system[@MOLMER]. This procedure, usually employed in the quantum information context with trapped atoms and ions, presents the advantage of giving complete information about the system state.
However, if one is interested only in determining if both molecules are entangled or not, other measurement schemes can be simpler and more direct. They are based on [*entanglement witnesses*]{}[@WITNESS]. These measurements present the disadvantage of not providing necessary and sufficient criteria for entanglement detection since only a subspace of the Hilbert space spanned by all entangled states is detected.
A possible way of testing entanglement using entanglement witnesses is to perform Bell type experiments[@BELL_CHSH] with molecules in an optical lattice. By applying the unitary transformations which allow for the implementation of a conditional phase gate between the storage rotational levels ${\left| 0 \right\rangle}$ and ${\left| 1 \right\rangle}$ as discussed in Section\[sec:creation\], and then by measuring the population of each level, one can infer the quantity $$\label{bell}
{\cal B}=\big| \langle \sigma_a \sigma_b \rangle + \langle \sigma_{a'} \sigma_b \rangle + \langle \sigma_{a} \sigma_{b'} \rangle - \langle \sigma_{a'} \sigma_{b'} \rangle \big|\,,$$ where the $\sigma_{\!\alpha}$ are the Pauli matrices in the $\alpha$ directions, written in the basis set. In this type of measurement, the molecules do not need to be distinguished. As shown in Ref.[@BELL_CHSH], all separable states satisfy the inequality $${\cal B} \leqslant 2\,,$$ while some entangled states violate it. Other types of approaches are also possible with temporal Bell inequalities, for instance[@Or_ent].
In the solid matrix system, the rotational states of the molecules are not as accessible as in the preceding case. In such systems, the measurements are usually made by radiation detection or by photon echo techniques[@CLAUDINE]. In Ref.[@EU], it was shown that photon echoes can be used as entanglement witnesses, detecting a subspace of entangled states. In the experimental system in question, the echoes are observed in a transition between two vibrational levels. In order to obtain information about entanglement between rotational states, one should first coherently transfer the population of state ${\left| 1 \right\rangle}\equiv{\left| 2,v_0 \right\rangle}$ to the first excited vibrational state with no rotational excitation, ${\left| 0,v_1 \right\rangle}$, using the two-photon process shown in Fig.\[fig3\]. The result of this transformation is somehow to swap the excitations associated with the rotational and vibrational degrees of freedom. By doing so, entanglement between rotational levels is, therefore, converted into entanglement between vibrational levels. The techniques described in[@EU] can then be applied for entanglement detection.
Conclusion
==========
We have presented an alternative way for creating controlled and uncontrolled entanglement between rotational levels of two polar diatomic molecules trapped in optical lattices or in solid matrices.
Our scheme is based on a weak dipole coupling which is conditionally created between molecules, leading to a conditional phase shift. It uses the three lowest rotational levels of two vibrational states. For storage of the information between the gate operations, the qubit state is transferred efficiently via a Raman transition to two uninteracting states of long coherence times.
We have discussed two possible experimental scenarios which are suitable for implementing the proposed scheme, as well as possible detection techniques adapted to both experimental contexts. These results throw some light on how to perform quantum information operations in cold and trapped molecular systems.
The authors are indebted to Claudine Crépin and Michel Broquier for inspiring discussions. During the realization of this work, Pérola Milman was financially supported by the ACI [*“Molecular Simulations"*]{}. Eric Charron acknowledges financial support from CEA (contract number LRC-DSM 05-33) and HPC facilities of IDRIS-CNRS (contract number 05-1848). Laboratoire de Photophysique Moléculaire is associated with Université Paris-Sud.
[99]{}
A. Rauschenbeutel, G. Nogues, S. Osnaghi, P. Bertet, M. Brune, J. M. Raimond, and S. Haroche, Science [**288**]{}, 2024 (2000) ; J. M. Raimond, M. Brune, and S. Haroche, , 565 (2001).
H. Häffner, W. Hänsel, C. F. Roos, J. Benhelm, D. Chek-al-kar, M. Chwalla, T. Körber, U. D. Rapol, M. Riebe, P. O. Schmidt, C. Becher, O. Gühne, W. Dür and R. Blatt, Nature [**438**]{}, 643 (2005) ; D. Leibfried, E. Knill, S. Seidelin, J. Britton, R. B. Blakestad, J. Chiaverini, D. B. Hume, W. M. Itano, J. D. Jost, C. Langer, R. Ozeri, R. Reichle and D. J. Wineland, Nature [**438**]{}, 639 (2005).
L. M. K. Vandersypen and I. L. Chuang, , 1037 (2004).
O. Mandel, M. Greiner, A. Widera, T. Rom, T. W. Hänsch, and I. Bloch, Nature [**425**]{}, 937 (2003) ; J. V. Porto, S. Rolston, B. Laburthe Tolra, C. J. Williams, and W. D. Phillips, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A [**361**]{}, 1417 (2003) ; D. Jaksch, Cont. Phys. [**45**]{}, 367 (2004).
Special Issue, [*Ultracold Polar Molecules: Formation and Collisions*]{}, Edited by J. Doyle, B. Friedrich, R.V. Krems, and F. Masnou-Seeuws, Eur. Phys. J. D [**31**]{}, 149 (2004).
R. Wymar, R. S. Freeland, D. J. Han, C. Ryu, and D. J. Heinzen, Science [**287**]{}, 1016 (2000) ; C. McKenzie, J. HeckerDenschlag, H. Häffner, A. Browaeys, L. E. E. de Araujo, F. K. Fatemi, K. M. Jones, J. E. Simsarian, D. Cho, A. Simoni, E. Tiesinga, P. S. Julienne, K. Helmerson, P. D. Lett, S. L. Rolston, and W. D. Phillips, , 120403 (2002).
E. A. Donley, N. R. Claussen, S. T. Thompson, and C. E. Wieman, Nature [**417**]{}, 529 (2002) ; C. A. Regal, C. Ticknor, J. L. Bohn, and D. S. Jin, Nature [**424**]{}, 47 (2003) ; J. Herbig, T. Kraemer, M. Mark, T. Weber, C. Chin, H. C. Nägerl, and R. Grimm, Science [**301**]{}, 1510 (2003).
A. J. Kerman, J. M. Sage, S. Sainis, T. Bergeman, and D. DeMille, , 033004 (2004) ; J. M. Sage, S. Sainis, T. Bergeman, and D. DeMille, , 203001 (2005).
C. A. Stan, M. W. Zwierlein, C. H. Schunck, S. M. F. Raupach, and W. Ketterle, , 143001 (2004).
M. W. Mancini, G. D. Telles, A. R. L. Caires, V. S. Bagnato, and L. G. Marcassa, , 133203 (2004) ; S. Inouye, J. Goldwin, M. L. Olsen, C. Ticknor, J. L. Bohn, and D. S. Jin, , 183201 (2004) ; D. Wang, J. Qi, M. F. Stone, O. Nikolayeva, H. Wang, B. Hattaway, S. D. Gensemer, P. L. Gould, E. E. Eyler, and W. C. Stwalley, , 243005 (2004).
C. Haimberger, J. Kleinert, M. Bhattacharya, and N. P. Bigelow, , 021402(R) (2004).
T. Rom, T. Best, O. Mandel, A. Widera, M. Greiner, T. W. Hänsch, and I. Bloch, , 073002 (2004) ; T. Stöferle, H. Moritz, K. Günter, M. Köhl, and T. Esslinger, , 030401 (2006) ; G. Thalhammer, K. Winkler, F. Lang, S. Schmid, R. Grimm, and J. H. Denschlag, , 050402 (2006).
M. G. Moore and H. R. Sadeghpour, , 041603(R) (2003) ; T. Miyakawa and P. Meystre, , 021601(R) (2006).
E. Charron and M. Raoult, , 033407 (2006).
Z. Amitay, R. Kosloff, and S. R. Leone, Chem. Phys. Lett. [**359**]{}, 8 (2002) ; J. Vala, Z. Amitay, B. Zhang, S. R. Leone, and R. Kosloff, , 062316 (2002).
J. P. Palao, and R. Kosloff, , 188301 (2002).
C. M. Tesch, and R. de Vivie-Riedle, , 12158 (2004).
A. Micheli, G. K. Brennen, and P. Zoller, Nature Phys. [**2**]{}, 341 (2006).
D. DeMille, , 067901 (2002).
C. Lee and E. A. Ostrovskaya, , 062321 (2005).
S. Kotochigova and E. Tiesinga, , 041405(R) (2006).
S. F. Yelin, K. Kirby, and R. Côté, , 050301(R) (2006).
C. Hettich, C. Schmitt, J. Zitzmann, S. Kühn, I. Gerhardt, and V. Sandoghdar, Science [**298**]{}, 385 (2002).
E. Tiesinga, S. Kotochigova, and P. S. Julienne, , 042722 (2002) ; S. Kotochigova and E. Tiesinga, , 1 (2005).
Even though the polar angle $\theta$ is defined on the interval only, the probability distributions shown in this graph are periodically extended to the interval in order to improve the legibility of the figure.
For bipartite pure states, the von Neumann entropy associated with one of the subsystems provides an unambiguous measure of the degree of entanglement (see chapter11 of Ref.[@CHUANG] for details). In a $d-$dimensional Hilbert space and for bipartite pure states, a maximal entanglement is obtained when this entropy reaches its maximum value $\log_2(d)$.
P. Divincenzo, Fortschr. Phys. [**48**]{}, 771 (2000).
L. K. Grover, [*Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing*]{}, p. 212, (1996), and quant-ph/9605043 ; L. K. Grover, , 325 (1997).
P. W. Shor, [*Proc. 5th Annual Symp. on Found. of Comput. Science*]{}, IEEE Comput. Soc. Press (1994) ; P. W. Shor, SIAM J. Sci. Statist. Comput. [**26**]{} 1484 (1997), and quant-ph/9508027.
M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, [*Quantum Computation and Quantum Information*]{}, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000).
U. Gaubatz, P. Rudecki, S. Schiemann, and K. Bergmann, , 5363 (1990) ; K. Bergmann, H. Theuer, and B. W. Shore, , 1003 (1998).
S. Lloyd, , 346 (1995).
T. Calarco, E. A. Hinds, D. Jaksch, J. Schmiedmayer, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, , 022304 (2000).
E. Charron, E. Tiesinga, F. Mies, and C. Williams, , 077901 (2002) ; D. Vager, B. Segev, and Y. B. Band, , 022325 (2005).
A. Rauschenbeutel, G. Nogues, S. Osnaghi, P. Bertet, M. Brune, J.M. Raimond, and S. Haroche, , 5166 (1999) ; E. Charron, E. Tiesinga, F. Mies, and C. Williams, 077901 (2002) ; N. Kiesel, C. Schmid, U. Weber, R. Ursin, and H. Weinfurter, , 210505 (2005).
M. A. Cirone, A. Negretti, T. Calarco, P. Krüger, and J. Schmiedmayer, Eur. Phys. J. D 35, 165 (2005); E. Charron, M. A. Cirone, A. Negretti, J. Schmiedmayer, and T. Calarco, , 012308 (2006).
M. Aymar and O. Dulieu, , 204302 (2005).
G. Herzberg, [*Molecular Spectra and Molecular Structure, I.Spectra of Diatomic Molecules*]{}, 2nd ed., D. Van Nostrand Co., NY (1950).
M. Broquier, C. Crépin, A. Cuissot, H. Dubost, and J. P. Galaup, Eur. Phys. J. D [**36**]{}, 41 (2005) ; M. Broquier, C. Crépin, A. Cuisset, H. Dubost, J. P. Galaup, and P. Roubin, J. Chem. Phys. [**118**]{}, 9582 (2003) ; C. Crépin, M. Broquier, H. Dubost, J. P. Galaup, J. L. Le Gouët, and J. M. Ortega, , 964 (2000).
P. W. Dooley, I. V. Litvinyuk, K. F. Lee, D. M. Rayner, M. Spanner, D. M. Villeneuve, and P. B. Corkum, , 023406 (2003).
A. S. Mouritzen and K. Mølmer, , 244311 (2006).
B. Terhal, Phys. Lett. A [**271**]{}, 319 (2000) ; D. Bruss, J. Math. Phys. [**43**]{}, 4237 (2002).
J. S. Bell, Physics (Long Island Ciy, New York) [**1**]{}, 195 (1964) ; J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, , 880 (1969).
P. Milman, A. Keller, E. Charron, and Osman Atabek, quant-ph/0612044 (2006).
P. Milman, , 042317 (2006).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'A variety of unconventional superconductors have low carrier density as a common factor. However, the underlying mechanism of superconductivity in such low carrier density systems is not well understood. Besides, small carrier density is an unfavourable component for conventional superconductivity as described by the Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer (BCS) theory. Therefore, studying low carrier density systems can lead to a better understanding in such systems. In this paper, we report superconductivity property studies in low carrier density systems, Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ and Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$, using various experimental techniques. Single crystals of Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ and Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$ have been grown using the Czochralski crystal pulling method in a tetra-arc furnace. The x-ray diffraction experiment reveals that both compounds crystallize in cubic structure [(space group $\it{Pm3n}$, no. 223)]{}. The transport, magnetization and heat capacity measurements show that Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ single crystal undergoes a superconducting transition at 2.85 K, whereas, Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$ becomes superconductor at 3.1 K.'
address: 'Department of Condensed Matter Physics and Material Science, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai-400005, India'
author:
- 'Om Prakash, A. Thamizhavel, S. Ramakrishnan'
bibliography:
- 'reference.bib'
title: 'Superconductivity in Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ and Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$: A comparative study'
---
Introduction
============
A variety of unconventional superconductors present low density of the charge carriers as a common factor, implying that it could be the basis for a unifying picture to understand the superconductivity in such exotic systems. Low density of charge carriers is one of the characteristic features which is shared by cuprates, fullerenes and MgB$_2$ [@Fleming1991; @Holczer1991; @Nagamatsu2001]. This is quite surprising since low carrier density is an unfavourable element for superconductivity within the conventional framework of BCS [@Bardeen1957] or Migdal${-}$Eliashberg [@Migdal1958; @Eliashberg1960] theories. Moreover, a small superfluid density, is unavoidably related to poor screening and strong electronic correlations, ingredients which are expected to be also detrimental for conventional superconductivity. On these grounds it is hard to understand why these low carrier materials are the best superconductors. As far as the superconductivity exhibited by inter-metallic compounds is concerned, the role of electron-phonon interaction cannot be overlooked. However, one may have to look beyond the conventional framework of BCS or Migdal${-}$Eliashberg theories in order to understand the unconventional superconductivity in these compounds. From the experimental side, it is important to look for new superconducting materials with low carrier density.
Experimental Details
====================
Single crystals of Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ and Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$ have been grown using Czochralski crystal pulling method in a tetra-arc furnace under high purity argon atmosphere. Stoichiometric ammount of Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ and Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$ (10 g each) was taken and melted 4-5 times in the tetra-arc furnace to make a homogeneous polycrystalline mixture. Single crystals were pulled using a tungsten seed rod at the rate of 10 mm/h for about 6 h to get 5-6 mm long and 3-4 mm thick crystals. The phase purity was characterized by powder X-ray diffraction using PANanalytical X-ray diffractometer. Single crystals were oriented along the crystallographic direction \[100\] using Laue back reflection using Huber Laue diffractometer and cut to desired shape and dimensions using a spark erosion cutting machine. Resistivity measurements were done in a home made setup using standard four-probe technique. Magnetization measurements were done in commercial SQUID magnetometer (MPMS5, Quantum Design, USA) and heat capacity measurements were done using PPMS.
Results and Discussion
======================
The crystal structure of Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ is shown in Fig. \[fig:fig1\]. Both compounds have same crystal structure and cubic symmetry ($\it{Pm3n}$, space group $\#$ 223). Rietveld analysis [@Carvajal1993] of the Powder X-ray diffraction (PXRD) of Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ is shown in Fig. \[fig:fig2\]. The temperature dependence of resistivity $\rho (T)$ from 300 to 2K for Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ and Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$ are shown in Fig. \[fig:fig3\]. A semi-metallic behaviour $( \frac{d\rho}{dT}<0 )$ can be observed in the normal state resistivity data of both the compounds.
![Rietveld analysis of the powder XRD pattern of Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$. No impurity peaks are observed indicating single phase nature of the compound. Similar PXRD pattern is also observed for Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$.[]{data-label="fig:fig2"}](1a){height="6cm"}
![Rietveld analysis of the powder XRD pattern of Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$. No impurity peaks are observed indicating single phase nature of the compound. Similar PXRD pattern is also observed for Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$.[]{data-label="fig:fig2"}](1b){height="6cm"}
\[fig:fig2a\] \[fig:fig1b\]
\[fig:fig3a\] \[fig:fig3b\]
The magnetoresistance data for Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ and Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$ is shown in Fig. \[fig:fig4\]. The width of the superconducting transition increases with increasing magnetic field. The transition temperature is taken at the point where resistivity becomes half of its normal state value. The temperature dependence of the upper critical field for Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ and Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$ is shown in Fig. \[fig:fig5\]. We estimate the orbital upper critical field, $\mu{_0}Hc{_2}(0)$, for both the compounds using Werthamer-Helfand-Hohenberg (WHH) expression[@Werthamer1966], $\mu{_0}Hc{_2}(0) = -0.693 ~T{_c}\frac{dHc{_2}}{dT}\vert{_{T=T{_c}}}$ in the dirty limit for type-II superconductors. A nearly linear relationship is observed in Fig. \[fig:fig5\] between $\mu{_0}Hc{_2}$ and $T{_c}$ in the proximity of the transition temperature ($T{_c}$ at H = 0) for both the compounds but the linear trend is more prominent for Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$.
\[fig:fig4a\] \[fig:fig4a\]
The slope $\frac{dHc{_2}}{dT}\vert{_{T=T{_c}}}$ is used to calculate $\mu{_0}H{_{c2}} = 4.63\pm0.09$ T for Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ and $\mu{_0}Hc{_2}= 5.68\pm 0.12$ T for Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$ using the WHH formula in the dirty limit. The value of $\mu{_0}H{_{c2}}$ is smaller than the weak coupling Pauli paramagnetic limit $\mu{_0}H{^\mathrm{Pauli}}=1.82T_{c}=5.09$ T for Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ and $\mu{_0}H{^\mathrm{Pauli}}=5.80$ T for Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$. The upper critical field value $\mu{_0}H{_{c2}}(0)$ can be used to estimate the Ginzburg-Landau coherence length $\xi(0){_{GL}}=\sqrt{\Phi{_0}/{2\pi{H{_{c2}}(0)}}}= 80.4\pm{0.5}\AA$ for Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ and $\xi(0){_{GL}}= 76.1\pm{0.7}\AA$ for Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$, where $\Phi{_0}={hc}/{2e}$ is the magnetic flux quantum.\
The DC-magnetisation data of both compounds is shown in Fig. \[fig:fig6\] indicating diamagnetic transitions of Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ at 2.8 K and Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$ at 3.1 K. Very similar values of $T_{c}$ from both resistivity and susceptibility data confirm that our single crystals are of very high quality. Large vortex pinning can be observed in the field cooled (FC-Meissner) data in shown in Fig. \[fig:fig6\].
\[fig:fig5a\] \[fig:fig5b\]
\[fig:fig6a\] \[fig:fig6b\]
The characterisation of the superconducting transition using heat capacity measurements is shown in Fig. \[fig:fig7\]. The specific heat jump at the thermodynamic transition confirm the bulk superconductivity in both the compounds. The low temperature normal state specific heat can be well fitted with $\frac{C}{T} = \gamma + \beta T^2$, where $\gamma T$ represents the electronic contribution and $\beta T^3$ describe the lattice-phonon contributions to the specific heat in the normal state. Fitting the above formula give electronic specific heat coefficient $\gamma= 7.08\frac{mJ}{mol K^2}$ ($\gamma =25.4 \frac{mJ}{mol K^2}$ ) and the phonon/lattice contributions $\beta = 3.52\frac{mJ}{mol K^4}$$(\beta = 2.30\frac{mJ}{mol K^2})$ for Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ (Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$). The ratio $\frac{\Delta C}{\gamma Tc}$ can be used to measure the strength of the electron-phonon coupling. The specific heat jump $\frac{\Delta C}{Tc}$ is $6.07\frac{mJ}{mol K^2}$ ($29\frac{mJ}{mol K^2}$), setting the value of $\frac{\Delta C}{\gamma Tc} = 0.85$ ( $\frac{\Delta C}{\gamma Tc} = 1.15$ ) for Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ (Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$). These values are smaller than the weak-coupling limit of 1.43 for a conventional BCS superconductor, suggesting that these two compounds are moderately electron-phonon coupled superconductor.\
The comparison among the normal and superconducting state parameters of the both compounds is shown in Table-\[table:table1\]. We also notice from Table-\[table:table1\] that value of $\gamma$ is larger in Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$ suggesting stronger electronic correlations in Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$ as compared to electronic correlations in Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$.
[lcc]{} Parameters &Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ & Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$\
$T_{\rm c}$ (K) &2.85 & 3.1\
$\gamma$ (mJ/molK$^{2}$) &7.1 & 25.4\
$\Theta_{\rm D}$ (K) &223 & 257\
$\Delta C_{\rm el}/\gamma T_{\rm c}$ &0.85 & 1.15\
$\mu{_0}H{_{c2}}$ (T) &4.63 &5.68\
$\xi(0)_{GL}$ ($\AA$) &80.4 & 78\
\[table:table1\]
Conclusion
==========
We have grown single crystals and characterised the superconducting properties of two semi-metallic compounds Y$_3$Ru$_4$Ge$_{13}$ and Lu$_3$Os$_4$Ge$_{13}$. A bulk superconducting transition is confirmed and characterised through electrical transport, magnetisation and heat capacity measurements on the single crystals. The magnetic susceptibility measurements show large pinning of vortices in both the compounds. The analysis of the low temperature heat capacity data suggests that both these compounds are moderately electron-phonon coupled type-$II$ superconductors.
References {#references .unnumbered}
==========
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
In order to analyze stability of a two-queue model, we consider a two-dimensional quasi-birth-and-death process (2d-QBD process), denoted by $\{\bY(t)\}=\{((L_1(t),L_2(t)),J(t))\}$. The two-dimensional process $\{(L_1(t),L_2(t))\}$ on $\mathbb{Z}_+^2$ is called a level process, where the individual processes $\{L_1(t)\}$ and $\{L_2(t)\}$ are assumed to be skip free. The supplemental process $\{J(t)\}$ is called a phase process and it takes values in a finite set. The 2d-QBD process is a CTMC, in which the transition rates of the level process vary according to the state of the phase process like an ordinary (one-dimensional) QBD process. In this paper, we first state the conditions ensuring a 2d-QBD process is positive recurrent or transient and then demonstrate that the efficiency of a two-queue model can be estimated by using the conditions we obtained.
: continuous-time Markov chain, quasi-birth-and-death process, stability, positive recurrence, Foster’s criterion, matrix analytic method
: 60J10, 60K25
author:
- |
Toshihisa Ozawa\
Faculty of Business Administration, Komazawa University\
1-23-1 Komazawa, Setagaya-ku, Tokyo 154-8525, Japan\
E-mail: [email protected]
title: 'Stability condition of a two-dimensional QBD process and its application to estimation of efficiency for two-queue models'
---
Introduction {#sec:intro}
============
Consider a two-queue model that consists of two customer classes corresponding to two queues and several servers serving customers according to some kind of service policy. In contrast to single-queue models, the stability condition of such a two-queue model is often non-trivial. For example, consider an $M/M/1$ queue with setup times (model 1) and an $M_1,M_2/M_1,M_2/1$ nonpreemptive-priority queue with setup times (model 2). Let $\lambda_1$ and $\mu_1$ be the arrival and service rates of model 1, respectively, and $\lambda_{2,1}$, $\lambda_{2,2}$, $\mu_{2,1}$ and $\mu_{2,2}$ those of model 2. The traffic intensities of the models are given by $\rho_1=\lambda_1/\mu_1$ and $\rho_2=\lambda_{2,1}/\mu_{2,1}+\lambda_{2,2}/\mu_{2,2}$, respectively. It is well known that model 1 is stable if $\rho_1<1$, where we say a queueing model is stable if the continuous-time Markov chain (CTMC) representing the behavior of the queueing model is positive recurrent. On the other hand, model 2 may not be stable even if $\rho_2<1$, and this means that the stability condition of model 2 cannot be given only by using the traffic intensity. A reason why this phenomenon occurs in model 2 is that the queue of high-priority customers sometimes becomes empty even if the system is overloaded and at that time the server needs setup time to start service for a low-priority customer. With respect to model 2, letting the value of $\lambda_{2,1}$ or $\lambda_{2,2}$ vary with fixing the other parameters, we can see that there exists $\rho^*<1$ such that model 2 is stable if $\rho_2<\rho^*$ and it is unstable (i.e., the corresponding CTMC is transient) if $\rho_2> \rho^*$. The value of $\rho^*$ depends on the model parameters (see Section \[sec:example\]). This $\rho^*$ is a measure to estimate efficiency of model 2 since it corresponds to the maximum ratio of server ability devoted to customer service under a certain condition. We, therefore, call $\rho^*$ the efficiency of the model. $\rho^*$ is also a measure to estimate efficiency of the service policy. Note that the value of $(\lambda_{2,1},\lambda_{2,2})$ when $\rho_2$ equals $\rho^*$ corresponds to the maximum throughput vector of customers.
Another typical example is an N-model [@Tezcan13], which consists of two customer classes and two server pools. Let $m_1$ be the number of servers in the first server pool and $m_2$ that in the second server pool. While the servers in the first server pool can serve only class-1 customers, those in the second server pool can serve customers of both classes, where class-1 customers have priority over class-2 customers. Assume Poisson arrivals and exponential services. Let $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ be the arrival rates of class-1 customers and class-2 customers, respectively, and let $\mu_1$ and $\mu_2$ be the service rates of class-1 customers and class-2 customers. The traffic intensity of the N-model per server is given by $\rho=(\lambda_1/\mu_1+\lambda_2/\mu_2)/(m_1+m_2)$. Like the first example, the condition “$\rho<1$" does not ensure the N-model is stable. When the value of $\lambda_1$ or $\lambda_2$ varies with fixing the other parameters, there exists $\rho^*<1$ such that the N-model is stable if $\rho<\rho^*$ and it is unstable if $\rho>\rho^*$. This $\rho^*$ is a measure to estimate (total) efficiency of the N-model. Stability of N-models has been analyzed in [@Tezcan13].
In order to evaluate the efficiency of a two-queue model, it suffices to know the stability condition of the two-queue model. We, therefore, consider a two-dimensional quasi-birth-and-death process (2d-QBD process, for a discrete-time version of 2d-QBD process, see [@Ozawa13]) as a stochastic model representing the behavior of the two-queue model and obtain the stability condition of the 2d-QBD process. Denote a 2d-QBD process by $\{\bY(t)\}=\{((L_1(t),L_2(t)),J(t))\}$. The two-dimensional process $\{(L_1(t),L_2(t))\}$ on $\mathbb{Z}_+^2$ is called a level process, where the individual processes $\{L_1(t)\}$ and $\{L_2(t)\}$ are assumed to be skip free. The supplemental process $\{J(t)\}$ is called a phase process and it takes values in a finite set. The 2d-QBD process is a CTMC, in which the transition rates of the level process vary according to the state of the phase process like an ordinary QBD process. This modulation is space homogeneous except for the boundaries of $\mathbb{Z}_+^2$. In the same way as ordinary QBD processes [@Latouche99; @Neuts94], stochastic models arising from various two-queue models and two-node queueing networks with Markovian arrival processes (MAPs) and phase-type services can be represented as 2d-QBD processes. Furthermore, two-queue models with various service policies such as nonpreemptive priority, $K$-limited service, server vacation and server setup can also be represented as 2d-QBD processes (for the case of ordinary QBD process, see [@Ozawa04]). Our first aim is to explicitly state the conditions ensuring a 2d-QBD process is positive recurrent or transient as a main theorem, and the second one is to demonstrate that the efficiency of a two-queue model can be evaluated by using the conditions we obtained. Here, it should be emphasized that we do not intend to analyze specific queueing models. Instead, we present a general-purpose way to analyze stability of Markovian two-queue models as well as Markovian two-node queueing networks.
In the proof of the main theorem, we use a discrete-time 2d-QBD process obtained from the original 2d-QBD process by uniformization. The discrete-time 2d-QBD process has the same stationary distribution as the original 2d-QBD process and the stability condition of the latter is coincident with that of the former. A discrete-time 2d-QBD process *without a phase process* is a two-dimensional skip-free reflecting random walk (2d-RRW) and stability of 2d-RRWs has been studied in a lot of literature (see [@Fayolle95] and references therein). Especially, remarkable results have been obtained in [@Fayolle89; @Malyshev81]. In this paper, following their results, we analyze stability of the discrete-time 2d-QBD process obtained from the original QBD process. Key notions we use are “induced Markov chain" and “mean increment vector" [@Fayolle95; @Malyshev81]. An induced Markov chain is a subprocess generated from a 2d-RRW and the mean increment vector with respect to the induced Markov chain is the vector of the expected increments of the 2d-RRW evaluated by using the stationary distribution of the induced Markov chain. The notion of induced Markov chain can be applied to discrete-time 2d-QBD processes as well as continuous-time 2d-QBD processes. Since a (continuous-time) 2d-QBD process is a CTMC, we define the mean transition rate vectors for the 2d-QBD process, instead of the mean increment vectors. The obtained conditions ensuring a discrete-time 2d-QBD processes (resp. continuous-time 2d-QBD process) is positive recurrent or transient are represented in terms of the mean increment vectors (resp. mean transition rate vectors). We prove our results by using a kind of Foster’s criterion. Here, we briefly comment on fluid limits and fluid models. As is well-known, one of the most useful methods for analyzing stability of queueing networks including two-queue models is the combination of fluid limits and fluid models (see [@Bramson08] and references therein). Applying that method to a queueing model with a service policy, we must give fluid equations to represent the service policy and prove the fluid model corresponding to the original queueing model is stable or not. It is not always an easy task. On the other hand, in our method, once a queueing model is represented as a 2d-QBD process, we can see the queueing model is stable or not, by using the conditions we obtained.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section \[sec:model\], the 2d-QBD process is described in detail and the conditions ensuring it is positive recurrent or transient are stated as a main theorem. The main theorem is proved in Section \[sec:proof\]. In Section \[sec:example\], via two simple examples, we demonstrate that the efficiency of a two-queue model can be evaluated by using our results. The paper concludes with some remarks in Section \[sec:concluding\].
*Notations.* $\mathbb{Z}$ is the set of all integers, $\mathbb{Z}_+$ that of all nonnegative integers and $\mathbb{N}$ that of all positive integers. Define $\mathbb{H}$, $\mathbb{H}_+$ and $\mathbb{H}_-$ as $\mathbb{H}=\{-1,0,1\}$, $\mathbb{H}_+=\{0,1\}$ and $\mathbb{H}_-=\{-1,0\}$, respectively. $O$ is a matrix of $0$’s, $\bone$ is a column vector of $1$’s and $\bzero$ is a column vector of $0$’s. Their dimensions are determined in context, but if the dimensions should be specified, we denote them by subscripts. For example, $\bone_k$ is a $k\times 1$ vector of $1$’s. $I$ is the identity matrix.
Model description and stability condition {#sec:model}
=========================================
2d-QBD process and related CTMCs {#sec:2dQBD}
--------------------------------
A 2d-QBP process $\{\bY(t)\}=\{((L_1(t),L_2(t)),J(t))\}$ is a CTMC on a state space $\calS$ given as $$\calS = (\{0\}\times\{0\}\times S_0) \cup (\mathbb{N}\times\{0\}\times S_1) \cup (\{0\}\times\mathbb{N}\times S_2) \cup (\mathbb{N}\times\mathbb{N}\times S_+),$$ where for $i\in\{0,1,2,+\}$, $S_i=\{1,2,\ldots,s_i\}$ and $s_i$ is the cardinality of $S_i$. The infinitesimal generator of $\{\bY(t)\}$, $Q$, is represented in block form as $$Q=\left( Q_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')}; (l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')\in\mathbb{Z}_+^2 \right),$$ where each block $Q_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')}$ is given as, for some $i$ in $\{0,1,2,+\}$, $$Q_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')}=\left( q_{((l_1,l_2),j),((l_1',l_2'),j')}; j,j'\in S_i \right)$$ and for $((l_1,l_2),j)\ne ((l_1',l_2'),j')$, $q_{((l_1,l_2),j),((l_1',l_2'),j')}$ is the transition rate from $((l_1,l_2),j)$ to $((l_1',l_2'),j')$. Since $\{L_1(t)\}$ and $\{L_2(t)\}$ are skip free, the block matrices can be given in terms of 36 matrices $
A^{(0)}_{k_1,k_2},\ A^{(1)}_{k_1,k_2},\ A^{(2)}_{k_1,k_2},\ A^{(+)}_{k_1,k_2},\ k_1,k_2\in\mathbb{H},
$ as follows: for $(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')\in\mathbb{Z}_+^2$, $$\begin{aligned}
&Q_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')} = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
A^{(0)}_{\varDelta l_1,\varDelta l_2},
& \mbox{if $(l_1,l_2)=(0,0)$, $\varDelta l_1,\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}_+$}, \cr
& \mbox{if $(l_1',l_2')=(0,0)$, $\varDelta l_1,\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}_-$}, \cr
& \mbox{if $(l_1,l_2)=(1,0)$, $\varDelta l_1=-1$, $\varDelta l_2=1$}, \cr
& \mbox{or if $(l_1,l_2)=(0,1)$, $\varDelta l_1=1$, $\varDelta l_2=-1$}, \cr
A^{(1)}_{\varDelta l_1,\varDelta l_2},
& \mbox{if $l_1\ge 1$, $l_2=0$, $\varDelta l_1\in\mathbb{H}_+$, $\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}_+$}, \cr
& \mbox{if $l_1\ge 2$, $l_2=0$, $\varDelta l_1=-1$, $\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}_+$}, \cr
& \mbox{if $l_1\ge 1$, $l_2=1$, $\varDelta l_1\in\mathbb{H}_+$, $\varDelta l_2=-1$}, \cr
& \mbox{or if $l_1\ge 2$, $l_2=1$, $\varDelta l_1=\varDelta l_2=-1$}, \cr
A^{(2)}_{\varDelta l_1,\varDelta l_2},
& \mbox{if $l_1=0$, $l_2\ge 1$, $\varDelta l_1\in\mathbb{H}_+$, $\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}_+$}, \cr
& \mbox{if $l_1=0$, $l_2\ge 2$, $\varDelta l_1\in\mathbb{H}_+$, $\varDelta l_2=-1$}, \cr
& \mbox{if $l_1=1$, $l_2\ge 1$, $\varDelta l_1=-1$, $\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}_+$}, \cr
& \mbox{or if $l_1=1$, $l_2\ge 2$, $\varDelta l_1=\varDelta l_2=-1$}, \cr
A^{(+)}_{\varDelta l_1,\varDelta l_2},
& \mbox{if $l_1\ge 1$, $l_2\ge 1$, $\varDelta l_1,\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}_+$}, \cr
& \mbox{if $l_1\ge 2$, $l_2\ge 1$, $\varDelta l_1=-1$, $\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}_+$}, \cr
& \mbox{if $l_1\ge 1$, $l_2\ge 2$, $\varDelta l_1\in\mathbb{H}_+$, $\varDelta l_2=-1$}, \cr
& \mbox{or if $l_1\ge 2$, $l_2\ge 2$, $\varDelta l_1=\varDelta l_2=-1$}, \cr
O, & \mbox{otherwise}, \end{array} \right.
\label{eq:Q_blocks}\end{aligned}$$ where $\varDelta l_1=l_1'-l_1$ and $\varDelta l_2=l_2'-l_2$ (see Fig. \[fig:transition\_proba\]). The dimensions of the block matrices are determined in context; for example, the dimension of each $A^{(+)}_{k_1,k_2}$ is $s_+\times s_+$ and that of $A^{(1)}_{0,-1}$ is $s_+\times s_1$. We assume the following condition throughout the paper.
\[as:Yt\_irreducible\] The CTMC $\{\bY(t)\}$ is irreducible.
Since $Q$ is an infinitesimal generator, for $i\in\{0,1,2,+\}$, the off-diagonal elements of $A^{(i)}_{0,0}$ are nonnegative and the diagonal elements are negative under Assumption \[as:Yt\_irreducible\]; for $(k_1,k_2)\ne (0,0)$, $A^{(i)}_{k_1,k_2}$ is nonnegative. For $k_1,k_2\in\mathbb{H}$, define matrices $A^{(+)}_{*,k_2}$, $A^{(+)}_{k_1,*}$ and $A^{(+)}_{*,*}$ as $A^{(+)}_{*,k_2} = \sum_{k_1'\in\mathbb{H}} A^{(+)}_{k_1',k_2}$, $A^{(+)}_{k_1,*} = \sum_{k_2'\in\mathbb{H}} A^{(+)}_{k_1,k_2'}$ and $A^{(+)}_{*,*} = \sum_{k_1',k_2'\in\mathbb{H}} A^{(+)}_{k_1',k_2'}$. Furthermore, for $k_1,k_2\in\mathbb{H}$, define $A^{(1)}_{*,k_2}$ and $A^{(2)}_{k_1,*}$ as $A^{(1)}_{*,k_2} = \sum_{k_1'\in\mathbb{H}} A^{(1)}_{k_1',k_2}$ and $A^{(2)}_{k_1,*} = \sum_{k_2'\in\mathbb{H}} A^{(2)}_{k_1,k_2'}$.
![Transition rates of the 2d-QBD process[]{data-label="fig:transition_proba"}](fig_1.pdf){width="10cm"}
Next, we define three kinds of CTMC generated from $\{\bY(t)\}$ by removing one or two boundaries. Denote them by $\{\bY^{(+)}(t)\}=\{((L^{(+)}_1(t),L^{(+)}_2(t)),J^{(+)}(t))\}$, $\{\bY^{(1)}(t)\}=\{((L^{(1)}_1(t),L^{(1)}_2(t)),J^{(1)}(t))\}$ and $\{\bY^{(2)}(t)\}=\{((L^{(2)}_1(t),L^{(2)}_2(t)),J^{(2)}(t))\}$, respectively. $\{\bY^{(+)}(t)\}$ is a CTMC on the state space $\calS^{(+)}=\mathbb{Z}^2\times S_+$ and it is generated from $\{\bY(t)\}$ by removing the boundaries on the $l_1$ and $l_2$-axes. The infinitesimal generator of $\{\bY^{(+)}(t)\}$, $Q^{(+)}$, is represented in block form as $$Q^{(+)}=\left( Q^{(+)}_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')}; (l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')\in\mathbb{Z}^2 \right),$$ and each block $Q^{(+)}_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')}$ is given as $$\begin{aligned}
&Q^{(+)}_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')}
= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} A^{(+)}_{\varDelta l_1,\varDelta l_2}, & \mbox{if $\varDelta l_1,\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}$}, \cr
O, & \mbox{otherwise}, \end{array} \right. \end{aligned}$$ where $\varDelta l_1=l_1'-l_1$ and $\varDelta l_2=l_2'-l_2$. $\{\bY^{(1)}(t)\}$ is a CTMC on the state space $\calS^{(1)} = (\mathbb{Z}\times\{0\}\times S_1) \cup (\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{N}\times S_+)$ and it is generated from $\{\bY(t)\}$ by removing the boundary on the $l_2$-axis. The infinitesimal generator of $\{\bY^{(1)}(t)\}$, $Q^{(1)}$, is represented in block form as $$Q^{(1)} = \left( Q^{(1)}_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')}; (l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')\in\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}_+ \right),$$ and each block $Q^{(1)}_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')}$ is given as $$\begin{aligned}
&Q^{(1)}_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')}
= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
A^{(1)}_{\varDelta l_1,\varDelta l_2},
& \mbox{if $l_2=0$, $\varDelta l_1\in\mathbb{H}$, $\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}_+$}, \cr
& \mbox{or if $l_2=1$, $\varDelta l_1\in\mathbb{H}$, $\varDelta l_2=-1$}, \cr
A^{(+)}_{\varDelta l_1,\varDelta l_2},
& \mbox{if $l_2\ge 1$, $\varDelta l_1\in\mathbb{H}$, $\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}_+$}, \cr
& \mbox{or if $l_2\ge 2$, $\varDelta l_1\in\mathbb{H}$, $\varDelta l_2=-1$}, \cr
O, & \mbox{otherwise},
\end{array} \right. \end{aligned}$$ where $\varDelta l_1=l_1'-l_1$ and $\varDelta l_2=l_2'-l_2$. $\{\bY^{(2)}(t)\}$ is a CTMC on the state space $\calS^{(2)} = (\{0\}\times\mathbb{Z}\times S_2) \cup (\mathbb{N}\times\mathbb{Z}\times S_+)$ and it is generated from $\{\bY(t)\}$ by removing the boundary on the $l_1$-axis. The infinitesimal generator of $\{\bY^{(2)}(t)\}$, $Q^{(2)}$, is represented in block form as $$Q^{(2)} = \left( Q^{(2)}_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')}; (l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')\in\mathbb{Z}_+\times\mathbb{Z} \right),$$ and each block $Q^{(2)}_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')}$ is given as $$\begin{aligned}
&Q^{(2)}_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')}
= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
A^{(2)}_{\varDelta l_1,\varDelta l_2},
& \mbox{if $l_1=0$, $\varDelta l_1\in\mathbb{H}_+$, $\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}$}, \cr
& \mbox{or if $l_1=1$, $\varDelta l_1=-1$, $\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}$}, \cr
A^{(+)}_{\varDelta l_1,\varDelta l_2},
& \mbox{if $l_1\ge 1$, $\varDelta l_1\in\mathbb{H}_+$, $\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}$}, \cr
& \mbox{or if $l_1\ge 2$, $\varDelta l_1=-1$, $\varDelta l_2\in\mathbb{H}$}, \cr
O, & \mbox{otherwise},
\end{array} \right. \end{aligned}$$ where $\varDelta l_1=l_1'-l_1$ and $\varDelta l_2=l_2'-l_2$. The CTMCs $\{\bY^{(+)}(t)\}$, $\{\bY^{(1)}(t)\}$ and $\{\bY^{(2)}(t)\}$ are used for defining the induced CTMCs of $\{\bY(t)\}$.
Induced CTMCs and mean transition rate vectors {#sec:mean_increment}
----------------------------------------------
We define the induced CTMCs and mean transition rate vectors of the 2d-QBD process $\{\bY(t)\}$, according to [@Fayolle95; @Malyshev81]. For $\{\bY(t)\}$, there are three induced CTMCs: $\calL^{(+)}$, $\calL^{(1)}$ and $\calL^{(2)}$. The induced CTMC $\calL^{(+)}$ is the phase process of $\{\bY^{(+)}(t)\}$, i.e., $\calL^{(+)} = \{J^{(+)}(t)\}$. The state space of $\calL^{(+)}$ is given by $S_+$ and the infinitesimal generator by $A^{(+)}_{*,*}$. The induced CTMCs $\calL^{(1)}$ and $\calL^{(2)}$ are the non-space-homogeneous parts of $\{\bY^{(1)}(t)\}$ and $\{\bY^{(2)}(t)\}$, respectively, and they are given as $\calL^{(1)} = \{(L^{(1)}_2(t),J^{(1)}(t))\}$ and $\calL^{(2)} = \{(L^{(2)}_1(t),J^{(2)}(t))\}$. The state space of $\calL^{(1)}$ is given by $(\{0\}\times S_1)\cup(\mathbb{N}\times S_+)$ and that of $\calL^{(2)}$ by $(\{0\}\times S_2)\cup(\mathbb{N}\times S_+)$. $\calL^{(1)}$ and $\calL^{(2)}$ are ordinary QBD processes and their infinitesimal generators, denoted by $A^{(1)}_*$ and $A^{(2)}_*$, are given in block tri-diagonal form as $$A^{(1)}_* =
\begin{pmatrix}
A^{(1)}_{*,0} & A^{(1)}_{*,1} & & & \cr
A^{(1)}_{*,-1} & A^{(+)}_{*,0} & A^{(+)}_{*,1} & & \cr
& A^{(+)}_{*,-1} & A^{(+)}_{*,0} & A^{(+)}_{*,1} & \cr
& & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(2)}_* =
\begin{pmatrix}
A^{(2)}_{0,*} & A^{(2)}_{1,*} & & & \cr
A^{(2)}_{-1,*} & A^{(+)}_{0,*} & A^{(+)}_{1,*} & & \cr
& A^{(+)}_{-1,*} & A^{(+)}_{0,*} & A^{(+)}_{1,*} & \cr
& & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots
\end{pmatrix}.$$
In the 2d-QBD process arising from a two-queue model, the induced CTMCs $\calL^{(+)}$, $\calL^{(1)}$ and $\calL^{(2)}$ may become reducible. For example, in the 2d-QBD process arising from a two-class non-preemptive priority queue with setup times, which will be considered in Section \[sec:example\], $\calL^{(+)}$ is reducible and has just one irreducible class (closed communication class). Furthermore, in that 2d-QBD process, $\calL^{(1)}$ is reducible and has no irreducible class. Therefore, we assume the following conditions throughout the paper.
\[as:calL\_irreducible\] The induced CTMC $\calL^{(+)}$ has just one irreducible class.
\[as:calL12\_irreducible\] Both the induced CTMCs $\calL^{(1)}$ and $\calL^{(2)}$ have at most one irreducible class. If $\calL^{(1)}$ (resp. $\calL^{(2)}$) has just one irreducible class, the irreducible class is a countably infinite set and every state in the irreducible class is accessible from any state of $\calL^{(1)}$ (resp. $\calL^{(2)}$).
These assumptions are not essential and we can easily extend them. For example, $\calL^{(+)}$ may have several irreducible classes. We adopt these assumptions since they are sufficiently wide in analyzing queueing models and they also make discussion of stability for 2d-QBD processes simple. Under Assumption \[as:calL\_irreducible\], since the state space of $\calL^{(+)}$, $S_+$, is finite, $\calL^{(+)}$ always has a unique stationary distribution. We denote it by $\bpi^{(+)}_{*,*}$. The mean transition rate vector with respect to $\calL^{(+)}$, $\ba^{(+)}=(a^{(+)}_1,a^{(+)}_2)$, is defined as $$\begin{aligned}
&a^{(+)}_1 = \bpi^{(+)}_{*,*} (-A^{(+)}_{-1,*}+A^{(+)}_{1,*}) \bone,\quad
a^{(+)}_2 = \bpi^{(+)}_{*,*} (-A^{(+)}_{*,-1}+A^{(+)}_{*,1}) \bone. \end{aligned}$$ From the definition, we see that $\ba^{(+)}$ is the mean transition rate vector of the level process $\{(L^{(+)}_1(t),L^{(+)}_2(t))\}$ of $\{\bY^{(+)}(t)\}$. If the induced CTMC $\calL^{(1)}$ (resp. $\calL^{(2)}$) has no irreducible classes, all the states of $\calL^{(1)}$ (resp. $\calL^{(2)}$) are transient. In that case, we do not define the mean transition rate vector with respect to $\calL^{(1)}$ (resp. $\calL^{(2)}$). If $\calL^{(1)}$ (resp. $\calL^{(2)}$) has just one irreducible class, we denote the irreducible class by $\calS^{(1)}_{irr}$ (resp. $\calS^{(2)}_{irr}$).
\[re:calL12\_properties\] Under Assumption \[as:calL12\_irreducible\], if $\calL^{(1)}$ has just one irreducible class, $\calS^{(1)}_{irr}$ is countably infinite and we have that $\calS^{(1)}_{irr}\cap(\{0\}\times S_1)\ne\emptyset$ and, for every $k\in\mathbb{N}$, $\calS^{(1)}_{irr}\cap(\{k\}\times S_+)\ne\emptyset$. A similar result also holds for $\calL^{(2)}$.
We see from Remark \[re:calL12\_properties\] that, under Assumption \[as:calL12\_irreducible\], if $\calL^{(1)}$ (resp. $\calL^{(2)}$) has just one irreducible class, it is an ordinary QBD process. In that case, let $R^{(1)}$ (resp. $R^{(2)}$) be the rate matrix of $\calL^{(1)}$ (resp. $\calL^{(2)}$). $R^{(1)}$ and $R^{(2)}$ are the minimum nonnegative solutions to the following matrix quadratic equations: $$\begin{aligned}
&(R^{(1)})^2 A^{(+)}_{*,-1} + R^{(1)} A^{(+)}_{*,0} + A^{(+)}_{*,1} = O,\\
&(R^{(2)})^2 A^{(+)}_{-1,*} + R^{(2)} A^{(+)}_{0,*} + A^{(+)}_{1,*} = O.\end{aligned}$$ If $a^{(+)}_2<0$, then $\calL^{(1)}$ has a unique stationary distribution $\bpi^{(1)}_*=(\bpi^{(1)}_{*,l},l\in\mathbb{Z}_+)$ given as $$\begin{aligned}
\bpi^{(1)}_{*,l} = \bpi^{(1)}_{*,0} A^{(1)}_{*,1} (-A^{(+)}_{*,0}-R^{(1)} A^{(+)}_{*,-1})^{-1} (R^{(1)})^{l-1},\ l\ge 1,\end{aligned}$$ and the mean transition rate vector with respect to $\calL^{(1)}$, $\ba^{(1)}=(a^{(1)}_1,a^{(1)}_2)$, is defined as $$\begin{aligned}
a^{(1)}_1 &= \bpi_{*,0}^{(1)}\big( (-A_{-1,0}^{(1)}+A_{1,0}^{(1)})\bone_{s_1}+(-A_{-1,1}^{(1)}+A_{1,1}^{(1)})\bone_{s_+} \big) \cr
&\quad + \bpi_{*,1}^{(1)}\big( (-A_{-1,-1}^{(1)}+A_{1,-1}^{(1)})\bone_{s_1}+(-A^{(+)}_{-1,0}-A^{(+)}_{-1,1}+A^{(+)}_{1,0}+A^{(+)}_{1,1})\bone_{s_+} \big)\cr
&\quad + \bpi_{*,2}^{(1)} (I-R^{(1)})^{-1} (-A^{(+)}_{-1,*}+A^{(+)}_{1,*})\bone_{s_+},\\
a^{(1)}_2 &= \bpi_{*,0}^{(1)} A_{*,1}^{(1)}\bone_{s_+} + \bpi_{*,1}^{(1)}\big( -A_{*,-1}^{(1)}\bone_{s_1}+A^{(+)}_{*,1}\bone_{s_+} \big) + \bpi_{*,2}^{(1)} (I-R^{(1)})^{-1} (-A^{(+)}_{*,-1}+A^{(+)}_{*,1})\bone_{s_+} \cr
&= 0. \end{aligned}$$ If $a^{(+)}_2=0$, then $\calL^{(1)}$ is null recurrent and if $a^{(+)}_2>0$, then it is transient. In these cases, the mean transition rate vector $\ba^{(1)}$ is undefined. If $a^{(+)}_1<0$, then $\calL^{(2)}$ has a unique stationary distribution $\bpi^{(2)}_*=(\bpi^{(2)}_{*,l},l\in\mathbb{Z}_+)$ given as $$\begin{aligned}
\bpi^{(2)}_{*,l} = \bpi^{(2)}_{*,0} A^{(2)}_{1,*} (-A^{(+)}_{0,*}-R^{(2)} A^{(+)}_{-1,*})^{-1} (R^{(2)})^{l-1},\ l\ge 1,\end{aligned}$$ and the mean transition rate vector with respect to $\calL^{(2)}$, $\ba^{(2)}=(a^{(2)}_1,a^{(2)}_2)$, is defined as $$\begin{aligned}
a^{(2)}_1 &= \bpi_{*,0}^{(2)} A_{1,*}^{(2)}\bone_{s_+} + \bpi_{*,1}^{(2)}\big( -A_{-1,*}^{(2)}\bone_{s_2}+A^{(+)}_{1,*}\bone_{s_+} \big) + \bpi_{*,2}^{(2)} (I-R^{(2)})^{-1} (-A^{(+)}_{-1,*}+A^{(+)}_{1,*})\bone_{s_+} \nonumber \\
&= 0. \\
a^{(2)}_2 &= \bpi_{*,0}^{(2)}\big( (-A_{0,-1}^{(2)}+A_{0,1}^{(2)})\bone_{s_2}+(-A_{1,-1}^{(2)}+A_{1,1}^{(2)})\bone_{s_+} \big) \cr
&\quad + \bpi_{*,1}^{(2)}\big( (-A_{-1,-1}^{(2)}+A_{-1,1}^{(2)})\bone_{s_2}+(-A^{(+)}_{0,-1}-A^{(+)}_{1,-1}+A^{(+)}_{0,1}+A^{(+)}_{1,1})\bone_{s_+} \big)\cr
&\quad + \bpi_{*,2}^{(2)} (I-R^{(2)})^{-1} (-A^{(+)}_{*,-1}+A^{(+)}_{*,1})\bone_{s_+}.\end{aligned}$$ If $a^{(+)}_1=0$, then $\calL^{(2)}$ is null recurrent and if $a^{(+)}_1>0$, then $\calL^{(2)}$ is transient. In these cases, the mean transition rate vector $\ba^{(2)}$ is undefined. From the definitions, we see that, for $i\in\{1,2\}$, if $\ba^{(i)}$ is well defined, it is the mean transition rate vector of the level process $\{(L^{(i)}_1(t),L^{(i)}_2(t))\}$ of $\{\bY^{(i)}(t)\}$.
Positive recurrence and transience {#sec:stability_cond}
----------------------------------
Conditions ensuring the 2d-QBD process is positive recurrent or transient are given as follows. We will prove this theorem in Section \[sec:proof\].
\[th:stability\_cond1\]
- In the case where $a^{(+)}_1<0$ and $a^{(+)}_2<0$, the 2d-QBD process $\{\bY(t)\}$ is positive recurrent if $a^{(1)}_1<0$ and $a^{(2)}_2<0$, and it is transient if either $a^{(1)}_1>0$ or $a^{(2)}_2>0$.
- In the case where $a^{(+)}_1\ge 0$ and $a^{(+)}_2<0$, $\{\bY(t)\}$ is positive recurrent if $a^{(1)}_1<0$, and it is transient if $a^{(1)}_1>0$.
- In the case where $a^{(+)}_1<0$ and $a^{(+)}_2\ge 0$, $\{\bY(t)\}$ is positive recurrent if $a^{(2)}_2<0$, and it is transient if $a^{(2)}_2>0$.
- If one of $a^{(+)}_1$ and $a^{(+)}_2$ is positive and the other is non-negative, then $\{\bY(t)\}$ is transient.
\[re:further\_study1\] The following cases are excluded from Theorem \[th:stability\_cond1\].
[rl]{} (a-1) & $a^{(+)}_1<0$, $a^{(+)}_2<0$, $a^{(1)}_1=0$ and $a^{(2)}_2\le 0$. (a-2) & $a^{(+)}_1<0$, $a^{(+)}_2<0$, $a^{(1)}_1\le 0$ and $a^{(2)}_2=0$. (b) & $a^{(+)}_1\ge 0$, $a^{(+)}_2<0$ and $a^{(1)}_1=0$. (c) & $a^{(+)}_1< 0$, $a^{(+)}_2\ge 0$ and $a^{(2)}_2=0$. (d) & $a^{(+)}_1=a^{(+)}_2=0$.
We know that 2d-RRWs are null recurrent in the cases corresponding to (a-1) through (c) (see Theorem 3.3.2 of [@Fayolle95]). Similar results are expected to hold for 2d-QBD processes. In [@Fayolle95], the case corresponding to (d) is called the case of zero drifts. In that case, the 2d-QBD process may become positive recurrent (for the case of 2d-RRW, see Theorem 3.4.1 of [@Fayolle95]). To clarify these points, we need a method different from that used for proving Theorem \[th:stability\_cond1\] in Section \[sec:proof\]. We, therefore, leave it as a further study.
Efficiency of two-queue models: examples {#sec:example}
========================================
Two-queue model
---------------
We consider a queueing model with two customer classes, depicted in Fig. \[fig:twoqueue\]. Class-1 customers arrive according to an arrival process with arrival rate $\lambda_1$ and enter queue 1 (Q$_1$). Class-2 customers arrive according to another arrival process with arrival rate $\lambda_2$ and enter queue 2 (Q$_2$). In the system, there are $c$ servers ($c\ge 1$) and they serve customers according to some kind of service policy. After completion of service, customers leave the system without reentrance. We refer to this queueing model as a two-queue model. Let $h_1$ and $h_2$ be the mean service times of class-1 customers and class-2 customers, respectively. Then, the traffic intensity of the two-queue model per server is given by $\rho=(\lambda_1 h_1+\lambda_2 h_2)/c$. We define the efficiency of the two-queue model, denoted by $\rho^*$, as follows. Let the value of $\lambda_1$ (or $\lambda_2$) increase without changing the stochastic nature of the arrival process up to the value at which the model becomes unstable for the first time. Denote that value of $\lambda_1$ (resp. $\lambda_2$) by $\lambda_1^*$ (resp. $\lambda_2^*$) and give $\rho^*$ as $\rho^*=(\lambda_1^* h_1+\lambda_2 h_2)/c$ (resp. $\rho^*=(\lambda_1 h_1+\lambda_2^* h_2)/c$). For example, if the original arrival process of class-1 customers is given by a Markovian arrival process (MAP) with representation $(C,D)$, then the arrival process of class-1 customers with arrival rate $\lambda_1$ is given by the MAP with representation $((\lambda_1/\hat{\lambda}_1) C, (\lambda_1/\hat{\lambda}_1) D)$, where $\hat{\lambda}_1$ is the mean arrival rate of the original MAP. We call $\rho^*$ the efficiency of the two-queue model. If it is possible to exhaustively use the ability of the servers for customer service, the value of $\rho^*$ becomes $1$. The vector $(\lambda_1^*,\lambda_2)$ (resp. $(\lambda_1,\lambda_2^*)$) corresponds to the maximum throughput vector of the two-queue model.
![Two-queue model[]{data-label="fig:twoqueue"}](fig_twoqueue.pdf){width="8cm"}
In the following subsections, we consider two kinds of priority queueing model in order to demonstrate how our results work. In each model, there are two queues that interact with each other and the stability condition of the model is not so trivial. Note that we do not intend to propose new queueing models here; we just present examples to understand our results.
Priority queue with setup times
-------------------------------
The first example is a single-server two-class non-preemptive priority queue with setup times. Class-1 customers arrive according to a Poisson process with intensity $\lambda_1$ and class-2 customers according to another Poisson process with intensity $\lambda_2$. Service times for class-1 customers are subject to an exponential distribution with mean $1/\mu_1$ and those for class-2 customers subject to another exponential distribution with mean $1/\mu_2$. The traffic intensity $\rho$ is given as $\rho=\lambda_1/\mu_1+\lambda_2/\mu_2$. Class-1 customers have non-preemptive priority over class-2 customers. The idle server needs a setup time to restart service for customers. Furthermore, after completing service for a class-1 customer (resp. class-2 customer), the server also needs a setup time if a customer to be served next is of class-2 (resp. of class-1). Setup times for class-1 customer’s service are subject to an exponential distribution with mean $1/\gamma_1$ and those for class-2 customer’s service subject to another exponential distribution with mean $1/\gamma_2$. We assume that the arrival processes, service times and setup times are mutually independent.
For $i\in\{1,2\}$, let $L_i(t)$ be the number of class-$i$ customers in the system at time $t$. Let $J(t)$ be the server state at time $t$, which is defined as follows. When $L_1(t)=L_2(t)=0$, $J(t)$ takes the value of $1$, which means that the server is idle. When $L_1(t)>0$ and $L_2(t)=0$, $J(t)$ takes a value in $\{1,2\}$, where $J(t)=1$ means that the server is engaging in service for a class-1 customer and $J(t)=2$ that it is engaging in setup for class-1 customer’s service. When $L_1(t)=0$ and $L_2(t)>0$, $J(t)$ takes a value in $\{1,2\}$, where $J(t)=1$ means that the server is engaging in service for a class-2 customer and $J(t)=2$ that it is engaging in setup for class-2 customer’s service. When $L_1(t)>0$ and $L_2(t)>0$, $J(t)$ takes a value in $\{1,2,3,4\}$, where $J(t)=1$ means that the server is engaging in service for a class-1 customer, $J(t)=2$ that it is engaging in setup for class-1 customer’s service, $J(t)=3$ that it is engaging in service for a class-2 customer and $J(t)=4$ that it is engaging in setup for class-2 customer’s service. Then, the process $\{\bY(t)\}=\{((L_1(t),L_2(t)),J(t))\}$ is a 2d-QBD process and it is governed by the infinitesimal generator $Q$ composed of the following block matrices: $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(+)}_{-1,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
\mu_1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \cr
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \cr
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \cr
0 & 0 & 0 & 0
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(+)}_{0,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
-(\lambda+\mu_1) & 0 & 0 & 0 \cr
\gamma_1 & -(\lambda+\gamma_1) & 0 & 0 \cr
0 & 0 & -(\lambda+\mu_2) & 0 \cr
0 & 0 & \gamma_2 & -(\lambda+\gamma_2)
\end{pmatrix}, \\
&A^{(+)}_{0,-1} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \cr
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \cr
0 & \mu_2 & 0 & 0 \cr
0 & 0 & 0 & 0
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(1)}_{0,-1} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 \cr
0 & 0 \cr
0 & \mu_2 \cr
0 & 0
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(2)}_{-1,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & \mu_1 \cr
0 & 0 \cr
0 & 0 \cr
0 & 0
\end{pmatrix},\\
&A^{(+)}_{1,0}=\lambda_1 I,\
A^{(+)}_{0,1}=\lambda_2 I,\
A^{(+)}_{1,1}=A^{(+)}_{-1,1}=A^{(+)}_{1,-1}=A^{(+)}_{-1,-1}=O,
$$ $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(1)}_{-1,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
\mu_1 & 0 \cr
0 & 0
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(1)}_{0,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
-(\lambda+\mu_1) & 0 \cr
\gamma_1 & -(\lambda+\gamma_1)
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(1)}_{0,1} = \lambda_2 \begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \cr
0 & 1 & 0 & 0
\end{pmatrix},\\
&A^{(1)}_{1,0}=\lambda_1 I,\
A^{(1)}_{1,1}=A^{(1)}_{-1,1}=O,\ A^{(1)}_{1,-1}=A^{(1)}_{-1,-1}=O,
$$ $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(2)}_{0,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
-(\lambda+\mu_2) & 0 \cr
\gamma_2 & -(\lambda+\gamma_2)
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(2)}_{0,-1} = \begin{pmatrix}
\mu_2 & 0 \cr
0 & 0
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(2)}_{1,0} = \lambda_1 \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \cr
0 & 0 & 0 & 1
\end{pmatrix},\\
&A^{(2)}_{0,1}=\lambda_2 I,\
A^{(2)}_{1,1}=A^{(2)}_{1,-1}=O,\ A^{(2)}_{-1,1}=A^{(2)}_{-1,-1}=O,
$$ $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(0)}_{-1,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
\mu_1 \cr 0
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(0)}_{0,0} = -\lambda,\
A^{(0)}_{0,-1} = \begin{pmatrix}
\mu_2 \cr 0
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(0)}_{1,0} = \lambda_1 \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(0)}_{0,1} = \lambda_2 \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1
\end{pmatrix},\\
&A^{(0)}_{1,1}=\bzero^\top,\ A^{(0)}_{-1,-1}=\bzero,\
A^{(0)}_{-1,1}=A^{(0)}_{1,-1}=O,
$$ where $\lambda=\lambda_1+\lambda_2$. The state space of $\{\bY(t)\}$ is given by $\calS=(\{0\}\times\{0\}\times S_0)\cup(\{0\}\times\mathbb{N}\times S_1)\cup(\mathbb{N}\times\{0\}\times S_2)\cup(\mathbb{N}^2\times S_+)$, where $S_0=\{1\}$, $S_1=S_2=\{1,2\}$, $S_+=\{1,2,3,4\}$. The infinitesimal generator of the induced CTMC $\calL^{(+)}=\{J^{(+)}(t)\}$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(+)}_{*,*} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \cr
\gamma_1 & -\gamma_1 & 0 & 0 \cr
0 & \mu_2 & -\mu_2 & 0 \cr
0 & 0 & \gamma_2 & -\gamma_2
\end{pmatrix}. \end{aligned}$$ Hence, $\calL^{(+)}$ is reducible and has just one irreducible class, which is $\{1\}$. The stationary distribution of $\calL^{(+)}$ is given by $\bpi^{(+)}_{*,*}=\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}$ and the mean transition rate vector $\ba^{(+)}=(a^{(+)}_1,a^{(+)}_2)$ is given as $a^{(+)}_1=\lambda_1-\mu_1$ and $a^{(+)}_2=\lambda_2>0$. The nonzero block matrices of the infinitesimal generator of the induced CTMC $\calL^{(1)}=\{(L^{(1)}_2(t),J^{(1)}(t))\}$ are given by $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(+)}_{*,-1}=A^{(+)}_{0,-1},\
A^{(+)}_{*,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
-\lambda_2 & 0 & 0 & 0 \cr
\gamma_1 & -(\lambda_2+\gamma_1) & 0 & 0 \cr
0 & 0 & -(\lambda_2+\mu_2) & 0 \cr
0 & 0 & \gamma_2 & -(\lambda_2+\gamma_2)
\end{pmatrix}, \
A^{(+)}_{*,1}=\lambda_2 I,\\
&A^{(1)}_{*,-1}=A^{(1)}_{0,-1},\
A^{(1)}_{*,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
-\lambda_2 & 0 \cr
\gamma_1 & -(\lambda_2+\gamma_1)
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(1)}_{*,1}=A^{(1)}_{0,1}.
$$ From the structure of these block matrices, we see that $\calL^{(1)}$ is reducible and has no irreducible classes. On the other hand, the nonzero block matrices of the infinitesimal generator of the induced CTMC $\calL^{(2)}=\{(L^{(2)}_1(t),J^{(2)}(t))\}$ are given by $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(+)}_{-1,*}=A^{(+)}_{-1,0},\
A^{(+)}_{0,*} = \begin{pmatrix}
-(\lambda_1+\mu_1) & 0 & 0 & 0 \cr
\gamma_1 & -(\lambda_1+\gamma_1) & 0 & 0 \cr
0 & \mu_2 & -(\lambda_1+\mu_2) & 0 \cr
0 & 0 & \gamma_2 & -(\lambda_1+\gamma_2)
\end{pmatrix}, \
A^{(+)}_{1,*}=\lambda_1 I,\\
&A^{(2)}_{-1,*}=A^{(2)}_{-1,0},\
A^{(2)}_{0,*} = \begin{pmatrix}
-\lambda_1 & 0 \cr
\gamma_1 & -(\lambda_1+\gamma_1)
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(2)}_{1,*}=A^{(2)}_{1,0}.
$$ From the structure of these block matrices, we see that $\calL^{(2)}$ is irreducible. Hence, if $a^{(+)}_1<0$, $\calL^{(2)}$ is positive recurrent and the mean transition rate vector $\ba^{(2)}=(a^{(2)}_1,a^{(2)}_2)$ is well defined. By Theorem \[th:stability\_cond1\], if $a^{(+)}_1<0$ and $a^{(2)}_2<0$, $\{\bY(t)\}$ is positive recurrent; if $a^{(+)}_1\ge 0$ or if $a^{(+)}_1<0$ and $a^{(2)}_2>0$, it is transient.
Fixing the values of $\mu_1$, $\mu_2$, $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ and setting $\lambda_1$ at a value satisfying $a^{(+)}_1=\mu_1-\lambda_1<0$, we can evaluate the value of $\lambda_2$ that makes $a^{(2)}$ equal $0$ by using the bisection method. We denote by $\lambda_2^*$ that value of $\lambda_2$. The efficiency of the model is given by $\rho^*=\lambda_1/\mu_1+\lambda_2^*/\mu_2$ and the maximum throughput vector by $(\lambda_1,\lambda_2^*)$. In Table \[tab:table1\], we give numerical examples when $\mu_1=\mu_2=1$, $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=2$ and $a^{(+)}_1<0$. From the table, we can see how setup times influence congestion of the system depending on $\lambda_1$. In this case, the efficiency of the model becomes minimum when the value of $\lambda_1$ is around $0.4$. Similar evaluation is available even if the arrival processes are replaced with MAPs and the service time distributions as well as the setup time distributions are replaced with phase-type distributions (PH-distributions). We give the representation of the model in that case in Appendix \[sec:setup\_MAPPH\].
[c|ccccccccc]{} $\lambda_1$ & 0.1 & 0.2 & 0.3 & 0.4 & 0.5 & 0.6 & 0.7 & 0.8 & 0.9 $\lambda_2^*$ & 0.821 & 0.678 & 0.557 & 0.453 & 0.361 & 0.278 & 0.202 & 0.131 & 0.064 $\rho^*$ & 0.922 & 0.878 & 0.857 & 0.853 & 0.861 & 0.878 & 0.902 & 0.931 & 0.964
\[tab:table1\]
Two-queue model with an additional server
-----------------------------------------
The second example is a model related to the N-model. It is composed of two $M/M/1$ queues and an additional server. We denote the two queues by Q$_1$ and Q$_2$, respectively. The additional server can serve customers in both the queues, and customers in Q$_1$ have non-preemptive priority over those in Q$_2$, with respect to use of the additional server. It means that, after completing a service, if there exists at least one waiting customer in Q$_1$, the additional server next serves a customer in Q$_1$; if there are no waiting customers in Q$_1$ and there exists at least one waiting customer in Q$_2$, it next serves a customer in Q$_2$; otherwise, it becomes idle. Denote by $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ the arrival rates of Q$_1$ and Q$_2$, respectively, and by $\mu_1$ and $\mu_2$ the service rates of them, respectively. The traffic intensity per server is given by $\rho=(\lambda_1/\mu_1+\lambda_2/\mu_2)/3$.
[cc|cc|cc|cc]{} & & & $J(t)$ & $(j_1,j_2,j_3)$ & $J(t)$ & $(j_1,j_2,j_3)$ & $J(t)$ & $(j_1,j_2,j_3)$ & $J(t)$ & $(j_1,j_2,j_3)$ 1 & (0,0,0) & 1 & (1,0,1) & 1 & (0,2,2) & 1 & (1,2,1) 2 & (1,0,0) & 2 & (1,2,1) & 2 & (1,2,2) & 2 & (1,2,2) 3 & (0,0,1) & 3 & (1,0,2) & 3 & (0,2,1) & & 4 & (0,2,0) & & & & & & 5 & (0,0,2) & & & & & & 6 & (1,2,0) & & & & & & 7 & (0,2,1) & & & & & & 8 & (1,0,2) & & & & & &
\[tab:server\_state\]
For $i\in\{1,2\}$, let $L^\dag_i(t)$ be the number of customers in Q$_i$ at time $t$. For $i\in\{1,2\}$, define $L_i(t)$ as $L_i(t)=\max\{0, L^\dag_i(t)-1\}$. Denote by $(j_1,j_2,j_3)$ the states of the servers: if the server of Q$_1$ is idle, then $j_1=0$ and if it is serving a customer in Q$_1$, then $j_1=1$; if the server of Q$_2$ is idle, then $j_2=0$ and if it is serving a customer in Q$_2$, then $j_2=2$; if the additional server is idle, then $j_3=0$, if it is serving a customer in Q$_1$, then $j_3=1$ and if it is serving a customer in Q$_2$, then $j_3=2$. Let $J(t)$ be the server state at time $t$, which is defined as follows: if $L_1(t)=L_2(t)=0$, $J(t)$ takes a value in $S_0=\{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8\}$ as Table \[tab:server\_state\]; if $L_1(t)>0$ and $L_2(t)=0$, $J(t)$ takes a value in $S_1=\{1,2,3\}$ as Table \[tab:server\_state\]; if $L_1(t)=0$ and $L_2(t)>0$, $J(t)$ takes a value in $S_2=\{1,2,3\}$ as Table \[tab:server\_state\]; if $L_1(t)>0$ and $L_2(t)>0$, $J(t)$ takes a value in $S_+=\{1,2\}$ as Table \[tab:server\_state\]. In several states of the servers, a portion of server ability is used ineffectively. For example, when $L_1(t)=0$, $L_2(t)>0$ and $J(t)=3$, there is one customer in Q$_1$ and there is at lest one waiting customer in Q$_2$, but the server of Q$_1$ is idle since the additional server is serving the customer in Q$_1$. This is a reason why the efficiency of the model becomes less than one. The process $\{\bY(t)\}=\{((L_1(t),L_2(t)),J(t))\}$ is a 2d-QBD process and it is governed by the infinitesimal generator $Q$ composed of the following block matrices: $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(+)}_{-1,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
2\mu_1 & 0 \cr
0 & \mu_1
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(+)}_{0,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
-(\lambda+2\mu_1+\mu_2) & 0 \cr
0 & -(\lambda+\mu_1+2\mu_2) \cr
\end{pmatrix},\\
&A^{(+)}_{0,-1} = \begin{pmatrix}
\mu_2 & 0 \cr
\mu_2 & \mu_2
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(+)}_{1,0}=\lambda_1 I,\
A^{(+)}_{0,1}=\lambda_2 I,\
A^{(+)}_{1,1}=A^{(+)}_{-1,1}=A^{(+)}_{1,-1}=A^{(+)}_{-1,-1}=O,
$$ $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(1)}_{0,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
-(\lambda+2\mu_1) & \lambda_2 & 0 \cr
\mu_2 & -(\lambda+2\mu_1+\mu_2) & 0 \cr
\mu_2 & 0 & -(\lambda+\mu_1+\mu_2)
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(1)}_{0,1} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 \cr
\lambda_2 & 0 \cr
0 & \lambda_2
\end{pmatrix},\\
&A^{(1)}_{-1,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
2\mu_1 & 0 & 0 \cr
0 & 2\mu_1 & 0\cr
0 & 0 & \mu_1
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(1)}_{0,-1} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & \mu_2 & 0 \cr
0 & \mu_2 & \mu_2
\end{pmatrix},\\
&A^{(1)}_{1,0}=\lambda_1 I,\
A^{(1)}_{1,1}=A^{(1)}_{-1,1}=O,\ A^{(1)}_{1,-1}=A^{(1)}_{-1,-1}=O,
$$ $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(2)}_{0,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
-(\lambda+2\mu_1) & \lambda_1 & 0 \cr
\mu_1 & -(\lambda+\mu_1+2\mu_2) & 0 \cr
\mu_1 & 0 & -(\lambda+\mu_1+\mu_2)
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(2)}_{1,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 \cr
0 & \lambda_1 \cr
\lambda_1 & 0
\end{pmatrix},\\
&A^{(2)}_{0,-1} = \begin{pmatrix}
2\mu_2 & 0 & 0 \cr
0 & 2\mu_2 & 0\cr
0 & 0 & \mu_2
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(2)}_{-1,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & \mu_1 & \mu_1 \cr
0 & \mu_1 & 0
\end{pmatrix},\\
&A^{(2)}_{1,0}=\lambda_2 I,\
A^{(2)}_{1,1}=A^{(2)}_{-1,1}=O,\ A^{(2)}_{1,-1}=A^{(2)}_{-1,-1}=O,
$$ where $\lambda=\lambda_1+\lambda_2$; we omit the description of $A^{(0)}_{ij}$ for $i,j\in\mathbb{H}$ since they are not used for evaluating the value of the efficiency of the model. The infinitesimal generator of $\calL^{(+)}$ is given by $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(+)}_{*,*} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 \cr
\mu_2 & -\mu_2 \cr
\end{pmatrix}. \end{aligned}$$ Hence, $\calL^{(+)}$ is reducible and has just one irreducible class, which is $\{1\}$. The stationary distribution of $\calL^{(+)}$ is given by $\bpi^{(+)}_{*,*}=\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 \end{pmatrix}$ and the mean transition rate vector $\ba^{(+)}=(a^{(+)}_1,a^{(+)}_2)$ is given as $a^{(+)}_1=\lambda_1-2\mu_1$ and $a^{(+)}_2=\lambda_2-\mu_2$. The nonzero block matrices of the infinitesimal generator of $\calL^{(1)}$ are given by $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(+)}_{*,-1}=A^{(+)}_{0,-1},\
A^{(+)}_{*,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
-(\lambda_2+\mu_2) & 0 \cr
0 & -(\lambda_2+2\mu_2) \cr
\end{pmatrix}, \
A^{(+)}_{*,1}=\lambda_2 I,\\
&A^{(1)}_{*,-1}=A^{(1)}_{0,-1},\
A^{(1)}_{*,0} = \begin{pmatrix}
-\lambda_2 & \lambda_2 & 0 \cr
\mu_2 & -(\lambda_2+\mu_2) & 0 \cr
\mu_2 & 0 & -(\lambda_2+\mu_2)
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(1)}_{*,1}=A^{(1)}_{0,1}.
$$ From the structure of these block matrices, we see that $\calL^{(1)}$ is reducible and has just one irreducible class, which is infinite. On the other hand, the nonzero block matrices of the infinitesimal generator of $\calL^{(2)}$ are given by $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(+)}_{-1,*}=A^{(+)}_{-1,0},\
A^{(+)}_{0,*} = \begin{pmatrix}
-(\lambda_1+2\mu_1) & 0 \cr
\mu_2 & -(\lambda_1+\mu_1+\mu_2) \cr
\end{pmatrix}, \
A^{(+)}_{1,*}=\lambda_1 I,\\
&A^{(2)}_{-1,*}=A^{(2)}_{-1,0},\
A^{(2)}_{0,*} = \begin{pmatrix}
-\lambda_1 & \lambda_1 & 0 \cr
\mu_1 & -(\lambda_1+\mu_1) & 0 \cr
\mu_1 & 0 & -(\lambda_1+\mu_1)
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(2)}_{1,*}=A^{(2)}_{1,0}.
$$ From the structure of these block matrices, we see that $\calL^{(2)}$ is irreducible. By Theorem \[th:stability\_cond1\], if $a^{(+)}_1<0$, $a^{(+)}_2\ge 0$ and $a^{(2)}_2<0$, $\{\bY(t)\}$ is positive recurrent; if $a^{(+)}_1<0$, $a^{(+)}_2\ge 0$ and $a^{(2)}_2>0$, it is transient. When $\mu_1=\mu_2=1$ and $a^{(+)}_1=\lambda_1-2\mu_1<0$, the value of $\lambda_2$ that makes $a^{(2)}$ equal $0$, denoted by $\lambda_2^*$, is given for each value of $\lambda_1$ in Table \[tab:table2\], where the efficiency of the model is given by $\rho^*=(\lambda_1/\mu_1+\lambda_2^*/\mu_2)/3$ and the maximum throughput vector by $(\lambda_1,\lambda_2^*)$. From the table, we can see how the additional server relieves congestion of Q$_2$ depending on the value of $\lambda_1$. In this case, the efficiency of the model is improved as the value of $\lambda_1$ increases.
[c|ccccccccc]{} $\lambda_1$ & 1.1 & 1.2 & 1.3 & 1.4 & 1.5 & 1.6 & 1.7 & 1.8 & 1.9 $\lambda_2^*$ & 1.610 & 1.550 & 1.488 & 1.424 & 1.357 & 1.289 & 1.219 & 1.147 & 1.074 $\rho^*$ & 0.903 & 0.917 & 0.929 & 0.941 & 0.952 & 0.963 & 0.973 & 0.982 & 0.991
\[tab:table2\]
Proof of the main theorem {#sec:proof}
=========================
Discrete-time 2d-QBD process {#sec:dt2dQBD}
----------------------------
In order to prove Theorem \[th:stability\_cond1\], we use a method developed for analyzing stability of 2d-RRWs [@Fayolle89; @Fayolle95]. Consider the 2d-QBD process $\{\bY(t)\}=\{((L_1(t),L_2(t)),J(t))\}$ defined in Section \[sec:model\]. Setting the uniformization parameter $\nu<\infty$ so that it satisfies $-q_{((l_1,l_2),j),((l_1,l_2),j)}\le \nu$ for every $((l_1,l_2),j)\in\calS$, we obtain a discrete-time 2d-QBD process from $\{\bY(t)\}$ by uniformization. We denote the discrete-time 2d-QBD process by $\{\bY_n\}=\{((L_{1,n},L_{2,n}),J_n)\}$. $\{\bY_n\}$ is a (discrete-time) Markov chain on the state space $\calS$ whose transition probability matrix $P$ is given in block form as $$P=\left( P_{(l_1,l_2),(l'_1,l_2')}; (l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')\in\mathbb{Z}_+^2 \right),$$ where $P_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')} = \delta_{l_1,l_1'} \delta_{l_2,l_2'} I + Q_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')}/\nu$ and $\delta_{l,l'}$ is the Kronecker delta. The block matrices of $P$ are, therefore, given in terms of $\bar{A}^{(i)}_{k_1,k_2},\,i\in\{0,1,2,+\},\,k_1,k_2\in\mathbb{H}$, like $Q$, where $\bar{A}^{(i)}_{k_1,k_2} = \delta_{k_1,0} \delta_{k_2,0} I + A^{(i)}_{k_1,k_2}/\nu$ (see expression (\[eq:Q\_blocks\])). For $k_1,k_2\in\mathbb{H}$, define $\bar{A}^{(+)}_{*,*}$, $\bar{A}^{(+)}_{*,k_2}$, $\bar{A}^{(+)}_{k_1,*}$, $\bar{A}^{(1)}_{*,k_2}$ and $\bar{A}^{(2)}_{k_1,*}$ in a manner similar to that used for defining $A^{(+)}_{*,*}$, $A^{(+)}_{*,k_2}$, $A^{(+)}_{k_1,*}$, $A^{(1)}_{*,k_2}$ and $A^{(2)}_{k_1,*}$. Under Assumption \[as:Yt\_irreducible\], the Markov chain $\{\bY_n\}$ is irreducible.
Analogously to the case of $\{\bY(t)\}$, we define (discrete-time) Markov chains $\{\bY^{(+)}_n\}$, $\{\bY^{(1)}_n\}$ and $\{\bY^{(2)}_n\}$ corresponding to $\{\bY^{(+)}(t)\}$, $\{\bY^{(1)}(t)\}$ and $\{\bY^{(2)}(t)\}$, respectively. For $i\in\{1,2,+\}$, the state space of $\{\bY^{(i)}_n\}=\{((L^{(i)}_{1,n},L^{(i)}_{2,n}),J^{(i)}_n)\}$ is given by $\calS^{(i)}$ and its transition probability matrix $P^{(i)}$ is given in block form as $$P^{(i)}=\left( P^{(i)}_{(l_1,l_2),(l'_1,l_2')}; (l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')\in\calS^* \right),$$ where $P^{(i)}_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')} = \delta_{l_1,l_1'} \delta_{l_2,l_2'} I + Q^{(i)}_{(l_1,l_2),(l_1',l_2')}/\nu$; $\calS^*$ is $\mathbb{Z}^2$ if $i=``+"$; it is $\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}_+$ if $i=1$; it is $\mathbb{Z}_+\times\mathbb{Z}$ if $i=2$. For $\{\bY_n\}$, there are also three induced Markov chains: $\bar{\calL}^{(+)}$, $\bar{\calL}^{(1)}$ and $\bar{\calL}^{(2)}$. $\bar{\calL}^{(+)}$ is given as $\bar{\calL}^{(+)} = \{J^{(+)}_n\}$ and its state space is given by $S_+$. $\bar{\calL}^{(1)}$ and $\bar{\calL}^{(2)}$ are given as $\bar{\calL}^{(1)} = \{(L^{(1)}_{2,n},J^{(1)}_n)\}$ and $\bar{\calL}^{(2)} = \{(L^{(2)}_{1,n},J^{(2)}_n)\}$, respectively, and their state spaces are given by $(\{0\}\times S_1)\cup(\mathbb{N}\times S_+)$ and $(\{0\}\times S_2)\cup(\mathbb{N}\times S_+)$, respectively. $\bar{\calL}^{(1)}$ and $\bar{\calL}^{(2)}$ are ordinary discrete-time QBD processes. Under Assumption \[as:calL\_irreducible\], $\bar{\calL}^{(+)}$ has just one irreducible class and, under Assumption \[as:calL12\_irreducible\], $\bar{\calL}^{(1)}$ and $\bar{\calL}^{(2)}$ have at most one irreducible class.
For $i\in\{1,2,+\}$, $\bar{\calL}^{(i)}$ is a Markov chain obtained from the CTMC $\calL^{(i)}$ by uniformization and the stationary distribution of $\bar{\calL}^{(i)}$ is identical to that of $\calL^{(i)}$. Hence, the mean increment vector with respect to $\bar{\calL}^{(+)}$, $\bar{\ba}^{(+)}=(\bar{a}^{(+)}_1,\bar{a}^{(+)}_2)$, is given as $$\begin{aligned}
&\bar{a}^{(+)}_1 = \bpi^{(+)}_{*,*} (-\bar{A}^{(+)}_{-1,*}+\bar{A}^{(+)}_{1,*}) \bone = a^{(+)}_1/\nu,\quad
\bar{a}^{(+)}_2 = \bpi^{(+)}_{*,*} (-\bar{A}^{(+)}_{*,-1}+\bar{A}^{(+)}_{*,1}) \bone = a^{(+)}_2/\nu. \end{aligned}$$ Analogously, for $i\in\{1,2\}$, if $\bar{a}^{(+)}_{3-i}<0$, the induced Markov chain $\bar{\calL}^{(i)}$ is positive recurrent and the mean increment vector with respect to $\bar{\calL}^{(i)}$, $\bar{\ba}^{(i)}=(\bar{a}^{(i)}_1,\bar{a}^{(i)}_2)$, is given as $\bar{\ba}^{(i)}=\ba^{(i)}/\nu$. For $i\in\{1,2,+\}$, $\bar{\ba}^{(i)}$ is the mean increment vector of the level process of $\{\bY^{(i)}_n\}=\{(\bL^{(i)}_n,J^{(i)}_n)\}$, where $\bL^{(i)}_n=(L^{(i)}_{1,n},L^{(i)}_{2,n})$, and it satisfies, for any $\by\in\calS^{(i)}$, $$\begin{aligned}
& \bar{\ba}^{(i)}
= \lim_{k\to\infty} \frac{1}{k} \sum_{n=1}^k \mathbb{E}(\bL^{(i)}_n-\bL^{(i)}_{n-1}\,|\,\bY^{(i)}_0=\by)
= \lim_{k\to\infty} \frac{1}{k} \mathbb{E}(\bL^{(i)}_k-\bL^{(i)}_0\,|\,\bY^{(i)}_0=\by).
\label{eq:a1i_limit}\end{aligned}$$ We use this fact after. Since $\{\bY_n\}$ is a Markov chain obtained from the CTMC $\{\bY(t)\}$ by uniformization, $\{\bY(t)\}$ is positive recurrent (resp. transient) if and only if $\{\bY_n\}$ is positive recurrent (resp. transient). Hence, in order to prove Theorem \[th:stability\_cond1\], it suffices to prove the following corollary.
\[co:stability\_cond2\]
- In the case where $\bar{a}^{(+)}_1<0$ and $\bar{a}^{(+)}_2<0$, the discrete-time 2d-QBD process $\{\bY_n\}$ is positive recurrent if $\bar{a}^{(1)}_1<0$ and $\bar{a}^{(2)}_2<0$, and it is transient if either $\bar{a}^{(1)}_1>0$ or $\bar{a}^{(2)}_2>0$.
- In the case where $\bar{a}^{(+)}_1\ge 0$ and $\bar{a}^{(+)}_2<0$, $\{\bY_n\}$ is positive recurrent if $\bar{a}^{(1)}_1<0$, and it is transient if $\bar{a}^{(1)}_1>0$.
- In the case where $\bar{a}^{(+)}_1<0$ and $\bar{a}^{(+)}_2\ge 0$, $\{\bY_n\}$ is positive recurrent if $\bar{a}^{(2)}_2<0$, and it is transient if $\bar{a}^{(2)}_2>0$.
- If one of $\bar{a}^{(+)}_1$ and $\bar{a}^{(+)}_2$ is positive and the other is non-negative, then $\{\bY_n\}$ is transient.
Embedded Markov chain {#sec:embeddedMC}
---------------------
We consider a kind of embedded Markov chain for the discrete-time 2d-QBD process $\{\bY_n\}$. Let $u_1$, $u_2$ and $u_+$ be positive integers. Let $K_+$, $K_1$ and $K_2$ be positive integers satisfying $K_1>K_+\ge 2$, $K_2>K_+$ and $K_i>u_i$ for $i\in\{1,2,+\}$. Divide the state space $\calS$ into exclusive subsets $\calV_+$, $\calV_1$, $\calV_2$ and $\calV_0$, defined as $$\begin{aligned}
&\calV_+ = \{((l_1,l_2),j)\in\calS: l_1\ge K_+,\ l_2\ge K_+\}, \quad
\calV_1 = \{((l_1,l_2),j)\in\calS: l_1\ge K_1,\ l_2<K_+\}, \\
&\calV_2 = \{((l_1,l_2),j)\in\calS: l_1< K_+,\ l_2\ge K_2\}, \quad
\calV_0 = \{((l_1,l_2),j)\in\calS: l_1< K_1,\ l_2<K_2\}\setminus\calV_+\end{aligned}$$ (see Fig. \[fig:calS\_partition\]). Define a function $u$ on $\calS$ as $$u(\by) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
u_i & \mbox{if $\by\in\calV_i$ for some $i\in\{1,2,+\}$}, \cr
1 & \mbox{otherwise},
\end{array} \right.$$ a random sequence $\{\sigma_n\}$ as $$\sigma_0=0,\quad \sigma_{n+1}=\sigma_n+u(\bY_{\sigma_n}),\,n\ge 0,$$ and a Markov chain $\{\hat{\bY}_n\}=\{((\hat{L}_{1,n},\hat{L}_{2,n}),\hat{J}_n)\}$ as $\hat{\bY}_n = \bY_{\sigma_n},\,n\ge 0$. The process $\{\hat{\bY}_n\}$ is an embedded Markov chain of $\{\bY_n\}$.
\[re:embeddedMC\] If $\hat{\bY}_k=\bY_{\sigma_k}=((L_{1,\sigma_k},L_{2,\sigma_k}),J_{\sigma_k})\in\calV_+$, we have $u(\bY_{\sigma_k})=u_+<K_+$ and $L_{m,\sigma_k}\ge K_+$ for $m\in\{1,2\}$. Since the level process $\{(L_{1,n},L_{2,n})\}$ is skip free, $\{\bY_n\}=\{((L_{1,n},L_{2,n}),J_n)\}$ does not touch the boundaries of the state space $\calS$, during the time interval $[\sigma_k,\sigma_{k+1}]$. Therefore, in a stochastic sense, $\{\bY_n\}$ behaves just like the Markov chain $\{\bY^{(+)}_n\}$ during that time interval. Analogously, for $i\in\{1,2\}$, if $\hat{\bY}_k=\bY_{\sigma_k}\in\calV_i$, then $\{\bY_n\}$ behaves just like the Markov chain $\{\bY^{(i)}_n\}$ during the time interval $[\sigma_k,\sigma_{k+1}]$.
(80,70)(0,0) (0,10)[(1,0)[70]{}]{} (10,0)[(0,1)[70]{}]{} (70,4)[(0,0)[$l_1$]{}]{} (4,68)[(0,0)[$l_2$]{}]{} (30,30)[(1,0)[40]{}]{} (30,30)[(0,1)[40]{}]{} (10,30)(2,0)[10]{}[(1,0)[1]{}]{} (30,10)(0,2)[10]{}[(0,1)[1]{}]{} (2,30)[(0,0)[$K_+$]{}]{} (30,5)[(0,0)[$K_+$]{}]{} (50,50)[(0,0)[$\calV_+$]{}]{} (10,40)[(1,0)[20]{}]{} (50,10)[(0,1)[20]{}]{} (2,40)[(0,0)[$K_2$]{}]{} (50,5)[(0,0)[$K_1$]{}]{} (20,50)[(0,0)[$\calV_2$]{}]{} (60,20)[(0,0)[$\calV_1$]{}]{} (20,20)[(0,0)[$\calV_0$]{}]{}
To prove Corollary \[co:stability\_cond2\], we will use the following proposition, which is a modification of Theorem 2.2.4 of [@Fayolle95] (also see Theorem 1.4 of [@Malyshev81] and Proposition 4.5 of [@Bramson08]).
\[pr:Foster2\] The discrete-time 2d-QBD process $\{\bY_n\}$ is positive recurrent if there exist parameter sets $\{K_+,K_1,K_2\}$ and $\{u_+,u_1,u_2\}$, a positive number $\delta$, a finite subset $\calS_0\subset\calS$ and a lower bounded real function $f$ on $\calS$ such that
- $\mathbb{E}(f(\hat{\bY}_1)-f(\hat{\bY}_0)\,|\,\hat{\bY}_0=\by) \le -\delta$ for every $\by\in\calS\setminus\calS_0$, and
- $\mathbb{E}(f(\hat{\bY}_1)\,|\,\hat{\bY}_0=\by) < \infty$ for every $\by\in\calS_0$.
In the case where $u_i$ is set at $1$ for every $i\in\{1,2,+\}$, this proposition is called [*Foster’s criterion*]{}. We will also use the following proposition, which is a modification of Theorem 2.2.7 of [@Fayolle95] (also see Theorem 1.6 of [@Malyshev81]).
\[pr:Markov\_unstable2\] The discrete-time 2d-QBD process $\{\bY_n\}$ is transient if there exist parameter sets $\{K_+,K_1,K_2\}$ and $\{u_+,u_1,u_2\}$, a real function $f$ on $\calS$ and positive numbers $\delta$, $c$ and $b$ such that, for $\calA=\{\by\in\calS : f(\by)>c \}$,
- $\calA\ne\emptyset$,
- $\mathbb{E}(f(\hat{\bY}_1)-f(\hat{\bY}_0)\,|\,\hat{\bY}_0=\by) \ge \delta$ for every $\by\in\calA$, and
- the inequality $|f(\by')-f(\by)|>b$ implies $\mathbb{P}(\bY_1=\by'\,|\,\bY_0=\by)=0$.
In the following subsection, we prepare to construct test function $f$ appeared in the above propositions.
Time averaged increment vectors {#sec:cond_mean_increment}
-------------------------------
For $i\in\{1,2,+\}$, consider the Markov chain $\{\bY^{(i)}_n\}=\{(\bL^{(i)}_n,J^{(i)}_n)\}$ defined in Subsection \[sec:dt2dQBD\], and define, for $\by\in\calS^{(i)}$ and $k\ge 1$, the expectation of the time-averaged increment vector of $\{\bY^{(i)}_n\}$, $\bg^{(i)}_{\by}(k)=(g^{(i)}_{1,\by}(k),g^{(i)}_{2,\by}(k))$, as $$\bg^{(i)}_{\by}(k)
= \mathbb{E}\bigg( \frac{1}{k} \sum_{n=1}^{k} (\bL^{(i)}_n-\bL^{(i)}_{n-1})\,\Big|\,\bY^{(i)}_0=\by \bigg).
$$ From equation (\[eq:a1i\_limit\]), we see that, for $i\in\{1,2,+\}$, if the induced Markov chain $\bar{\calL}^{(i)}$ has a unique stationary distribution, $\bg^{(i)}_{\by}(k)$ satisfies $$\lim_{k\to\infty} \bg^{(i)}_{\by}(k) = \bar{\ba}^{(i)}.
\label{eq:limit_gi}$$ Under Assumption \[as:calL\_irreducible\], $\bar{\calL}^{(+)}=\{J^{(+)}_n\}$ has the unique stationary distribution $\bpi_{*,*}$. For any $\by=((l_1,l_2),j)\in\calS^{(+)}$, $\mathbb{E}(\bL^{(+)}_n-\bL^{(+)}_{n-1}\,|\,\bY^{(+)}_0=\by)=\mathbb{E}(\bL^{(+)}_n-\bL^{(+)}_{n-1}\,|\,J^{(+)}_0=j) $ and the state space $S_+$ of $\{J^{(+)}_n\}$ is finite. Hence, we immediately obtain an approximation for $\bg^{(+)}_{\by}(k)$, as follows.
\[pr:approximation\_g\] For any $\varepsilon>0$, there exists a positive integer $u_+^*$ such that if $k\ge u_+^*$, then for every $\by\in\calS^{(+)}$, $$\big| g^{(+)}_{m,\by}(k) - \bar{a}^{(+)}_m \big| < \varepsilon\quad \mbox{for $m\in\{1,2\}$}.
\label{eq:app_g}$$
(85,70)(0,0) (0,10)[(1,0)[80]{}]{} (80,4)[(0,0)[$l_1$]{}]{} (40,66)[(0,1)[5]{}]{} (40,0)(0,4)[17]{}[(0,1)[2]{}]{} (35,68)[(0,0)[$l_2$]{}]{} (0,30)[(1,0)[80]{}]{} (31.5,28.5)[(0,0)[$K_+$]{}]{} (55,45)[(0,0)[$\calV^{(1)}_+$]{}]{} (55,21)[(0,0)[$\calV^{(1)}_0$]{}]{}
For $i\in\{1,2\}$, let $\{\calV^{(i)}_0, \calV^{(i)}_+\}$ be a partition of the state space $\calS^{(i)}$, defined as $$\calV^{(i)}_0 = \{((l_1,l_2),j)\in\calS^{(i)}: l_{3-i}<K_+ \},\quad
\calV^{(i)}_+ = \calS^{(i)}\setminus \calV^{(i)}_0$$ (see Fig. \[fig:tildeS\_partition\]). The following proposition gives approximations for $\bg^{(1)}_{\by}(k)$ and $\bg^{(2)}_{\by}(k)$.
\[pr:approximation\_g12\] Let $\varepsilon$ be an arbitrary positive number and set $u_+$ so that it satisfies, for any $\by\in\calS^{(+)}$, $|g^{(+)}_{m,\by}(u_+)-\bar{a}^{(+)}_m|<\varepsilon/4$ for $m\in\{1,2\}$, which is possible by Proposition \[pr:approximation\_g\]. Furthermore, set $K_+$ so that it satisfies $K_+>u_+$. For $i\in\{1,2\}$, $\bg^{(i)}_{\by}(k)$ is approximated as follows.
- When $\bar{a}^{(+)}_{3-i}<0$, there exists a positive integer $u_i^*$ such that if $k\ge u_i^*$, then for every $\by\in\calV^{(i)}_0$, $$\big| g^{(i)}_{m,\by}(k) - \bar{a}^{(i)}_m \big| < \varepsilon\quad \mbox{for $m\in\{1,2\}$}.$$
- When $\bar{a}^{(+)}_{3-i}\ge 0$, there exists a positive integer $u_i^*$ such that if $k\ge u_i^*$, then for every $\by\in\calV^{(i)}_0$, $$\big| g^{(i)}_{m,\by}(k) - \bar{a}^{(+)}_m \big| < \varepsilon\quad \mbox{for $m\in\{1,2\}$}.$$
Since the proof of this proposition is elementary, we give it in Appendix \[sec:app\_proof\_pro3\_4\].
Proof of Corollary \[co:stability\_cond2\] {#sec:proof_subsec}
------------------------------------------
Using a linear function on $\mathbb{R}^2$, we construct a test function and apply Propositions \[pr:Foster2\] and \[pr:Markov\_unstable2\] to the discrete-time 2d-QBD process $\{\bY_n\}$. Denote by $\langle\bx_1,\bx_2\rangle$ the inner product of vectors $\bx_1,\bx_2\in\mathbb{R}^2$. The linear function of $\bx\in\mathbb{R}^2$ is given by $\langle\bx,\bw\rangle$, where $\bw$ is a given vector. For $\by\in\calS$, define the one-step mean increment vector of the embedded Markov chain $\{\hat{\bY}_n\}=\{(\hat{\bL}_n,\hat{J}_n)\}$, $\hat{\balpha}_{\by}=(\hat{\alpha}_{1,\by},\hat{\alpha}_{2,\by})$, as $$\hat{\balpha}_{\by}
= \mathbb{E}(\hat{\bL}_1-\hat{\bL}_0\,|\,\hat{\bY}_0=\by)
= \mathbb{E}(\bL_{u(\by)}-\bL_0\,|\,\bY_0=\by).$$ The following proposition corresponds to Condition B and Theorem 2.1 of [@Malyshev81] (also see Condition B and Theorem 4.3.4 of [@Fayolle95]).
\[pr:positive\_recurrence\] The discrete-time 2d-QBD process $\{\bY_n\}$ is positive recurrent if there exist parameter sets $\{K_+,K_1,K_2\}$ and $\{u_+,u_1,u_2\}$, a positive vector $\bw=(w_1,w_2)$ and a positive number $\delta$ such that, for every $\by\in\calS\setminus\calV_0$, $\langle\hat{\balpha}_{\by},\bw\rangle\le -\delta$.
We prove this proposition by Proposition \[pr:Foster2\]. Let $\bw=(w_1,w_2)$ be a positive vector satisfying the condition of the proposition and consider the following function as a test function: $$f(\by) = f((\bl,j)) = \langle \bl,\bw \rangle,\quad \by=(\bl,j)=((l_1,l_2),j)\in\calS.$$ This function $f$ takes nonnegative values on $\calS$ and hence, it is lower bounded. Since $\langle\bx,\bw\rangle$ is linear in $\bx\in\mathbb{R}^2$, we have, for every $\by\in\calS\setminus\calV_0$, $$\begin{aligned}
\mathbb{E}(f(\hat{\bY}_1)-f(\hat{\bY}_0)\,|\,\hat{\bY}_0=\by)
= \langle \mathbb{E}(\hat{\bL}_1-\hat{\bL}_0\,|\,\hat{\bY}_0=\by),\bw\rangle
= \langle\hat{\balpha}_{\by},\bw\rangle
\le -\delta, \end{aligned}$$ where $\calV_0$ is finite. By the definition of the embedded Markov chain $\{\hat{\bY}_n\}$, if $\by=((l_1,l_2),j)\in\calV_0$, then $u(\by)=1$ and we have $$\begin{aligned}
\mathbb{E}(f(\hat{\bY}_1)\,|\,\hat{\bY}_0=\by)
=\mathbb{E}(\langle\bL_1,\bw\rangle\,|\,\bY_0=\by\big)
\le K_1 w_1+K_2 w_2<\infty, \end{aligned}$$ where we use the fact that $\{\bL_n\}$ is skip free. This completes the proof.
First, we consider the case where $\bar{a}^{(+)}_1<0$, $\bar{a}^{(+)}_2<0$, $\bar{a}^{(1)}_1<0$ and $\bar{a}^{(2)}_2<0$. Set $\bw=(1,1)>\bzero$, then we have $\langle\bar{\ba}^{(+)},\bw\rangle=\bar{a}^{(+)}_1+\bar{a}^{(+)}_2<0$, $\langle\bar{\ba}^{(1)},\bw\rangle=\bar{a}^{(1)}_1<0$ and $\langle\bar{\ba}^{(2)},\bw\rangle=\bar{a}^{(2)}_2<0$. Set positive numbers $\delta$ and $\varepsilon$ so that they satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
-(\delta + \varepsilon)
= \max\{ \langle\bar{\ba}^{(+)},\bw\rangle,\ \langle\bar{\ba}^{(1)},\bw\rangle,\ \langle\bar{\ba}^{(2)},\bw\rangle \}
<0. \end{aligned}$$ Set positive integer $u_+$ so that it satisfies, for every $\by\in\calS^{(+)}$ and for every $m\in\{1,2\}$, $|g^{(+)}_{m,\by}(u_+)-\bar{a}^{(+)}_m|<\varepsilon/8$. It is possible by Proposition \[pr:approximation\_g\]. Set positive integer $K_+$ so that it satisfies $K_+>u_+$. Furthermore, for $i\in\{1,2\}$, set positive integer $u_i$ so that it satisfies, for every $\by\in\calV^{(i)}_0$ and for every $m\in\{1,2\}$, $|g^{(i)}_{m,\by}(u_i)-\bar{a}^{(i)}_m|<\varepsilon/2$. It is possible by Proposition \[pr:approximation\_g12\]. For $i\in\{1,2\}$, set positive integer $K_i$ so that it satisfies $K_i>\max\{u_i, K_+\}$. Note that we have, for every $\by\in\calV_+\subset\calS^{(+)}$, $\hat{\balpha}_{\by}/u_+=\bg^{(+)}_{\by}(u_+)$ and, for $i\in\{1,2\}$ and for every $\by\in\calV_i\subset\calV^{(i)}_0$, $\hat{\balpha}_{\by}/u_i=\bg^{(i)}_{\by}(u_i)$ (see Remark \[re:embeddedMC\]). Hence, we obtain, for $\by\in\calV_+$, $$\begin{aligned}
\langle\hat{\balpha}_{\by}/u_+,\bw\rangle
= \langle\bar{\ba}^{(+)},\bw\rangle + \langle\bg^{(+)}_{\by}(u_+)-\bar{\ba}^{(+)},\bw\rangle
\le -(\delta+\varepsilon)+\varepsilon/8+\varepsilon/8
\le -\delta
\le -\delta/u_+\end{aligned}$$ and, for $i\in\{1,2\}$ and for every $\by\in\calV_i$, $$\begin{aligned}
\langle\hat{\balpha}_{\by}/u_i,\bw\rangle
= \langle\bar{\ba}^{(i)},\bw\rangle + \langle\bg^{(i)}_{\by}(u_i)-\bar{\ba}^{(i)},\bw\rangle
\le -(\delta+\varepsilon)+\varepsilon/2+\varepsilon/2
= -\delta
\le -\delta/u_i.\end{aligned}$$ As a result, by Proposition \[pr:positive\_recurrence\], the discrete-time 2d-QBD process $\{\bY_n\}$ is positive recurrent.
Next, we consider the case where $\bar{a}^{(+)}_1\ge 0$, $\bar{a}^{(+)}_2<0$ and $\bar{a}^{(1)}_1<0$. Set $\bw=(-\bar{a}^{(+)}_2,1+\bar{a}^{(+)}_1)>\bzero$, then we have $\langle\bar{\ba}^{(+)},\bw\rangle=\bar{a}^{(+)}_2<0$ and $\langle\bar{\ba}^{(1)},\bw\rangle=-\bar{a}^{(+)}_2 \bar{a}^{(1)}_1<0$. Set positive numbers $\delta$ and $\varepsilon$ so that they satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
-(\delta + \varepsilon)
= \max\{ \langle\bar{\ba}^{(+)},\bw\rangle,\ \langle\bar{\ba}^{(1)},\bw\rangle \}
<0. \end{aligned}$$ Set positive integer $u_+$ so that it satisfies, for every $\by\in\calS^{(+)}$ and for every $m\in\{1,2\}$, $|g^{(+)}_{m,\by}(u_+)-\bar{a}^{(+)}_m|<\varepsilon/8$ and positive integer $K_+$ so that it satisfies $K_+>u_+$. Furthermore, set positive integers $u_1$ and $u_2$ so that they satisfy, for every $\by\in\calV^{(1)}_0$ and for every $m\in\{1,2\}$, $|g^{(1)}_{m,\by}(u_1)-\bar{a}^{(1)}_m|<\varepsilon/2$ and, for every $\by\in\calV^{(2)}_0$ and for every $m\in\{1,2\}$, $|g^{(2)}_{m,\by}(u_2)-\bar{a}^{(+)}_m|<\varepsilon/2$, respectively. For $i\in\{1,2\}$, set positive integer $K_i$ so that it satisfies $K_i>\max\{u_i, K_+\}$. Then, we have, for every $i\in\{1,2,+\}$ and for every $\by\in\calV_i$, $\langle\hat{\balpha}_{\by}/u_i,\bw\rangle=\langle\bg^{(i)}_{\by}(u_i),\bw\rangle\le -\delta\le-\delta/u_i$. As a result, by Proposition \[pr:positive\_recurrence\], $\{\bY_n\}$ is positive recurrent.
The proof for the case where $\bar{a}^{(+)}_1< 0$, $\bar{a}^{(+)}_2\ge 0$ and $\bar{a}^{(2)}_2<0$ is analogous to the above case. This completes the proof of the corollary in the case where $\{\bY_n\}$ is positive recurrent.
For a vector $\bw\in\mathbb{R}^2$ and real number $c\in\mathbb{R}$, define a subset of $\calS$, $\calA_{\bw,c}$, as $$\calA_{\bw,c} = \{\by=(\bl,j)\in\calS: \langle\bl,\bw\rangle>c\},$$ and an index set $\scrI_{\bw,c}$ as $$\scrI_{\bw,c} = \{i\in\{0,1,2,+\}: \calA_{\bw,c}\cap\calV_i\ne\emptyset\}.$$ The following proposition corresponds to Condition B$'$ and Theorem 2.1 of [@Malyshev81] (also see Condition B$'$ and Theorem 4.3.4 of [@Fayolle95]).
\[pr:transience\] The discrete-time 2d-QBD process $\{\bY_n\}$ is transient if there exist parameter sets $\{K_+,K_1,K_2\}$ and $\{u_+,u_1,u_2\}$, a nonzero vector $\bw=(w_1,w_2)$, a real number $c$ and a positive number $\delta$ such that $\calA_{\bw,c}\ne\emptyset$ and, for every $i\in\scrI_{\bw,c}$ and for every $\by\in\calV_i$, $\langle\hat{\balpha}_{\by},\bw\rangle\ge \delta$.
We prove this proposition by Proposition \[pr:Markov\_unstable2\]. Let $\bw=(w_1,w_2)$ and $c$ be a real vector and real number satisfying the condition of the proposition. Consider the following test function: $$f(\by) = f((\bl,j)) = \langle \bl,\bw \rangle,\quad \by=(\bl,j)\in\calS.$$ Then, we have, for every $\by\in\calA_{\bw,c}\subset\cup_{i\in\scrI_{\bw,c}} \calV_i$, $$\begin{aligned}
\mathbb{E}(f(\hat{\bY}_1)-f(\hat{\bY}_0)\,|\,\hat{\bY}_0=\by)
&= \langle\hat{\balpha}_{\by},\bw\rangle
\ge \delta. \end{aligned}$$ Since the process $\{\bL_n\}$ is skip free, we have $$\begin{aligned}
|f(\bY_1)-f(\bY_0)|
&=| \langle \bL_1-\bL_0,\bw \rangle |
\le |w_1|+|w_2|. \end{aligned}$$ Hence, for every $\by,\by'\in\calS$, if $|f(\by')-f(\by)|>|w_1|+|w_2|$, then $\mathbb{P}(\bY_1=\by'\,|\,\bY_0=\by)=0$. This completes the proof.
First, we consider the case where one of $\bar{a}^{(+)}_1$ and $\bar{a}^{(+)}_2$ is positive and the other is non-negative. Set $\bw=(1,1)$, then we have $\langle\bar{\ba}^{(+)},\bw\rangle=\bar{a}^{(+)}_1+\bar{a}^{(+)}_2>0$. Set positive numbers $\delta$ and $\varepsilon$ so that they satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
\delta + \varepsilon = \langle\bar{\ba}^{(+)},\bw\rangle > 0. \end{aligned}$$ Set positive integer $u_+$ so that it satisfies, for every $\by\in\calS^{(+)}$ and for every $m\in\{1,2\}$, $|g^{(+)}_{m,\by}(u_+)-\bar{a}^{(+)}_m|<\varepsilon/8$ and positive integer $K_+$ so that it satisfies $K_+>u_+$. For $i\in\{1,2\}$, set positive integer $u_i$ so that it satisfies, for every $\by\in\calV^{(i)}_0$ and for every $m\in\{1,2\}$, $|g^{(i)}_{m,\by}(u_i)-\bar{a}^{(+)}_m|<\varepsilon/2$, and set positive integer $K_i$ so that it satisfies $K_i>\max\{u_i, K_+\}$. Set $c=\max\{K_1,K_2\}+K_+$. Then, $$\begin{aligned}
&\calA_{\bw,c}
=\{\by=((l_1,l_2),j)\in\calS: \langle(l_1,l_2),\bw\rangle=l_1+l_2>c\}
\ne \emptyset\end{aligned}$$ and we have $\scrI_{\bw,c}=\{1,2,+\}$. We have, for every $\by\in\calV_+\subset\calS^{(+)}$, $$\begin{aligned}
\langle\hat{\balpha}_{\by}/u_+,\bw\rangle
= \langle\bar{\ba}^{(+)},\bw\rangle + \langle\bg^{(+)}_{\by}(u_+)-\bar{\ba}^{(+)},\bw\rangle
\ge \delta+\varepsilon-(\varepsilon/8+\varepsilon/8)
\ge \delta
\ge \delta/u_+\end{aligned}$$ and, for $i\in\{1,2\}$ and for every $\by\in\calV_i\subset\calV^{(i)}_0$, $$\begin{aligned}
\langle\hat{\balpha}_{\by}/u_i,\bw\rangle
= \langle\bar{\ba}^{(+)},\bw\rangle + \langle\bg^{(i)}_{\by}(u_i)-\bar{\ba}^{(+)},\bw\rangle
\ge \delta+\varepsilon-(\varepsilon/2+\varepsilon/2)
= \delta
\ge \delta/u_i.\end{aligned}$$ As a result, by Proposition \[pr:transience\], the discrete-time 2d-QBD process $\{\bY_n\}$ is transient.
Next, we consider the case where $\bar{a}^{(+)}_2<0$ and $\bar{a}^{(1)}_1>0$; $\bar{a}^{(+)}_1$ may take any value. Set $\bw=(-\bar{a}^{(+)}_2,-(1+|\bar{a}^{(+)}_1|))$, then we have $\langle\bar{\ba}^{(+)},\bw\rangle=-\bar{a}^{(+)}_2+|\bar{a}^{(+)}_1 \bar{a}^{(+)}_2|-\bar{a}^{(+)}_1 \bar{a}^{(+)}_2>0$ and $\langle\bar{\ba}^{(1)},\bw\rangle=-\bar{a}^{(+)}_2 \bar{a}^{(1)}_1>0$. Set positive numbers $\delta$ and $\varepsilon$ so that they satisfy $$\begin{aligned}
\delta + \varepsilon = \min\{\langle\bar{\ba}^{(+)},\bw\rangle,\langle\bar{\ba}^{(1)},\bw\rangle\} > 0. \end{aligned}$$ Set positive integer $u_+$ so that it satisfies, for every $\by\in\calS^{(+)}$ and for every $m\in\{1,2\}$, $|g^{(+)}_{m,\by}(u_+)-\bar{a}^{(+)}_m|<\varepsilon/8$ and positive integer $K_+$ so that it satisfies $K_+>u_+$. Furthermore, set positive integer $u_1$ so that it satisfies, for every $\by\in\calV^{(1)}_0$ and for every $m\in\{1,2\}$, $|g^{(1)}_{m,\by}(u_1)-\bar{a}^{(1)}_m|<\varepsilon/2$ and positive integer $K_1$ so that it satisfies $K_1>\max\{u_1, K_+\}$. Set $u_2$ at a sufficiently large positive integer, for example, at $u_1$, and positive integer $K_2$ so that it satisfies $K_2>\max\{u_2, K_+\}$. Set $c=|\bar{a}^{(+)}_2| K_1$. Then, $$\begin{aligned}
&\calA_{\bw,c}
=\{\by=((l_1,l_2),j)\in\calS: \langle(l_1,l_2),\bw\rangle=|\bar{a}^{(+)}_2| l_1-(1+|\bar{a}^{(+)}_1|)l_2>c\}
\ne \emptyset\end{aligned}$$ and $\scrI_{\bw,c}=\{1,+\}$. We have, for $i\in\{1,+\}$ and for every $\by\in\calV_i\subset\calS^{(i)}$, $\langle\hat{\balpha}_{\by}/u_i,\bw\rangle = \langle\bg^{(i)}_{\by}(u_i),\bw\rangle \ge \delta/u_i$. As a result, by Proposition \[pr:transience\], $\{\bY_n\}$ is transient.
The proof for the case where $\bar{a}^{(+)}_1<0$ and $\bar{a}^{(2)}_2>0$ is analogous to the above case. This completes the proof of the corollary in the case where $\{\bY_n\}$ is transient.
Concluding remarks {#sec:concluding}
==================
For stability analysis of multiple-queue models and queueing networks, a method that can handle multidimensional QBD processes is desired. The notion of induced Markov chain and that of mean increment vector can also be applied to discrete-time multidimensional QBD processes and a certain result has been obtained in [@Ozawa15]. However, in a discrete-time multidimensional QBD process, several induced Markov chains are also discrete-time multidimensional QBD processes and, in order to evaluate the mean increment vectors, we need the stationary distributions of the multidimensional QBD processes. For example, in a 3d-QBD process, one induced Markov chain is a finite Markov chain, three induced Markov chains are ordinary discrete-time QBD processes and the other three induced Markov chains are discrete-time 2d-QBD processes. In general, it is very difficult to obtain the stationary distribution of a multidimensional QBD process if the dimension of the level process is greater than or equal to $2$. At present, we have no good ideas to overcome that difficulty, and it is left as a further study.
[99]{} M. Bramson: Stability of queueing networks. *Probability Survey*, **5** (2008), 169–345. G. Fayolle: On random walks arising in queueing systems: ergodicity and transience via quadratic forms as Lyapounov functions – Part I. *Queueing Systems*, **5** (1989), 167–184. G. Fayolle, V.A. Malyshev and M.V. Menshikov: *Topics in the Constructive Theory of Countable Markov Chains* (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995). G. Latouche and V. Ramaswami: *Introduction to Matrix Analytic Methods in Stochastic Modeling* (SIAM, Philadelphia, 1999). V.A. Malyshev and M.V. Menshikov: Ergodicity, continuity, and analyticity of countable Markov chains. *Transactions of the Moscow Mathematical Society*, **1** (1981), 1–47. M.F. Neuts: *Matrix-Geometric Solutions in Stochastic Models* (Dover Publications, New York, 1994). T. Ozawa: Analysis of queues with Markovian Service Processes. *Stochastic Models*, **20(4)** (2004), 391–413. T. Ozawa: Asymptotics for the stationary distribution in a discrete-time two-dimensional quasi-birth-and-death process. *Queueing Systems*, **74** (2013), 109–149. T. Ozawa: Stability of multidimensional skip-free Markov modulated reflecting random walks: Revisit to Malyshev and Menshikov’s results and application to queueing networks. Unpublished work (2015). (arXiv:1208.3043) T. Tezcan: Stability analysis of N-model systems under a static priority rule. *Queueing Systems*, **73** (2013), 235–259.
Setup time model with MAPs and PH-distributions {#sec:setup_MAPPH}
===============================================
For $i\in\{1,2\}$, the arrival process of class-$i$ customers is given by the MAP with representation $(C_i,D_i)$, the service time distribution of them by the PH-distribution with representation $(U_i, \bbeta_i)$ and the distribution of setup times for class-$i$ customer’s service by the PH-distribution with representation $(U^{set}_i, \bbeta^{set}_i)$. For $i\in\{1,2\}$, define $\bu_i$ and $\bu^{set}_i$ as $\bu_i=-U_i \bone$ and $\bu^{set}_i=-U^{set}_i\bone$. In the priority queue with setup times, the nonzero block matrices of the infinitesimal generator $Q$ are given as follows. $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(+)}_{-1,0} = I\otimes I\otimes
\begin{pmatrix}
\bu_1 \bbeta_1 & O & O & O \cr
O & O & O & O \cr
O & O & O & O \cr
O & O & O & O
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(+)}_{0,0} = C_1\oplus C_2\oplus \begin{pmatrix}
U_1 & O & O & O \cr
\bu^{set}_1 \bbeta_1 & U_1^{set} & O & O \cr
O & O & U_2 & O \cr
O & O & \bu^{set}_2 \bbeta_2 & U^{set}_2
\end{pmatrix}, \\
&A^{(+)}_{0,-1} = I\otimes I\otimes
\begin{pmatrix}
O & O & O & O \cr
O & O & O & O \cr
O & \bu_2 \bbeta^{set}_1 & O & O \cr
O & O & O & O
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(+)}_{1,0}=D_1\otimes I\otimes I,\
A^{(+)}_{0,1}=I\otimes D_2\otimes I,\
$$ $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(1)}_{-1,0} = I\otimes I\otimes
\begin{pmatrix}
\bu_1\bbeta_1 & O \cr
O & O
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(1)}_{0,0} = C_1\oplus C_2\oplus
\begin{pmatrix}
U_1 & O \cr
\bu^{set}_1 \bbeta_1 & U^{set}_1
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(1)}_{1,0}=D_1\otimes I\otimes I, \\
&A^{(1)}_{0,1} = I\otimes D_2\otimes
\begin{pmatrix}
I & O & O & O \cr
O & I & O & O
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(2)}_{1,0} =D_1\otimes I\otimes
\begin{pmatrix}
O & O & I & O \cr
O & O & O & I
\end{pmatrix},\\
&A^{(1)}_{0,-1} = I\otimes I\otimes
\begin{pmatrix}
O & O \cr
O & O \cr
O & \bu_2 \bbeta^{set}_1 \cr
O & O
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(2)}_{-1,0} = I\otimes I\otimes
\begin{pmatrix}
O & \bu_1 \bbeta^{set}_2 \cr
O & O \cr
O & O \cr
O & O
\end{pmatrix},\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(2)}_{0,0} = C_1\oplus C_2\oplus
\begin{pmatrix}
U_2 & O \cr
\bu^{set}_2 \bbeta_2 & U^{set}_2
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(2)}_{0,-1} = I\otimes I\otimes
\begin{pmatrix}
\bu_2 \bbeta_2 & O \cr
O & O
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(2)}_{0,1}=I\otimes D_2\otimes I,\
$$ $$\begin{aligned}
&A^{(0)}_{-1,0} = I\otimes I\otimes
\begin{pmatrix}
\bu_1 \cr \bzero
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(0)}_{0,0} = C_1\oplus C_2,\
A^{(0)}_{0,-1} = I\otimes I\otimes
\begin{pmatrix}
\bu_2 \cr \bzero
\end{pmatrix},\\
&A^{(0)}_{1,0} = D_1\otimes I\otimes
\begin{pmatrix}
\bzero^\top & \bbeta^{set}_1
\end{pmatrix},\
A^{(0)}_{0,1} = I\otimes D_2\otimes
\begin{pmatrix}
\bzero^\top & \bbeta^{set}_2
\end{pmatrix}.
$$
Proof of Proposition \[pr:approximation\_g12\] {#sec:app_proof_pro3_4}
==============================================
First, we consider the case where $\bar{a}^{(+)}_2<0$. In this case, the induced Markov chain $\bar{\calL}^{(1)}$ has just one irreducible class, and the unique stationary distribution $\bpi^{(1)}_*$ exists. Furthermore, $\bg^{(1)}_{\by}(k)$ satisfies, for any $\by=((l_1,l_2),j)\in\calV^{(1)}_0$, $$\bg^{(1)}_{\by}(k)
= \frac{1}{k} \sum_{n=1}^k \mathbb{E}\big(\bL^{(1)}_n-\bL^{(1)}_{n-1}\,|\,(L^{(1)}_{2,0},J^{(1)}_0)=(l_2,j)\big),$$ and the set $\{(l_2',j'): \mbox{$((l_1',l_2'),j')\in\calV^{(1)}_0$ for some $l_1'\in\mathbb{Z}$}\}$ is finite. Hence, from equation (\[eq:limit\_gi\]), we obtain statement (i) of the proposition for $\bg^{(1)}_{\by}(k) $. In the case where $\bar{a}^{(+)}_1<0$, an analogous result holds for $\bg^{(2)}_{\by}(k) $.
Next, assuming $\bar{a}^{(+)}_2\ge 0$, we consider the case where $\bar{\calL}^{(1)}$ has no irreducible classes or it has just one irreducible class (see Assumption \[as:calL12\_irreducible\]). In this case, any state of $\bar{\calL}^{(1)}$ is transient or null recurrent and we have, for any $(l_2,j),(l_2',j')\in(\{0\}\times S_1)\cup(\mathbb{N}\times S_+)$, $$\lim_{n\to\infty} \mathbb{P}\big((L^{(1)}_{2,n},J^{(1)}_n)=(l_2',j')\,|\,(L^{(1)}_{2,0},J^{(1)}_0)=(l_2,j)\big) = 0.$$ Define a function $u^{(1)}$ on $\calS^{(1)}$ as $$u^{(1)}(\by) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
u_+ & \mbox{if $\by\in\calV^{(1)}_+$}, \cr
1 & \mbox{otherwise},
\end{array} \right.$$ and a random sequence $\{\sigma^{(1)}_n\}$ as $$\sigma^{(1)}_0=0,\quad \sigma^{(1)}_{n+1}=\sigma^{(1)}_n+u^{(1)}(\bY^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_n}),\,n\ge 0.$$ For $\by=((l_1,l_2),j)\in\calV^{(1)}_0$, we obtain, by the definition of $\bg^{(1)}_{\by}(k)$, $$\begin{aligned}
\bg^{(1)}_{\by}(k)
&= \frac{1}{k} \mathbb{E}\Big(\sum_{n=0}^{k} 1(\sigma^{(1)}_n\le k<\sigma^{(1)}_{n+1}) (\bL^{(1)}_{k}-\bL^{(1)}_0)\,\Big|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by\Big) \cr
&\ = \frac{1}{k} \mathbb{E}\Big(\sum_{n=0}^{k} 1(\sigma^{(1)}_n\le k<\sigma^{(1)}_{n+1}) \Big( \sum_{l=1}^n (\bL^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_l}-\bL^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}})+(\bL^{(1)}_{k}-\bL^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_n}) \Big)\,\Big|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by\Big) \cr
&\ = \frac{1}{k} \sum_{l=1}^{k} \mathbb{E}\big(1(\sigma^{(1)}_l\le k) (\bL^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_l}-\bL^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}})\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by\big) \cr
&\qquad\qquad + \frac{1}{k} \sum_{n=0}^{k} \mathbb{E}\big(1(\sigma^{(1)}_n\le k<\sigma^{(1)}_{n+1})(\bL^{(1)}_{k}-\bL^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_n})\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by\big), \end{aligned}$$ where $1(\cdot)$ is an indicator function and we use the fact that $\sigma^{(1)}_n>k$ for $n>k$. We have $$\begin{aligned}
&\mathbb{E}\big(1(\sigma^{(1)}_l\le k) (\bL^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_l}-\bL^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}})\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by\big) \cr
&\quad= \sum_{\by'\in\calS^{(1)}} \mathbb{E}(\bL^{(1)}_{u^{(1)}(\by')}-\bL^{(1)}_0\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by')\,\mathbb{P}(\sigma^{(1)}_l\le k,\,\bY^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}}=\by'\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by) \cr
&\quad= \sum_{\by'\in\calV^{(1)}_0} \mathbb{E}(\bL^{(1)}_1-\bL^{(1)}_0\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by')\,\mathbb{P}(\sigma^{(1)}_l\le k,\,\bY^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}}=\by'\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by) \cr
&\qquad\qquad + \sum_{\by'\in\calV^{(1)}_+} u_+\,\bg^{(+)}_{\by'}(u_+)\,\mathbb{P}(\sigma^{(1)}_l\le k,\,\bY^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}}=\by'\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by), \end{aligned}$$ where we use the fact that $\frac{1}{u_+}\mathbb{E}(\bL^{(1)}_{u_+}-\bL^{(1)}_0\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by')=\bg^{(+)}_{\by'}(u_+)$ for $\by'\in\calV^{(1)}_+\subset\calS^{(+)}$ (see Remark \[re:embeddedMC\]). $\bg^{(1)}_{\by}(k)$ is, therefore, represented as $$\bg^{(1)}_{\by}(k) = \bphi^a_{\by}(k) + \bphi^b_{\by}(k) + \bphi^c_{\by}(k),
\label{eq:gA_phiA123}$$ where $\bphi^a_{\by}(k)=(\phi^a_{1,\by}(k),\phi^a_{2,\by}(k))$, $\bphi^b_{\by}(k)=(\phi^b_{1,\by}(k),\phi^b_{2,\by}(k))$ and $\bphi^c_{\by}(k)=(\phi^c_{1,\by}(k),\phi^c_{2,\by}(k))$ are given as $$\begin{aligned}
&\bphi^a_{\by}(k) = \frac{1}{k} \sum_{l=1}^{k} \sum_{\by'\in\calV^{(1)}_0} \mathbb{E}(\bL^{(1)}_1-\bL^{(1)}_0\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by')\,\mathbb{P}(\sigma^{(1)}_l\le k,\,\bY^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}}=\by'\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by), \cr
&\bphi^b_{\by}(k) = \frac{1}{k} \sum_{l=1}^{k} \sum_{\by'\in\calV^{(1)}_+} u_+\,\bg^{(+)}_{\by'}(u_+)\,\mathbb{P}(\sigma^{(1)}_l\le k,\,\bY^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}}=\by'\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by), \cr
&\bphi^c_{\by}(k) = \frac{1}{k} \sum_{n=0}^{k} \mathbb{E}\big(1(\sigma^{(1)}_n\le k<\sigma^{(1)}_{n+1})(\bL^{(1)}_{k}-\bL^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_n})\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by\big). \end{aligned}$$
Define $\calV_0^*$ as $\calV_0^*=\{(l_2',j'): \mbox{$((l_1',l_2'),j')\in\calV^{(1)}_0$ for some $l_1'\in\mathbb{Z}$}\}$. This $\calV_0^*$ is a finite subset of the state space of $\bar{\calL}^{(1)}=\{(L^{(1)}_{2,n},J^{(1)}_n)\}$. Since the process $\{\bL^{(1)}_n\}$ is skip free, we obtain, for $m\in\{1,2\}$, $$\begin{aligned}
|\phi^a_{m,\by}(k)|
&\le \frac{1}{k} \sum_{l=1}^{k}\ \sum_{\by'\in\calV^{(1)}_0} \mathbb{P}(\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}+u^{(1)}(\by')\le k,\,\bY^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}}=\by'\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by) \cr
&\le \frac{1}{k} \sum_{l=0}^{k-1} \mathbb{P}(\bY^{(1)}_l\in\calV^{(1)}_0\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by), \label{eq:phiA1_g^{(1)}}\end{aligned}$$ where $\mathbb{P}(\bY^{(1)}_l\in\calV^{(1)}_0\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by) = \mathbb{P}\big((L^{(1)}_{2,l},J^{(1)}_l)\in\calV_0^*\,|\,(L^{(1)}_{2,0},J^{(1)}_0)=(l_2,j)\big)$. Since $\calV_0^*$ is finite and any state of $\bar{\calL}^{(1)}$ is transient or null recurrent, there exists a positive integer $u_{1a}^*$ such that if $k\ge u_{1a}^*$, then for every $\by\in\calV^{(1)}_0$ and $m\in\{1,2\}$, $|\phi^a_{m,\by}(k)|<\varepsilon/4$. Since $\sigma^{(1)}_{n+1}-\sigma^{(1)}_n\le u_+$ for any $n\ge 0$ and $\{\bL^{(1)}_n\}$ is skip free, we have, for every $\by\in\calV^{(1)}_0$ and for $m\in\{1,2\}$, $$\begin{aligned}
|\phi^c_{m,\by}(k)|
&\le \frac{1}{k} \sum_{n=0}^{k} \mathbb{E}\big(1(\sigma^{(1)}_n\le k<\sigma^{(1)}_{n+1}) | L^{(1)}_{m,k}-L^{(1)}_{m,\sigma^{(1)}_n}| \,\big|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by\big) \cr
&\le \frac{u_+}{k} \mathbb{E}\Big(\sum_{n=0}^{k} 1(\sigma^{(1)}_n\le k<\sigma^{(1)}_{n+1}) \,\Big|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by\Big)
= \frac{u_+}{k}.
\label{eq:phiA2_g^{(1)}} \end{aligned}$$ Hence, there exists a positive integer $u_{1c}^*$ such that if $k\ge u_{1c}^*$, then for every $\by\in\calV^{(1)}_0$ and $m\in\{1,2\}$, $|\phi^c_{m,\by}(k)|<\varepsilon/4$. For $\by\in\calS^{(1)}$ and for $k\ge 1$, define $q_{\by}(k)$ as $$\begin{aligned}
&q_{\by}(k)= \frac{1}{k} \sum_{l=1}^{k} \sum_{\by'\in\calV^{(1)}_+} u_+ \mathbb{P}(\sigma^{(1)}_l\le k,\,\bY^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}}=\by'\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by), \end{aligned}$$ then we have $$\begin{aligned}
q_{\by}(k)
&= \frac{1}{k} \sum_{l=1}^{k} \mathbb{E}\big(u^{(1)}(\bY^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}})\,1(\sigma^{(1)}_l\le k)\,1(\bY^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}}\in\calV^{(1)}_+)\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by\big)
= q^a_{\by}(k) - q^b_{\by}(k),
\label{eq:qAB_psi12}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
&q^a_{\by}(k) = \frac{1}{k} \mathbb{E}\Big( \sum_{l=1}^{k} u^{(1)}(\bY^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}})\,1(\sigma^{(1)}_l\le k)\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by\Big), \\
&q^b_{\by}(k) = \frac{1}{k} \sum_{l=1}^{k} \mathbb{P}(\sigma^{(1)}_l\le k,\,\bY^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}}\in\calV^{(1)}_0\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by) \end{aligned}$$ and we use the fact that $u^{(1)}(\by')=u_+$ for $\by'\in\calV^{(1)}_+$. Since $\sigma^{(1)}_l=\sum_{n=1}^{l} u^{(1)}(\bY^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{n-1}})$, we have $$\sum_{l=1}^{k} u^{(1)}(\bY^{(1)}_{\sigma^{(1)}_{l-1}})\,1(\sigma^{(1)}_l\le k) = \sum_{l=1}^{k} \sigma^{(1)}_l\,1(\sigma^{(1)}_l\le k<\sigma^{(1)}_{l+1}),$$ and this leads us to $(k-u_+)/k < q^a_{\by}(k) \le k/k = 1$. Hence, there exists a positive integer $u^*_{1b,a}$ such that if $k\ge u^*_{1b,a}$, then for every $\by\in\calS^{(1)}$, $1-\varepsilon/(8 \bar{a}^{(+)}_{max})< q^a_{\by}(k) \le 1$, where $\bar{a}^{(+)}_{max}=\max\{1,|\bar{a}^{(+)}_1|,|\bar{a}^{(+)}_2|\}$. We have $$\begin{aligned}
q^b_{\by}(k)
&\le \frac{1}{k} \sum_{l=0}^{k-1} \mathbb{P}(\bY^{(1)}_l\in\calV^{(1)}_0\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by),
$$ where $\mathbb{P}(\bY^{(1)}_l\in\calV^{(1)}_0\,|\,\bY^{(1)}_0=\by)=\mathbb{P}\big((L^{(1)}_{2,l},J^{(1)}_l)\in\calV_0^*\,|\,(L^{(1)}_{2,0},J^{(1)}_0)=(l_2,j)\big)$. Since $\calV_0^*$ is finite and every state of $\bar{\calL}^{(1)}=\{(L^{(1)}_{2,n},J^{(1)}_n)\}$ is transient or null recurrent, there exists a positive integer $u_{1b,b}^*$ such that if $k\ge u_{1b,b}^*$, then for every $\by\in\calV^{(1)}_0$, $0\le q^b_{\by}(k)<\varepsilon/(8 \bar{a}^{(+)}_{max})$. Hence, by expression (\[eq:qAB\_psi12\]), letting $u^*_{1b}=\max\{u^*_{1b,a},u^*_{1b,b}\}$, we see that if $k\ge u^*_{1b}$, then for every $\by\in\calV^{(1)}_0$, $1-\varepsilon/(4 \bar{a}^{(+)}_{max}) < q_{\by}(k) \le 1$. Under the condition of the proposition, for every $\by'\in\calV^{(1)}_+$ and $m\in\{1,2\}$, $|g^{(+)}_{m,\by'}(u_+)-\bar{a}^{(+)}_m|<\varepsilon/4$, and we have, for every $\by\in\calV^{(1)}_0$ and $m\in\{1,2\}$, $$\begin{aligned}
|\phi^b_{m,{\by}}(k)-\bar{a}^{(+)}_m q_{\by}(k)| < \varepsilon/4 \cdot q_{\by}(k) \le \varepsilon/4.\end{aligned}$$
As a result, letting $u^*_1=\max\{u_{1a}^*,u_{1b}^*,u_{1c}^*,u_++1\}$, we see from equation (\[eq:gA\_phiA123\]) that if $k\ge u_1^*$, then for every $\by\in\calV^{(1)}_0$ and for $m\in\{1,2\}$, $$\begin{aligned}
|g^{(1)}_{m,\by}(k)-\bar{a}^{(+)}_m|
\le |\phi^a_{m,\by}(k)| + |\phi^b_{m,\by}(k)-\bar{a}^{(+)}_m q_{\by}(k)| + |\bar{a}^{(+)}_m|\, |q_{\by}(k)-1| + |\phi^c_{m,\by}(k)| <\varepsilon,\end{aligned}$$ and this completes the proof.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
We explore the impact of spatial fluctuations in the intergalactic medium temperature on the Ly$\alpha$ forest flux power spectrum near $z \sim 3$. We develop a semianalytic model to examine temperature fluctuations resulting from inhomogeneous and incomplete reionizations. Detection of these fluctuations might provide insight into the reionization histories of hydrogen and helium. Furthermore, these fluctuations, neglected in previous analyses, could bias constraints on cosmological parameters from the Ly$\alpha$ forest. We find that the temperature fluctuations resulting from inhomogeneous reionization are likely to be very small, with an rms amplitude of $\la 5\%$, $\sigma_{T_0}/\langle T_0
\rangle \la 0.05$. More important are the temperature fluctuations that arise from incomplete reionization, which might plausibly be as large as $50\%$, $\sigma_{T_0}/ \langle T_0 \rangle
\sim 0.5$. In practice, however, these temperature fluctuations have only a small effect on flux power spectrum predictions. The smallness of the effect is possibly due to density fluctuations dominating over temperature fluctuations on the scales probed by current measurements. On the largest scales currently probed, $k \sim 0.001$ s km$^{-1}$ ($\sim$0.1 $h$ Mpc$^{-1}$), the effect on the flux power spectrum may be as large as $\sim 10\%$ in extreme models. The effect is larger on small scales, up to $\sim 20\%$ at $k = 0.1$ s km$^{-1}$, due to thermal broadening. Our results suggest that the omission of temperature fluctuations effects from previous analyses does not significantly bias constraints on cosmological parameters.
author:
- 'Kamson Lai, Adam Lidz, Lars Hernquist, Matias Zaldarriaga'
bibliography:
- 'ms.bib'
title: 'The Impact of Temperature Fluctuations on the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}Forest Power Spectrum'
---
Introduction {#intro}
============
In the current theoretical picture of the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest, most of the structure in the forest is a product of gravitational instability. The absorbing gas is assumed to be in photoionization equilibrium with a spatially homogeneous radiation field. On large scales the hydrogen gas distribution follows the dark matter distribution, and on small scales it is Jeans pressure-smoothed [see e.g., @cen94; @zhan95; @hern96; @mira96; @muec96; @bi97; @bond97; @hui97a; @crof98; @brya99; @dave99; @theu99; @nuss99]. This gravitational instability model of the forest, motivated by numerical simulations, seems to agree well with observations [e.g. @crof02; @mcdo04b; @tytl04; @viel04c; @lidz05].
In this model, each [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest spectrum provides a one-dimensional map of the density field in the intergalactic medium (IGM). The [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest can thus be used to constrain the amplitude and slope of the linear matter power spectrum at $z \sim 3$ on scales of $k \sim 0.1 -
5 {\ensuremath{\,h\,{\rm Mpc^{-1}}}}$ [see e.g., @crof98; @mcdo00; @zald01b; @crof02; @zald03]. When combined with measurements from Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) experiments and galaxy surveys, the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest provides important constraints on cosmological parameters [e.g. @selj05; @viel05a]. Recently, very tight constraints on cosmological parameters were derived using measurements of the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest flux power spectrum from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) [@mcdo04a; @mcdo04b; @selj05]. The data samples used in the SDSS flux power spectrum measurements are almost two orders of magnitude larger than those used in previous measurements. The increase in statistical precision sets a high bar for the required control over systematic effects in theoretical predictions. The key issues are now to devise consistency checks for the gravitational instability model of the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest, to quantify the accuracy of our theoretical modeling, and to improve the modeling when possible. These steps are essential in order to estimate the systematic-error budget in the modeling, and to utilize the full statistical power of the SDSS measurements.
Toward this end, we point out that previous models of the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest adopt an over-simplified description of the IGM reionization history and the resulting thermal evolution. Specifically, previous models assume that reionization is sudden and uniform, so that in effect each gas element in the IGM experiences the same reionization history. In reality, reionization is likely to be an extended and inhomogeneous process [@soka03; @soka04; @bark04; @furl04; @babi05], with some gas elements reionizing earlier than others, and hence cooling to lower temperatures by $z \sim 3$ [e.g. @hui03]. Furthermore, may be reionized by bright quasars, and the process may be incomplete near $z \sim 3$. In this case, the IGM at $z \sim 3$ resembles a two-phase medium. The first phase consists of regions that have already been engulfed by the ionization fronts that are expanding around bright quasars. These regions, recently photo-heated by a hard quasar spectrum, may have temperatures in excess of $\sim
{\ensuremath{3 \times 10^{4}}}{\mbox{ K}}$ [@abel99]. The second phase consists of regions where has yet to reionize, but have / reionized at early times. In this phase, gas elements with density near the cosmic mean will be significantly cooler, with temperatures of $\sim
{\ensuremath{1 \times 10^{4}}}{\mbox{ K}}$. These temperature fluctuations should be imprinted in the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest since the widths of [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}absorption lines, as well as the hydrogen recombination coefficient, and hence the optical depth to [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}absorption, depend on temperature.
The goal of this paper is to estimate the amplitude and spatial scale of the temperature fluctuations resulting from and reionization, and to examine their impact on the flux power spectrum. Temperature fluctuations are particularly interesting because if they significantly impact the flux power spectrum, then their detection would likely provide insights into the reionization histories of hydrogen and helium. Furthermore, we reiterate that it is important to check whether omitting temperature fluctuations in the analyses will significantly bias the determination of cosmological parameters from the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest.
The outline of this paper is as follows. We begin with a brief overview of the theoretical model describing the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest in [§ \[review\]]{}. We then estimate the amplitude of temperature fluctuations expected from inhomogeneous reionization in [§ \[tfluc\_hi\]]{}. In [§ \[tfluc\_heii\]]{} we estimate the amplitude and scale of temperature fluctuations for a range of models describing reionization by bright quasars, using the observed quasar luminosity function as input. In [§ \[flux\_power\]]{}, we examine the impact of these fluctuations on the flux power spectrum. We conclude in [§ \[conclusion\]]{} and discuss possible future research directions.
Modeling the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}Forest {#review}
==================================
In this section, we briefly review the standard theoretical model of the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest in order to introduce notation, and highlight the approximations that we subsequently test in this paper. For more details, the reader can refer to e.g., @hui97a.
The gas responsible for the absorption in the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest is thought to be in photoionization equilibrium with a radiation background produced by star-forming galaxies and/or quasars. In this case, the abundance of neutral hydrogen scales like $n_{\rm HI} \propto \alpha(T) \Delta^2/\Gamma$. Here, $\alpha(T)
\propto T^{-0.7}$ is the temperature dependent hydrogen recombination coefficient, $\Delta$ is the baryon density in units of the cosmic mean, and $\Gamma$ is the hydrogen photoionization rate. The optical depth to [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}absorption is proportional to the neutral hydrogen abundance (besides thermal broadening and peculiar velocities), which implies a simple power-law relationship between the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}optical depth and the gas density. Therefore, if the gas temperature and $\Gamma$ are known or can be modeled, then there exists a direct connection between the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}absorption and the underlying density fluctuations.
Indeed, the physics that sets the temperature of the absorbing gas is expected to be relatively simple. The gas temperature is determined largely by the competition between photoionization heating and adiabatic cooling [@mira94; @hui97b]. In this case, the temperature of the low density gas, where shock-heating should be unimportant, is expected to be tightly correlated with its density [@hui97b]. In fact, these authors show that the gas temperature should be a power-law in the gas density: $T = T_0 \Delta^{\gamma
-1}$. The numerical values of the power law index, $\gamma$, and the temperature at mean density, $T_0$, depend on when the gas was reionized and the nature of the ionizing sources [e.g. @hui97b; @abel99; @soka02; @theu02a; @hui03].
The standard assumption is that $\Gamma$, $T_0$ and $\gamma$ are all spatially uniform, i.e. they have a single value throughout the entire IGM. To the extent that this is true, the neutral hydrogen density, and hence the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}optical depth, scales as $\tau = A_\tau
\Delta^{2 - 0.7(\gamma -1)}$, where the proportionality constant $A_\tau$ is independent of spatial position. In this simple case, fluctuations in the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest absorption directly traces the underlying density fluctuations. Several authors have investigated the possible ‘contamination’ from spatial fluctuations in the hydrogen photoionization rate, $\Gamma$, finding that these fluctuations should be quite small near $z \sim 3$ [@crof99; @meik04; @crof04; @mcdo04c]. Little attention, however, has been given to the assumption that $T_0$ and $\gamma$ are also spatially uniform.
In the case where $T_0$ and $\gamma$ fluctuate spatially, the relation for the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}optical depth generalizes to: $$\label{Eqn::tau}
\tau = A_\tau \Delta^{2 - 0.7(\gamma-1)} (1+\delta_{T_0})^{-0.7}.$$ The new ingredient in this equation is the term $1+\delta_{T_0} = T_0
/ {\ensuremath{\langle T_0 \rangle}}$ which represents spatial fluctuations in the temperature of the gas at the cosmic mean density. Furthermore, we consider spatial fluctuations in $\gamma$, i.e. $\gamma$ in this equation now depends on position. Additionally, fluctuations in the IGM temperature lead to spatial variations in the thermal broadening kernel, which will affect the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest on small scales.
The flux transmitted through the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest, after taking into account peculiar velocities and thermal broadening, is given by $F =
e^{-\tau}$. Fluctuations in the transmission are given by $\delta_F =
(F - {\ensuremath{\langle F \rangle}})/{\ensuremath{\langle F \rangle}}$, and the power spectrum of $\delta_F$ is the flux power spectrum, which we denote by $P_F(k)$. Our goal then is to explore the impact of the temperature fluctuations encoded in [Eq. \[Eqn::tau\]]{}, and in the thermal broadening kernel, on the flux power spectrum $P_F(k)$.
Temperature Fluctuations from Inhomogeneous Reionization {#tfluc_hi}
========================================================
![[*Panel (a):*]{} reionization redshift distribution for $\zeta$ = 6, 12, and 18. [*Panel (b):*]{} Temperature distribution at $z=3$ for the same reionization models in (a). The thick (thin) curves are calculated using $T_r = 2.5 \times 10^4$ K ($3 \times 10^4$ K).[]{data-label="Fig::HI"}](f1.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
We begin by considering the amplitude of temperature fluctuations resulting from reionization, which recent theoretical work has emphasized to be likely inhomogeneous and extended [@soka03; @bark04; @furl04; @babi05]. We use the model of @furl04 to describe the duration of extended reionization, and scaling relations from @hui97b to estimate the amplitude of the resulting temperature fluctuations. Throughout this paper, we will work generally within the context of a model in which / are reionized at high redshift by star-forming galaxies, while is reionized close to $z \sim 3$ by quasars. This is not the only possibility (see Lidz et al. 2005, in prep., for a discussion), and so it is useful for us to explicitly separate out the temperature fluctuations that arise from reionization and those that arise from reionization. The case that and are both reionized at high redshift will then be similar to our calculation: the only difference being that the temperature at reionization would likely be higher, and the duration of the reionization process might be different.
The @furl04 model describes the growth and overlap of regions during reionization. The basic picture in this model is that large scale overdense regions contain more ionizing sources, and are reionized earlier, than underdense regions. The model assumes that a galaxy of mass $m_{\rm gal}$ can ionize a mass corresponding to $\zeta
m_{\rm gal}$, where $\zeta$ is an unknown parameter describing how efficiently a galaxy can ionize surrounding gas (see @furl05b and @furl05a for extensions to this model). A region is considered ionized when the the fraction of mass in halos more massive than some minimum mass, $m_{\rm min}$, exceeds a threshold set by the ionization efficiency of the sources: $f_{\rm coll} >
\zeta^{-1}$. Here, $f_{\rm coll}$ denotes the fraction of mass in the region which has collapsed into halos of mass larger than $m_{\rm
min}$. In this case, the size distribution of regions can be calculated in a similar manner to the halo mass function in the excursion set formalism [e.g., @bond91; @lace93].
The @furl04 model predicts, given $\zeta$, the filling factor of ionized regions. It is given by $$\label{Eqn::Q_HI}
Q = \zeta \bar{f}_{\rm coll}$$ where $\bar{f}_{\rm coll}$ is the global collapse fraction (different from $f_{\rm coll}$, the collapse fraction of a region with a given overdensity). In the extended Press-Schechter theory, the global collapse fraction is given by [@bond91; @lace93]: $$\label{Eqn::f_coll}
\bar{f}_{\rm coll} = {\rm erfc} \left[ \frac{\delta_{\rm c}(z)}{\sqrt{2
\sigma_{\rm min}^2(z)}} \right],$$ where $\delta_{\rm c}(z)$ is the critical density for collapse and $\sigma_{\rm min}^2(z)$ is the density variance on the scale of $m_{\rm min}$, the minimum mass of an ionizing source. We take the minimum mass to be the mass corresponding to a virial temperature of $10^4 {\mbox{ K}}$, where atomic hydrogen line cooling is efficient.
The probability distribution of reionization redshift is related to the filling factor $Q$ by $$\label{Eqn::Pz}
\frac{dP}{dz_r} = \left. -\frac{dQ}{dz} \right|_{z = z_r}.$$ In [Fig. \[Fig::HI\]]{}a, we plot $dP/dz_r$ for $\zeta$ = 6, 12, and 18. The curves terminate when $Q = 1$, corresponding to the end of reionization. The figure clearly illustrates that reionization should be quite extended, with the whole process taking place over a $\Delta z$ of several. The end, and somewhat the duration, of reionization naturally depends on how efficiently the sources produce ionizing photons, which is quite uncertain. We therefore consider $\zeta$ = 6, 12, and 18, in which case the end of reionization occurs at $z =$ 6, 8, and 9 respectively. For our purposes, these choices of $\zeta$ bracket the interesting range of possibilities. It is uninteresting to consider sources that are much less efficient, because we know the IGM is highly ionized below $z \sim 6$ [e.g. @fan02]. On the other hand, more efficient sources would lead to a very early end to reionization, in which case the temperature at lower redshifts is completely insensitive to when precisely the gas was reionized owing to efficient Compton cooling [@hui03].
In order to investigate the temperature fluctuations that result from extended reionization, we rely on analytic approximations by @hui97b to describe the thermal history of the IGM. These analytic approximations derive from the fact that the temperature of the low density gas is primarily determined by photoionization heating and adiabatic cooling. Under these simple physical conditions, @hui97b give formulae for the evolution of $T_0$ and $\gamma$ (see their Eq. 19 and 22). The input to these formulae is simply the temperature, $T_r$, that a gas element reaches when it is reionized at redshift $z_r$. Given $T_r$, these formulae give the values of $T_0$ and $\gamma$ at lower redshifts, $z < z_r$.
The temperature at reionization, $T_r$, is quite uncertain. It is determined both by the intrinsic spectrum of the ionizing sources, and the hardening of the spectrum owing to absorption in the IGM [@abel99]. Scatter in the intrinsic and re-processed spectra will likely give rise to a distribution of $T_r$. It is also unclear that gas elements reionized at different times, albeit by sources with the same intrinsic spectrum, will reach the same temperature following reionization. We currently ignore these subtleties in our model, and assume that all gas elements will reionize to the same $T_r$. The value $T_r = {\ensuremath{2.5 \times 10^{4}}}{\mbox{ K}}$ is reasonable assuming that galaxies are the ionizing sources [@hui97b]. We also investigate the effects of using a more extreme $T_r = {\ensuremath{3 \times 10^{4}}}{\mbox{ K}}$. Note that because of the high abundance of galaxies, each gas element will likely see the combined radiation from numerous sources during reionization. This will tend to average out the scatter in the intrinsic and re-processed spectra, so a uniform $T_r$ is probably a good approximation. The same may not be true if quasars are the ionizing sources, since quasars are sparse and each gas element will only see the radiation from one, or a few, nearby sources.
With $z$ and $T_r$ fixed, $T_0$ is a function of $z_r$ only and we can find the distribution of $T_0$ with the simple transformation: $$\label{Eqn::Pt}
\frac{dP}{dT_0} = \frac{dP}{dz_r} \left|\frac{dT_0}{dz_r}\right|^{-1}.$$ The temperature distribution is plotted in [Fig. \[Fig::HI\]]{}b. The cutoff in the distribution at high $T_0$ occurs because there is a definite end to reionization in our model, after which the probability of reionization is formally zero. The upper temperature limit to the distribution is therefore set by the $T_0$ of the most recently reionized gas elements. There is a sharp rise in the temperature distribution at low $T_0$, because gas elements reionized above $z
\sim 10$ will have reached almost the same temperature at low redshift, owing to efficient Compton cooling at high redshift [@hui97b].
The temperature distribution at $z=3$ spans a very narrow range in $T_0$, generally less than a few hundred degrees Kelvin, in all the models we consider. This is because the interplay between photoionization heating and adiabatic cooling drives the gas towards a thermal asymptote [@hui03]. Therefore, gas elements that are reionized sufficiently early will approach the same asymptotic temperature at low redshifts. As a result, the temperature fluctuations at $z=3$ owing to reionization are small. In the $\zeta=6$ model, with $T_r = 2.5 \times 10^4$ K, the level of temperature fluctuations is about $4\%$, $\sigma_{T_0}/{\ensuremath{\langle T_0 \rangle}} =
0.04$. In the $\zeta = 12$ and 18 models, the levels of temperature fluctuations are even smaller at $< 1\%$. Taking $T_r = 3 \times
10^4$ K does not give significantly larger temperature fluctuations. The amplitude of temperature fluctuations might be larger at higher redshifts, because the gas elements have less time to cool. However, efficient cooling quickly causes the gas to approach the thermal asymptote, and we find that the amplitude of temperature fluctuations at $z=4$ is very similar to that at $z=3$.
It is possible to have temperature fluctuations larger than what we have estimated. For instance, if is reionized alongside /, then temperatures of ${\ensuremath{4 \times 10^{4}}}{\mbox{ K}}$ or higher are plausible following reionization [@abel99], leading to larger temperature fluctuations. Furthermore, the analytic approximation we employ assumes a constant spectrum for the ionizing background. In reality, the spectrum experienced by a gas element can be hardened significantly during reionization relative to the late time spectrum [@abel99]. Therefore, for a given $T_r$, the analytic approximation tends to overestimate the late time temperature, since the hardened spectrum at reionization is assumed throughout. Processes such as recombination cooling are also neglected in the analytic approximation, further contributing to the overestimation of the late time temperature. A more detailed calculation taking into account different cooling mechanisms and variations in the spectrum of the ionizing background will in general yield larger temperature fluctuations. Note also that the temperature fluctuations at $z \sim
6$ might be significantly larger than those at $z \sim 3$. This might bias constraints derived from $z \sim 6$ quasar spectra, such as the evolution of the hydrogen photoionization rate [e.g. @fan02].
In summary, we find that while reionization can be quite extended, gas cooling erases temperature fluctuations over time. Therefore, temperature fluctuations from inhomogeneous reionization are likely negligible at $z=3$, especially if is reionized by $z \ga 8$. Even though possibilities such as a high temperature at reionization or evolution in the spectrum of the ionizing background might lead to larger temperature fluctuations, it seems likely that there must be ‘reionization activity’ very near $z \sim 3$ in order for the temperature to fluctuate significantly at this redshift.
Temperature Fluctuations from Incomplete Reionization {#tfluc_heii}
=====================================================
[lccccccc]{} Fiducial & -3.28 & -2.58 & -1.78 & -7.31 & 0.47 & $10^7$ & [$3 \times 10^{4}$]{}\
Small Fluctuations (SF) & -3.48 & -2.81 & -1.78 & -7.12 & 0.32 & $10^7$ & [$3 \times 10^{4}$]{}\
Large Fluctuations (LF) & -3.28 & -2.58 & -1.78 & -7.69 & 0.77 & $10^7$ & [$4 \times 10^{4}$]{}\
Small Scale (SS) & -3.28 & -2.58 & -1.78 & -7.69 & 0.77 & $10^6$ & [$4 \times 10^{4}$]{}\
Large Scale (LS) & -3.28 & -2.58 & -1.78 & -7.50 & 0.77 & $10^8$ & [$4 \times 10^{4}$]{}\
Large Fluc. $z=4$ (LF4) & -3.28 & -2.58 & -1.78 & -7.12 & 0.47 & $10^7$ & [$4 \times 10^{4}$]{}
One possible scenario that can give rise to potentially large temperature fluctuations is when is reionized gradually by bright quasars. If reionization is still underway at $z \sim 3$, there should be hot bubbles around bright quasars embedded in a much cooler background IGM, in which only / has reionized. The temperature in the hot bubbles may be as high as $T_0 \sim {\ensuremath{3 \times 10^{4}}}$ K [@abel99], while the temperature outside of these bubbles should be around $T_0 \sim 10^4$ K, as described in the previous section. In this case, the temperature fluctuations can be significantly larger than those arising from reionization. Additionally, the regions that recently reionized will be close to isothermal ($\gamma = 1$), while the cool exterior will have a steeper temperature-density relation, $\gamma \sim 1.4 - 1.6$, with the precise value depending on when / reionizes. In this section, we begin by describing a simple model for the growth of bubbles, and their subsequent thermal evolution. We will then discuss the resulting temperature distribution and power spectrum of temperature fluctuations.
Numerical Model {#model}
---------------
Our procedure is to populate a simulation box with quasars by drawing sources from the observed quasar luminosity function (QLF). We then follow the growth of bubbles around each quasar source for a fixed quasar lifetime, $t_q$, and record the subsequent thermal evolution inside the ionized regions. We can then measure the statistics of the resulting temperature field, and use the temperature field, along with the density and peculiar velocity fields from a cosmological simulation, to study the statistics of the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest.
First, we will consider the time evolution of the ionized volume around an isolated quasar source. The most interesting period for temperature fluctuations is before the overlap of ionized regions is complete. In this pre-overlap phase, the growth of regions is simple to describe, since we can make the approximation that a gas element will only see the radiation from the central quasar. The growth of the ionized region around the quasar is then given by [@shap87; @mada99]: $$\label{Eqn::dVdt}
\frac{dV}{dt} = \frac{\dot{N}}{{\ensuremath{\bar{n}_{\rm He}}}} - \frac{V}{{\ensuremath{t_{\rm rec}}}}.$$ In the above equation, $V$ is the [*comoving volume*]{} of the ionized bubble, [$\bar{n}_{\rm He}$]{} is the cosmic mean comoving number density of helium atoms, and $\dot{N}$ is the number of ionizing photons emitted by the quasar per unit time. This equation assumes that all of the helium in the pre- reionized gas is singly ionized. Further, it assumes that all photons emitted above the threshold contribute to reionization, since absorption of ionizing photons by and is negligible owing to their high ionization levels. The ionized region is assumed to be spherical, and grows according to [Eq. \[Eqn::dVdt\]]{} while the quasar is active. The bubble is assumed to remain fixed at its final size after the quasar turns off, and the subsequent redshift evolution of $T_0$ and $\gamma$ inside the bubble is tracked by the formulae of @hui97b.
In [Eq. \[Eqn::dVdt\]]{}, a single volume averaged recombination rate is assumed for inside the bubble. The recombination time is ${\ensuremath{t_{\rm rec}}}= \left( {\ensuremath{\bar{n}_{\rm e,p}}} \alpha^B_{\rm HeIII} C \right)^{-1}$, where $\alpha^B_{\rm HeIII}$ is the recombination coefficient to the excited states of (case B) [see @mada99], and [$\bar{n}_{\rm e,p}$]{} is the [*proper*]{} electron number density. The clumping factor of is defined as $C = {\ensuremath{\langle n^2_{\rm HeIII} \rangle}} / {\ensuremath{\bar{n}_{\rm HeIII}}}^2$. The value of $C$ is quite uncertain, and values between $C = 1 - 30$ are commonly used in the literature [see e.g., @mada99; @meik05]. In our calculation we chose $C = 1$. Regardless, the effect of recombinations on the growth of bubbles should be limited, since the recombination time [$t_{\rm rec}$]{} is much longer than the expected quasar lifetime $t_q$. Assuming an IGM temperature of [$3 \times 10^{4}$]{}, [$t_{\rm rec}$]{}is on the order of $10^9$ yrs at $z=3$, much longer than $t_q$, which we vary between $10^6 - 10^8$ yrs. A quasar of luminosity $L$ will then be surrounded by a region with an approximate volume of $V
\propto L t_q$ at the end of its lifetime.
The next ingredient in our modeling is our description of the abundance, spectrum, and lifetime of quasars. We parameterize the QLF with the standard double power law [@boyl98; @pei95; @croo04]: $$\label{Eqn::QLF}
\phi(L,z) = \frac{\phi_*/L_*}{(L/L_*)^{-\alpha}+(L/L_*)^{-\beta}}.$$ We use measurements of the QLF from 2SLAQ [@rich05] at $0.4 < z <
2.1$, and SDSS [@fan01a] at $z > 3.6$. Note that the bright-end slope $\alpha$ from SDSS appears to be significantly different ($\gtrsim 2 \sigma$) than that measured by 2SLAQ at low redshift. Also, the SDSS measurements at $z > 3.6$ do not probe the faint end of the QLF. In order to bridge the gap between the SDSS and 2SLAQ measurements, and to extrapolate to all relevant luminosities, we make several assumptions. First, at intermediate redshifts, we linearly interpolate between the low and high redshift bright-end slopes. Second, we use the faint-end slope, $\beta$, and the normalization of the QLF, $\phi_*$, from 2SLAQ and assume that they remain fixed with redshift. Finally, we fixed $L_*$ by requiring that our model QLF matches the SDSS best-fit abundance of bright quasars. Specifically, we match to the fitting formula of @fan01a, in which the number density of quasars with magnitudes $M_{1450} < -26$ is given by $\log \Phi(z,M_{1450} <
-26) = A - B(z-3)$, with $\Phi$ in units of Mpc$^{-3}$.
Finally, we adopt a low luminosity cutoff for the quasar luminosity function of $L_{\rm min} = 0.018 L_*$ (see @mada99 for a discussion), and the quasar spectrum from @mada99, which goes as $\nu^{-1.8}$ above the ionization threshold. All quasar sources are assumed to have the same spectrum and lifetime.
With these considerations in mind, we investigate several models. Our strategy here is to span a conservative range in the parameters that characterize the quasar sources, and hence a range in the amplitude and characteristic scale of the resulting temperature fluctuations. This is prudent given not only the observational uncertainties in these parameters, but also the uncertainties and approximations inherent in our modeling. The parameters of these models are summarized in Table \[ParTab\]. In our fiducial model, we adopt the best fit values from 2SLAQ and SDSS for the parameters in the QLF, and use $t_q = 10^7$ yrs and $T_r = {\ensuremath{3 \times 10^{4}}}{\mbox{ K}}$ for the quasar lifetime and temperature at reionization, respectively. We then vary the parameters around these values, investigating models with small temperature fluctuations (SF), and large temperature fluctuations (LF), as detailed in Table \[ParTab\]. In the LF model, in addition to varying the parameters of the QLF, we adopt a large temperature at reionization, $T_r = {\ensuremath{4 \times 10^{4}}}{\mbox{ K}}$. In each case, we vary the parameters of the observed QLF within their allowed 2-$\sigma$ range. Finally, we vary the quasar lifetime in order to cover a range in the characteristic scale of the temperature fluctuations. Specifically, the large scale (LS) temperature fluctuations model adopts $t_q = 10^8$ yrs, while the small scale (SS) temperature fluctuations model adopts $t_q = 10^6$ yrs.
Temperature Distributions {#tdist}
-------------------------
![[*Panel (a):*]{} reionization redshift distribution for the fiducial, SF, and LF models. [*Panel (b):*]{} Temperature distribution at $z=3$ for the same reionization models in (a). For illustrative clarity, the SF and LF models are shifted in the $z_r$-direction by +0.1 and -0.1 respectively in (a), and in the $T_0$-direction by +200 K and -200 K in (b).[]{data-label="Fig::HeII"}](f2.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
We construct realizations of the $T_0$ and $\gamma$ fields in each of the models discussed in the previous section. We use a $80 {\ensuremath{\,h^{-1}\,{\rm Mpc}}}$ comoving box, and $512^3$ mesh points. This boxsize is convenient for overlaying on the cosmological simulation which we will describe in [§ \[flux\_power\]]{}. Throughout, we average the statistics in the fiducial, LF, and LS models over five independent realizations, in order to reduce scatter owing to the small number of bubbles in our $80 {\ensuremath{\,h^{-1}\,{\rm Mpc}}}$ simulation box. In the other models, the bubble distribution is sampled sufficiently well with a single realization.
With the numerical models in hand, we proceed to measure the probability distribution of the temperature field. We first examine in [Fig. \[Fig::HeII\]]{}a the probability distribution of reionization redshifts, in analogy with [Fig. \[Fig::HI\]]{}a. This figure is constructed by recording the redshift at which each pixel in the simulation is first engulfed by an expanding bubble. We only plot our fiducial, SF, and LF models, since the other models have temperature distributions that are similar to that of the LF model. One can see that reionization is quite extended, and that these simple models are each consistent with incomplete reionization near $z \sim 3$. Our models are essentially Monte-Carlo versions of the @mada99 calculation and are consistent with these earlier calculations.
The resulting temperature distributions at $z=3$ are shown in [Fig. \[Fig::HeII\]]{}b. In our models, we assume that the background IGM, in which only / is reionized, has a uniform temperature at $T_0 =
10^4{\mbox{ K}}$, as justified in [§ \[tfluc\_hi\]]{}. We additionally assume a uniform $\gamma = 1.4$ for the background IGM. In the figure, one can clearly see the bimodal temperature distribution that results from incomplete reionization. The $\gamma$ distribution exhibits a similar bimodal distribution, with $\gamma \sim 1$ inside regions, and $\gamma = 1.4$ in the background IGM. The temperature distributions are quite broad, with r.m.s. fluctuation amplitudes of $\sigma_{T_0} / {\ensuremath{\langle T_0 \rangle}}$ = 0.24, 0.33, and 0.58 ($\sigma_{T_0}$ = [$4.8 \times 10^{3}$]{}, [$6.4 \times 10^{3}$]{}, and [$1.2 \times 10^{4}$]{}) in the SF, fiducial, and LF models, respectively. Note that the higher temperatures of the hot regions in the LF model are not a consequence of that model’s reionization history, but rather because we chose a larger $T_r$ to maximize fluctuations. Compared to the results from [§ \[tfluc\_hi\]]{}, we see that temperature fluctuations from incomplete reionization can be as much as a factor of 10 larger than that from extended reionization.
The temperature distributions shown in [Fig. \[Fig::HeII\]]{}b are each distributions at $z = 3$ in different models, but they also roughly represent the fluctuations during different [*stages*]{} of reionization. The filling factor of regions, $Q$, is indicated by the area under the hot component of the temperature distribution. In the LF model, $Q$ is about 0.5 at $z = 3$. Here, the amplitude of temperature fluctuations is maximal, as the hot and cold regions occupy comparable fractions of space. On the other hand, in the SF and fiducial models, reionization is considerably more complete. The temperature distribution is dominated by hot regions by $z=3$, and the fluctuations are smaller. At a higher redshift, reionization is less complete in the fiducial and SF models, and the temperature distributions in these models will be similar to that in the LF model at $z = 3$.
Power Spectrum of Temperature Fluctuations {#Sec::TempPS}
------------------------------------------
{width=".9\textwidth"}
The temperature distributions presented above are informative, but they tell us nothing about the [*characteristic scale*]{} of the temperature fluctuations. To investigate this, we measure the 3-dimensional power spectrum of the temperature field, $T_0$, from our simulations. In [Fig. \[Fig::TPS\]]{} we show the dimensionless power spectrum, $\Delta_T^2 (k) \propto k^3 P_T(k)$, for each of the five models we consider. Each power spectrum shows a well defined characteristic scale, with the power spectrum growing as $k^3$ on large scales, and falling as $k^{-1}$ on small scales. The large and small scales trends in $\Delta_T^2(k)$ are a natural consequence of our model in which the source positions are uncorrelated (see below for comments on this approximation). The assumptions that the bubbles have a well defined boundary, and that $T_0$ within each bubble is uniform, also contribute to the trends seen in $\Delta_T^2(k)$. The characteristic bubble size is set by (see Eqs. \[Eqn::dVdt\] and \[Eqn::QLF\]) the break in the luminosity function, $L_*$, the quasar spectrum, and the quasar lifetime, $t_q$. The characteristic comoving scale in the fiducial, SF, and LF models is $R_* \sim 5
{\ensuremath{\,h^{-1}\,{\rm Mpc}}}$, while it is $R_* \sim 11 {\ensuremath{\,h^{-1}\,{\rm Mpc}}}$ in the LS model, and $R_* \sim
2 {\ensuremath{\,h^{-1}\,{\rm Mpc}}}$ in the SS model.
Two simplifying assumptions in our model may cause the characteristic scale to be underestimated. First, our model does not take into account quasar clustering, and so we tend to underestimate the chance that ionized bubbles around neighboring quasars will overlap to form large ionized regions. Assuming a quasar bias $b_q = 4$ (extrapolated from @croo05), we find that clustering enhances the average number of sources inside an ionized region by a factor of $\sim 3$ over that of a uniform distribution. However, even when the effect of clustering is included, there are on average $< 1$ additional active sources inside an ionized region of size $R \sim 10 {\ensuremath{\,h^{-1}\,{\rm Mpc}}}$. Therefore, the clustering of active sources can safely be ignored. Quasar clustering will also lead to the clustering and overlap of fossil ionized regions. In this case, neglecting clustering may cause the typical volume of hot regions to be underestimated by as much as a factor of 3. It is therefore prudent to investigate models spanning a wide range of characteristic scales, as we have done. The second simplification in our model is in our treatment of multiple ionizing sources. When the ionization fronts of two or more bubbles overlap, the resulting large ionized region will expand so as to conserve ionizing photons coming from the multiple sources inside the combined region. We neglect this subtlety in our modeling, noting that the probability for overlap is not significant around $Q = 0.5$, when temperature fluctuations are largest.
We aim to explore the effects of temperature fluctuations on the statistics of the absorption in the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest. Since in the standard picture of the forest most structure derives from gravitational instability, it is instructive to compare temperature fluctuations with density fluctuations. Which is a more important source of structure in the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest, temperature or density fluctuations? We address this question in [Fig. \[Fig::TPS\]]{}, where we include curves indicating the linear matter power spectrum, and the @peac96 fit for the non-linear power spectrum. This may not be exactly the relevant comparison: for instance, the optical depth to [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}absorption scales with matter density as $(1+\delta)^2$, while it only varies with temperature as $(1+\delta_{T_0})^{-0.7}$. Density fluctuations of a given amplitude are therefore amplified into larger optical depth fluctuations than temperature fluctuations of the same amplitude. Nonetheless, the comparison is suggestive. [Fig. \[Fig::TPS\]]{} illustrates that on small scales, $k \ga 1 {\ensuremath{\,h\,{\rm Mpc^{-1}}}}$, the density power is at least $1-2$ orders of magnitude larger than the temperature power in all models considered. On these scales, fluctuations in the density field will be the more important source of structure in the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest. On the other hand, on large scales, the temperature power may be comparable, or even dominant, in comparison to the density power. For instance, in the LS model, the temperature power is actually larger than the density power for $k \la 0.3 {\ensuremath{\,h\,{\rm Mpc^{-1}}}}$.
Our results seem to suggest that temperature fluctuations may be an important source of structure in the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest on large scales. There are, however, a few caveats to this intuition. First, as mentioned above, the optical depth scales more strongly with density than temperature. Second, current flux power spectrum measurements do not probe very large scales, as illustrated by the red dotted lines in [Fig. \[Fig::TPS\]]{}, which show the range of scales probed by SDSS observations. This suggests that if the characteristic scale of the temperature fluctuations is large, much of the effect will be on scales larger than that probed by current measurements. Finally, it is important to keep in mind, that the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest provides a [*1-d skewer*]{} through the IGM. As a result, the power spectrum of fluctuations along a line of sight, on large scales, includes aliased power from small wavelength modes transverse to the line of sight. This may tend to wash out some of the signal from temperature fluctuations on large scales.
Impact of Temperature Fluctuations on the Flux Power Spectrum {#flux_power}
=============================================================
We now arrive at the heart of our study: how do the temperature fluctuations, described in the previous section, impact the flux power spectrum? To answer this question, we turn to cosmological simulations. We combine the realizations of the $T_0$ and $\gamma$ fields discussed in the previous section with the density and peculiar velocity fields from a cosmological simulation. We then extract absorption spectra from the simulation, and measure the flux power with and without temperature fluctuations.
The cosmological simulation we use is a Hydro-Particle-Mesh (HPM) simulation (@gned98; @heit05; @lidz05; Habib et al. 2005, in prep.), with $2 \times 512^3$ particles and $512^3$ mesh-points in an $80 {\ensuremath{\,h^{-1}\,{\rm Mpc}}}$ box. For our purposes, we want a simulation box that is large enough to sample the bubble distribution, while resolving the pressure-smoothing and thermal broadening scales. Our simulation represents a compromise between these requirements. The resolution is inadequate for detailed predictions, as shown in the convergence studies presented in the Appendix of @lidz05. Furthermore, the accuracy of HPM has been criticized in the literature [e.g. @viel05b]. However, our present goal is only to investigate how the flux power spectrum differs with and without temperature fluctuations, rather than to make a detailed comparison with data. For this limited purpose, we believe our simulation is adequate. One further caveat is that the gas pressure force, as calculated in our HPM simulation, depends on the thermal history of the IGM. In principle, we should use the fluctuating temperature field in our models to calculate the gas pressure in our HPM simulation. However, we ignore this effect and use HPM simulations calculated with a uniform temperature, including the temperature fluctuations only when we construct the artificial [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest spectra. The flux power spectrum, particularly on SDSS scales, depends rather weakly on gas pressure-smoothing [@mcdo04b; @viel05c], and so this is probably a good approximation.
We extract artificial spectra at $z = 3$ from the HPM simulation box in the usual way (see [Eq. \[Eqn::tau\]]{}), incorporating peculiar velocities and thermal broadening. This is done for each of our five models, and we compare the flux power spectrum in the fluctuating temperature model with that in a similar model without temperature fluctuations. In the models without temperature fluctuations, $T_0$ and $\gamma$ are each set to their global averages in the corresponding models that include temperature fluctuations. In each case, we normalize the quantity $A_\tau$ in [Eq. \[Eqn::tau\]]{} to match the observed mean transmitted flux at $z = 3$, which we take to be ${\ensuremath{\langle F \rangle}} = 0.68$, close to the value measured by @mcdo00.
The results of this calculation are shown in [Fig. \[Fig::FPSt\]]{} and [Fig. \[Fig::FPSs\]]{}, where we parameterize the effect of temperature fluctuations by the fractional difference in the flux power spectrum between a fluctuating temperature model and a no fluctuations model. The first feature to notice is simply that the effect of temperature fluctuations on the flux power spectrum is quite small on all scales examined. Closer examination reveals that the flux power spectrum is boosted on large scales and on small scales compared to equivalent models without temperature fluctuations, while there is a very slight suppression on intermediate scales. We will discuss each effect in turn.
The first effect is due to increased structure in the forest on large scales, contributed by the hot, isothermal bubbles. The flux power is boosted on large scales because the flux transmission is sensitive to the temperature-dependent recombination coefficient, and the spatially fluctuating temperature-density relation. In [Fig. \[Fig::FPSt\]]{}, concentrating on large scales for the moment, we study the effect for models with varying levels of temperature fluctuations: the fiducial, SF, and LF models. Specifically, we compare the fractional difference between the flux power spectrum with and without temperature fluctuations and the 1-$\sigma$ error bars on the SDSS measurements of @mcdo04a. The fractional difference between the models is always smaller than the 1-$\sigma$ SDSS errors. The difference is only at the $5\%$ level on the largest scales probed in the LF model. The effect also appears to diminish rather quickly with decreasing temperature fluctuation strength, as illustrated by the other two models in the figure.
In [Fig. \[Fig::FPSs\]]{}, we show the same comparison for models in which we vary the [*characteristic scale*]{} of the temperature fluctuations: the SS, LF, and LS models. Each of these models has approximately the [*same fluctuation strength*]{}, and only differ in their characteristic scale. In this case, the effect can be as large as $\sim 10\%$ on the largest scales probed, comparable to the SDSS 1-$\sigma$ error bars at this redshift. In the models where the characteristic scale of the temperature fluctuations is smaller, the effect on the flux power spectrum is smaller. This appears to be consistent with the interpretation suggested in [§ \[Sec::TempPS\]]{}: density fluctuations generally swamp temperature fluctuations, unless the temperature fluctuations have a large characteristic scale.
The next effect is a boost in the small scale power, which is the result of thermal broadening. The figures illustrate that the models with temperature fluctuations typically have $\sim 20\%$ more power on scales of $k \sim 0.1$ s/km than corresponding models with a uniform $T_0$ and $\gamma$. In [Fig. \[Fig::FPSt\]]{} and \[Fig::FPSs\], we compare this boost in small scale power to the 1-$\sigma$ statistical error-bars on the measurement of @crof02, which is the most precise measurement to date on these scales. The enhanced small scale power in the models with temperature fluctuations can be understood as follows. On small scales, the power spectrum in a fluctuating temperature model will approximately be a filling-factor weighted average of the power spectrum of hot regions and that of cold regions. Roughly speaking, the power spectrum on small scales is exponentially suppressed with increasing temperature [@zald01b]. The weighted average we mention, and hence the power spectrum on small scales in fluctuating temperature models, is therefore dominated by the cold regions. The fluctuating temperature model will then have [*more small scale power*]{} than a uniform temperature model with the same [*mean temperature*]{} as the fluctuating model.
![[*Top:*]{} Fractional difference in the $z = 3$ flux power spectrum between simulations with and without temperature fluctuations. The fiducial, SF, and LF models are plotted with the 1-$\sigma$ fractional errors from @mcdo04a and @crof02 (dark and light gray shaded areas, respectively). [*Bottom:*]{} Flux power spectrum with and without temperature fluctuations in the fiducial model.[]{data-label="Fig::FPSt"}](f4.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
Finally, there is a slight suppression in the flux power on intermediate scales, typically around a few percent. This suppression occurs on scales in which the temperature field has little power, and on scales too large for thermal broadening to have an effect. The suppression is likely a consequence of the fact that the normalization $A_\tau$ required to match the observed mean transmitted flux is slightly smaller in models with a fluctuating temperature field. The smaller $A_\tau$ in the fluctuating temperature models implies that density fluctuations of a given amplitude are translated into lesser optical depth fluctuations on intermediate scales.
One might expect temperature fluctuations to have a larger effect at high redshift, when the amplitude of density fluctuations is smaller. We test this by considering a model that, at $z=4$, has very similar temperature fluctuations to those in our LF model at $z=3$. The parameters of this model, which we call LF4, are detailed in Table \[ParTab\]. We find that the effect, again parameterized by the fractional difference between the models with and without temperature fluctuations, is only a couple percent larger on large scales in the LF4 model. Even though the effect is larger at $z=4$, it is less significant in the sense that the statistical errors on the SDSS measurement are larger at $z=4$ than at $z=3$.
![[*Top:*]{} Similar to [Fig. \[Fig::FPSt\]]{} but for the LF, SS, and LS models. [*Bottom:*]{} Flux power spectrum with and without temperature fluctuations in the LF model.[]{data-label="Fig::FPSs"}](f5.eps){width="\columnwidth"}
Conclusion
==========
In this paper, we have estimated the level of temperature fluctuations expected in the IGM at $z \sim 3$ from extended reionization and incomplete reionization. We find that the temperature fluctuations from extended reionization should be quite small, $\sigma_{T_0}/{\ensuremath{\langle T_0 \rangle}} \lesssim 5\%$, while the fluctuations from incomplete reionization might be as large as $\sim 50\%$. These fluctuations should have only a small effect on the flux power spectrum: on large scales, $k \sim 0.001 \;{\rm s/km}$, temperature fluctuations lead to an increase in the $z = 3$ flux power spectrum by at most $\sim 10\%$. On small scales, $k \sim 0.1 \;{\rm s/km}$, fluctuations in the thermal broadening scale boost the power by $\sim
20\%$.
Further study is required to quantify the effects of temperature fluctuations on cosmological parameter constraints. In particular, note that in the LS model (see [Fig. \[Fig::FPSs\]]{}), the effect of temperature fluctuations are at, or larger than, the 1-$\sigma$ level over several independent data points. A detailed investigation will require a multi-parameter fit to the observed data [see @mcdo04b], which is outside the scope of the present paper. However, we can anticipate the results of a more detailed investigation by comparing with the effects of UV background fluctuations, as studied in @mcdo04c [@mcdo04b]. Fluctuations in the UV background and temperature fluctuations have a similar influence on the amplitude and shape of the flux power spectrum, at least on large scales (see Fig. 12 of @mcdo04b). @mcdo04b included the effect of UV background fluctuations in a multi-parameter fit, and found little effect ($\lesssim 1\%$) on the inferred values of the amplitude and slope of the linear power spectrum. The general reason for this insensitivity is that the effective errors on the flux power spectrum are larger than the raw statistical errors on the data, after @mcdo04b marginalize over other, more significant, effects. Similarly, we do not expect temperature fluctuations to have a substantial effect on the values of the amplitude and slope of the linear power spectrum.
For the purpose of cosmological parameter estimation, it would be instructive to know whether the effect of temperature fluctuations is degenerate with any parameters describing the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest. As we mentioned in the previous paragraph, the effect of temperature fluctuations may be degenerate with those of UV background fluctuations on large scales. However, they have different effects on small scales. Additionally, inspecting, e.g. Fig. 13 of @mcdo04b [see also @viel05c], shows that the boost in the flux power on large and small scales expected from temperature fluctuations is not closely mimicked by changing any single modeling parameter. In principle, this means that the effect of temperature fluctuations is likely distinguishable from other effects. The redshift evolution of the effect potentially provides an additional diagnostic. However, even though the number of quasar spectra will likely more than double by the time SDSS is finished, detecting temperature fluctuations in the flux power spectrum will remain a challenge owing to the smallness of the effect.
Numerous improvements could be made in our simple modeling. First, we place quasars at random positions in our simulation box, which ignores quasar clustering. This effect is already discussed in [§ \[Sec::TempPS\]]{}. Here, we note that since quasars are very sparse sources, ignoring source clustering is a much better approximation than in the case that the sources are galaxies, in which case this approximation is quite poor [@furl04]. Furthermore, in reality, quasars should reside in very massive halos, rather than at random positions. As a result, we ignore the fact that very close to the quasar the gas will be overdense, tending to cancel out the enhanced transmission owing to the hot bubble around the quasar. The bubbles are, however, $\sim 10{\ensuremath{\,h^{-1}\,{\rm Mpc}}}$ in size, over which the density contrast will be small.
In modeling temperature fluctuations (the ‘thermal proximity effect’), we also ignored the ‘radiation proximity effect’. In reality the intensity of ionizing radiation will be enhanced over that of the radiation background close to an [*active*]{} quasar [e.g. @scot02; @roll05]. Nearby dead quasars, ‘light echos’ of enhanced radiation will remain, propagating out into the IGM [@crof04]. These effects are ignored in our modeling, and the radiation background is treated as uniform. In any case, the effects of the radiation proximity effect should be small compared to that from temperature fluctuations. This is because the radiation proximity effect has a characteristic time scale of $t_q \sim 10^7$ yrs, short compared to the characteristic time scale of temperature fluctuations, $t_{\rm cool} \sim 10^9$ yrs. Here, we define the cooling time $t_{\rm cool}$ to be the time it takes for a gas element to cool to half its original temperature assuming only adiabatic cooling. The longer characteristic time scale, and the fact that temperature fluctuations and the radiation proximity effect have similar physical characteristic scales, imply that a much larger fraction of space is affected by temperature fluctuations than by the radiation proximity effect.
Additionally, we used a simplified ‘light bulb’ model for quasar activity, in which each quasar shines at constant luminosity for the duration of its lifetime, $t_q$, and emit no light thereafter. In reality, this is probably a poor approximation to the quasar light curve, since quasars likely spend extended periods at low luminosity, going into or coming out of their peak luminosity phase [@hopk05a; @spri05]. Finally, quasars may launch large outflows [e.g. @scan04; @dim05], which could also modify the absorption in their vicinity.
In spite of all of these possible complications, we strove to cover a wide range in the amplitude and scale of temperature fluctuations in our analysis. It is unlikely that the problems discussed above will lead to an effect that lies far outside the range probed by our study. It should therefore be a fairly secure conclusion that temperature fluctuations do not significantly impact the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest flux power spectrum on large scales. Our results provide additional support for the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest as a robust probe of cosmology.
Even though temperature fluctuations seem to have a small effect on the flux power spectrum, they may have a larger effect on other observables of the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest. The flux power spectrum, while being the best measured statistic in the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest, may be a poor statistic to use in searching for temperature fluctuations. There have been several searches for temperature fluctuations in the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest with wavelet analyses [@theu02b; @zald02]. These searches have failed to detect temperature fluctuations, but have been carried out using only very small data samples. It would be interesting to investigate the expected signal from these searches given our modeling. A related statistic that might be sensitive to temperature fluctuations is the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest ‘tri-spectrum’, as defined in @zald01a (see also @fang04). This statistic measures the scatter in the small scale power, as a function of scale, from region to region in the IGM. We might, therefore, expect a larger tri-spectrum in our models with temperature fluctuations than in models with no temperature fluctuations.
One final point is that if reionization is underway at $z = 3$, this might cause biases in estimates of the IGM temperature from the flux power spectrum, and the ionizing background derived from the [Ly$\alpha$ ]{}forest proximity effect. The enhancement we find in the flux power spectrum on small scales might imply a slight bias in measurements of the IGM temperature from the small scale flux power spectrum [e.g. @zald01b], and other similar measurements. A crude estimate of the bias is as follows. Approximately, thermal broadening suppresses the flux power exponentially so that $P_F(k) \propto
\exp(-k^2\sigma^2)$, where $\sigma^2 = k_{\rm b} T/m_{\rm H}$, and $k_{\rm b}$ is Boltzmann’s constant. We found that temperature fluctuations increase $P_F(k)$ at $k = 0.1$ s/km by $20\%$, which thereby implies a $\sim 10\%$ [*underestimate*]{} of the temperature in models that assume a uniform temperature. We caution, however, that the mean temperature is an incomplete description of the IGM thermal state in the presence of inhomogeneous reionization and/or large quantities of hot, shocked gas. Temperature fluctuations may also bias estimates of the ionizing background from the quasar proximity effect, which assumes that the IGM is at the cosmic mean temperature close to the quasar. We are investigating this, and other possible biases in the constraints from the proximity effect, using radiative transfer simulations.
AL thanks Katrin Heitmann and Salman Habib for their collaboration in producing the HPM simulation used in this analysis. We thank the anonymous referee for useful comments on our manuscript. We also thank Scott Burles, Steve Furlanetto, John Huchra, and Peng Oh for useful discussions on these, and related topics. This work was supported in part by NSF grants ACI 96-19019, AST 00-71019, AST 02-06299, AST 03-07690, and NASA ATP grants NAG5-12140, NAG5-13292, and NAG5-13381. Some of the simulations were performed at the Center for Parallel Astrophysical Computing at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We propose an extension of the original thought experiment proposed by Geroch, which sparked much of the actual debate and interest on black hole thermodynamics, and show that the generalized second law of thermodynamics is in compliance with it.'
author:
- 'George E. A. Matsas'
- 'André R. Rocha da Silva'
title: New thought experiment to test the generalized second law of thermodynamics
---
In 1970 Geroch [@G] raised the possibility of violating the ordinary second law of thermodynamics with help of classical black holes. The idea was to bring [*slowly*]{} from infinity a box with proper energy $E_{\rm b}$ over the event horizon and throw it eventually inside the hole. The cycle would be closed by lifting back the ideal rope, which is assumed to have arbitrarily small mass. Because static asymptotic observers would ascribe zero energy to the box at the event horizon, the hole would remain the same after engulfing the box. This would challenge the ordinary second law of thermodynamics, since eventually all entropy associated with the box would be vanished from the Universe with no entropy increase counterpart.
As an objection to Geroch’s process, Bekenstein argued that quantum mechanics would constraint the size and energy of the box accordingly. This would prevent the box from reaching the event horizon as a whole and, thus, the black hole would necessarily gain mass after engulfing the box. Then, Bekenstein [@B] conjectured that black holes would have a non-zero entropy $S_{\rm bh} = k c^3 A /(4 \hbar G)$ proportional to the event horizon area $A$ and formulated the [*Generalized Second Law*]{} (GSL), namely, that the total entropy of a closed system (including that one associated with black holes) would never decrease. Now, because the GSL would be violated when the box entropy satisfied $S> 2 \pi k E_{\rm b} R/ (\hbar c)$, where $R$ is the proper radius of the smallest sphere which circumscribes the box (see Ref. [@Bo] for a comprehensive discussion), Bekenstein conjectured in addition the existence of a new thermodynamical law, namely, that every system should have an entropy-to-energy ratio satisfying $S/E_{\rm b} \leq 2 \pi k R/(\hbar c)$.
Notwithstanding, in 1982 Unruh and Wald showed [@UW] that by taking into account the buoyancy force induced by the Hawking radiation [@Ha], as a comprehensive semiclassical gravity analysis would demand (notice that $S_{\rm bh}$ depends on $G,c$ and $\hbar$), the GSL would [*not*]{} be violated irrespective of the imposition of the constraint $S/E_{\rm b} \leq 2 \pi k R/ (\hbar c)$. The thermal ambiance outside the hole would prevent the box from descending beyond the point after which the energy delivered to the black hole would be too small to guarantee $\delta S_{\rm bh} \geq S$ as demanded by the GSL.
Unruh and Wald’s resolution depends crucially on the precise point where the box finds its hydrostatic equilibrium: were it [*lower*]{}, the GSL would be violated. This circumstance led us to analyze an extension of the Geroch process in which the box is given some angular momentum before it enters the hole. In this case, one can decompose the force on the box into four distinct components. The first two ones correspond to the gravitational and buoyancy forces, which are already present when the box is static outside the hole. The remaining ones correspond to the centrifugal force and to an extra one, denominated here [*kinetic gravitational force*]{} (see Ref. [@M]), which effectively increases the gravitational force on the box. Close enough to the black hole, i.e., $r < 3 GM/c^2$, the kinetic gravitational force surpasses the centrifugal one [@AL], and the equilibrium point is lower than when the box is at rest. Thus, to rescue the GSL we must rely on the box’s kinetic energy, which is the single new ingredient added to the original Geroch process. Indeed, we show here that, the kinetic energy given to the box increases enough its total energy to compensate the reduction of the potential energy caused by the lowering of the equilibrium point. In this way, the energy given to the hole is enough to guarantee $\delta S_{\rm bh} \geq S$. The precise increase of the total entropy in this process is displayed. We use natural units $c=\hbar=G=k=1$ throughout the rest of the paper.
Let us describe our static black hole by the line element $$ds^2 = -\chi^2 dt^2 + \chi^{-2} dr^2
+ r^2 (d\theta^2 + \sin^2 \theta d\phi^2) \;,
\label{ss}$$ where $ \chi =\sqrt{1-2M/r} $ is the gravitational redshift factor. The hole which is assumed to be in thermal equilibrium with Hawking radiation can be thought as being enclosed in a large container made of adiathermal walls [@SH].
Our thermodynamical analysis will be carried out by Killing observers at rest with the thermal radiation which is treated as a perfect fluid (see Refs. [@W]-[@FMW] and references therein for a recent discussion). This is characterized by the stress-energy tensor $$T^{\mu \nu} =
(e+ p)u^\mu u^\nu +
p g^{\mu \nu} \;,
\label{seT}$$ where $e=e(r)$ and $p=p(r)$ are the proper energy density and pressure, respectively, and $u^{\mu}= \chi^{\mu}/\chi$ is the corresponding 4-velocity with $\chi^\mu = (\partial_t)^\mu$. The associated proper acceleration $
a_{\rm s}= \sqrt { a_{\rm s}^\alpha a^{\rm s}_\alpha }
$ (with $ a^\alpha_{\rm s} = u^\nu \nabla_\nu u^\alpha$) is $$a_{\rm s}= M/\chi r^2 \;.
\label{as}$$ From the condition $
\nabla_\mu T^{\mu \nu} = 0
$, we obtain $
\nabla^\mu p + (e+p)a^{\mu}_{\rm s}=0
$, which leads to $$e {d\chi}/{ dl} + { d(\chi p)}/{dl} =0 \;\;,
\label{hee}$$ where $
l(r) \equiv \int^{r}_{2M}dr'/\sqrt{1-2M/r'}
$.
For the sake of simplicity, we assume that our box is rectangular, has proper volume $V$ and is [*thin*]{}, i.e. $\delta l \; d\chi / dl \ll \chi$ everywhere in the box, where $\delta l$ is the box’s proper height. This condition will be not only physically desirable as a way to minimize [*turbulence*]{} and [*shear*]{} effects but also technically convenient as will be seen further.
The process which we consider here is as follows. Firstly the box is lowered slowly from infinity by some agent towards the black hole up to the point where $r \equiv r_{\rm{uw}}$, in which place it finds its hydrostatic equilibrium. As shown by Unruh and Wald [@UW], $r_{\rm{uw}}$ is the solution of the equation $E_{\rm b} = V e$. In this step some work $W_{\rm uw}>0$ is gained by the asymptotic static agent. Now, he/she spends some energy to put the box in uniform circular motion with angular velocity $\omega_0 =d\phi/dt={\rm const}$ (at $\theta = \pi/2$). We argue further that this can be done without significantly disturbing the background radiation. The energy spent by the agent in this part of the process is denoted by $K_1$, where $K_1<0$ in our convention. Clearly, the hydrostatic equilibrium point changes as the consequence of the motion (see Fig. \[figure1\]). In the process of bringing the box to its new equilibrium point the asymptotic agent gains some extra work $W>0$, where we assume here that the angular momentum $J$ is kept constant. Next, we suppose that the box is released and allowed to fall into the black hole, which is supposed to remain in equilibrium with its thermal atmosphere [@GW]. Any entropy increase in the dropping process will be disregarded here because we are interested in analyzing the most challenging situation for the GSL in the context of rotating boxes, i.e. the one where the final total entropy is the least. This is also the reason why we release the box at the equilibrium point, since this is where the minimum amount of energy is delivered to the black hole. At the end, the angular momentum and energy delivered to the hole are $\delta L = J$ and $$\delta M = E_{\rm b}-W_{\rm{net}}\;,
\label{ed}$$ respectively, where $
W_{\rm{net}}=W_{\rm{uw}}+K_1 + W
$ is the net work gained by the asymptotic agent.
Because we assume $E_{\rm b}\ll M$, we only consider first-order terms in the expression for the black hole entropy increase $$\delta S_{\rm{bh}}= \frac{\delta M}{T_{\rm{bh}}}
= \frac{E_{\rm b} - W_{\rm uw}}{T_{\rm bh}}
+ \frac{|K_1| - W}{T_{\rm bh}} \;,
\label{Sbh}$$ where $T_{\rm bh} = 1/(8\pi M)$ (see Refs. [@RG] and [@RMW]). This was obtained by differentiating $S_{\rm bh} = S_{\rm bh} (E,L) = 2\pi E^2 (1+\sqrt{1-L^2/E^4\;})$ around $E=M$ and $L=0$ and using Eq. (\[ed\]). Now assuming the most challenging case, where the box is filled with thermal radiation, it can be shown that $(E_{\rm b} - W_{\rm uw})/T_{\rm bh} = S_{\rm
b}$ [@UW] (see also Refs. [@W] and [@BUBW]). In our process with the moving box, the change in the generalized total entropy is, thus, $$\delta S_{\rm{g}}=\delta S_{\rm{bh}}-S_{\rm b}
=(|K_1| -W)/{T_{\rm{bh}}}\;.
\label{Sg}$$ As a result, the GSL will be satisfied depending whether or not $|K_1| -W\geq 0$. In order to decide on it, we have to analyze more carefully the subprocess, where the box gains the kinetic energy $K_1$ and moves towards its new equilibrium point ($r=r_{\rm ne}$) along which the asymptotic agent gains the work $W$. (Naturally, if the box is not put in motion, $|K_1| = W = 0$ and we recover Unruh and Wald’s result.)
At this point, we would like to make two remarks about the process of setting the box in motion. First, we do not want that the moving box disturbs much the thermal atmosphere because the associated entropy increase would be difficult to compute. This should be partly achieved by using [*thin*]{} boxes or by considering a set of boxes rather than a single one. They would be lowered from infinity to $r_{\rm uw}$ and fitted one with the other forming a closed ring around the black hole. This would eliminate front and rear particle shocks with the box walls, which would disrupt the energy distribution (and entropy) of the thermal bath. Particle shocks with the up and down walls (which would still exist) are not source of concernings, since they do not lead to energy or momentum transfer. In this paper, the assumption of a single thin box will suffice. After all, the existence of other sources of entropy increase would only help to render the GSL valid. Now, the use of thin boxes is also useful to solve our second concerning. In order to keep the box uncorrupted during the initial acceleration interval, we impose that the 4-velocity $v^\mu$ of the box’s points satisfy the [*no expansion condition*]{}: $
\Theta\equiv \nabla_\mu v^\mu = 0
$. This can be realized by choosing $
v^\mu(x^\alpha) =\left[\chi^\mu + \omega(x^\alpha) \phi^\mu \right]/
|\chi^\mu + \omega(x^\alpha) \phi^\mu)|
$ with $
\phi^\mu = (\partial_{\phi})^{\mu}
$ and $
\omega(x^\alpha)=\chi^{2}t/r^{2}\phi \leq \omega_{0}
$ for $
0 \leq t/\phi \leq \omega_0 r^2 / \chi^2
$, where $
0 < \omega_{0} < \chi/r
$. This is necessary but not sufficient to guarantee the validity of the rigid body condition $
\sigma_{\mu \nu} + (\Theta/3) h_{\mu \nu} = 0
$, i.e., that the proper distance among the box’s points are kept the same, where $
h_{\mu \nu} \equiv g_{\mu \nu} + v_{ \mu } v_{ \nu }
$ and $
\sigma_{\mu \nu} \equiv
h^{\;\alpha}_{\mu}h^{\;\beta}_{\nu}\nabla_{(\alpha}v_{\beta)}-
(\Theta/3) h_{\mu \nu}
$ is the shear tensor. Happily, however, the use of our thin box assumption leads to an approximate verification of the rigid body condition (see Ref. [@M] for a comprehensive discussion). (The thinner the box, the more the rigid body equation is satisfied.) Finally, we also stress that as the box reaches its uniform circular motion the rigid body condition is fully verified and no distortion appears at all.
In order to compute Eq. (\[Sg\]), we begin recalling that in the uniform motion regime, $
t/\phi >\omega_{0}r^2/\chi^2
$, the box’s points have 4-velocity $
v^\mu = \eta^{\mu}/\eta
$, where $
\eta^\mu = \chi^{\mu}+\omega_{0}\phi^{\mu}
$ with $
\eta = \sqrt{\chi^{2}-r^{2}\omega^{2}_{0}}
$ and proper acceleration $
a_{\rm m}= \sqrt{ a_{\rm m}^\alpha a^{\rm m}_\alpha }
$ (with $a_{\rm m}^\alpha = v^\nu \nabla_\nu v^\alpha$), which can be rewritten as $$a_{\rm m} = \eta^{-1}d\eta/dl\;.
\label{am}$$ The box’s angular momentum and kinetic energy at $ r= r_{\rm uw}$ as defined asymptotically are $$\begin{aligned}
J&\equiv& E_{\rm b} v^{\mu}\phi_{\mu}|_{r=r_{\rm uw}}
\nonumber \\
&=& E_{\rm b} \omega_0 r^2/\eta |_{r=r_{\rm uw}}
\label{angular} \end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
K_{1} &\equiv & E_{\rm b}[\chi^{\mu}\left(u_{\mu}- v_{\mu} \right)]_{r=r_{\rm uw}}
\nonumber \\
& = & - E_{\rm b}|\chi \left(1-\chi/\eta\right)|_{r=r_{\rm uw}} \;.
\label{K1}\end{aligned}$$ The local force on the box is $$\begin{aligned}
F_{\rm{loc}}
& \equiv & E_{\rm b} a_{\rm m}
\label{aJoriginal} \\
&=&
\frac{ME_{\rm b}}{\chi r^{2}}-
\frac{\chi J^{2}}{E_{\rm b}r^{3}}+
\frac{M J^{2}}{\chi E_{\rm b}r^{4}}\;.
\label{aJ} \end{aligned}$$ The first two terms in the right-hand side should be identified with the gravitational force on the box when it lies at rest and with the centrifugal force, respectively. The last term (which involves $M$ as well as $J$) is what we have called kinetic gravitational force. By using Eq. (\[angular\]), one can verify that for $r < 3M$ the kinetic gravitational force is larger than (the absolute value of) the centrifugal force. As a result, for $r<3M$ the [*new*]{} equilibrium point for the [*moving*]{} box will be closer to the black hole, i.e., $r_{\rm ne} < r_{\rm uw}$ (see Fig. \[figure1\]).
In order to obtain $r_{\rm ne} $, we must calculate the buoyancy force on the moving box. The proper hydrostatic pressures on the top ($r=r_\top$) and at the bottom ($r=r_\bot$) of the box are $
P_{\top/\bot} \equiv T_{\mu \nu} n^{\mu}_{\top/\bot} n^{\nu}_{\top/\bot}
= p(r_{ \top/\bot})
$, where $
n^{\mu}_{ \top/\bot }=\chi(r_{\top/\bot })(\partial_{r})^{\mu}
$ are unit vectors orthogonal to the box’s 4-velocity. Consequently, the hydrostatic scalar forces on the top and at the bottom of the box are $
F_{\top}= - Ap_{\top}
$ and $
F_{\bot}= Ap_{\bot}
$, respectively, where $A$ is the corresponding proper area. In order to obtain the buoyancy force, we transmit both $F_{\top}$ and $F_{\bot}$ to the point ${\cal{O}}$, where the local force (\[aJ\]) is calculated. Let us assume that the forces are transmitted through [*ideal*]{} cables and rods characterized by the stress-energy tensor $
{\cal{T}}^{\mu \nu} = P_{\rm c/r} h^{\mu \nu}
$ satisfying $
\nabla_{\mu}{\cal{T}}^{\mu \nu}=0
$, where $P_{\rm c/r}$ stands for pressure. Thus, from $F_{\top/\bot}$ we obtain the transmitted forces $F^{\cal{O}}_{\top/\bot}$ at ${\cal{O}}$ as $
F_{\top/\bot}^{\cal O} =
[\eta({r}_{\top/\bot})/\eta({r}_{\cal O})]F_{\top/\bot}
$. The buoyancy force is, then, written as $$F^{\cal O}_{\rm buo}
= F_{\top}^{\cal O} + F_{\bot}^{\cal O}
= \left. \frac{V}{\eta}
\frac{d(\eta p)}{dl}
\right|_{{r} = {r}_{\cal O}} \;,
\label{Fbuo}$$ where we have used our thin box assumption, namely, that $
\delta l \, d(\eta p)/dl \ll \eta p
$ everywhere in the box so that we can neglect higher derivative terms in Eq. (\[Fbuo\]).
Now, by adding up Eqs. (\[aJoriginal\]) and (\[Fbuo\]) we obtain the total local force on the box as $$F^{\cal O}_{\rm tot} =
V\left[ \frac{\rho_{\rm{b}}}{\eta} \frac{d\eta}{dl}
+ \frac{1}{\eta} \frac{d(\eta p )}{dl}\right]_{{r} = {r}_{\cal O}}\;,
\label{Flt}$$ where $\rho_{\rm{b}}=E_{\rm b}/V$. Now, we must note that the corresponding total local 4-force points along $(\partial_r)^\mu$, and so it also lies in the spacelike section of the static observers. As a result, the static observers ascribe the same force $F^{\cal O}_{\rm tot}$ acting on the box. Hence, the force which the asymptotic agent must apply to sustain the box is $
F^{\infty}_{\rm{tot}}=\chi(r_{\cal O}) F^{{\cal{O}}}_{\rm{tot}}
$, which can be recast in the form \[see Eq. (\[hee\])\] $$F^{\infty}_{\rm{tot}}=
V
\left[
\frac{M ( \rho_{\rm b} -e )}{r^2} +
\frac{J^2 ( \rho_{\rm b} + p )}{E_{\rm b}^2 r^3 }
\left(\frac{3M}{r}-1 \right)
\right]_{{r} = {r}_{\cal O}} \;.
\label{Fit}$$ Clearly in the limit where $
J \rightarrow 0
$, this expression is equal to Unruh and Wald’s result $$F^{\infty}_{\rm{uw}}= V (\rho_{\rm b }- e )\chi a_{\rm{s}}
\label{Fuw}$$ (see Refs. [@UW] and [@PW]). Note that if $ r_{\rm{uw}} =r_{\cal O} <3M$, then $F^{\infty}_{\rm{tot}}>0$ (where we recall that $F^{\infty}_{\rm{uw}}=0$) and the box is pulled downwards. The new equilibrium point at $r= r_{\rm ne}$ is obtained as the solution of $F^{\infty}_{\rm tot}(r_{\rm ne})=0$, i.e. $$[M(\rho_{\rm b}-e) \eta^2 (r_{\rm uw})\, r^2 +
\omega^{2}_{0} (\rho_{\rm b} + p)r^{4}_{\rm uw}(3M-r)]_{r=r_{\rm ne}}=0
\;,
\label{rne}$$ where the radial dependence of $p=p(e)=p[e(r)]$ is required.
The work $W$ gained by the asymptotic agent as the box is lowered from $r=r_{\rm uw}$ to $r=r_{\rm ne}$ is $$W = -\int^{r_{\rm{ne}}}_{r_{\rm{uw}}} F^{\infty}_{\rm{tot}}dr/\chi \;,
\label{Work}$$ where $ F^{\infty}_{\rm{tot}}$ is given in Eq. (\[Fit\]).
Before using Eqs. (\[K1\]) and (\[Work\]) in Eq. (\[Sg\]) to calculate explicitly $\delta S_{\rm g}$, let us use first a shortcut to show that $\delta S_{\rm g}>0$. For this purpose, let us add two extra steps in our original cycle as follows. Rather than throwing the box to the black hole at $r=r_{\rm ne}$, we (i) stop the box and (ii) bring it back to $r=r_{\rm uw}$ (see Fig. \[figure2\]). In the process of stopping it, the asymptotic agent gains an energy $$K_{\rm{ne}}= E_{\rm b} |\chi (1-\chi/\eta) |_{r=r_{\rm{ne}}}
\label{Kms}$$ and in the process of pulling it back from $r_{\rm ne}$ to $r_{\rm uw}$, he/she also gains an extra energy $$W_{\rm ne}=-\int^{r_{\rm{uw}}}_{r_{\rm_{ne}}}F^{\infty}_{\rm{uw}}dr/\chi\;,
\label{Wpullb}$$ where $F^{\infty}_{\rm uw}$ is given in Eq. (\[Fuw\]). By assuming that the closed cycle which brings the box from $r_{\rm uw}$ to $r_{\rm ne}$ and back to $r_{\rm uw}$ is conservative, we must have $K_1 + W + K_{\rm{ne}}+W_{\rm ne} =0 $, i.e. $$|K_1| -W =K_{\rm{ne}}+W_{\rm ne}\;.
\label{identity}$$ Then from Eq. (\[Sg\]), we obtain $$\delta S_{\rm{g}} = (K_{\rm{ne}}+W_{\rm ne})/T_{\rm{bh}}>0 \;.
\label{final}$$ This guarantees that the box’s energy increase of kinetic origin $|K_1|$ is enough to compensate the energy decrease of gravitational origin $W$ \[see Eq. (\[Sg\])\], saving the GSL.
Now, we proceed to calculate explicitly $\delta S_{\rm{g}}$. For this purpose, we assume (for simplicity ) that the Hawking radiation and the box only contain a single free massless bosonic field, say, photons, in which case $p=e(r)/3$ with $e= (\pi^{2}/15) T^{4}$ and $T=T_{\rm bh}/\chi$ is the Tolman’s relation [@To]. In this case $$r_{\rm uw}= \frac{2M}{1- \sqrt{(\pi^{2}T_{\rm bh}^{4}) /(15 \rho_b)}} \;,
\label{ruw}$$ where we impose $\rho_{\rm b} > 9 \pi^2 T_{\rm bh}^4/15 $ to guarantee that $2M < r_{\rm uw} < 3M$ \[and we recall that $r_{\rm ne}$ is given in Eq. (\[rne\])\]. Finally, we are in position to evaluate numerically $\delta S_{\rm{g}}$. As a check, we use independently Eqs. (\[Sg\]) and (\[final\]). The results are plotted in Fig. \[figure3\].
The existence of Hawking radiation has allowed us to ascribe temperature to black holes. This in addition with the laws of black hole mechanics led us to associate entropy to these objects. However, in order to treat black holes as legitimate thermodynamical systems it is necessary to conjecture the GSL. Since it is not possible to develop direct tests for the GSL, the best we can do is to verify its validity through thought experiments devised in contexts, where our well known theories can be safely used. In these vein, we have offered here a new thought experiment and shown that the GSL complies with it.
G.M. acknowledges partial support from Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo and A.S. acknowledges full support from Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo.
[99]{}
R. Geroch, Colloquium at Princeton University, December, 1971 (unpublished).
J. D. Bekenstein, Phys. Rev. D [**7**]{}, 2333 (1973).
R. Bousso Rev. Mod. Phys. [**74**]{}, 825 (2002).
W. G. Unruh and R. M. Wald, Phys. Rev. D [**25**]{}, 942 (1982).
S. W. Hawking, Nature [**248**]{}, 30 (1974); S. W. Hawking, Commun. Math. Phys. [**43**]{}, 199 (1975).
G. E. A. Matsas, Phys. Rev. D [**68**]{}, 027701 (2003).
M. A. Abramowicz and J. P. Lasota, Acta Phys. Pol. B [**5**]{}, 327 (1974).
S. W. Hawking, Phys. Rev. D [**13**]{}, 191 (1976); P. C. W. Davies, Rep. Prog. Phys. [**41**]{}, 1313 (1978)
R. M. Wald, Living Rev. Relativ. [**4**]{}, 2001-6 (2001)
S. Gao and R. M. Wald, Phys. Rev. D [**64**]{}, 084020 (2001).
É. É. Flanagan, D. Marolf and R. M. Wald, Phys. Rev. D [**62**]{}, 084035 (2000)
R. M. Wald, [*General Relativity*]{} (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1984).
R. M. Wald, [*Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime and Black Hole Thermodynamics*]{} (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1994)
W. G. Unruh and R. M. Wald, Phys. Rev. D [**27**]{}, 2271 (1983).
R. C. Tolman, [*Relativity, Thermodynamics and Cosmology*]{} (Oxford University, Oxford, England, 1934)
M. A. Pelath and R. M. Wald, Phys. Rev. D [**60**]{}, 104009 (1999).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The control of phonon scattering by interfaces is critical to the manipulation of heat conduction in composite materials and semiconducting nanostructures. However, one of the factors limiting our understanding of elastic phonon scattering is the lack of a computationally efficient approach for describing the phenomenon in a manner that accounts for the atomistic configuration of the interface and the exact bulk phonon dispersion. Building on the atomistic Green’s function (AGF) technique for ballistic phonon transport, we formulate an atomistic $S$-matrix method that treats bulk phonon modes as the scattering channels and can determine the numerically exact scattering amplitudes for individual two-phonon processes, enabling a highly detailed analysis of the phonon transmission and reflection spectrum as well as the directional dependence of the phonon scattering specularity. Explicit formulas for the individual phonon reflection, absorption and transmission coefficients are given in our formulation. This AGF-based $S$-matrix approach is illustrated through the investigation of: (1) phonon scattering at the junction between two isotopically different but structurally identical carbon nanotubes, and (2) phonon boundary scattering at the zigzag and armchair edges in graphene. In particular, we uncover the role of edge chirality on phonon scattering specularity and explain why specularity is reduced for the ideal armchair edge. The application of the method can shed new light on the relationship between phonon scattering and the atomistic structure of interfaces.'
author:
- 'Zhun-Yong Ong'
bibliography:
- 'PhononNotes.bib'
title: 'Atomistic $S$-matrix method for numerical simulation of phonon reflection, transmission and boundary scattering '
---
Introduction
============
It is well-known that phonon scattering with interfaces and surfaces modifies phonon trajectories and thermal conductivity at the nanoscale in insulators and semiconductors, [@DGCahill:APR14_Nanoscale] and can potentially be exploited to control heat conduction for high efficiency thermoelectric applications. [@MMaldovan:PRL13_Narrow; @GRomano:PRB16_Temperature] For example, the dramatically lower thermal conductivity in silicon nanowires has been attributed to the enhanced surface scattering of phonons [@DLi:APL03_SiNW; @PMartin:PRL09_Impact; @JLim:NL12_Quantifying] while molecular dynamics simulations suggest that surface modification can lower the thermal conductivity of silicon thin films. [@BLDavis:PRL14; @SNeogi:ACSNano15_Tuning]
In spite of the importance of phonon scattering by interfaces and surfaces for thermal transport, our understanding of the phenomenon [@DLi:NMTE15_Phonon; @AMaznev:PRB15_Boundary; @KKothari:SciRep17_Phonon] is constrained by the currently limited range of experimental means for the direct determination of the spectral transmission coefficients [@CHua:PRB17_Experimental] and relies heavily on acoustic-based approximations which are valid only in the long-wavelength limit. For example, the acoustic and diffuse mismatch theories, [@ETSwartz:RMP89_Thermal] which describe how incoming phonons are scattered elastically by an interface, are widely used to estimate the transmission probability of phonons while variations of Ziman’s model of elastic scattering by a rough surface [@JZiman:Book60_Electrons] are used to model diffuse phonon reflection from boundaries. [@ZAksamija:PRB10_Anisotropy] However, attempts to simulate elastic phonon scattering atomistically remain constrained by the lack of an efficient numerical method that can treat directly the scattering-induced transition between an incoming bulk phonon and an outgoing bulk phonon of equal frequency on either side of the interface. Although other atomistic approaches such as wavepacket-based simulations [@NZuckerman:PRB08_Acoustic] have been used to study phonon transmission and reflection at interfaces [@PKSchelling:APL02_Phonon] and surfaces, [@ZWei:JAP12_Wave; @CShao:JAP17_Probing] their application is difficult as they require large simulation domains and are computational expensive, limiting their usefulness for extracting quantitative insights as well as applicability to more complicated atomistic structures. The traditional atomistic Green’s function (AGF) method, [@WZhang:NHT07; @JSWang:EPJB08_Quantum; @SSadasivam:ARHT14_Atomistic] which is numerically exact and can be used to compute the overall transmittance spectrum for solid interfaces, [@WZhang:JHT07_Simulation; @ZTian:PRB12_Enhancing] cannot resolve the transmission of individual phonons.
Nevertheless, there has been significant recent progress [@ZYOng:PRB15_Efficient; @SSadasivam:PRB17_Phonon] in extending the AGF method for studying the transmission and conversion of *individual* phonon modes at the interface, giving us a more detailed picture of the forward scattering (or transmission) of phonons in terms of their polarization and wavelength dependence. Building on methods developed for tight-binding models of quantum transport in Ref. [@PAKhomyakov:PRB05_Conductance] and exploiting the properties of the Bloch matrix, [@TAndo:PRB91_Quantum] it is shown in Ref. [@ZYOng:PRB15_Efficient] how the transmission coefficient of individual phonon modes can be calculated by using an extension of the traditional AGF method. An alternative formulation of the calculation method that also connects the transmission spectrum to the bulk phonon spectra and similarly yields the dependence of the transmission coefficient on phonon polarization and wavelength is presented in Ref. [@SSadasivam:PRB17_Phonon].
Despite their methodological improvements, such AGF-based approaches remain incomplete because they cannot treat phonon reflection which is important for understanding the boundary scattering of phonons; for instance, there is no accessible quantification of phonon polarization and wavelength conversion in backward scattering (reflection) by the interface, unlike the case for the forward scattering (transmission) of phonons. More generally, we lack an *atomistic* approach to elastic phonon scattering (forward and backward) that considers the granularity of the crystal structure and can be used for the computation of scattering cross-sections, important for modeling phonon transport. [@RPrasher:JAP04_Thermal; @RPrasher:JAP05_Thermal; @NZuckerman:PRB08_Acoustic] Moreover, in heat conduction within low-dimensional structures such as atomically thin crystals and nanowires, the specularity of boundary scattering plays an important role in phonon transport and depends on the configuration of the boundary. [@PMartin:PRL09_Impact; @MBae:NatCommun13_Ballistic; @AMajee:PRB16_Length] Thus, phonon momentum relaxation from elastic boundary scattering is often invoked [@PMartin:PRL09_Impact] to explain the reduced thermal conductivity of these nanostructures relative to their bulk counterparts. [@JLim:NL12_Quantifying] However, this interpretation relies on certain assumptions about the boundary scattering specularity and thus, the direct determination of the specularity parameters can provide a more complete and accurate description of the phenomenon especially in situations where the atomistic configuration of the boundary may be important.
To address this state of affairs, we introduce in this paper a numerical $S$-matrix approach that generalizes earlier methodological developments by Ong and Zhang [@ZYOng:PRB15_Efficient] and more importantly, has the advantage of grounding the description of phonon transmission and reflection in the language of conventional quantum mechanical scattering theory, allowing us to draw on existing numerical techniques and conceptual insights in our modeling of the phenomenon. The key idea in our method is to exploit the relationship between the Green’s function, which encodes the transition between the initial and final states [@EEconomou:Book83_Greens] and for which we have well-developed numerical methods, and scattering theory. To the best of our knowledge, this conceptual connection between the Green’s function and the $S$-matrix in transport models was first made by Lee and Fisher [@DSFisher:PRB81_Relation] who describe electron transport through a finite disordered system in terms of the transmission and reflection of the plane-wave lead eigenstates. A similar theoretical framework underpins our conceptualization of phonon transmission and reflection by the interface. Proceeding along similar lines, we identify the *bulk* phonon modes and the interface with the scattering channels and scatterer, respectively. Thus, in the parlance of conventional scattering theory, [@RNewton:Book82_Scattering] phonon transmission and reflection by the interface is treated as a multichannel *elastic* scattering problem in which individual scattering processes are characterized by the scattering amplitudes between incoming and outgoing phonon channels.
Nevertheless, although it is known that a formal connection can be made between the Green’s function and scattering, the formulation of a numerical scheme to determine the elastic scattering amplitudes between scattering channels remains challenging, because it requires us to adapt the general scattering formalism, which is largely based on plane waves, [@EEconomou:Book83_Greens] to variables derived from the interatomic force constant matrices that characterize the lattice. In our paper, we give a detailed description of how the scattering formalism can be implemented numerically in an AGF-based $S$-matrix approach that uses these interatomic force constant matrices. To minimize confusion and maintain consistency of notation, the paper is written in a largely *self-contained* manner so that the basic ideas behind the calculation techniques are digestible.
As a cautionary note, we point out that our AGF-based S-matrix method is only applicable to two-phonon elastic scattering processes. Inelastic mechanisms such as three-phonon processes, [@PHopkins:JHT11] which may play a significant role in interfacial thermal transport, cannot be treated in our approach for now and their treatment requires complementary approaches like those described in Refs. [@KSaaskilahti:PRB14_Role; @YZhou:PRB17_Full] or possibly a modification of the techniques presented in this paper. Bearing these limitations in mind, the formalism introduced in this paper should be sufficiently general that it can be easily extended to a wider class of problems involving elastic phonon scattering such as scattering by crystallographic defects (e.g. isotopes, vacancies and dislocations).
The organization of our paper is as follows. We first review the original AGF method [@NMingo:PRB03_Phonon] and its extension in Ref. [@ZYOng:PRB15_Efficient]. Next, we show how the transmitted and reflected phonon modes can be determined from the incident phonon mode, and derive the transmission ($\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}$ and $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}$) and reflection matrices ($\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}$ and $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}$) which constitute the *full* $S$ matrix ($\boldsymbol{S}$). The general properties and application of the transmission and reflection matrices are also discussed. Finally, the advantages and versatility of our AGF-based S-matrix approach are illustrated through two examples: (1) the investigation of phonon reflection and transmission at the armchair junction between two isotopically different (8,8) carbon nanotubes, and (2) the investigation of phonon scattering by the graphene armchair and zigzag edges. In the second example where transverse periodic boundary conditions are important, we describe the Fourier decomposition of the force-constant matrices for the efficient computation of the phonon channels and the application of the zone-unfolding technique [@TBoykin:PRB05_Practical; @TBoykin:PhysicaE09_Non] to map the phonon channels to the phonon modes of the primitive Brillouin zone of graphene. From our analysis of the effects of edge chirality and isotopic disorder on phonon specularity, we show why phonon specularity is reduced for armchair edges.
Method \[sec:Method\]
=====================
Review of original Atomistic Green’s Function (AGF) method
----------------------------------------------------------
We briefly give here an overview of the basic elements of the original atomistic Green’s function (AGF) formalism, introduced by Mingo and Yang in Ref. [@NMingo:PRB03_Phonon], and its extension developed in Ref. [@ZYOng:PRB15_Efficient] so that the context for the new S-matrix method is clear. A similar review of the method can also be found in Ref. [@ZYOng:JAP18_Tutorial]. The main idea of the traditional AGF method is as follows: We take the harmonic matrix $\mathbf{H}$ of the infinite system (left lead, scattering region and right lead) and break it up into submatrices associated with the principal layers of the leads and the scattering region. From these submatrices, we construct: (1) the uncoupled surface Green’s function of each lead and (2) the effective frequency-dependent harmonic matrix $\mathbf{H}^{\prime}$ of the finite projected system that consists of the scattering region and its edges. The retarded Green’s function $\boldsymbol{G}^{\text{ret}}$ of the projected system, which determines overall phonon transmission $\Xi(\omega)$, is then computed from $\mathbf{H}^{\prime}$. In the extension of the AGF method, [@ZYOng:PRB15_Efficient] the Bloch matrices and *bulk* phonon modes can be computed from the uncoupled surface Green’s function of the leads and thus used to determine from $\boldsymbol{G}^{\text{ret}}$ the scattering amplitudes between the incident and the transmitted modes.
### Numerical setup for AGF calculation
![Schematic of the scattering system (left lead, scattering region and right lead) and the submatrices associated with each slice or principal layer which represents the set of atomic degrees of freedom for a block row in Eq. (\[eq:SystemForceConstantMatrix\]). The left and right lead each consist of a semi-infinite one-dimensional array of identical slices while the scattering region corresponds to the interface.[]{data-label="fig:SystemSchematic"}](Figure1)
In our scheme, as shown in Fig. \[fig:SystemSchematic\], the system is partitioned into three subsystems: (1) the left lead, (2) the scattering region and (3) the right lead. The leads are identified with the physical bulk lattices while the scattering region contains the interface. Each lead consists of a semi-infinite one-dimensional array of identical slices (or principal layers) while the scattering region is considered a slice by itself. Hence, the entire system has an infinite number of slices, each of which can be indexed by an integer. The index convention used in this paper is one in which the index increases as one goes from left to right. We define the scattering region as slice $1$ while the principal layers in the left and right lead are enumerated $-\infty,\ldots,0$ and $2,\ldots,+\infty$, respectively.
Formally, the lattice dynamical properties of the system are determined by the mass-normalized force-constant matrix $\mathbf{H}$ which represents the harmonic coupling of the entire system and has the block-tridiagonal structure, $$\mathbf{H}=\left(\begin{array}{ccccccc}
\ddots & \ddots\\
\ddots & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{00} & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{01}\\
& \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{10} & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{00} & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{LC}}\\
& & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{CL}} & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{C}} & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{CR}}\\
& & & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{RC}} & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{00} & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{01}\\
& & & & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{10} & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{00} & \ddots\\
& & & & & \ddots & \ddots
\end{array}\right)\label{eq:SystemForceConstantMatrix}$$ where $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{C}}$, and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{CL}}$ ($\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{CR}}$) are respectively the force-constant submatrices corresponding to the interface region and the coupling between the interface region and the semi-infinite left (right) lead. We can associate each slice in Fig. \[fig:SystemSchematic\] with a block row in $\mathbf{H}$. In the standard AGF setup, the block row submatrices $\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{00}$ and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{01}$, where $\alpha=\text{L}$ and $\alpha=\text{R}$ for the left and right lead, respectively, characterize the lead phonons. If we set the slices to be large enough so that only adjacent slices can couple, then $\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{00}$ corresponds to the force-constant matrix for each slice while $\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{01}$ ($\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{10}$) corresponds to the harmonic coupling between each slice and the slice to its right (left) in the lead. In the rest of the paper, we reserve $\alpha$ as the dummy variable for distinguishing the leads, with $\alpha=\text{L}$ and $\alpha=\text{R}$ representing the left and right lead, respectively.
We note here that in spite of the infinite number of slices making up the system, only a finite set of unique force-constant matrices ($\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{C}}$, $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{CL}}$, $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{CR}}$, $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{00}$, $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{01}$, $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{00}$ and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{01}$) are needed as inputs for the AGF calculation because the leads are made up of identical slices and the Hermiticity of $\mathbf{H}$ implies that $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{LC}}=(\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{CL}})^{\dagger}$ and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{RC}}=(\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{CR}})^{\dagger}$, and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{01}=(\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{10})^{\dagger}$. The periodic arraying of the slices in the leads means that each slice constitutes a unit cell and that the bulk phonon dispersion for the lead can be determined from the expression $$\text{det}[\omega^{2}\boldsymbol{I}_{\alpha}-\boldsymbol{D}_{\alpha}(k)]=0\ ,\label{eq:BulkPhononDispersion}$$ where $\boldsymbol{D}_{\alpha}(k)=\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{10}e^{-ika_{\alpha}}+\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{00}+\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{01}e^{ika_{\alpha}}$ is the dynamical matrix and $\boldsymbol{I}_{\alpha}$ is the identity matrix of the size as $\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{00}$; the variables $k$ and $a_{\alpha}$ represent the phonon wave vector and lattice constant in one dimension, respectively.
### Total phonon transmission
In principle, the system dynamics are determined by the infinitely large $\mathbf{H}$ in Eq. (\[eq:SystemForceConstantMatrix\]). However, for the *effective* dynamics at a fixed frequency $\omega$, the lattice dynamics problem becomes more tractable as we need only to project the dynamics onto a finite portion of the system, [@JSWang:EPJB08_Quantum; @NMingo:Springer09] corresponding to slices 0 to 2 in Fig. \[fig:SystemSchematic\], to determine phonon transmission through the scattering region (slice 1). Hence, we use the submatrices in Eq. (\[eq:SystemForceConstantMatrix\]) to construct the *effective* harmonic matrix for this subsystem [@JSWang:EPJB08_Quantum] $$\mathbf{H}^{\prime}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{\prime} & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{LC}}^{\prime} & 0\\
\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{CL}}^{\prime} & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{C}}^{\prime} & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{CR}}^{\prime}\\
0 & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{RC}}^{\prime} & \boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{\prime}
\end{array}\right)\ ,\label{eq:ProjectedForceConstantMatrix}$$ where $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{\prime}=\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{00}+\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{10}\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{ret}}\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{01}$ and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{\prime}=\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{00}+\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{01}\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{R},+}^{\text{ret}}\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{10}$ represent the left and right edge, respectively while $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{C}}^{\prime}=\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{C}}$ and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{CL/CR}}^{\prime}=\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{CL/CR}}=(\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{LC/RC}}^{\prime})^{\dagger}$ (see Fig. \[fig:ProjectedSystemSchematic\]). The retarded surface Green’s functions $\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{ret}}$ and $\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{R},+}^{\text{ret}}$ are given by
\
$$\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,-}^{\text{ret}}=[(\omega^{2}+i\eta)\boldsymbol{I}_{\alpha}-\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{00}-\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{10}\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,-}^{\text{ret}}\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{01}]^{-1}\label{eq:RetardedLeftSurfaceGF}$$ $$\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,+}^{\text{ret}}=[(\omega^{2}+i\eta)\boldsymbol{I}_{\alpha}-\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{00}-\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{01}\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,+}^{\text{ret}}\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{10}]^{-1}\label{eq:RetardedRightSurfaceGF}$$ \[eq:AllRetardedSurfaceGF\]
where $\eta$ is the small infinitesimal part that we add to $\omega^{2}$ to impose causality, and they are commonly generated using the decimation technique [@FGuinea:PRB83_Effective] or by solving the generalized eigenvalue equation. [@JSWang:EPJB08_Quantum; @SSadasivam:PRB17_Phonon] Physically, Eq. (\[eq:RetardedLeftSurfaceGF\]) is the retarded surface Green’s function for a decoupled semi-infinite lattice extending infinitely to the left (denoted by the ‘-’ in the subscript of $\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,-}^{\text{ret}}$) while Eq. (\[eq:RetardedRightSurfaceGF\]) is the corresponding surface Green’s function for a decoupled semi-infinite lattice extending infinitely to the right (denoted by the ‘+’ in the subscript of $\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,+}^{\text{ret}}$). In addition, the advanced surface Green’s functions can be obtained from the Hermitian conjugates of Eq. (\[eq:AllRetardedSurfaceGF\]), i.e. $\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,-}^{\text{adv}}=(\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,-}^{\text{ret}}){}^{\dagger}$ and $\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,+}^{\text{adv}}=(\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,+}^{\text{ret}})^{\dagger}$.
To find the phonon transmission through the interface, we compute the corresponding Green’s function for Eq. (\[eq:ProjectedForceConstantMatrix\]), $\boldsymbol{G}^{\text{ret}}=[(\omega^{2}+i\eta)\mathbf{I}^{\prime}-\mathbf{H}^{\prime}]^{-1}$ where $\mathbf{I}^{\prime}$ is an identity matrix of the same size as $\mathbf{H}^{\prime}$; the $\boldsymbol{G}^{\text{ret}}$ matrix can be partitioned into submatrices in the same manner as $\mathbf{H}^{\prime}$, i.e. $$\boldsymbol{G}^{\text{ret}}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}} & \boldsymbol{G}_{\text{LC}}^{\text{ret}} & \boldsymbol{G}_{\text{LR}}^{\text{ret}}\\
\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{CL}}^{\text{ret}} & \boldsymbol{G}_{\text{C}}^{\text{ret}} & \boldsymbol{G}_{\text{CR}}^{\text{ret}}\\
\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{RL}}^{\text{ret}} & \boldsymbol{G}_{\text{RC}}^{\text{ret}} & \boldsymbol{G}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}
\end{array}\right)\ .\label{eq:FiniteGreensFunction}$$ In the original AGF method,[@WZhang:NHT07; @JSWang:EPJB08_Quantum] the phonon transmittance through the scattering region is given by the well-known Caroli formula: [@CCaroli:JPhysC71; @WZhang:NHT07; @JSWang:EPJB08_Quantum] $$\Xi(\omega)=\text{Tr}[\boldsymbol{\Gamma}_{\text{R}}\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{RL}}^{\text{ret}}\boldsymbol{\Gamma}_{\text{L}}(\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{RL}}^{\text{ret}})^{\dagger}]\label{eq:CaroliFormula}$$ where $\boldsymbol{\Gamma}_{\text{L}}=i\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{10}(\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{ret}}-\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{adv}})\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{01}$ and $\boldsymbol{\Gamma}_{\text{R}}=i\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{01}(\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{R},+}^{\text{ret}}-\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{R},+}^{\text{adv}})\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{10}$.
![Schematic of the finite projected system in Eq. (\[eq:ProjectedForceConstantMatrix\]), consisting of the scattering region (slice $1$) and its terminated edges (slices $0$ and $2$). The frequency-dependent dynamics of the semi-infinite leads are implicitly included in $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{\prime}$ and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{\prime}$ through the surface Green’s functions $\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{ret}}$ and $\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{R},+}^{\text{ret}}$ from which we can derive the incoming and outgoing phonon modes [\[]{}$\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)$ and $\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{R}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)$[\]]{} and their group velocities [\[]{}$\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)$ and $\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{R}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)$[\]]{}.[]{data-label="fig:ProjectedSystemSchematic"}](Figure2)
Phonon transmission, reflection and $S$-matrix
----------------------------------------------
From the Green’s function $\boldsymbol{G}^{\text{ret}}$ in Eq. (\[eq:FiniteGreensFunction\]), we can use the traditional AGF method to compute the phonon transmittance $\Xi(\omega)$ which is the sum of the individual phonon transmission coefficients. [@ZHuang:JHT11_Modeling; @ZYOng:PRB15_Efficient] A more explicit connection to conventional scattering theory may be made by noting that the transmission coefficients can be derived directly from the diagonal elements of the transmission matrix, [@DSFisher:PRB81_Relation] which relates the amplitude of the incoming phonon flux to that of the outgoing forward-scattered (or transmitted) phonon flux and is computed numerically from $\boldsymbol{G}^{\text{ret}}$. [@ZYOng:PRB15_Efficient] However, this picture of the scattering process is incomplete as it does not treat the amplitude of the *backward*-scattered (or reflected) phonons and the trajectories of the phonons reflected from the interface. This suggests that a matrix analogous to the transmission matrix is needed for the backward component of the scattered phonons. To accomplish this, we introduce the reflection matrix and show how it can be computed efficiently by building on the technical ideas given in Ref. [@ZYOng:PRB15_Efficient]. The reflection matrix for each lead can then be combined with the transmission matrices to form the *$S$ matrix* that governs overall phonon transmission and reflection at the interface.
### Definition of transmission, absorption and reflection coefficients
Before we proceed, we clarify some of the terminology used in the following discussions. An *incident* or “incoming” phonon is one that has its group velocity pointing towards the interface and corresponds to the asymptotically free ($t\rightarrow-\infty$) bulk phonon state prior to scattering while an “outgoing” phonon is one that has its group velocity pointing away from the interface and corresponds to the asymptotically free ($t\rightarrow\infty$) bulk phonon state after scattering. There are two types of outgoing phonons: (1) the *transmitted* or forward-scattered phonons on the other side of the interface with a group velocity in the same direction as that of the incident phonon and (2) the *reflected* or backward-scattered phonons on the same side of the interface but with a group velocity opposite to that of the incident phonon. For example, an incoming phonon in the left lead propagating towards the interface has a positive group velocity. After colliding with the interface, the incoming phonon is scattered into a range of outgoing phonon states, transmitted and reflected, with a “scattering amplitude” and “transition probability” associated with each transition between the incoming phonon state and an outgoing phonon state.
We also use the transmission, absorption and reflection coefficients, which can be obtained from sums of the relevant transition probabilities, to characterize the loss and gain of energy by phonon channels. The transmission coefficient $\Xi$ associated with each incoming phonon channel is defined as the fraction of the energy flux *lost* by the incoming phonon channel across the interface to all the outgoing phonon channels on the other side. The absorption coefficient $\xi$ associated with each outgoing phonon channel is defined as the fraction of the energy flux gained by the outgoing phonon channel from all the incoming phonon channels across the interface. Similarly, we can also associate a reflection coefficient $\xi^{\prime}$ with each outgoing phonon channel, which we define as the fraction of the energy flux gained by the outgoing phonon channel from all the incoming channels on the *same* side of the interface.
### Bloch matrices and bulk phonon eigenmodes
The advanced and retarded Bloch matrices [@TAndo:PRB91_Quantum; @PAKhomyakov:PRB05_Conductance; @ZYOng:PRB15_Efficient] of the left and right lead, $\boldsymbol{F}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)$ and $\boldsymbol{F}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)$, describe their bulk translational symmetry along the direction of the heat flux and can be computed directly from the formulas:
$$\boldsymbol{F}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)=\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,+}^{\text{adv/ret}}\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{10}\label{eq:RightGoingBlochMatrix}$$
$$\boldsymbol{F}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)^{-1}=\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,-}^{\text{adv/ret}}\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{01}\label{eq:LeftGoingBlochMatrix}$$
\[eq:BlochMatrices\]
As pointed out in Ref. [@ZYOng:PRB15_Efficient], the bulk eigenmodes for the lead can be determined directly from the Bloch matrices:
$$\boldsymbol{F}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)=\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)\boldsymbol{\Lambda}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)\label{eq:RightGoingModes}$$
$$\boldsymbol{F}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)^{-1}\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)=\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)\boldsymbol{\Lambda}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)^{-1}\label{eq:LeftGoingModes}$$
\[eq:BlochMatrixEigenmodes\]
where $\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{ret}}(+)$ [\[]{}$\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{ret}}(-)$[\]]{} is a matrix with its column vectors corresponding to the rightward-going (leftward-going) extended or rightward (leftward) decaying evanescent modes and has the form $\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{ret}}=(\boldsymbol{e}_{1}\boldsymbol{e}_{2}\ldots\boldsymbol{e}_{N})$ where $\boldsymbol{e}_{n}$ is a normalized eigenvector of the Bloch matrix in the $n$-th column of $\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{ret}}$ [\[]{}$\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{ret}}(-)$[\]]{}. Similarly, $\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv}}(-)$ [\[]{}$\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv}}(+)$[\]]{} is a matrix with its column vectors corresponding to rightward-going (leftward-going) extended or leftward (rightward) decaying evanescent modes. The matrix $\boldsymbol{\Lambda}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)$ [\[]{}$\boldsymbol{\Lambda}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)$[\]]{} is a diagonal matrix with matrix elements of the form $e^{ik_{n}a}$ where $k_{n}$ is the phonon wave vector corresponding to the $n$-th column eigenvector in $\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)$ [\[]{}$\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)$[\]]{}.
We note that because the Bloch matrices are not Hermitian, their eigenvectors are not necessarily orthogonal. This can pose a problem [@SSadasivam:PRB17_Phonon] for transmission coefficient calculations when the eigenvectors have the same $k$ and are degenerate. This issue can be simply resolved by orthonormalizing the degenerate column eigenvectors in $\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}$ with a Gram-Schmidt procedure. [@GArfken:Book95_Mathematical; @CMWerneth:EJP10_Numerical] The final piece of ingredient needed for the following phonon scattering calculations is the diagonal velocity matrix [@PAKhomyakov:PRB05_Conductance; @JSWang:EPJB08_Quantum] $$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{V}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)= & \frac{ia_{\alpha}}{2\omega}[\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)]^{\dagger}\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{01}[\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,+}^{\text{adv/ret}}-\nonumber \\
& (\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,+}^{\text{ret/adv}})^{\dagger}]\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{10}\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)\ ,\label{eq:RightGoingVelocityMatrix}\end{aligned}$$ which has group velocities of the eigenvectors in $\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)$ as its diagonal elements. Likewise, $\boldsymbol{V}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)$ is defined as $$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{V}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)= & -\frac{ia_{\alpha}}{2\omega}[\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)]^{\dagger}\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{10}[\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,-}^{\text{adv/ret}}-\nonumber \\
& (\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,-}^{\text{ret/adv}})^{\dagger}]\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{01}\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)\ .\label{eq:LeftGoingVelocityMatrix}\end{aligned}$$ For evanescent modes, the group velocity is always zero while for propagating modes that contribute to the heat flux, the group velocity is positive (negative) in $\boldsymbol{V}_{\alpha}^{\text{ret}}(+)$ and $\boldsymbol{V}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv}}(-)$ [\[]{}$\boldsymbol{V}_{\alpha}^{\text{ret}}(-)$ and $\boldsymbol{V}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv}}(+)$[\]]{}. In addition, we define the diagonal matrices $\widetilde{\boldsymbol{V}}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)$ and $\widetilde{\boldsymbol{V}}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)$ in which their nonzero diagonal matrix elements are the inverse of those of $\boldsymbol{V}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)$ and $\boldsymbol{V}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-),$ respectively. For each lead, we can also define the diagonal matrices
$$\boldsymbol{I}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)=\boldsymbol{V}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)\widetilde{\boldsymbol{V}}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)\label{eq:RightGoingIdentityMatrix}$$
$$\boldsymbol{I}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)=\boldsymbol{V}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)\widetilde{\boldsymbol{V}}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)\label{eq:LeftGoingIdentityMatrix}$$
\[eq:AllGoingIdentityMatrices\]
in which the $n$-th diagonal element equals $1$ if the $n$-th column of $\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)$ and $\boldsymbol{U}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(-)$ corresponds to an extended mode and $0$ otherwise. Therefore, it follows from Eq. (\[eq:AllGoingIdentityMatrices\] ) that the number of rightward-going phonon channels $N_{\alpha}(+)$ and the number of leftward-going phonon channels $N_{\alpha}(-)$ are given by
$$N_{\alpha}(+)=\text{Tr}[\boldsymbol{I}_{\alpha}^{\text{ret}}(+)]=\text{Tr}[\boldsymbol{I}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv}}(-)]\label{eq:NumberRightGoingChannels}$$
$$N_{\alpha}(-)=\text{Tr}[\boldsymbol{I}_{\alpha}^{\text{ret}}(-)]=\text{Tr}[\boldsymbol{I}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv}}(+)]\ .\label{eq:NumberLeftGoingChannels}$$
\[eq:AllNumberOfChannels\]
### Phonon scattering: transmission
Now, let us consider the scattering problem for an incoming phonon from the left lead that is incident on the scattering region. In the $n=0$ slice at the edge of the left lead, the motion can be decomposed into two parts, i.e. $$\boldsymbol{c}_{0}=\boldsymbol{c}_{0}(+)+\boldsymbol{c}_{0}(-)\label{eq:Slice0Motion}$$ where $\boldsymbol{c}_{0}(+)$ and $\boldsymbol{c}_{0}(-)$ respectively represent the rightward-going (incident) and leftward-going (reflected) components, while in the $n=2$ slice at the edge of the right lead, the motion is given by $$\boldsymbol{c}_{2}=\boldsymbol{c}_{2}(+)\ ,\label{eq:TransmittedWave}$$ where the right-hand side represents a rightward-going (transmitted) wave which can be a linear combination of bulk right-lead phonon modes propagating away from the interface. Suppose the rightward-going component in Eq. (\[eq:Slice0Motion\]) is a left-lead bulk phonon mode, i.e. $\boldsymbol{c}_{0}(+)=\boldsymbol{u}_{\text{L},n}(k,\omega)$ where $n$ and $k$ are the phonon polarization index and wave vector, respectively. Then, it can be shown [@PAKhomyakov:PRB05_Conductance] that the transmitted wave $\boldsymbol{c}_{2}(+)$ in the right lead is related to the incident wave $\boldsymbol{c}_{0}(+)$ from the right lead, via the expression $$\boldsymbol{c}_{2}=\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{RL}}^{\text{ret}}\boldsymbol{Q}_{\text{L}}\boldsymbol{u}_{\text{L},n}(k,\omega)\label{eq:TransmittedIncidentWave}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{Q}_{\alpha}= & (\omega^{2}+i\eta)\boldsymbol{I}_{\alpha}-\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{00}\nonumber \\
& -\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{10}\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,-}^{\text{ret}}(\omega)\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{01}-\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{01}\boldsymbol{g}_{\alpha,+}^{\text{ret}}(\omega)\boldsymbol{H}_{\alpha}^{10}\label{eq:InverseBulkGreensFunction}\end{aligned}$$ and $\boldsymbol{Q}_{\alpha}^{-1}$ is the bulk Green’s function of the $\alpha$ lead. The expression in Eq. (\[eq:TransmittedIncidentWave\]) can be expressed as a linear combination of transmitted right-lead phonon modes $\boldsymbol{u}_{\text{R},m}(k_{m},\omega)$, i.e. $\boldsymbol{c}_{2}=\sum_{m}\boldsymbol{u}_{\text{R},m}(k_{m},\omega)\tau_{mn}$, where $\tau_{mn}$ is the linear coefficient and forms the matrix elements of the transmission matrix $\boldsymbol{\tau}$, where $$\boldsymbol{\tau}=[\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}(+)]^{-1}\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{RL}}^{\text{ret}}\boldsymbol{Q}_{\text{L}}\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}(+)\ .\label{eq:taumatrix}$$ The flux-normalized transmission matrix is $\boldsymbol{t}_{\text{RL}}=[\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}(+)]^{\nicefrac{1}{2}}\boldsymbol{\tau}[\widetilde{\boldsymbol{V}}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}(+)]^{\nicefrac{1}{2}}$, which we can rewrite as [@ZYOng:PRB15_Efficient] $$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{t}_{\text{RL}}= & \frac{2i\omega}{\sqrt{a_{\text{R}}a_{\text{L}}}}[\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}(+)]^{\nicefrac{1}{2}}[\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}(+)]^{-1}\nonumber \\
& \times\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{RL}}^{\text{ret}}[\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv}}(-)^{\dagger}]^{-1}[\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv}}(-)]^{\nicefrac{1}{2}}\ .\label{eq:tmatrix_RL}\end{aligned}$$ Each row of $\boldsymbol{t}_{\text{RL}}$ corresponds to either a transmitted right-lead extended or evanescent mode. For an outgoing evanescent mode, the row elements and group velocity, given by the diagonal element of $\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}(+)$, are zero. Conversely, each column of of $\boldsymbol{t}_{\text{RL}}$ corresponds to either an incident left-lead extended or evanescent mode, and the column elements and group velocity of the evanescent modes, given by the diagonal element of $\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv}}(-)$, are zero. If the $m$-th row and $n$-th column of $\boldsymbol{t}_{\text{RL}}$correspond to extended transmitted and incident modes, then $|[\boldsymbol{t}_{\text{RL}}]_{mn}|^{2}$ gives us the probability that incident left-lead phonon is transmitted across the interface into the right-lead phonon. Similarly, we can define the flux-normalized transmission matrix for phonon transmission from the right to the left lead:
$$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{t}_{\text{LR}}= & \frac{2i\omega}{\sqrt{a_{\text{L}}a_{\text{R}}}}[\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}(-)]^{\nicefrac{1}{2}}[\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}(-)]^{-1}\nonumber \\
& \times\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{LR}}^{\text{ret}}[\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{R}}^{\text{adv}}(+)^{\dagger}]^{-1}[\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{R}}^{\text{adv}}(+)]^{\nicefrac{1}{2}}\ .\label{eq:tmatrix_LR}\end{aligned}$$
### Phonon scattering: reflection
Like in Eq. (\[eq:TransmittedIncidentWave\]), we can describe the motion in slice 0 in terms of the incident wave, i.e. $\boldsymbol{c}_{0}=\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}\boldsymbol{Q}_{\text{L}}\boldsymbol{u}_{\text{L},n}(k,\omega)$. It follows that the reflected component is $\boldsymbol{c}_{0}(-)=\boldsymbol{c}_{0}-\boldsymbol{c}_{0}(+)=(\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}-\boldsymbol{Q}_{\text{L}}^{-1})\boldsymbol{Q}_{\text{L}}\boldsymbol{u}_{\text{L},n}(k,\omega)$. Therefore, the flux-normalized reflection matrix, which gives the scattering amplitude between leftward-going (reflected) and rightward-going (incident) states in the left lead, can be defined as: $$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{r}_{\text{LL}}= & \frac{2i\omega}{a_{\text{L}}}[\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}(-)]^{\nicefrac{1}{2}}[\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}(-)]^{-1}\nonumber \\
& \times(\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}-\boldsymbol{Q}_{\text{L}}^{-1})[\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv}}(-)^{\dagger}]^{-1}[\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv}}(-)]^{\nicefrac{1}{2}}\ .\label{eq:rmatrix_LL}\end{aligned}$$ The corresponding expression for phonon reflection in the right lead can be similarly defined as $$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{r}_{\text{RR}}= & \frac{2i\omega}{a_{\text{R}}}[\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}(+)]^{\nicefrac{1}{2}}[\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}(+)]^{-1}\nonumber \\
& \times(\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}-\boldsymbol{Q}_{\text{R}}^{-1})[\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{R}}^{\text{adv}}(+)^{\dagger}]^{-1}[\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{R}}^{\text{adv}}(+)]^{\nicefrac{1}{2}}\ ,\label{eq:rmatrix_RR}\end{aligned}$$ which gives the scattering amplitude between rightward-going (reflected) and leftward-going (incident) states in the right lead.
### Phonon transmission and reflection matrices
Given Eqs. (\[eq:tmatrix\_RL\]) to (\[eq:rmatrix\_RR\]), we can construct the rationalized smaller matrices $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}$, $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}$, $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}$ and $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}$ from $\boldsymbol{t}_{\text{RL}}$, $\boldsymbol{t}_{\text{LR}}$, $\boldsymbol{r}_{\text{LL}}$ and $\boldsymbol{r}_{\text{RR}}$ by deleting the matrix rows and columns corresponding to evanescent states. This is done numerically by inspecting each diagonal element of $\boldsymbol{I}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\pm)$ of Eq. (\[eq:AllGoingIdentityMatrices\]), which is either equal to 0 (evanescent) or 1 (extended), and removing the corresponding columns or rows when $[\boldsymbol{I}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\pm)]_{nn}=0$. For example, to find $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}$, we inspect $\boldsymbol{I}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}(+)$ for row deletion and $\boldsymbol{I}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv}}(-)$ for column deletion in $\boldsymbol{t}_{\text{RL}}$. Hence, $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}$ is an $N_{\text{R}}(+)\times N_{\text{L}}(+)$ matrix. Similarly, we can also define the rationalized smaller matrices $\bar{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(+)$ by deleting the rows and columns associated with evanescent modes from $\boldsymbol{\Lambda}_{\alpha}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\pm)$ in Eq. (\[eq:BlochMatrixEigenmodes\]).
The *transmission coefficient* of the $n$-th *incoming* phonon channel in the left lead is defined as the $n$-th diagonal element of $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}^{\dagger}\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}$, i.e. $$\Xi_{\text{L},n}=[\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}^{\dagger}\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}]_{nn}\ ,\label{eq:IncomingTransmitCoeff}$$ which is equal to the fraction of its energy flux transmitted across the interface, and its wave vector $k_{n}$ can be determined from $[\bar{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv}}(-)]_{nn}=e^{ik_{n}a_{\text{L}}}$ or $k_{n}=\frac{1}{a_{\text{L}}}\cos^{-1}\text{Re}[\bar{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv}}(-)]_{nn}$. For the reflected modes, the *reflection coefficient* of the $m$-th outgoing leftward-going mode in the left lead is given by the $m$-th diagonal element of $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}^{\dagger}$, i.e. $$\xi_{\text{L},m}^{\prime}=[\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}^{\dagger}]_{mm}\ ,\label{eq:OutgoingReflectCoeff}$$ with its phonon wave vector $k_{m}$ given by $k_{m}=\frac{1}{a_{\text{L}}}\cos^{-1}\text{Re}[\bar{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}(-)]_{mm}$, while the *absorption coefficient* of the $l$-th outgoing rightward-going mode in the right lead is given by the $l$-th diagonal element of $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}^{\dagger}$, i.e. $$\xi_{\text{R},l}=[\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}^{\dagger}]_{ll}\ ,\label{eq:OutgoingTransmitCoeff}$$ with its phonon wave vector $k_{l}$ given by $k_{l}=\frac{1}{a_{\text{R}}}\cos^{-1}\text{Re}[\bar{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}(+)]_{ll}$.
The transmission coefficient for the $n$-th incoming phonon channel in the right lead ($\Xi_{\text{R},n}$), the absorption coefficient of the $l$-th outgoing phonon channel in the left lead ($\xi_{\text{L},l}$ ) and the reflection coefficient of the $m$-th outgoing phonon channel in the right lead ($\xi_{\text{R},m}^{\prime}$) can be similarly defined like in Eqs. (\[eq:IncomingTransmitCoeff\]) to (\[eq:OutgoingTransmitCoeff\]), and their formulas are summarized in Table \[tab:PhononFormulae\]. It should also be noted that for $\alpha=\text{L},\text{R}$, $$\xi_{\alpha,m}+\xi_{\alpha,m}^{\prime}=1\label{eq:SumEnergyFluxFraction}$$ which physically means that the sum of the energy flux fractions from absorption and reflection equals unity, consistent with the conservation of energy. In addition, we remark that the phonon transmittance can be expressed as the sum of the transmission [\[]{}Eq. (\[eq:IncomingTransmission\])[\]]{} or absorption [\[]{}Eq. (\[eq:OutgoingTransmission\])[\]]{} coefficients of either lead, i.e.
$$\begin{aligned}
\Xi(\omega) & =\sum_{n=1}^{N_{\text{L}}(+)}\Xi_{\text{L},n}=\sum_{m=1}^{N_{\text{R}}(-)}\Xi_{\text{R},m}\ \label{eq:IncomingTransmission}\\
& =\sum_{n=1}^{N_{\text{L}}(-)}\xi_{\text{L},n}=\sum_{m=1}^{N_{\text{R}}(+)}\xi_{\text{R},m}\ .\label{eq:OutgoingTransmission}\end{aligned}$$
\[eq:AllPhononTransmittace\]
### Phonon scattering specularity
With our method, the phonon scattering specularity parameter, which measures the ‘smoothness’ of a surface, can be extracted directly from the reflection matrices $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}$ and $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}$. Here, we discuss briefly the meaning of phonon specularity and how it is computed in the AGF-based $S$-matrix approach. In Ref. [@JZiman:Book60_Electrons], the specularity parameter is simply defined as the proportion of the intensity of the incident wave that remains in the outgoing wave in the specular direction, with the effects of polarization conversion ignored and the rest of the intensity assumed to be redistributed equally in all directions. In our $S$-matrix approach, we adopt a similar definition for atomistic phonon scattering specularity $\mathcal{P}$ by taking it to be the intensity proportion that is scattered to the specularly reflected outgoing channel, which we define as the outgoing phonon channel with the longitudinal wave vector $k_{\bar{n}}=-k_{n}$ and of the same polarization. However, we caution that this definition of specularity does not necessarily imply that the remainder is equally distributed in the rest of the outgoing channels, i.e. the absence of specularity does not correspond to diffusive scattering.
In the case of *total* phonon reflection in the left lead, the *specularity parameter* $\mathcal{P}_{\text{L}}(k_{n})$ for the incoming left-lead phonon at $k_{n}$ is determined by its transition probability to the outgoing phonon channel at $k_{\bar{n}}$, i.e. $$\mathcal{P}_{\text{L}}(k_{n})=|[\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}^{\dagger}]_{n\bar{n}}|^{2}\ .\label{eq:LeftLeadSpecularityParameterDefn}$$ The expression in Eq. (\[eq:LeftLeadSpecularityParameterDefn\]) satisfies the requirement that $\mathcal{P}=1$ for fully specular reflection and in the limit that the number of channels goes to infinity, $\mathcal{P}=0$ for fully diffusive scattering. [@JZiman:Book60_Electrons] In the more general case of *partial* phonon reflection and transmission at an interface, the specularity parameter for the mode at $k_{n}$ in Eq. (\[eq:LeftLeadSpecularityParameterDefn\]) has to be normalized by the overall probability of its phonon reflection, giving us $$\mathcal{P}_{\text{L}}(k_{n})=\frac{|[\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}^{\dagger}]_{n\bar{n}}|^{2}}{\sum_{m}|[\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}^{\dagger}]_{nm}|^{2}}=\frac{|[\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}^{\dagger}]_{n\bar{n}}|^{2}}{[\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}^{\dagger}\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}]_{nn}}\ .\label{eq:NormalizedLeftLeadSpecularityParameterDefn}$$ Similarly, the specularity parameter for an incoming right-lead phonon with the wave vector $k_{m}$ is $\mathcal{P}_{\text{R}}(k_{m})=|[\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}^{\dagger}]_{m\bar{m}}|^{2}/[\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}^{\dagger}\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}]_{mm}\ .$
Variable Formula Phonon wave vector
----------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incoming left-lead phonon transmission coefficient $\Xi_{\text{L},n}=[\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}^{\dagger}\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}]_{nn}$ $k_{n}=\frac{1}{a_{\text{L}}}\cos^{-1}\text{Re}[\bar{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv}}(-)]_{nn}$
Outgoing right-lead phonon absorption coefficient $\xi_{\text{R},n}=[\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}^{\dagger}]_{nn}$ $k_{n}=\frac{1}{a_{\text{R}}}\cos^{-1}\text{Re}[\bar{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}(+)]_{nn}$
Outgoing left-lead phonon reflection coefficient $\xi_{\text{L},n}^{\prime}=[\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}^{\dagger}]_{nn}$ $k_{n}=\frac{1}{a_{\text{L}}}\cos^{-1}\text{Re}[\bar{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}(-)]_{nn}$
Incoming right-lead phonon transmission coefficient $\Xi_{\text{R},n}=[\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}^{\dagger}\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}]_{nn}$ $k_{n}=\frac{1}{a_{\text{R}}}\cos^{-1}\text{Re}[\bar{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{R}}^{\text{adv}}(+)]_{nn}$
Outgoing left-lead phonon absorption coefficient $\xi_{\text{L},n}=[\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}^{\dagger}]_{nn}$ $k_{n}=\frac{1}{a_{\text{L}}}\cos^{-1}\text{Re}[\bar{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}(-)]_{nn}$
Outgoing right-lead phonon reflection coefficient $\xi_{\text{R},n}^{\prime}=[\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}^{\dagger}]_{nn}$ $k_{n}=\frac{1}{a_{\text{R}}}\cos^{-1}\text{Re}[\bar{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}(+)]_{nn}$
### $S$-matrix description of phonon scattering
Given $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}$, $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}$, $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}$ and $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}$, we can define the $S$ matrix $$\boldsymbol{S}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}} & \bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}\\
\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}} & \bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}
\end{array}\right)\ ,\label{eq:SMatrix}$$ which connects the amplitudes of the scattered (reflected and transmitted) bulk phonons to the incident bulk phonons and is unitary if the system possesses time-reversal symmetry, i.e. $\boldsymbol{S}\boldsymbol{S}^{\dagger}=\boldsymbol{S}^{\dagger}\boldsymbol{S}=\boldsymbol{I}_{p}$ where $\boldsymbol{I}_{p}$ is an identity matrix of the same size as $\boldsymbol{S}$. The unitarity of $\boldsymbol{S}$ allows us to derive several identities involving $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}$, $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}$, $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}$ and $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}$. Equations (\[eq:AllNumberOfChannels\]) and (\[eq:SMatrix\]) imply that $$N_{\text{L}}(+)+N_{\text{R}}(-)=N_{\text{L}}(-)+N_{\text{R}}(+)\ ,\label{eq:IncomingOutgoingChannelEquality}$$ i.e. the total number of incoming phonon channels is equal to the total number of outgoing phonon channels. It follows from Eqs. (\[eq:SMatrix\]) and (\[eq:SumEnergyFluxFraction\]) that $$\left\{ \begin{array}{c}
N_{\text{L}}(+)\\
N_{\text{L}}(-)
\end{array}\right\} =\left\{ \begin{array}{c}
\text{Tr}(\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}^{\dagger}\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}+\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}^{\dagger}\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}})\\
\text{Tr}(\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}^{\dagger}+\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}^{\dagger})
\end{array}\right\} \label{eq:LeftLeadChannelCount}$$ and $N_{\text{L}}(+)=N_{\text{L}}(-)$, i.e., the number of leftward-going bulk phonon channels is equal to the number of rightward-going bulk phonon channels in the left lead. Similarly, we also have $$\left\{ \begin{array}{c}
N_{\text{R}}(-)\\
N_{\text{R}}(+)
\end{array}\right\} =\left\{ \begin{array}{c}
\text{Tr}(\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}^{\dagger}\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}+\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}^{\dagger}\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}})\\
\text{Tr}(\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}^{\dagger}+\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}^{\dagger})
\end{array}\right\} \label{eq:RightLeadChannelCount}$$ and $N_{\text{R}}(-)=N_{\text{R}}(+)$. Equations (\[eq:LeftLeadChannelCount\]) and (\[eq:RightLeadChannelCount\]) also allow us to establish the general *reciprocity relationship*, [@AMaznev:WM13_Reciprocity] $$\text{Tr}(\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}^{\dagger})=\text{Tr}(\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}^{\dagger})\ ,\label{eq:Reciprocity}$$ or that the total rightward-going phonon transmission is equal to total leftward-going phonon transmission. They also imply that the phonon transmittance is bounded by the finite number of channels, i.e., $\Xi(\omega)\leq\text{min}\left(N_{\text{L}}(+),N_{\text{R}}(-)\right)\ .$
Example with carbon nanotube junction
=====================================
We illustrate the method by simulating phonon scattering at the armchair junction between two isotopically different but structurally identical (8,8) carbon nanotubes, as can be seen in Fig. \[fig:CNTPhononPlot\](a), with the left one (‘CNT-12’) consisting of $^{12}$C atoms and the right one (‘CNT-24’) of $^{24}$C atoms which have twice the mass of $^{12}$C atoms. The greater atomic mass of the $^{24}$C atom doubles the mass density of CNT-24 and hence rescales its phonon frequencies by a factor of $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}$, introducing a difference in the polarization and distribution of phonon channels on either side of the junction at each frequency $\omega$. However, the phonon dispersion ($\omega$ vs. $k$) curves in CNT-24 are identical in shape to those of CNT-12 apart from the difference in frequency scaling. Thus, each phonon branch or ‘subband’ in CNT-12, which depends on polarization and angular symmetry, [@EDobardzic:PRB03_Single] has a unique image subband in CNT-24 and as we shall show later, this simplifies our analysis of the polarization dependence of phonon scattering. Although $^{24}$C atoms do not exist, this fictitious system is sufficiently realistic to contain the essential physics of phonon scattering by an interface as well as to illustrate key concepts introduced in the previous section.
Calculation details
-------------------
We build the carbon nanotube (CNT) and optimize its structure in GULP [@JGale:MolSim03_gulp] using the Tersoff potential [@JTersoff:PRL88_Empirical] parameters from Ref. [@LLindsay:PRB10_Optimized]. The force-constant matrices for the left and right leads ($\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{00}$, $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{01}$, $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{00}$ and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{01}$) are also computed in GULP. In our CNT structure, the interatomic interactions are sufficiently short-range so that the *primitive* unit cells correspond to the individual slices in our AGF calculation. At each frequency ($\omega$) point, we use the force-constant matrices to find the surface Green’s function $\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{R},+}^{\text{ret}}$ and $\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{ret}}$, from which we determine $\mathbf{H}^{\prime}$ and $\boldsymbol{G}^{\text{ret}}$ using Eqs. (\[eq:ProjectedForceConstantMatrix\]) and (\[eq:FiniteGreensFunction\]). Using Eqs. (\[eq:BlochMatrices\]) and (\[eq:BlochMatrixEigenmodes\]), we also calculate the incoming phonon modes $\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv}}(-)$ and $\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{R}}^{\text{adv}}(+)$ and the outgoing phonon modes $\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}(-)$ and $\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}(+)$ as well as their associated velocity matrices,$\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv}}(-)$, $\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{R}}^{\text{adv}}(+)$, $\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}(-)$ and $\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{R}}^{\text{ret}}(+)$. The surface Green’s functions $\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{R},-}^{\text{ret}}$ and $\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{L},+}^{\text{ret}}$ are also computed and combined with $\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{R},+}^{\text{ret}}$ and $\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{ret}}$ to find $\boldsymbol{Q}_{\text{R}}$ and $\boldsymbol{Q}_{\text{L}}$. Finally, these matrix variables are collected and used to compute the transmission and reflection matrices ($\boldsymbol{t}_{\text{RL}}$, $\boldsymbol{t}_{\text{LR}}$, $\boldsymbol{r}_{\text{LL}}$ and $\boldsymbol{r}_{\text{RR}}$ ) in Eqs. (\[eq:tmatrix\_RL\]) to (\[eq:rmatrix\_RR\]). We then eliminate the non-physical matrix rows and columns from them to obtain $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}$, $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}$, $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}$ and $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}$ which constitute the $S$ matrix in Eq. (\[eq:SMatrix\]). The transmission, absorption, and reflection coefficients of the phonon channels for each CNT are computed, using Eqs. (\[eq:IncomingTransmitCoeff\]) to (\[eq:OutgoingTransmitCoeff\]).
Transmission, absorption and reflection coefficients
----------------------------------------------------
We analyze the distribution of the transmission, absorption and reflection coefficients for the incident phonon flux from CNT-12 to CNT-24. Figure \[fig:CNTPhononPlot\](b) shows the reflection coefficient distribution [\[]{}$\xi_{\text{L},n}^{\prime}$ for $n=1,\ldots,N_{\text{L}}(-)$[\]]{} for the outgoing leftward-going phonon modes while Fig. \[fig:CNTPhononPlot\](c) shows the transmission coefficient distribution [\[]{}$\Xi_{\text{L},n}$ for $n=1,\ldots,N_{\text{L}}(+)$[\]]{} for the incoming rightward-going phonon modes in CNT-12. On the other side of the interface, the absorption coefficient distribution [\[]{}$\xi_{\text{R},n}$ for $n=1,\ldots,N_{\text{R}}(+)$[\]]{} for the outgoing rightward-going phonon modes in CNT-24 is shown in Fig. \[fig:CNTPhononPlot\](d). We also plot the phonon dispersion curves for CNT-12 and CNT-24 in Fig. \[fig:CNTPhononPlot\] over the frequency range between 0 and 100 meV, with the individual phonon branches [@MDresselhaus:AdvPhys00_Phonons] clearly visible. In each spectrum, we note that only half of the points on the dispersion curves contribute to the transmission or absorption/reflection because half of the modes are either leftward or rightward-going. Thus, only half of the phonon channels can contribute to the phonon transmission or reflection at any frequency.
Figure \[fig:CNTPhononPlot\](c) shows that at low frequencies ($\omega<20$ meV), the transmission coefficients ($\Xi_{\text{L},n}$) of all the incoming phonon modes are very close to unity, i.e. the phonon modes in CNT-12 are nearly perfectly transmitted across the interface. Conversely, the reflection coefficients ($\xi_{\text{L},n}^{\prime}$) of the corresponding outgoing phonon modes in Fig. \[fig:CNTPhononPlot\](b) are close to zero at low frequencies. A comparison of Figs. \[fig:CNTPhononPlot\](b) and (c) shows that each reflected phonon mode at $k_{i}$ with a reflection coefficient of $\xi_{\text{L},i}^{\prime}$ in Fig. \[fig:CNTPhononPlot\](b) corresponds symmetrically to a transmitted phonon mode at $k_{j}=-k_{i}$ with a transmission coefficient of $\Xi_{\text{L},j}=1-\xi_{\text{L},i}^{\prime}$ in Fig. \[fig:CNTPhononPlot\](c). In CNT-24 [\[]{}Fig. \[fig:CNTPhononPlot\](d)[\]]{}, the absorption coefficient spectrum ($\xi_{\text{R},n}$) for the outgoing phonon modes reveals that many of the rightward-going phonon channels have an absorption coefficient close to zero even at low frequencies although others have an absorption coefficient close to unity, indicating that there are preferred outgoing channels and subbands for phonon absorption. The presence of these $\xi_{\text{R},n}\sim0$ channels is because at the same frequency ($\omega$), there are generally more phonon channels in CNT-24 than in CNT-12 and the phonon flux at the interface is thus limited by the transmission bottleneck through the fewer incoming phonon channels in CNT-12. The absorption coefficients also tend to be lower for outgoing phonon modes nearer the phonon subband edges and with a lower group velocity ($v=\frac{\partial\omega}{\partial k}$).
![**(a)** Plot of the armchair junction between two isotopically different carbon nanotubes (CNT’s). The left CNT (‘CNT-12’) is constructed from $^{12}$C atoms while the right CNT (‘CNT-24’) has $^{24}$C atoms. Phonon momentum and polarization-resolved plot of **(b)** left-lead reflection coefficients, **(c)** left-lead transmission coefficients, and **(d)** right-lead absorption coefficients for phonon transmission from CNT-12 to CNT-24. []{data-label="fig:CNTPhononPlot"}](Figure3)
Transition probabilities of scattering processes
------------------------------------------------
In our analysis of the absorption spectrum in Fig. \[fig:CNTPhononPlot\](d), we find that energy is preferentially transmitted to some phonon subbands, suggesting that transitions between phonon channels associated with certain subbands are dominant. To elucidate the role of the subbands in phonon scattering, we use our method to determine and analyze the transition probabilities between different bulk phonon channels. We analyze two sets of scattering processes, with the first corresponding to an incoming phonon channel at $k_{1}$ in the left lead (CNT-12) and the second to an incoming phonon channel at $\bar{k}_{3}$ in the right lead (CNT-24), at $\omega=39.5$ meV. Here and in our subsequent discussion of the scattering simulation results, to represent a phonon wave vector of equal magnitude but directionally opposite to $k_{i}$, we write a bar over the latter, i.e. $\bar{k}_{i}=-k_{i}$; the corresponding integer index for $\bar{k}_{i}$ is written as $\bar{i}$. The transition probabilities $P(k\rightarrow k^{\prime})$ for all available incoming and outgoing phonon channels are computed from the square of the scattering amplitudes determined from the matrix elements of $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}$, $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}$, $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}$ and $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}$.
### Incoming phonon channel at $k_{1}$ in CNT-12 \[subsec:Incoming\_phonon\_channel\]
Figures \[fig:PhononTransitions\](a) and \[fig:PhononTransitions\](b) show the distribution of outgoing (reflected and transmitted) phonon channels in CNT-12 [\[]{}Fig. \[fig:PhononTransitions\](a)[\]]{} and CNT-24 [\[]{}Fig. \[fig:PhononTransitions\](b)[\]]{} as well as the incoming phonon channel with the wave vector $k_{1}$ in CNT-12 superimposed on the phonon dispersion spectrum of CNT-12 and CNT-24. The transition probabilities between the incoming phonon channel at $k_{1}$ and its main outgoing phonon channels at $\bar{k}_{1}$, $k_{2}$ and $k_{3}$, which are all doubly degenerate, are calculated from the matrix elements of $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}$ and $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{RL}}$ and indicated in Figs. \[fig:PhononTransitions\](a) and (b). The dominant transition probabilities [\[]{}$P(k_{1}\rightarrow\bar{k}_{1})$, $P(k_{1}\rightarrow k_{2})$ and $P(k_{1}\rightarrow k_{3})$[\]]{} add up to nearly unity once the two-fold degeneracy of the final phonon states is taken into account.
We find that the transmission of the incoming phonon mode at $k_{1}$, which has a transmission coefficient of $\Xi_{\text{L},1}=0.642$, is dominated by forward scattering transitions ($k_{1}\rightarrow k_{3}$) to the outgoing phonon channels at $k_{3}$, with the transition probability given by $P(k_{1}\rightarrow k_{3})=0.307$ or nearly half of the transmission coefficient, because the phonon subbands for $k_{3}$ are the CNT-24 image of the phonon subbands for $k_{1}$ as shown in Figs. \[fig:PhononTransitions\](a) and (b), indicating that angular symmetry and polarization considerations play an important role in forward scattering. The phonon reflection processes is dominated by backward scattering to the phonon channels at $\bar{k}_{1}$ and $k_{2}$. Unusually, the $k_{1}\rightarrow\bar{k}_{1}$ transition, which corresponds to an *intra*-subband process, has a slightly lower probability than the $k_{1}\rightarrow k_{2}$ transition, an *inter*-subband process, suggesting that transitions between these two phonon subbands, indicated by bold dashed and dotted lines in panels (a) and (b), are favored in backward scattering.
### Incoming phonon channel at $\bar{k}_{3}$ in CNT-24
Given the dominant transition between $k_{1}$ in CNT-12 and $k_{3}$ in CNT-24, it would be interesting to study the scattering processes associated with the incoming phonon channel at $\bar{k}_{3}$ in CNT-24. As before, the transition probabilities are computed from the matrix elements of $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{RR}}$ and $\bar{\boldsymbol{t}}_{\text{LR}}$, and shown in Figs. \[fig:PhononTransitions\](c) and (d). We find that the transmission of the mode at $\bar{k}_{3}$, which has a transmission coefficient of $\Xi_{\text{R},\bar{3}}=0.651$, is dominated by the $\bar{k}_{3}\rightarrow\bar{k}_{1}$ process which has the transition probability of $P(\bar{k}_{3}\rightarrow\bar{k}_{1})=0.307$, numerically equal to $P(k_{1}\rightarrow k_{3})$ as expected, because the $\bar{k}_{3}\rightarrow\bar{k}_{1}$ transition is the time reversal of the $k_{1}\rightarrow k_{3}$ transition in Figs. \[fig:PhononTransitions\](a) and (b). Also, the main reflected outgoing phonon channels in CNT-24 are at $k_{3}$ and $k_{4}$. Like in the previous simulation, the $\bar{k}_{3}\rightarrow k_{4}$ transition, an inter-subband process, plays a greater role in phonon reflection than the $\bar{k}_{3}\rightarrow k_{3}$ transition, an intra-subband process, but also to a substantially greater extent since $P(\bar{k}_{3}\rightarrow k_{4})\gg P(\bar{k}_{3}\rightarrow k_{3})$, highlighting the role of polarization in phonon scattering. The $\bar{k}_{3}\rightarrow k_{4}$ inter-subband transition is favored because the subband for $k_{4}$ is the CNT-24 image of the subband for $k_{2}$ in Fig. \[fig:PhononTransitions\](a).
{width="14cm"}
Example with zigzag and armchair graphene edge
==============================================
To illustrate the utility of our method for studying boundary scattering, we apply the $S$-matrix method to investigate the effects of edge orientation and structure on phonon scattering in graphene. Unlike the previous example of the CNT junction, there is no phonon transmission as we are dealing with pure phonon reflection in which every incoming phonon is backscattered elastically into a range of outgoing phonon channels. The phonon scattering specularity, important for understanding phonon transport in graphene nanoribbons,[@JHu:NL09_Thermal; @MBae:NatCommun13_Ballistic; @AMajee:PRB16_Length] can be obtained from the distribution of the transition probabilities.
In addition, because the system is a two-dimensional one in which we partition the lattice into unit cells larger than the usual primitive unit cell, two additional intermediate procedures are needed in the application of our $S$-matrix method to graphene. The first procedure deals with the periodic boundary conditions in the transverse direction which affect the structure of the matrices $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{00}$ and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{01}$ associated with the bulk lead and permit us to decompose them into their Fourier-component submatrices, facilitating the efficient computation of the surface and bulk Green’s functions. This Fourier decomposition requires us to partition the rectangular slices in Fig. \[fig:SystemSchematic\] into unit cells in the transverse direction [\[]{}Fig. \[fig:SliceSchematics\](a)[\]]{} and index the incoming and outgoing phonon channels with wave vectors associated with phonon modes in the ‘folded’ Brillouin zone [\[]{}Fig. \[fig:SliceSchematics\](b)[\]]{} which follows from the transverse partitioning of the rectangular slices in Fig. \[fig:SystemSchematic\]. The second procedure deals with the mapping of the phonon modes in the ‘folded’ Brillouin zone to the bulk phonon eigenmodes in the standard ‘unfolded’ Brillouin zone associated with the symmetry of the primitive unit cell in graphene. Although this step is not strictly necessary, the use of the zone-unfolding technique, as described by Boykin and Klimeck, [@TBoykin:PRB05_Practical; @TBoykin:PhysicaE09_Non] improves the clarity of the scattering results by presenting their analysis in more familiar terms.
![**(a)** Schematic of the bulk graphene slice (bounded by dotted lines) for the armchair edge scattering simulation. Each slice is partitioned in the transverse ($y$) direction into 4-atom unit cells. **(b)** The 4-atom unit cell is twice as large as the 2-atom primitive unit cell, resulting in a smaller folded Brillouin zone (bounded by dashed lines) with half the area of the standard Brillouin zone (bounded by solid lines). The longitudinal and transverse reciprocal lattice vectors for the folded BZ are given by $\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{long}}$ and $\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}$, respectively. []{data-label="fig:SliceSchematics"}](Figure5){width="8cm"}
Calculation details
-------------------
Like in the previous example, we construct the bulk graphene monolayer and optimize its structure in GULP [@JGale:MolSim03_gulp] using the same Tersoff potential parameters. [@LLindsay:PRB10_Optimized]. We assume that the graphene edge is terminated on the right and its bulk extends infinitely to the left. Thus, unlike the schematic shown in Fig. (\[fig:SystemSchematic\]), we need only to consider the force-constant matrices $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{00}$ and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{01}$ to describe the left bulk and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{C}}$ and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{CL}}$ to describe the graphene edge and its coupling to the left bulk. The force-constant matrices $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{00}$, $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{R}}^{01}$ and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{CR}}$ in Eq. (\[eq:SystemForceConstantMatrix\]) are not needed in this study and their matrix elements are set to zero.
The force-constant matrices for the bulk slices ($\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{00}$ and $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{01}$) are computed in GULP. For the armchair and zigzag edge structures, the slices in the leads each have $4N$ atoms. We take advantage of the periodicity in the transverse direction to partition the slice into $N$ 4-atom unit cells, as shown in Fig. \[fig:SliceSchematics\](a), at the real lattice points $\boldsymbol{R}_{1},\ldots,\boldsymbol{R}_{N}$ where $\boldsymbol{R}_{p}=(p-1)\boldsymbol{T}$ and $\boldsymbol{T}$ is the lattice vector characterizing the transverse periodicity. The $12\times12$ force-constant submatrix corresponding to the coupling between the unit cells at $\boldsymbol{R}_{p}$ and $\boldsymbol{R}_{q}$ within the same slice is denoted as $\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{00}(\boldsymbol{R}_{p},\boldsymbol{R}_{q})$ while the $12\times12$ force-constant submatrix corresponding to the coupling between the unit cell at $\boldsymbol{R}_{p}$ in the slice and the unit cell at $\boldsymbol{R}_{q}$ in the slice on the right (left) is denoted by $\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{01}(\boldsymbol{R}_{p},\boldsymbol{R}_{q})$ [\[]{}$\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{10}(\boldsymbol{R}_{p},\boldsymbol{R}_{q})$[\]]{}.
The transverse translational symmetry implies that the force-constant submatrices depend only on the relative displacement between the unit cells in the transverse direction, i.e. $$\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{R}_{p},\boldsymbol{R}_{q})=\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{R}_{p}-\boldsymbol{R}_{q})\label{eq:TranslationalInvarianceCondition}$$ for $l=0,1$ and $m=(l-1)\mod2$. For a slice with $N$ transverse unit cells, the submatrices make up the $12N\times12N$ matrix associated with the entire slice,
$$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{R}_{1},\boldsymbol{R}_{1}) & \mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{R}_{1},\boldsymbol{R}_{2}) & \cdots & \mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{R}_{1},\boldsymbol{R}_{N})\\
\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{R}_{2},\boldsymbol{R}_{1}) & \mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{R}_{2},\boldsymbol{R}_{2}) & \cdots & \mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{R}_{2},\boldsymbol{R}_{N})\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\
\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{R}_{N},\boldsymbol{R}_{1}) & \mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{R}_{N},\boldsymbol{R}_{2}) & \cdots & \mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{R}_{N},\boldsymbol{R}_{N})
\end{array}\right)\ .\label{eq:HL_definition}\end{aligned}$$
It follows from Eq. (\[eq:HL\_definition\]) that $\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{ml}(\boldsymbol{R}_{q},\boldsymbol{R}_{p})=\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{R}_{p},\boldsymbol{R}_{q})^{\dagger}$. In addition, Eq. (\[eq:TranslationalInvarianceCondition\]) and the transverse periodic boundary conditions imply that we can write Eq. (\[eq:HL\_definition\]) as $$\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(0) & \mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(-\boldsymbol{T}) & \cdots & \mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(-(N-1)\boldsymbol{T})\\
\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(-(N-1)\boldsymbol{T}) & \mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(0) & \cdots & \mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(-(N-2)\boldsymbol{T})\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\
\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(-\boldsymbol{T}) & \mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(-2\boldsymbol{T}) & \cdots & \mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(0)
\end{array}\right)\ ,\label{eq:ToeplitzFormHL}$$ which has the form of a block-circulant matrix. [@DeMazancout:IEEETrans83_Inverse]
### Working with transverse Fourier components
Although it seems natural to use Eq. (\[eq:AllRetardedSurfaceGF\]) directly to determine the surface Green’s function, it is numerically more efficient to exploit the block-circulant matrix structure of Eq. (\[eq:ToeplitzFormHL\]) by employing a discrete Fourier-transform approach like in Ref. [@DeMazancout:IEEETrans83_Inverse] which also yields a set of indices $\boldsymbol{Q}_{n}$, where $n=0,\ldots,N-1$, associated with the periodicity in the transverse direction. The matrix $\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}$ in Eq. (\[eq:ToeplitzFormHL\]) can be transformed into the block-diagonal form $\tilde{\boldsymbol{H}}_{\text{L}}^{lm}$, via the expression $$\boldsymbol{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}=\boldsymbol{P}\tilde{\boldsymbol{H}}_{\text{L}}^{lm}\boldsymbol{P}^{-1}\label{eq:CirculantMatrixFormHL}$$ where $$\boldsymbol{P}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
\tilde{\mathbf{I}}_{\text{L}}e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{1}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{1}} & \tilde{\mathbf{I}}_{\text{L}}e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{2}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{1}} & \cdots & \tilde{\mathbf{I}}_{\text{L}}e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{N}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{1}}\\
\tilde{\mathbf{I}}_{\text{L}}e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{1}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{2}} & \tilde{\mathbf{I}}_{\text{L}}e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{2}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{2}} & \cdots & \tilde{\mathbf{I}}_{\text{L}}e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{N}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{2}}\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\
\tilde{\mathbf{I}}_{\text{L}}e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{1}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{N}} & \tilde{\mathbf{I}}_{\text{L}}e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{2}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{N}} & \cdots & \tilde{\mathbf{I}}_{\text{L}}e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{N}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{N}}
\end{array}\right)\label{eq:UnitaryTransformMatrix}$$ is the special unitary matrix used for the basis transformation, $\tilde{\mathbf{I}}_{\text{L}}$ is the $12\times12$ identity submatrix, and $\tilde{\boldsymbol{H}}_{\text{L}}^{lm}$ is $$\tilde{\boldsymbol{H}}_{\text{L}}^{lm}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
\tilde{\mathbf{H}}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{1})\\
& \tilde{\mathbf{H}}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{2})\\
& & \ddots\\
& & & \tilde{\mathbf{H}}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{N})
\end{array}\right)\ .\label{eq:BlockDiagonalHL}$$ Each diagonal submatrix in Eq. (\[eq:BlockDiagonalHL\]) is the discrete Fourier transform of $\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{R}_{p},\boldsymbol{R}_{q})$, i.e. $$\tilde{\mathbf{H}}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})=\sum_{q=0}^{N-1}\mathbf{H}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{R}_{p},\boldsymbol{R}_{p+q})e^{-i\boldsymbol{Q}_{n}\cdot(\boldsymbol{R}_{p}-\boldsymbol{R}_{p+q})}\label{eq:FourierHSubmatrices}$$ where $l=0,1$ and $m=(l-1)\mod2$, and represents a transverse Fourier component corresponding to the transverse wave vector $\boldsymbol{Q}_{n}=\frac{n}{N}\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}$, where $n=0,\ldots,N-1$, and $\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}$ is the transverse reciprocal lattice vector satisfying $\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}\cdot\boldsymbol{T}=2\pi$. It can also be shown that $\tilde{\mathbf{H}}_{\text{L}}^{ml}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})=[\tilde{\mathbf{H}}_{\text{L}}^{lm}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})]^{\dagger}$.
The block-diagonal form of Eq. (\[eq:BlockDiagonalHL\]) allows us to treat each Fourier component as an effectively independent subsystem and determine piecewise the essential matrix variables such as the surface Green’s functions from the force-constant submatrices $\tilde{\mathbf{H}}_{\text{L}}^{00}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})$ and $\tilde{\mathbf{H}}_{\text{L}}^{01}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})$, using the methodology described in Sec. \[sec:Method\]. In the following discussions, we use the $\boldsymbol{B}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}$ as a shorthand notation to refer to the four related matrices $\boldsymbol{B}_{\text{L},+}^{\text{ret}}$, $\boldsymbol{B}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{ret}}$, $\boldsymbol{B}_{\text{L},+}^{\text{adv}}$ and $\boldsymbol{B}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{adv}}$ where $\boldsymbol{B}$ is any matrix function (e.g. the surface Green’s function $\boldsymbol{g}$).
In the same manner, the surface Green’s function can be block-diagonalized with the same $\boldsymbol{P}$ in Eq. (\[eq:CirculantMatrixFormHL\]), i.e., $$\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}=\boldsymbol{P}\tilde{\boldsymbol{g}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}\boldsymbol{P}^{-1}\label{eq:CirculantFormSurfaceGreensFunction}$$ where $\tilde{\boldsymbol{g}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}$ is a block-diagonal matrix like $\tilde{\boldsymbol{H}}_{\text{L}}^{lm}$ in Eq. (\[eq:BlockDiagonalHL\]) and has the block-diagonal $12\times12$ submatrices $\tilde{\mathbf{g}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})$ for $n=1,\ldots,N$, with
$$\tilde{\mathbf{g}}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})=[(\omega^{2}+i\eta)\tilde{\mathbf{I}}_{\text{L}}-\mathbf{\tilde{H}}_{\text{L}}^{00}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})-\mathbf{\tilde{H}}_{\text{L}}^{10}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})\tilde{\mathbf{g}}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})\mathbf{\tilde{H}}_{\text{L}}^{01}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})]^{-1}$$
$$\tilde{\mathbf{g}}_{\text{L},+}^{\text{ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})=[(\omega^{2}+i\eta)\tilde{\mathbf{I}}_{\text{L}}-\mathbf{\tilde{H}}_{\text{L}}^{00}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})-\mathbf{\tilde{H}}_{\text{L}}^{01}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})\tilde{\mathbf{g}}_{\text{L},+}^{\text{ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})\mathbf{\tilde{H}}_{\text{L}}^{10}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})]^{-1}$$
\[eq:FourierTransformRetSurfaceGF\]
like in Eq. (\[eq:AllRetardedSurfaceGF\]) and $\tilde{\mathbf{g}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})=\tilde{\mathbf{g}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})^{\dagger}$.
Similarly, we have the block-diagonal Bloch matrices $\tilde{\boldsymbol{F}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}$ with the diagonal submatrices $\tilde{\mathbf{F}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})$ given by $\tilde{\mathbf{F}}_{\text{L},+}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})=\tilde{\mathbf{g}}_{\text{L},+}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})\mathbf{\tilde{H}}_{\text{L}}^{10}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})$ and $\tilde{\mathbf{F}}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})=\tilde{\mathbf{g}}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})\mathbf{\tilde{H}}_{\text{L}}^{01}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})$ from Eq. (\[eq:BlochMatrices\]). The bulk eigenmode submatrices $\tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})$ are determined from Eq. (\[eq:BlochMatrixEigenmodes\]), i.e., $\tilde{\mathbf{F}}_{\text{L},+}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})\tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},+}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})=\tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},+}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})\tilde{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L},+}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})$ and $\tilde{\mathbf{F}}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})^{-1}\tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})=\tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})\tilde{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L},-}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})^{-1}$. As in Eq. (\[eq:BlochMatrixEigenmodes\]), the matrices $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})$ have only diagonal elements containing the eigenvalues of $\tilde{\mathbf{F}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}$ and make up the block-diagonal submatrices in $$\tilde{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
\tilde{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{1})\\
& \tilde{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{2})\\
& & \ddots\\
& & & \tilde{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{N})
\end{array}\right)$$ which is a purely diagonal $12N\times12N$ matrix. The Bloch eigenmode matrices have the form $$\tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n},k_{n,1}), & \ldots, & \tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n},k_{n,12})\end{array}\right)\label{eq:BlochEigenmodeMatrixColumnForm}$$ where $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n},k_{n,m})$ is the $12\times1$ column eigenvector for the transverse wave vector $\boldsymbol{Q}_{n}$ and the longitudinal wave vector $k_{n,m}$ for $m=1,\ldots,12$. The corresponding eigenvelocity submatrices $\tilde{\mathbf{V}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})$ can be found using Eqs. (\[eq:RightGoingVelocityMatrix\]) and (\[eq:LeftGoingVelocityMatrix\]), and have the form $$\tilde{\mathbf{V}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n})=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}
v_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n},k_{n,1}) & \cdots & 0\\
\vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\
0 & \cdots & v_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n},k_{n,12})
\end{array}\right)$$ where is $v_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n},k_{n,m})$ is the corresponding longitudinal group velocity for the eigenmode $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n},k_{n,m})$.
### Real space matrix variables
To recover the real-space surface Green’s function matrix $\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}$, we apply the transformation $\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}=\boldsymbol{P}\tilde{\boldsymbol{g}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}\boldsymbol{P}^{-1}$ like in Eq. (\[eq:CirculantFormSurfaceGreensFunction\]) and obtain $$\boldsymbol{g}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
\mathbf{g}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{R}_{1},\boldsymbol{R}_{1}) & \mathbf{g}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{R}_{1},\boldsymbol{R}_{2}) & \cdots & \mathbf{g}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{R}_{1},\boldsymbol{R}_{N})\\
\mathbf{g}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{R}_{2},\boldsymbol{R}_{1}) & \mathbf{g}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{R}_{2},\boldsymbol{R}_{2}) & \cdots & \mathbf{g}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{R}_{2},\boldsymbol{R}_{N})\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\
\mathbf{g}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{R}_{N},\boldsymbol{R}_{1}) & \mathbf{g}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{R}_{N},\boldsymbol{R}_{2}) & \cdots & \mathbf{g}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{R}_{N},\boldsymbol{R}_{N})
\end{array}\right)\ .\label{eq:RealSpaceSurfaceGF}$$ Similarly, the real-space Bloch matrix from Eq. (\[eq:BlochMatrices\]) can be obtained via the expression $\boldsymbol{F}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\pm)=\boldsymbol{P}\tilde{\boldsymbol{F}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}\boldsymbol{P}^{-1}$. Given that the real-space Bloch matrix must satisfy the conditions $$\boldsymbol{F}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\pm)^{\pm1}\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\pm)=\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\pm)\boldsymbol{\Lambda}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\pm)^{\pm}\label{eq:RealSpaceBlochMatrix}$$ where $\boldsymbol{\Lambda}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\pm)$ is also a purely diagonal matrix like $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}$ with the eigenvalues of $\boldsymbol{F}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\pm)$ along its diagonal. Equation (\[eq:RealSpaceBlochMatrix\]) implies that $\boldsymbol{\Lambda}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\pm)=\tilde{\boldsymbol{\Lambda}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}$ and we can write the real-space bulk eigenmode matrix as $$\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\pm)=\boldsymbol{P}\tilde{\boldsymbol{U}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}\ ,\label{eq:RealSpaceEigenmodes}$$ giving us
$$\begin{aligned}
\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\pm) & =\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
\tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{1})e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{1}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{1}} & \tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{2})e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{2}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{1}} & \cdots & \tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{N})e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{N}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{1}}\\
\tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{1})e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{1}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{2}} & \tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{2})e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{2}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{2}} & \cdots & \tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{N})e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{N}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{2}}\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\
\tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{1})e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{1}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{N}} & \tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{2})e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{2}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{N}} & \cdots & \tilde{\mathbf{U}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{N})e^{i\boldsymbol{Q}_{N}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{N}}
\end{array}\right)\label{eq:RealSpaceEigenmodeMatrix}\\
& =\left(\begin{array}{c}
\mathbf{u}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{1},k_{1,1}),\ldots,\mathbf{\mathbf{u}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{1},k_{1,12}),\ldots,\mathbf{\mathbf{u}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{N},k_{N,1}),\ldots,\mathbf{u}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{N},k_{N,12})\end{array}\right)\nonumber \end{aligned}$$
where the right-hand side of Eq. (\[eq:RealSpaceEigenmodeMatrix\]) is a $12N\times12N$ matrix with each column vector corresponding to an extended or evanescent bulk eigenmode and represented by $\mathbf{u}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n},k_{n,m})$, where $n=1,\ldots,N$ and $m=1,\ldots,12$. Hence, we have a total of $12N$ eigenmodes, associated with each is a real or complex longitudinal wave vector. For each transverse wave vector $\boldsymbol{Q}_{n}$, we have $12$ longitudinal wave vectors which we enumerate as $k_{n,1}$ to $k_{n,12}$. It also follows from Eqs. (\[eq:RealSpaceBlochMatrix\]) and (\[eq:RealSpaceEigenmodes\]) that the real-space velocity matrix is $\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{L}}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\pm)=\tilde{\boldsymbol{V}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}$.
Given the real-space surface Green’s functions in Eq. (\[eq:RealSpaceSurfaceGF\]), we can compute the effective harmonic matrix in Eq. (\[eq:ProjectedForceConstantMatrix\]) and the corresponding Green’s function $\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret}}$ from Eq. (\[eq:FiniteGreensFunction\]). Using $\boldsymbol{V}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret/adv}}(-)$ and $\boldsymbol{U}_{\text{L}}^{\text{ret/adv}}(-)$ from Eq. (\[eq:RealSpaceEigenmodeMatrix\]), we compute $\bar{\boldsymbol{r}}_{\text{LL}}$ from Eq. (\[eq:rmatrix\_LL\]) which gives us the transition amplitudes between the incoming and outgoing phonon channels.
### Brillouin zone unfolding
In our transverse partitioning scheme, we can associate with each phonon channel in Eq. (\[eq:RealSpaceEigenmodeMatrix\]) a transverse wave vector $\boldsymbol{Q}_{n}$ and its longitudinal wave vector $k_{n,m}$. The vector sum of these two wave vectors ($\boldsymbol{k}=\boldsymbol{Q}_{n}+k_{n,m}\hat{\boldsymbol{x}}$ where the longitudinal direction is in the $x$ direction) yields the locus of the mode ($\boldsymbol{k}$) within the ‘folded’ Brillouin zone (BZ) as shown in Fig. \[fig:SliceSchematics\](b). This folded BZ is a consequence of the 4-atom unit supercell used in our $S$-matrix method, which requires the partitioning of the atomic degrees of freedom into rectangular slices, and thus has half the reciprocal space area of the primitive BZ but contains 12 phonon branches compared to 6 phonon branches in the primitive BZ.
To make sense of our analysis of the transmission coefficients and individual transition amplitudes, it is necessary to map the scattering channels to the phonon modes in the *bulk* graphene lattice. This is done by ‘unfolding’ the 12 phonon branches within the folded BZ to obtain 6 phonon branches within the larger primitive BZ using the zone-unfolding technique of Boykin and Klimeck. [@TBoykin:PRB05_Practical; @TBoykin:PhysicaE09_Non] Given our choice of the 4-atom unit supercell, each phonon mode ($\boldsymbol{k}$) in the folded BZ has two possible image points ($\boldsymbol{k}^{\prime}$) in the primitive BZ, with one of them satisfying $\boldsymbol{k}^{\prime}=\boldsymbol{k}$ and the other shifted by an integer multiple of $\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{long}}$ and $\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}$, i.e. $\boldsymbol{k}^{\prime}=\boldsymbol{k}+n_{1}\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{long}}+n_{2}\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}$, where $n_{1}$ and $n_{2}$ are whole numbers that depend on $\boldsymbol{k}$. For notational brevity, we write $\boldsymbol{k}^{\prime}=\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})$. However, only one of the two image points corresponds to the correct bulk mode, except in the special case where $\boldsymbol{Q}_{n}=-\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}/2$ and all the phonon modes are two-fold degenerate.
For completeness, we outline the application of the Boykin-Klimeck unfolding technique [@TBoykin:PRB05_Practical; @TBoykin:PhysicaE09_Non] to the graphene lattice. We write the $12\times1$ column eigenvector $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{\text{L},\pm}^{\text{adv/ret}}(\boldsymbol{Q}_{n},k_{n,m})$ in Eq. (\[eq:BlochEigenmodeMatrixColumnForm\]), after dropping the superscripts and subscripts for the sake of brevity, as $$\tilde{\mathbf{u}}(\boldsymbol{k})=\left(\begin{array}{c}
\tilde{\boldsymbol{\beta}}_{1}(\boldsymbol{k})\\
\tilde{\boldsymbol{\beta}}_{2}(\boldsymbol{k})
\end{array}\right)\ ,\label{eq:Eigenmode_k}$$ where, for $n=1,2$, $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\beta}}_{n}(\boldsymbol{k})$ is the $6\times1$ column vector corresponding to $n$-th 2-atom primitive unit cell of the 4-atom supercell, and $\boldsymbol{\rho}_{n}$ is its displacement vector within the supercell. From Eq. (\[eq:Eigenmode\_k\]), we define the $12\times1$ column vector $$\tilde{\boldsymbol{B}}(\boldsymbol{k})=\left(\begin{array}{c}
\tilde{\boldsymbol{\beta}}_{1}(\boldsymbol{k})e^{-i\boldsymbol{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{\rho}_{1}}\\
\tilde{\boldsymbol{\beta}}_{2}(\boldsymbol{k})e^{-i\boldsymbol{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{\rho}_{2}}
\end{array}\right)$$ and the $12\times12$ matrix $$\boldsymbol{W}(\boldsymbol{k})=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}
\tilde{\boldsymbol{I}} & \tilde{\boldsymbol{I}}e^{i\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})\cdot\boldsymbol{\rho}_{1}}\\
\tilde{\boldsymbol{I}} & \tilde{\boldsymbol{I}}e^{i\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})\cdot\boldsymbol{\rho}_{2}}
\end{array}\right)\ ,$$ where $\tilde{\boldsymbol{I}}$ is the $6\times6$ identity matrix. The $12\times1$ column vector $\tilde{\boldsymbol{C}}(\boldsymbol{k})$ containing the unfolded modes is given by [@TBoykin:PRB05_Practical; @TBoykin:PhysicaE09_Non] $$\tilde{\boldsymbol{C}}(\boldsymbol{k})=\left(\begin{array}{c}
\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}}\\
\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})}
\end{array}\right)=\boldsymbol{W}(\boldsymbol{k})^{-1}\tilde{\boldsymbol{B}}(\boldsymbol{k})\label{eq:PossibleUnfoldedModes}$$ where $\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}}$ and $\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})}$ are the $6\times1$ column vectors corresponding to the the possible unfolded eigenmodes at $\boldsymbol{k}^{\prime}=\boldsymbol{k}$ and $\boldsymbol{k}^{\prime}=\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})$, respectively. If the folded mode in Eq. (\[eq:Eigenmode\_k\]) is not degenerate, then only one of the two possible unfolded eigenmodes in Eq. (\[eq:PossibleUnfoldedModes\]) is correct and the correct unfolded wave vector can be identified through elimination as the incorrect eigenmode is zero in all its components. Using Eq. (\[eq:PossibleUnfoldedModes\]) as an example, if $|\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}}|=0$, then the correct unfolded wave vector is $\boldsymbol{k}^{\prime}=\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})$ and the corresponding eigenvector is given by $$\tilde{\mathbf{u}}(\boldsymbol{k})\rightarrow\tilde{\mathbf{u}}(\boldsymbol{k})=\frac{|\tilde{\boldsymbol{B}}(\boldsymbol{k})|}{\sqrt{2}|\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})}|}\left(\begin{array}{c}
\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})}e^{i\boldsymbol{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{\rho}_{1}}\\
\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})}e^{i\boldsymbol{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{\rho}_{2}}
\end{array}\right)\ .$$ On the other hand, if the folded mode in Eq. (\[eq:Eigenmode\_k\]) is degenerate, i.e. there are other modes that share its wave vector and frequency, then it is possible that neither $|\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}}|=0$ nor $|\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})}|=0$, and hence both $\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}}$ and $\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})}$ represent correct unfolded eigenmodes, of which we may consider $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}(\boldsymbol{k})$ in Eq. (\[eq:Eigenmode\_k\]) as a mix. We can “unmix’ ’ the degenerate folded eigenmodes by assigning one unfolded eigenmode to each of the former. For example, in the special case where $\boldsymbol{Q}_{n}=-\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}/2$, the modes at each $\boldsymbol{k}$ are doubly degenerate and can be represented as $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{1}(\boldsymbol{k})$ and $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{2}(\boldsymbol{k})$. In that case, we have $$\begin{aligned}
\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{1}(\boldsymbol{k}) & \rightarrow\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{1}(\boldsymbol{k})=\frac{|\tilde{\boldsymbol{B}}(\boldsymbol{k})|}{\sqrt{2}|\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}}|}\left(\begin{array}{c}
\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}}e^{i\boldsymbol{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{\rho}_{1}}\\
\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}}e^{i\boldsymbol{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{\rho}_{2}}
\end{array}\right)\\
\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{2}(\boldsymbol{k}) & \rightarrow\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{2}(\boldsymbol{k})=\frac{|\tilde{\boldsymbol{B}}(\boldsymbol{k})|}{\sqrt{2}|\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})}|}\left(\begin{array}{c}
\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})}e^{i\boldsymbol{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{\rho}_{1}}\\
\tilde{\mathbf{c}}_{\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})}e^{i\boldsymbol{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{\rho}_{2}}
\end{array}\right)\end{aligned}$$ and the unfolded wave vectors of $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{1}(\boldsymbol{k})$ and $\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{2}(\boldsymbol{k})$ are $\boldsymbol{k}$ and $\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}(\boldsymbol{k})$, respectively.
To illustrate the unfolding method, we compute the flexural acoustic (ZA) phonon channels for $\boldsymbol{Q}_{n}=\frac{2n-N-2}{2N}\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}$, where $n=1,\ldots,N$, at $\omega=33$ meV for a bulk graphene system consisting of $N=24$ 4-atom supercells, like those in Fig. \[fig:SliceSchematics\](a), in the transverse (armchair) direction. The locus ($\boldsymbol{k}$) of these phonon channels in the folded BZ is represented by the square symbols in Fig. \[fig:PhononUnfoldingScheme\] and has the shape of a dual-blade ax head because of the zone-folding of some of the phonon modes (red and blue square symbols in Fig. \[fig:PhononUnfoldingScheme\]). After applying the Boykin-Klimeck zone-unfolding method, [@TBoykin:PRB05_Practical; @TBoykin:PhysicaE09_Non] the resultant locus of these wave vector points has the approximate shape of a circle, with the ‘unfolded’ modes represented by circles in Fig. \[fig:PhononUnfoldingScheme\]. The locus of the phonon channels in which the wave vectors in the folded BZ and their image in the primitive BZ differ by $\pm\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}$ is represented by red ($\boldsymbol{k}^{\prime}=\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}$) and blue ($\boldsymbol{k}^{\prime}=\boldsymbol{k}-\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}$) circles in the primitive BZ and by squares in the folded BZ. For example, the unfolded points in the primitive BZ at $\boldsymbol{k}_{1}^{\prime}$ and $\boldsymbol{k}_{2}^{\prime}$ in Fig. \[fig:PhononUnfoldingScheme\] are obtained by a displacement of $-\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}$ and $\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}$ in reciprocal space, respectively.
![Plot of computed ZA phonon modes at $\omega=33$ meV in the folded Brillouin zone (BZ) and their image points in the unfolded primitive BZ. The locus of the phonon channels (square symbols) within the folded BZ forms the shape of a dual-blade ax head while the shape of the locus of the phonon channels within the primitive BZ is approximately circular. []{data-label="fig:PhononUnfoldingScheme"}](Figure6){width="8cm"}
Chirality dependence of phonon boundary scattering in graphene
--------------------------------------------------------------
We study the effects of the edge chirality or orientation on the boundary scattering of low-energy flexural acoustic (ZA) phonons in graphene. It is shown by Wei, Chen and Dames in Ref. [@ZWei:JAP12_Wave] using wave packet dynamics simulations that the scattering of ZA phonons by the armchair edge can lead to what they call “wave packet splitting”, a phenomenon in which the incoming wave packet is split into two or more outgoing components with dissimilar wave vectors and back-scattered wave packets are generated after scattering. In the scattering framework, the two outgoing wave packet components correspond to having two outgoing phonon channels in which the transition probability is not zero. Wave packet splitting is however not observed in their simulations of scattering with the zigzag edge, [@ZWei:JAP12_Wave] suggesting that the edge chirality exerts a profound effect on the phonon scattering specularity. Additional evidence of this edge chirality dependence is provided by molecular dynamics simulations showing that the thermal conductivity is lower for armchair-edge graphene nanoribbons than for zigzag-edge graphene nanoribbons. [@JHu:NL09_Thermal] To explain their findings, [@ZWei:JAP12_Wave] Wei, Chen and Dames attribute the wave packet splitting to “the deeper symmetry properties of armchair and zigzag edges of the hexagonal graphene lattice”.
To understand the physics underlying this phenomenon more precisely, we investigate the edge scattering of ZA phonons by using our $S$-matrix approach to compute the transition probabilities between an incoming ZA phonon channel incident on the edge and the outgoing (reflected) ZA phonon channels for different edge chirality types. The scope of our investigation is limited to ZA phonons because the wave packet splitting of the longitudinal (LA) and transverse acoustic (TA) phonons can also arise from polarization conversion which does not affect ZA phonons but can obscure the specularity dependence on edge chirality. Our simulated system comprises a semi-infinite graphene sheet that is terminated on the right like in Figs. \[fig:GrapheneEdgeScatteringResults\](a) and \[fig:GrapheneEdgeScatteringResults\](d). In our scattering calculations, we set $\omega=33$ meV or $5\times10^{13}$ rad/s and set the incident phonon to be at either normal ($k_{y}=0$) or oblique ($k_{y}\neq0$) incidence.
### Zigzag edge
Figure \[fig:GrapheneEdgeScatteringResults\](b) shows the transition probability distribution along the reciprocal-space locus of the outgoing ZA phonon channels (solid square symbols) as well as the position of the incoming phonon channel at $\boldsymbol{k_{1}}$ (solid circle), which is at normal incidence ($k_{y}=0$) to the zigzag-edge boundary as shown in Fig. \[fig:GrapheneEdgeScatteringResults\](a). We find that incident phonon is specularly scattered, i.e. $\mathcal{P}(\boldsymbol{k_{1}})=1$, to the outgoing phonon channel at $\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{1}}=\sigma\boldsymbol{k_{1}}$, where $\sigma$ is the operator corresponding to the reflection $(k_{x},k_{y})\rightarrow(-k_{x},k_{y})$ in reciprocal space, given the computed transition probability of $P(\boldsymbol{k_{1}}\rightarrow\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{1}})=1.000$. Figure \[fig:GrapheneEdgeScatteringResults\](c) shows the transition probability distribution for the incoming phonon channel at $\boldsymbol{k_{2}}$ which is at an oblique incidence ($k_{y}\neq0$) to the boundary. The calculation also yields $P(\boldsymbol{k_{2}}\rightarrow\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{2}})=1.000$ for $\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{2}}=\sigma\boldsymbol{k_{2}}$, indicating that the phonon is also specularly scattered. These results are consistent with the findings in Ref. [@ZWei:JAP12_Wave] where it is shown that ZA phonon scattering with the zigzag edge is always specular regardless of the angle of incidence.
### Armchair edge
We repeat our calculations for ZA phonon scattering with the armchair edge as shown in Fig. \[fig:GrapheneEdgeScatteringResults\](d). At normal incidence to the armchair edge, the incident phonon at $\boldsymbol{k_{3}}$ is specularly scattered to the outgoing phonon channel $\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{3}}=\sigma\boldsymbol{k_{3}}$ since $P(\boldsymbol{k_{3}}\rightarrow\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{3}})=1.000$ as shown in Fig. \[fig:GrapheneEdgeScatteringResults\](e). However, at oblique incidence, the scattering of the incoming phonon channel at $\boldsymbol{k_{4}}$ is only partially specular as $P(\boldsymbol{k_{4}}\rightarrow\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{4}})=0.264$ for $\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{4}}=\sigma\boldsymbol{k_{4}}$ and the incident phonon is also backscattered to a second outgoing phonon channel at $\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{5}}$ with $P(\boldsymbol{k_{4}}\rightarrow\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{5}})=0.736$. There are no other outgoing channels to which the incident phonon is scattered because the total transition probability of these two outgoing channels is $P(\boldsymbol{k_{4}}\rightarrow\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{4}})+P(\boldsymbol{k_{4}}\rightarrow\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{5}})=1.000$. This splitting of the incident ZA phonon to two outgoing ZA phonon channels after scattering with the armchair edge is qualitatively consistent with the wave packet splitting observed in Ref. [@ZWei:JAP12_Wave].
To explain the partial scattering specularity of the incident phonon at $\boldsymbol{k_{4}}$, we note that the $y$ component of $\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{5}}-\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{4}}$, which is the difference in the reciprocal-space position of the outgoing phonon channels at $\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{4}}$ and $\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{5}}$, is equal to $\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}$ which characterizes the periodicity of the armchair edge as well as that of the supercell [\[]{}Fig. \[fig:GrapheneEdgeScatteringResults\](d)[\]]{} in the transverse ($y$) direction. To make this clearer, we plot in Fig. \[fig:GrapheneEdgeScatteringResults\](f) the point $\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{5}^{\prime}}=\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{5}}+\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}$ which is collinear with $\boldsymbol{k_{4}}$ and $\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{4}}$. More generally, this implies that any elastic phonon scattering by the edge must satisfy the conservation condition $$\hat{\boldsymbol{y}}\cdot(\boldsymbol{k}_{\text{in}}-\boldsymbol{k}_{\text{out}})=m|\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}|\label{eq:EdgeMomentumConservation}$$ where $m\in\mathbb{Z}$ and $\boldsymbol{k}_{\text{in}}$ ($\boldsymbol{k}_{\text{out}}$) is the wave vector of the incoming (outgoing) phonon channel.
Therefore, given Eq. (\[eq:EdgeMomentumConservation\]), we can explain why phonon scattering by the armchair edge is fully specular in Fig. \[fig:GrapheneEdgeScatteringResults\](e) and only partially specular in Fig. \[fig:GrapheneEdgeScatteringResults\](f). In Fig. \[fig:GrapheneEdgeScatteringResults\](e) where the incoming phonon at $\boldsymbol{k_{3}}$ is at normal incidence to the boundary, the only outgoing phonon channel that satisfies Eq. (\[eq:EdgeMomentumConservation\]) is at $\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{3}}$ and hence, the incident phonon undergoes fully specular scattering. On the other hand, when the incoming phonon is at $\boldsymbol{k_{4}}$, there are two outgoing phonon channels ($\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{4}}$ and $\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{5}}$) that satisfy Eq. (\[eq:EdgeMomentumConservation\]), such that $\hat{\boldsymbol{y}}\cdot(\boldsymbol{k_{4}}-\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{4}})=0$ and $\hat{\boldsymbol{y}}\cdot(\boldsymbol{k_{4}}-\boldsymbol{\bar{k}_{5}})=|\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}|$, resulting in a “splitting” of the incoming phonon.
Along the same lines, we can also explain the full specularity of ZA phonon scattering and the absence of wave packet splitting for the zigzag edge. The greater symmetry of the zigzag edge means that its $|\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}|$ is larger than the $|\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}|$ of the armchair edge since $|\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}|=\frac{2\pi}{\sqrt{3}a}$ and $\frac{2\pi}{3a}$ for the zigzag and armchair edge, respectively, where $a$ is the carbon-carbon bond length. This can also be seen when we compare the width of the folded BZ along the $k_{y}$-axis in Figs. \[fig:GrapheneEdgeScatteringResults\](b) and \[fig:GrapheneEdgeScatteringResults\](e). Hence, the conservation condition in Eq. (\[eq:EdgeMomentumConservation\]) is more restrictive for the zigzag edge because its larger $|\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}|$ allows for only one outgoing phonon channel when $\omega=33$ meV.
Effect of graphene edge chirality and isotopic disorder on ZA phonon specularity
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
### Ordered edges
We use our $S$-matrix method to study how the ZA phonon boundary scattering specularity ($\mathcal{P}$) varies systematically with frequency ($\omega$) and wave vector ($\boldsymbol{k}$) for different edge chirality configurations. The specularity parameter distribution of the incoming flexural acoustic (ZA) phonons is computed at $\omega=l\omega_{0}$, where $\omega_{0}=6.6$ meV or $10^{13}$ rad/s and $l=1,\ldots,6$, in Fig. \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\] for: (a) the ideal zigzag edge with $N=42$ unit cells or 84 atoms and (b) the ideal armchair edge with $N=24$ unit cells or 96 atoms in the transverse direction. At each frequency point, the locus of all the incoming ZA phonons is represented by a constant-frequency arc, as shown in Fig. \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\], and the loci form a concentric arrangement of arcs with the innermost and outermost arc corresponding to $\omega=\omega_{0}$ and $\omega=6\omega_{0}$, respectively.
Figure \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](a), which corresponds to the ideal zigzag edge, shows that the specularity is perfect ($\mathcal{P}=1$) as expected for all incoming ZA phonons in the frequency range studied, confirming the conservation condition in Eq. (\[eq:EdgeMomentumConservation\]). However, in Fig. \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](b) which corresponds to the ideal armchair edge, the the ZA phonon specularity varies with the frequency $\omega$ and wave vector $\boldsymbol{k}=(k_{x},k_{y})$, in agreement with the findings of Ref. [@ZWei:JAP12_Wave]. Figure \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](b) shows that the variation in specularity with $\boldsymbol{k}$ becomes more pronounced at larger $\omega$. In each constant-frequency arc in Fig. \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](b) for $\omega=4\omega_{0}$ to $6\omega_{0}$, $\mathcal{P}(\boldsymbol{k})$ approaches its *minimum* as $k_{y}$ approaches $\pm\frac{1}{2}|\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}|$ as indicated in Fig. \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](b). The existence of this minimum at a particular incident angle is reported but not explained in Ref. [@ZWei:JAP12_Wave].
For the specularity minimum at $k_{y}=\pm\frac{1}{2}|\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}|$, there are two outgoing channels at $\boldsymbol{\bar{k}}$ and $-\boldsymbol{k}$. Figure \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](b) shows that as we increase the frequency, the $\boldsymbol{k}\rightarrow-\boldsymbol{k}$ transition, which corresponds to the reversal of the phonon trajectory such that the angle of incidence is equal to the *negative* of the angle of reflection, becomes increasingly more probable. This implies that at high phonon frequencies, the a greater proportion of the phonon momentum in the $y$-direction is lost due to scattering with the *ideal* armchair edge.
### Disordered edges
Given the role of the edge translational symmetry in the ZA phonon scattering specularity, it would be interesting to see the effect of the loss of that symmetry on phonon specularity. To break the translational symmetry of the graphene edge, we randomly replace 25 percent of the edge$^{12}$C atoms with $^{24}$C atoms [\[]{}Figs. \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](a) and \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](d)[\]]{} to create isotopic disorder along the edges.
Figure \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\] shows the specularity parameter distribution at $\omega=l\omega_{0}$, where $l=1,\ldots,6$, for incoming ZA phonon channels at: (a,b) the zigzag edge with $N=42$ unit cells or 84 atoms and (c,d) the armchair edge with $N=24$ unit cells or 96 atoms in the transverse direction. The specularity distributions for the mass-disordered edges in Fig. \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](b) and (d) are obtained after averaging over 20 realizations of disorder while the distributions in Figs. \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](a) and \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](c) have no disorder and represent the baseline specularity values.
A comparison of Figs. \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](a) and \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](c) shows that the $\mathcal{P}(\boldsymbol{k})=1$ result no longer holds in the disordered zigzag edge. We observe that the specularity decreases as the frequency and the angle of incidence decrease. This dependence on the angle of incidence is unexpected as models of surface roughness scattering [@JZiman:Book60_Electrons; @AMaznev:PRB15_Boundary] suggest that the specularity should decrease monotonically with the angle of incidence. This suggests that the effect of edge disorder is different from that of edge roughness and that caution should be exercised when using specularity approximations based on surface roughness scattering.
In Fig. \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](d) at large $\omega$ ($\omega=l\omega_{0}$ for $l=4$ to $6$), we observe that the specularity parameter $\mathcal{P}(\boldsymbol{k})$ is maximum at normal incidence to the edge but decreases as the angle of incidence increases before reaching its minimum when $k_{y}=\pm\frac{1}{2}|\boldsymbol{G}_{\text{tran}}|$ like in Fig. \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](c). Comparing Figs. \[fig:ZAPhononSpecularity\](c) and (d), we find that the isotopic disorder at the armchair edge reduces $\mathcal{P}(\boldsymbol{k})$, with the decrease in $\mathcal{P}(\boldsymbol{k})$ becoming larger at higher frequency and angle of incidence, similar to the trend observed for the zigzag edge.
Summary and conclusion
======================
We have described the improvement of the atomistic Green’s function (AGF) method for treating individual phonon transmission and reflection, and shown explicitly how the phonon transmission and reflection matrices can be determined numerically and used to construct the unitary $S$ matrix that characterizes scattering by the interface and treats bulk phonon modes as scattering channels. In our AGF-based $S$-matrix approach, the scattering amplitude between the phonon channels is determined from the corresponding $S$-matrix element and yields the transition probability for the forward (transmission) or backward (reflection) scattering process. We illustrate the advantages of our new approach by first applying it to the example of phonon scattering at the junction of two isotopically different (8,8) carbon nanotubes. The $S$-matrix approach allows us to determine the dependence of the phonon transmission and reflection on frequency, polarization and phonon velocity. We also analyze the transition probability for individual scattering processes as well as describe the role of intra and inter-subband processes in phonon reflection.
We also illustrate the utility of the method by applying it to the study of phonon reflection from a graphene edge. We take advantage of the transverse periodic boundary condition to partition the system into its Fourier components for more efficient computation of matrix variables such as the surface Green’s function. For clarity, the scattering channels are mapped to the bulk phonon modes of graphene using the Boykin-Klimeck zone-unfolding technique. Our numerical calculations reveal that unlike the zigzag edge, phonon scattering with the armchair edge is only partially specular because of the symmetry difference between the armchair edge and the bulk lattice. We also find that the specularity varies with wave vector and frequency and decreases as expected when isotopic disorder is introduced to the edge.
Potentially, the application of our AGF-based $S$-matrix method in the atomistic simulations of other interfaces can provide a similarly detailed picture of phonon transmission and reflection, and shed light on the relationship between phonon scattering and the atomistic structure of the interface or surface. The method may also be incorporated into multiscale models of phonon and thermal conduction in heterogeneous solids with interfaces [@DSingh:JHT11_Effect] by combining it with the transport models based on the Boltzmann transport equation. The method can also be used to estimate phonon specularity in transport models of low-dimensional systems (e.g. silicon nanowires or graphene nanoribbons) in which edge scattering is important for momentum relaxation. In addition, the formalism presented in this paper may be applicable on its own to the numerical simulation of scattering in linear systems (e.g. photonic crystals [@JJoannopoulos:Book08_Photonic]) that have a lattice structure and are second order in time.
This work was supported in part by a grant from the Science and Engineering Research Council (Grant No. 152-70-00017) and financial support from the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A[\*]{}STAR), Singapore. I also gratefully acknowledge the gracious hospitality shown by the Department of Materials Science and Metallurgy at the University of Cambridge where part of this work was carried out.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Adversarial attacks during the testing phase of neural networks pose a challenge for the deployment of neural networks in security critical settings. These attacks can be performed by adding noise that is imperceptible to humans on top of the original data. By doing so, an attacker can create an adversarial sample, which will cause neural networks to misclassify. In this paper, we seek to understand the theoretical limits of what can be learned by neural networks in the presence of an adversary. We first defined the hypothesis space of a neural network, and showed the relationship between the growth number of the entire neural network and the growth number of each neuron. Combine that with the adversarial Vapnik-Chervonenkis(VC)-dimension of halfspace classifiers, we concluded the adversarial VC-dimension of the neural networks with sign activation functions.'
author:
- |
Zetong Qi\
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering\
University of Wisconsin - Madison\
`[email protected]`\
- |
**T.J. Wilder**\
Department of Computer Science\
University of Wisconsin - Madison\
`[email protected]`\
bibliography:
- 'references.bib'
title: 'Adversarial VC-dimension and Sample Complexity of Neural Networks'
---
=1
Introduction
============
Machine learning has become the fastest growing area of computer science, and neural networks are among the most studied among all ML algorithms because of their impressive performance in areas like image recognition, natural language processing, etc. However, practical neural networks are often vulnerable to adversarial attacks: given an input $x$ and any target label $t$, it is possible to find an $x'$ that is very similar to $x$ but which neural networks will misclassify as the target label $t$. This makes it difficult to apply neural networks in security critical areas like self-driving cars, malware detection systems, facial recognition systems to unlock devices, etc. Carlini et al. created the state of the art attacks on image recognition systems [@DBLP:journals/corr/CarliniW16a] and speech recognition systems [@DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1904-05734]. Some have proposed methods, like adversarial training [@goodfellow2014explaining], for creating neural networks that are robust against adversarial attacks.
In this paper, we aim to understand more about neural networks in the presence of a test time adversary. In particular, we try to see if the sample complexity of neural networks is different in the presence of adversaries. We show that, for some simple networks, the sample complexity bound does not change with the introduction of an adversary. We prove this for neural networks with sign activation functions by combining known bounds on sample complexity with recent bounds on the adversarial VC-dimension of halfspace classifiers from Cullina et al. [@cullina2018paclearning]
We first describe the adversarial PAC-learning framework. After that, we formally specify our neural network. Finally we prove that the VC-dimension bound is unchanged by the introduction of an adversary.
PAC-learning in the presence of an adversary
--------------------------------------------
In this section, we setup the framework for PAC-learning in the presence of an evasion adversary, which is one that generates and presents the learner with adversarial examples during the test phase but does not interfere with the training.
In our setup, there is an unknown distribution $\P_{\X \times \Y}$. The learner receives training data $S = ((x_1, y_1), \dots , (x_n, y_n)) \sim \P^n_{\X \times \Y} $ and outputs $\hat{h} \in \H$. The adversary receives data $(x, y) \in \P_{\X \times \Y}$ and outputs some $x' \in N(x)$, where $N(x)$ defines a neighborhood around $x$. The neighborhood of $x$ is defined as $N(x) = \{ x' \in \X : R(x, x') \leq \epsilon \}$ where $R(x, x')$ defines a nearness relationship.
Under this new framework, the adversarial expected risk, $L_P$, is defined as the learner’s risk under the true distribution $\P_{\X \times \Y}$ in the presence of an adversary constrained by the nearness relation $R$, and $L_S$ is defined as the adversarial empirical risk with the same adversary $$L_P(h, R) = \operatorname{\mathbb{E}}_{(x,y) \sim \P_{\X \times \Y}} \brac* {\max_{x' \in N(x)} \ell(h(x'), y)}$$ $$L_S(h, R) = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^{n} \brac* {\max_{x' \in N(x_i)} \ell(h(x'), y_i)}$$
The goal of the learner is to minimize the adversarial expected risk. Because calculating the expected risk over the distribution $\P_{\X \times \Y}$ is infeasible, the learner instead aims to minimize the adversarial empirical risk. The algorithm that selects the hypothesis $\hat{h}$ that minimizes the adversarial empirical risk from the hypothesis space $\H$, with nearness relation $R$, is called Adversarial Empirical Risk Minimization and we define the objective as follows $$AERM_{\H, R}(S) = \argmin_{h \in \H}{L_S(h, R)}$$
Corrupted hypotheses
--------------------
In this section, we describe the concept of a corrupted hypothesis class. The presence of an adversary forces the learner to learn with corrupted hypothesis. Instead of just predicting $\pm 1$, corrupted hypothesis also outputs $\bot$ that means “always wrong”.
For $\Y = \{-1, 1\}$, let the corrupted output space be $\widetilde{\Y} = \{-1, 1, \bot \}$. Now we can define the corruption function as a mapping from a hypothesis to the corrupted version $\kappa_R: (\X \mapsto \Y) \mapsto (\X \mapsto \widetilde{\Y})$: $$\kappa_R(h) = x \rightarrow \begin{cases}
-1 &\forall x' \in N(x) : h(x') = -1\\
1 &\forall x' \in N(x) : h(x') = 1\\
\bot &\exists x'_0, x'_1 \in N(x) : h(x'_0) \neq h(x'_1)
\end{cases}$$ Using this, we can define the set of corrupted hypotheses as $\widetilde{H} = \{\kappa_R(h): h \in \H\}$. In other words, the hypothesis will predict “always wrong” when the test data $x$ is in the neighborhood where different labels exist.
We also define the loss function $\lambda$, and the loss classes $\F$ and $\widetilde \F$ which are derived from $\H$ and $\widetilde H$ respectively $$\lambda(h) = \X \times \widetilde{\Y} \rightarrow \{0, 1\}$$ $$\F = \{\lambda(h) : h \in \H\}$$ $$\widetilde{F} = \{\lambda(\widetilde{h}) : \widetilde{h} \in \widetilde{\H}\}$$ We can define the equivalent shattering coefficient in terms of the loss class as $$\sigma'(\F, i) = \max_{(x',y) \in \X^i \times \Y^i} |\{\p*{f(x'_1, y_1), \dots, f(x'_{i}, y_{i})}: f \in \F\}|$$ Finally, the Adversarial VC-dimension is defined as $$AVC(\H, R) = \sup\{n \in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}: \sigma'(\lambda(\widetilde{\H}), n) = 2^n\}$$
Adversarial VC-dimension of halfspace classifiers
-------------------------------------------------
For the sake of simplicity, we assume that the adversary has standard $\ell_p$ norm-based constraints that are usually imposed on evasion adversaries as described in the literature [@DBLP:journals/corr/CarliniW16a; @goodfellow2014explaining]. As it turns out, the adversarial VC-dimension for halfspace classifiers corrupted by $\ell_p$ norm-constrained adversary is equal to the standard VC-dimension [@cullina2018paclearning]. That is: Let $\H$ be the family of halfspace classifiers of $\X \in \operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^d$. Then the adversarial VC-dimension of $\H$ in the presence of an adversary with $\ell_p$ norm-based constraints is $AVC(\H, R) = d+1$.
Adversarial VC-dimension of Neural Networks with Sign Activation Function
=========================================================================
Define the Neural Network
-------------------------
We define a general neural network described by a directed acyclic graph $G = (V, E)$, where all neurons have the same activation function $\sigma(a)$. In a neural network of depth $T$, let $V_0, \dots , V_T$ be the layers of the neural network and let $E_{(t-1, t)}$ be the weights connecting the layers $V_{t-1}$ and $V_t$. Any layer $V_t$ has $\abs* {V_t}$ number of neurons. We can express our neural network’s overall hypothesis space as a composition of the hypothesis spaces of each layer, $\H = \H^{(T)} \circ \H^{(T-1)} \circ \dots \circ \H^{(1)}$ where $\H^{(t)} = \{f: \operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^{|V_{t-1}|} \mapsto {\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}}^{|V_t|}\}$. We analyze the adversarial VC-dimension and sample complexity for this family of hypotheses in the event of an evasion attack.
Neural Networks with Sign Activation Function
---------------------------------------------
To simplify our hypothesis space, we choose the activation function to be $\sigma(a) = \1_{[a>0]}$, and let $\H^{(t)} = \{f: \operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^{|V_{t-1}|} \mapsto {\{\pm1\}}^{|V_t|}\}$. With this activation function, each neuron in each layer turns into a halfspace classifier: $$\forall t \in [T], V_t = sign(\langle E_{(t-1, t)}, V_{t-1} \rangle)$$ Cullina et al. showed that the adversarial VC dimension of a halfspace classifier for $\X = \operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^d$ is $d+1$ [@cullina2018paclearning]. In the previous section, we showed that the hypothesis class of a neural network $\H$ can be written as a composition of its layers, $\H = \H^{(T)}\circ \dots \circ\H^{(1)}$. The following lemma shows that the growth function of a composition of hypothesis classes is bounded by the products of the growth functions of the individual classes.
Let $\F_1$ be a set of functions from $\X$ to $\Z$ and let $\F_2$ be a set of functions from $\Z$ to $\Y$. Let $\H = \F_2 \circ \F_1$ be the composition class. That is, $\forall f_1 \in \F_1$ and $f_2 \in \F_2 : \exists h \in \H \text{ s.t. } h(x) = f_2(f_1(x))$. The growth function of $\H$, $\tau_{\H}(m)$, is bounded by $\tau_{\H}(m) \leq \tau_{\F_1}(m)\tau_{\F_2}(m)$\
*Proof:*\
$$\begin{aligned}
|\H_C| &= |\{f_2(f_1(c_1)), \dots, f_2(f_1(c_m)) : f_1 \in \F_1, f_2 \in \F_2\}| \\
&= \abs*{\bigcup_{f_1 \in \F_1} \{(f_2(f_1(c_1)), \dots, f_2(f_1(c_m))) : f_2 \in \F_2\}} \\
&\leq \abs{\F_{1C}} \cdot \tau_{\F_2}(m) \\
&\leq \tau_{\F_1}(m) \tau_{\F_2}(m) \\
\tau_{\H}(m) &\leq \tau_{\F_1}(m) \tau_{\F_2}(m) \hspace{5cm} \square\end{aligned}$$
Therefore, the growth function of the hypothesis space of neural networks is bounded by: $$\tau_{\H}(m) \leq \prod_{t=1}^{T}\tau_{\H^{(t)}(m)}$$ In addition, each $\H^{(t)}$ can written as a product of individual neurons, $\H^{(t)} = \H^{(t, 1)} \times \dots \times \H^{(t, \abs* {V_t})}$, where each $\H^{(t, j)}$ is a halfspace classifier: $\H^{(t, j)} = \{f: \operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^{|V_{t-1}|} \mapsto {\{\pm1\}}\}$. The following lemma shows that the growth function of the Cartesian product class is bounded by the products of the growth functions of the individual classes:
For $i = 1, 2$, let $\F_i$ be a set of functions from $\X$ to $\Y_i$. Define $\H = \F_1 \times \F_2$ to be the Cartesian product class. That is, $\forall f_1 \in \F_1$ and $f_2 \in \F_2: \exists h \in \H \text{ s.t. } h(x) = (f_1(x), f_2(x))$. The growth function of $\H$ is bounded by: $\tau_{\H}(m) \leq \tau_{\F_1}(m)\tau_{\F_2}(m)$
*Proof:*\
$$\begin{aligned}
|\H_C| &= |\{((f_1(c_1), f_2(c_1)), \dots, (f_1(c_m), f_2(c_m))) : f_1 \in \F_1, f_2 \in \F_2\}| \\
&= |\{((f_1(c_1), \dots, f_1(c_m)), (f_2(c_1), \dots, f_2(c_m))) : f_1 \in \F_1, f_2 \in \F_2\}| \\
&= |\F_{1C} \times \F_{2C}| \\
&= |\F_{1C}| \cdot |\F_{2C}| \\
\tau_{\H}(m) &\leq \tau_{\F_1}(m) \tau_{\F_2}(m) \hspace{5cm} \square\end{aligned}$$
Therefore, the growth function of each layer can be bounded by: $$\tau_{\H^{(t)}}(m) \leq \prod_{i=1}^{\abs* {V_t}} \tau_{\H^{(t, i)}}(m)$$ Combining these two lemmas, the growth function of the entire neural network is bounded by:\
$$\tau_{\H}(m) \leq \prod_{t=1}^T \prod_{i=1}^{\abs* {V_t}} \tau_{\H^{(t, i)}}(m)$$ Since the adversaries are only able to change the inputs, we only corrupt the first layer by introducing an adversary. However, since the adversarial VC-dimension of halfspace classifiers of dimension $d$ is $d+1$, the same as the regular VC-dimension, we can say that the $i$th neuron in *all* hidden layers have an effective VC-dimension of $d_{t,i}$, where $d_{t,i}$ is the number of edges that are going into the $i$th neuron of the $t$th layer, assuming that one edge accounts for the bias term.
Using this alongside our growth function bound, we can use Sauer’s lemma to show that:\
$$\tau_{\H}(m) \leq \prod_{t=1}^T \prod_{i=1}^{\abs*{V_t}} \p*{\frac{em}{d_{t,i}}}^{d_{t,i}} \leq \prod_{t=1}^T \prod_{i=1}^{\abs*{V_t}} \p*{em}^{d_{t,i}} = \p*{em}^{\p*{\sum_{t=1}^{T} \sum_{i=1}^{\abs*{V_t}}d_{t,i}}}$$ Notice that ${\sum_{t=1}^{T} \sum_{i=1}^{\abs* {V_t}}d_{t,i}}$ is just the number of edges in the neural network, therefore we have:\
$$\tau_{\H}(m) \leq \p*{em}^{\abs* E}$$ Let there be a set of size $m$ that is shattered by the neural network. Therefore the growth number $\tau_{\H}(m) = 2^m$. Combining this with $\tau_{\H}(m) \leq \p*{em}^{\abs* E}$, we have that: $$2^m \leq \p*{em}^{\abs* E}$$ The following lemma shows that $m$ must be $\O(\abs* E \log(\abs* E))$ in order to satisfy the inequality.
If a neural network’s hypothesis space $\H$ has $\abs* E$ number of parameters, let $m$ be the size of the set $\H$ shatters. If the inequality $2^m \leq \p*{em}^{\abs* E}$ is satisfied, then $\H$ has sample complexity of $\O(\abs* E \log(\abs* E))$.\
*Proof:*\
$$\begin{aligned}
2^m &\leq (em)^{|E|}\\
m \log(2) &\leq |E| \log(em) \\
m &\leq \frac{|E|}{\log(2)} \log(em) \\
em &\leq \frac{e|E|}{\log(2)} \log(em) \\
\noalign{\normalfont{Lemma A.1 in \cite{Shalev-Shwartz:2014:UML:2621980} states:
"for $a \geq 0$, if $x \geq 2a\log(a)$ then $x \geq a\log(x)$". We can take the contrapositive to get: "if $x < a\log(x)$ then $x < 2a\log(a)$" and apply it}} \\
em &< \frac{2e|E|}{\log(2)} \log\p*{\frac{e|E|}{\log(2)}} \\
m &< \frac{2|E|}{\log(2)} \log\p*{\frac{e|E|}{\log(2)}} \\
\noalign{\normalfont{Ignoring the constants, we have:s}} \\
m &\leq \O(|E|\log |E|) \hspace*{2cm} \square\end{aligned}$$
Putting all of these pieces together, we now have a bound on the adversarial VC-dimension for our network.
For a neural network with sign activation functions, the adversarial VC-dimension has the same bound as the regular VC-dimension.
*Proof:*\
Extending corrupted hypotheses
==============================
One big issue with the corrupted hypothesis class as defined by Cullina et al. is that it limits the expressiveness of the hypotheses by requiring $\pm 1$ output [@cullina2018paclearning]. In order to overcome this issue, we introduce two generalizations of the corrupted hypothesis class. The first is a generalization to multi-class corrupted hypotheses. $$\begin{aligned}
\kappa_R(h) = x \rightarrow \begin{cases}
h(x) &\forall x' \in N(x) : h(x) = h(x')\\
\bot &\exists x'_0, x'_1 \in N(x) : h(x'_0) \neq h(x'_1)
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$
This is more of a generalization in notation than anything else because we simply output the normal label of $x$ for the hypothesis if it agrees on all the neighbors of $x$, and reject it if it doesn’t. In the $\pm 1$ case, this version simplifies down to the original form of the equation.
However, this version is still impractical for problems without a reasonable number of outputs or for any problem which has more complex relationships between the outputs. To solve these problems, we introduce our second new form of the corrupted hypothesis class which we call the continuous corruption class. $$\begin{aligned}
\kappa_{R,d}(h) = x \rightarrow \begin{cases}
h(x) &\forall x' \in N(x) : d(h(x), h(x')) \leq \delta\\
\bot &\exists x'_0, x'_1 \in N(x) : d(h(x'_0), h(x'_1)) > \delta
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$
Here, $d$ defines a distance metric on $\Y$ which is analogous to $R$, the distance metric on $\X$. Instead of looking for perfect agreement among all the neighbors, we instead allow normal predictions on $x$, when any of the neighbors of $x$ would have sufficiently similar outputs. This formulation now allows us to describe the corrupted version of any hypothesis class, instead of only binary ones. It should be possible to theoretically describe how easy it is to corrupt any hypothesis class by comparing the normal and corrupted versions.
This formulation directly relates to our own problem of discovering VC-dimension of neural networks in adversarial environments. The original framework restricted us to $\pm 1$ output for the network and, for our proof of the bound, even for each node of the network. By using the continuous corruption class, we can instead look at adversarial elements of continuous functions, including many other common activation functions such as Sigmoids, Tanh, or ReLU. All of these are actually used in practice, while our version using sign activation is primarily a theoretical model.
Beyond accommodating for continuous functions, this generalization also allows for more interesting relationships between the output. For example, when classifying images for self-driving cars, it is a big problem if an adversary can make your model see a car instead of a human, but probably less of a problem if your model is made to see a car instead of a truck. Obviously there are may be problems either way, but when you have a lot of classes or continuous outputs, then intelligently picking your distance metric could help make the model robust without relying on perfect predictions.
Conclusion
==========
We analyzed the adversarial VC-dimension and sample complexity for neural networks with sign activation function and showed that it could achieve the same bound as the non-adversarial case. Though Cullina et. al. did show that the AVC-dimension could be arbitrarily larger or smaller than the ordinary VC-dimension, we have shown that there exist learners, including at least some neural networks, which may be highly resilient to adversarial attacks given sufficient training data. In practice however, we find that neural networks are often highly susceptible to adversarial attacks. This may be because of the number of training samples used in practice is usually significantly less than the sample complexity, and the learned model is overfitting to the limited training set so it doesn’t generalize well to the true distribution.
A natural extension to our work, which may help to show if that is true, is to find the adversarial VC-dimension of neural networks with some other activation functions such as Sigmoid, Tanh or ReLU. These are of particular interest because they are some of the most widely used in practice. The difficulty with the analysis of those activation functions arises from the fact that they are continuous and map $\operatorname{\mathbb{R}}\mapsto \operatorname{\mathbb{R}}$. Because each neuron has real output, it becomes hard to use the same proof techniques, because we cannot look at the AVC-dimension for a single neuron. That being said, there are many other methods which could potentially be used to prove these bounds. These include existing methods which bound the sample complexity for neural networks with sigmoid activation functions. For some of these functions, we may also be able to look at an adversarial Rademacher complexity and bound the sample complexity that way. We leave the exploration of these methods to future work.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We consider the Voronoi tessellation induced by a homogeneous and stationary Poisson point process of intensity $\lambda\!>\!0$ in a quadrant, where the two half-axes represent boundaries. We show that the mean cell size is less than $\lambda^{-1}$ when the seed is located exactly at the boundary, and it can be larger than $\lambda^{-1}$ when the seed lies close to the boundary. In addition, we calculate the second moment of the cell size at two locations: (i) at the corner of a quadrant, and (ii) at the boundary of the half-plane. In both cases, we illustrate that the two-parameter Gamma distribution, with location-dependent parameters, provides a good fit. As a potential application, we use the Gamma approximations to study the degree distribution for secure in-connectivity in wireless sensor networks deployed over a bounded domain.'
author:
- |
Konstantinos Koufos and Carl P. Dettmann [^1]\
[^2]
title: Distribution of Cell Size in Bounded Poisson Voronoi Tessellations with Application to Secure Local Connectivity
---
\[PVT\][Poisson Voronoi Tessellation]{} \[PPP\][Poisson Point Process]{} \[CDF\][Cumulative Distribution Function]{} \[PDF\][Probability Distribution Function]{} \[PMF\][Probability Mass Function]{} \[WSN\][Wireless Sensor Networks]{} \[RV\][Random Variable]{}
Physical layer security, Poisson Voronoi tessellations, stochastic geometry
Introduction
============
A random tessellation is a random subdivision of a space into disjoint regions or cells $\mathcal{C}_i$, see [@Moller1989; @Lieshout2012] for a formal definition. Perhaps the most basic random tessellation model partitions the plane $\mathbb{R}^2$ into Voronoi cells. In order to construct them, a set of random nuclei (or seeds) $S_i$ are first distributed, and then, the locations of the plane are associated with the nearest seed for the Euclidean distance. The boundaries of the Voronoi cells are equidistant to the two nearest seeds. When the distribution of the seeds follows the stationary with a finite intensity $\lambda\!>\!0$, the random tessellation is widely-known as the [@Moller1989; @Lieshout2012]. Since the concept of is quite fundamental, it accepts a wide range of applications from geo-sciences and astronomy, e.g., [@Schoenberg2008; @Ramella2001] to telecommunications [@Baccelli2001].
The statistical properties of planar , e.g., cell area, perimeter, vertex degree, etc. have been studied since the early 1950’s [@Meijering1952; @Gilbert1962]. The of the area of the typical cell in a planar is unknown, and approximations using the Gamma and the log-normal distribution with appropriately selected parameters have been widely adopted [@Weaire1986; @Tanemura2003; @Kumar1992; @Szabo2007]. An intuitive explanation for the good fit of the Gamma distribution using the nearest neighbour approximation is presented in [@Weaire1986]. In [@Brakke1986], an integral-based method is devised to compute various statistics of the including the edge length, the of the distance and angle between neighbouring seeds and vertices, the cell size etc. Unlike the , the distribution of cell size in planar Poisson Delaunay tessellation is known; it can be expressed in terms of the modified Bessel function [@Rathie1992]. For three-dimensional Delaunay cells, some properties of geometrical characteristics are available in [@Muche1996].
Following the recent emergence of small cell wireless networks with irregular structure, fundamental tools from stochastic geometry have been adopted to model the deployment of network elements and assess the performance [@Andrews2011]. The Gamma approximation for the distribution of cell size in has been used in cellular systems, e.g., to approximate the of the network load in a typical Voronoi cell [@Cao2013], as well as in , e.g., to investigate the of in-degree for secure local connectivity [@Pinto2012]. Nevertheless, small cell wireless networks have boundaries, and the statistics of a typical Voronoi cell may not well represent the properties of cells located close to the network borders.
In this paper, we consider a over a quadrant, where the two half-axes represent boundaries. We assume that the location of a seed of the underlying , hereafter the seed $S_0$, is arbitrarily fixed either at the boundary or close to the boundary. Firstly, we extend the integral-based method in [@Brakke1986] to compute the mean cell size. Unlike the in the infinite plane, we show that a unit-intensity in a quadrant can induce Voronoi cells with mean area smaller or larger than unity. Secondly, we show how to compute the second moment of the cell size for the Voronoi cell $\mathcal{C}_0$ (that generated by seed $S_0$) assuming that the seed $S_0$ is located either at the corner of the quadrant or at the boundary and far from the corner. The latter can be seen as a in the half-plane with the seed $S_0$ located at the boundary. In both cases, we illustrate that the Gamma distribution with fitted mean and variance provides an accurate approximation for the distribution of the cell size. In a recent paper [@Devroye2017], it has been shown that the asymptotic distribution of the Voronoi cell size is independent of the location of the seed $S_0$ (almost everywhere) and of the intensity underlying the including also the case of inhomogeneous . Our results complement the analysis in [@Devroye2017], showing that for a homogeneous with finite intensity $\lambda$ and in a zero measure set of $S_0$, i.e., at the boundary, the moments of the cell size can be location-dependent.
As a potential application, we utilize the Gamma approximation to study the distribution of in-degree with physical layer security in [@Wyner1975]. We illustrate that for a sensor located at the boundary, it might be more probable to have secure out-connectivity than secure in-connectivity. This result complements the analysis in [@Pinto2012], where it is shown that in the infinite plane, secure in-connectivity is more probable than out-connectivity.
Poisson Voronoi tessellation over a quadrant
============================================
We consider a of unit intensity (without loss of generality) over the quadrant $\mathbb{R}^2_+$. We denote by $\mathcal{S}$ the set of seeds $S_i$ generating the Voronoi cells, i.e., $S_i\in \mathcal{S}, i=0,1,\ldots,$. Due to the Slivnyak’s Theorem, see for instance [@Stoyan1995], the statistical properties of the do not change by conditioning the location of a seed. In order to study the properties of Voronoi cells close to the boundary, let us assume that the seed $S_0$ (that generating the Voronoi cell $\mathcal{C}_0$) is located (i) along the boundary at distance $a\!\geq\!0$ from the corner of the quadrant, (ii) at distance $h\!\geq\!0$ from the boundary of the half-plane. The latter can also be seen as the case where the seed $S_0$ is located far from the corner of the quadrant and at distance $h$ from the boundary. Let us consider a point $P\in\mathbb{R}^2_+$ with polar coordinates $\left(r,\phi\right)$. The point $P$ can be interior to some cell, at the boundary separating two cells, or it can also be a vertex. Adopting the terminology used in [@Brakke1986], we define the [*[void]{}*]{} of the point $P$ to be the intersection of the quadrant $\mathbb{R}^2_+$, and the disk with center that point and radius equal to the distance to the nearest seed(s). We denote by $A$ the area of the cell $\mathcal{C}_0$. In the next section, we show how to calculate the mean area $\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\}$.
Mean cell size
==============
-- --
-- --
In order to compute the mean area of the cell $\mathcal{C}_0$, we should identify the probability that the point $P$ is interior to the cell $\mathcal{C}_0$ and integrate this probability over the quadrant. The point $P$ is interior to that cell when its void is empty of other seeds, and the seed $S_0$ lies on its circumference. Since the underlying has unit intensity, the probability that the void of the point $P$ is empty is $e^{-V\left(P\right)}$, where the size of the void is $V(P)=D\left(P,d\left(P,S_0\right)\right)\cap\mathbb{R}^2_+$. The mean cell size can be read as $$\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\}\!=\!\mathbb{E}\left[\int_{\mathbb{R}^2_+} \mathbbm{1}_{P\in\mathcal{C}_0}{\rm d}P \right]\!=\!\int_{\mathbb{R}^2_+}\mathbb{P}\left(P\in\mathcal{C}_0\right){\rm d}P \!=\! \int_{\mathbb{R}^2_+} e^{-V\left(P\right)}{\rm d}P.$$
Let us assume that the seed $S_0$ is located along the boundary at distance $a$ from the corner. Given the distance $a$, we separate between the following cases in the calculation of the size of the area $V(P)$:
- $r\geq a/2, \phi\leq\phi_1$, where $\phi_1=\arccos\left(\frac{-a + \sqrt{2a^2+r^2}}{r}\right)$ is obtained as the positive solution of the equation $d\!=\!r \cos \phi$, where $d=\sqrt{r^2+a^2-2ar\cos\phi}$ is the distance between $S_0$ and $P$. For $\phi=\phi_1$ the void becomes tangential to the boundary along the y-axis. For $\phi\leq\phi_1$, the boundary along the x-axis cuts some part of the void, see Fig. \[fig:Integral1\]. The angle $\omega$ in Fig. \[fig:Integral1\] can be calculated as $\omega=\arccos\left(\frac{r \sin \phi}{d} \right)$, and the size of the void, denoted by $V_1$, is $$\label{eq:A1}
V_1 = \pi d^2 - \omega d^2 + r \sin\phi \left|r \cos\phi - a\right|.$$
- $r\geq a/2, \phi_1\leq\phi\leq\phi_2$, where the angle $\phi_2=\arccos\left(\frac{a}{2r} \right)$ is the solution of $d=\sqrt{r^2+a^2-2ar\cos\phi}$ for $d\!=\!r$. For $\phi\!=\!\phi_2$, the circle $D\left(P,d\left(P,S_0\right)\right)$ passes through the corner of the quadrant. For $\phi_1\leq\phi\leq\phi_2$, both boundaries along the x- and y-axis determine the void, see Fig. \[fig:Integral2\]. In Fig. \[fig:Integral2\], $\omega_1=\omega$, $\omega_2=\arccos\left(\frac{r \cos\phi}{d} \right)$, and the size of the void, denoted by $V_2$, is $$\label{eq:A2}
V_2 = \pi d^2 - \left(\omega_1+\omega_2\right) d^2 + r \sin\phi \left|r \cos\phi - a\right| + r d \cos\phi \sin\omega_2.$$
- $r\geq a/2, \phi_2\leq\phi\leq\pi/2$. In that case, see Fig. \[fig:Integral3\], the size of the void, denoted by $V_3$, can be calculated as the sum of a trapezium, a triangle and a circular domain with radius $d$ and angle $\left(\frac{3\pi}{2} -\omega_3-\omega_4\right)$, where $\omega_3=\omega_2$ and $\omega_4=\omega$. Hence, $$\label{eq:A3}
V_3 = \frac{1}{2} r \sin\phi\left(r\cos\phi+a\right) + \frac{1}{2} r d \cos\phi \sin\omega_3 + \frac{ \frac{3\pi}{2} - \omega_3 - \omega_4}{2 \pi} \pi d^2.$$
- $r\leq a/2, \phi\leq \pi/2$. In that case, $\phi_1=\phi_2=0$, and the void of the point $P$ always contains the corner of the quadrant in its interior. The size of the void is still given by equation .
Finally, one has to sum up the four terms to consider all points in the quadrant. $$\label{eq:Mean}
\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\} \!=\! \int\nolimits_0^{\phi_1}\!\!\!\!\! \int\nolimits_{\frac{a}{2}}^\infty\!\!\!\!\!\! e^{-V_1} r {\rm d}r {\rm d}\phi +\! \int\nolimits_{\phi_1}^{\phi_2}\!\!\!\int\nolimits_{\frac{a}{2}}^\infty\!\!\!\!\!\!e^{-V_2} r {\rm d}r {\rm d}\phi +\!\! \int\nolimits_{\phi_2}^{\frac{\pi}{2}}\!\!\!\!\! \int\nolimits_{\frac{a}{2}}^\infty\!\!\! e^{-V_3} r {\rm d}r {\rm d}\phi +\! \int\nolimits_{0}^{\frac{\pi}{2}}\!\!\!\int\nolimits_{0}^{\frac{a}{2}}\!\!\! e^{-V_3} r {\rm d}r {\rm d}\phi.$$
For a induced by a unit-intensity in the quadrant $\mathbb{R}^2_+$, the mean size of the cell $\mathcal{C}_0$ is $\frac{\arccos\left(\frac{2}{\pi}\right)}{\sqrt{\pi^2-4}}$ when the seed $S_0$ is located at the corner.
When the seed $S_0$ is located at the corner of the quadrant, one may substitute $a\!=\!0$, $\phi_1\!=\!0$ and $\phi_2\!=\!\pi/2$ in equation . Therefore the size of the void area is essentially computed from equation after substituting $d=r,\, \omega_1=\frac{\pi}{2}-\phi$ and $\omega_2=\phi$. The mean cell size is finally expressed as $$\label{eq:MeanCorner}
\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\} = \displaystyle \int\nolimits_0^{\pi/2}\!\! \int\nolimits_{0}^\infty \!\! e^{-r^2\left( \frac{\pi}{2} + \sin\left( 2\phi\right) \right)} r {\rm d}r {\rm d}\phi = \frac{\arccos\left(\frac{2}{\pi}\right)}{\sqrt{\pi^2-4}}\approx 0.36351.$$
-- -- --
-- -- --
For a induced by a unit-intensity in the quadrant $\mathbb{R}^2_+$, the mean size of the cell $\mathcal{C}_0$ is less than unity when the seed $S_0$ is located at the boundary. \[lem:2\]
In order to compute an upper bound for the mean cell size in equation for arbitrary $a\!\geq\!0$, we change the coordinate system so that the seed $S_0$ becomes the origin, and we construct lower bounds for the size of the void areas which can be evaluated in closed- and/or semi-closed form. We will consider all points of the quadrant. Note that the coordinates of the boundaries of the quadrant is $x\!=\!-a$ and $y\!=\! 0$ in the new coordinate system, see Fig. \[fig:Bound\].
When $r\!\geq\! 0, 0\!\leq\!\phi\!\leq\!\frac{\pi}{2}$ in the new coordinate system, see Fig. \[fig:Bound1\], we construct a lower bound for the size of the void area considering that the y-axis, $x\!=\! 0$, see the dashed line in Fig. \[fig:Bound1\], is a boundary. Thus, the mean cell size due to these points of the quadrant is actually bounded by equation .
In order to bound the size of the void for $0\!\leq\! r \!\leq\! a, \frac{\pi}{2}\!\leq\!\phi\!\leq\! \pi$, see Fig. \[fig:Bound2\], we use the area of the rectangle with sides $a$ and $2r\sin\phi$. Thus, the contribution of these points to the bound is equal to $$\displaystyle \int\nolimits_0^a\!\!\int\nolimits_{\frac{\pi}{2}}^\pi \!e^{-2ar\sin \phi} r {\rm d}r {\rm d}\phi = -\frac{\pi}{4}\mathbf{M}_1\!\left(2a^2\right),$$ where $\mathbf{M}_\nu\!\left(x\right)$ is the modified Struve function of the second kind, $\mathbf{M}_\nu\!\left(x\right)\!=\! \mathbf{L}_\nu\!\left(x\right)-I_\nu\!\left(x\right)$, where $\mathbf{L}_\nu\!\left(x\right)$ is the modified Struve function of the first kind, see [@Abramowitz1972 pp. 498], and $I_\nu\!\left(x\right)$ is the modified Bessel function of the first kind, see [@Abramowitz1972 pp. 374].
For the remaining points of the quadrant, i.e, $r\!>\! a, \frac{\pi}{2}\!\leq\!\phi\!\leq\!\pi- \arccos\left(\frac{a}{r}\right)$, see Fig. \[fig:Bound3\], a lower bound on the size of the void area is obtained by considering just a quarter of the circle. Hence, the remaining points give a contribution equal to $$\displaystyle \int\nolimits_a^\infty\!\!\int\nolimits_{\frac{\pi}{2}}^{\pi-\arccos\left(\frac{a}{r}\right)} \!e^{-\frac{\pi}{4}r^2} r {\rm d}\phi {\rm d}r = e^{-\frac{a^2 \pi}{4}} - {\text{Erfc}}\!\left(\frac{a\sqrt{\pi}}{2}\right),$$ where ${\text{Erfc}}\!\left(x\right)\!=\!\frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}}\int_x^\infty{e^{-t^2}{\rm d}t}$ is the complementary error function.
After summing up the contributions from the three parts of the quadrant we get $$\label{eq:Bounda}
\mathbb{E}\!\left\{A\right\} \!<\! e^{-\frac{a^2 \pi}{4}} - {\text{Erfc}}\!\left(\frac{a\sqrt{\pi}}{2}\right) -\frac{\pi}{4} \mathbf{M}_1\!\left(2a^2\right) + \frac{\arccos\left(\frac{2}{\pi}\right)}{\sqrt{\pi^2-4}}.$$
The upper bound in can be evaluated at arbitrary precision, and it is less than unity for all $a\!\geq \! 0$, see the red line in Fig. \[fig:MeanA\]. As $a\!\rightarrow\!\infty$, the Struve function converges to $\lim_{a\rightarrow\infty}\mathbf{M}_1\!\left(2a^2\right)\!=\! -\frac{2}{\pi}$, and the bound converges to $\frac{1}{2}\!+\!\frac{\arccos\left(\frac{2}{\pi}\right)}{\sqrt{\pi^2-4}}$.
For a induced by a unit-intensity in the half-plane, the mean size of cell $\mathcal{C}_0$ is less than unity when the seed $S_0$ is located at the boundary.
To simplify integration, we take a coordinate system where the seed $S_0$ is the origin. The size of the void area for points with coordinates $r\geq 0$, $0\leq\phi\leq \pi/2$ can be calculated using equation after substituting $d\!=\!r$, $a\!=\!0$ and $\omega\!=\!\frac{\pi}{2}-\phi$. After some straightforward calculation we get $$\label{eq:MeanEdge}
\mathbb{E}\!\left\{A\right\} = \displaystyle 2\! \int\nolimits_0^{\pi/2} \!\!\!\int\nolimits_{0}^\infty \!\!\!\!\! e^{-r^2\left( \frac{\pi}{2} + \phi + \sin\left( \phi\right) \cos\left( \phi\right) \right)} r {\rm d}r {\rm d}\phi \!=\! \int\nolimits_0^{\pi/2}\!\!\!\!\!\frac{2 {\rm d}\phi}{\pi\!+\!2\phi\!+\!\sin\left(2\phi\right)} \approx 0.61082,$$ where we have multiplied by $2$ to account for the angles $\pi/2 \leq\phi\leq \pi$.
One may also note that $\mathbb{E}\!\left\{A\right\} \!<\! \int\nolimits_0^{\frac{\pi}{2}}\!\frac{2 {\rm d}\phi}{\pi\!+\!2\phi} \!=\! \log\!\left(2\right)\!<\! 1$. Another way to prove that $\mathbb{E}\!\left\{A\right\} \!<\! 1$ is to take the limit of the bound in as $a\!\rightarrow\!\infty$, resulting to $\mathbb{E}\!\left\{A\right\} \!<\! \frac{1}{2}\!+\!\frac{\arccos\left(\frac{2}{\pi}\right)}{\sqrt{\pi^2-4}}\!<\! 1$.
A rather loose lower bound to equation can be obtained after neglecting the impact of the boundaries on the size of the void and substituting $V_1\!=\!V_2\!=\!V_3\!=\!\pi d^2$ in equation . Finally, $\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\}>\frac{1}{4}\left(1+{\text{Erf}\left(a\sqrt{\pi} \right)} \right) \forall a\!\geq\! 0$, where ${\text{Erf}}\left(x\right)\!=\!\frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}}\int_0^x{e^{-t^2}{\rm d}t}$ is the error function. \[rem:1\]
The computation of the mean cell size for varying $a$ using equation is validated in Fig. \[fig:MeanA\]. One may also find there the lower bound, see Remark \[rem:1\], and the upper bound, see , to the mean cell size. We see that for large $a$, the mean converges to the value given in equation . For small $a$, e.g., $a\!\leq\!\frac{1}{2}$, the vertical boundary reduces significantly the mean cell size. For intermediate values of $a$, e.g., $1\!\leq\! a\! \leq \!2$, the mean cell size is large when the cell $\mathcal{C}_0$ contains also the corner of the quadrant in its interior.
-- --
-- --
Let us now assume that the seed $S_0$ is located at distance $h$ from the boundary of the half-plane, see Fig. \[fig:Integral4\]. In order to simplify the integration, we assume that the origin of the coordinate system is the point at the boundary nearest to $S_0$, thus the polar coordinates of $S_0$ become $\left(h,\frac{\pi}{2}\right)$. By following similar steps used to obtain equations $-$, one can show that the mean cell size as a function of the parameter $h$ is $$\label{eq:Mean2}
\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\} = 2\int\nolimits_0^{\phi_0} \!\!\!\int\nolimits_{h/2}^\infty\!\!\! e^{-V_1} r {\rm d}r {\rm d}\phi + 2\int\nolimits_{\phi_0}^{\pi/2} \!\!\!\int\nolimits_{h/2}^\infty\!\!\! e^{-V_2} r {\rm d}r {\rm d}\phi + 2\int\nolimits_{0}^{\pi/2}\!\!\! \int\nolimits_{0}^{h/2}\!\!\! e^{-V_1} r {\rm d}r {\rm d}\phi,$$ where $V_1\!=\!\left(\!\pi\!-\!\omega\!+\!\frac{\sin\left(2\omega\right)}{2} \!\right)\!d^2$, $V_2\!=\!\pi d^2$, $d\!=\!\sqrt{r^2\!+\!h^2\!-\!2hr\sin\!\phi}$, $\phi_0\!=\!\arcsin\!\left(\!\frac{-h \!+\! \sqrt{2h^2+r^2}}{r}\!\right)$, $\omega\!=\!\arccos\left(\!\frac{r \sin \phi}{d} \!\right)$, and the factor $2$ has been added to account for angles $\pi/2 \leq\phi\leq \pi$.
-- -- --
-- -- --
For a induced by a unit-intensity in the half plane, the mean size of the cell $\mathcal{C}_0$ can be larger than unity when the seed $S_0$ lies close to the boundary. \[lem:3\]
First, we note that the lower bound obtained by setting $V_1\!=\!V_2\!=\!\pi d^2$ in equation is equal to $\frac{1}{2} \left(1+{\text{Erf}\left(h\sqrt{\pi} \right)} \right) \forall h\!\geq\! 0$. This is increasing in $h$ becoming unity as $h\!\rightarrow\!\infty$, thus cannot be used to claim mean cell sizes larger than unity. In order to obtain a lower bound to equation which is larger than unity for some $h$, we change the coordinate system so that the seed $S_0$ becomes the origin, and we construct appropriate upper bounds for the size of the void areas. In the new system, see the dashed lines in Fig. \[fig:Bound1h\]$-$\[fig:Bound3h\], the coordinates of the boundary is $y\!=\!-h$.
When $r\!\geq\! 0, 0\!\leq\! \phi\!\leq\! \frac{\pi}{2}$, see Fig. \[fig:Bound1h\], we may neglect the impact of boundary on the size of the void with negligible approximation error, thus $$2 \displaystyle \int\nolimits_0^\infty\!\!\int\nolimits_0^{\frac{\pi}{2}} \!e^{-\pi r^2} r {\rm d}r {\rm d}\phi = \frac{1}{2}.$$
When $r\!\leq\! h, -\frac{\pi}{2} \!\leq\! \phi\!\leq\! 0$, see Fig. \[fig:Bound2h\], we still neglect the impact of boundary on the size of the void. Note that this approximation may introduce non-negligble error for the points with radii $\frac{h}{2}\!\leq\! r \!\leq\! h$. $$2 \displaystyle \int\nolimits_0^{h}\!\!\int\nolimits_{-\frac{\pi}{2}}^0 \!e^{-\pi r^2} r {\rm d}r {\rm d}\phi = \frac{1}{2}\left( 1-e^{-\pi h^2}\right).$$
Finally, for the remaining points $r \!\geq\! h, -\arcsin\!\left(\frac{h}{r}\right)\!\leq\! \phi\!\leq\! 0$, see Fig. \[fig:Bound3h\], the size of the void area is $V\!\left(\phi\right) \!=\! \left(\frac{\pi}{2}+\omega+\cos\omega\sin\omega\right)r^2$, where $\omega\!\left(\phi\right)\!=\! \arcsin\!\left(\frac{h}{r}+\sin\phi\right)$. Due to the fact that $\frac{1}{2}\sin\!\left(2x\right)\!<\!x \, \forall x\!\geq\! 0$, the size of the void area can be upper-bounded by $V\!\left(\phi\right)\!\leq\! \left(\frac{\pi}{2}+2\omega\right)r^2$. For $r\!\geq\! h, -\frac{\pi}{2}\!\leq\!-\arcsin\!\left(\frac{h}{r}\right)\!\leq \phi\!\leq\! 0$, the function $\omega\!\left(\phi\right)$ is increasing in $\phi$ with positive second derivative. Hence, $V\!\left(\phi\right)\!\leq\!\left(\frac{\pi}{2} +2\left(\arcsin\left(\frac{h}{r}\right) + \phi \right) \right)r^2$. Therefore the contribution of the remaining points to the mean cell size can be lower-bounded as $$\int_h^\infty\!\!\!\int_{-\arcsin\left(\frac{h}{r}\right)}^0\!\! e^{-\left(\frac{\pi}{2} +2\left(\arcsin\left(\frac{h}{r}\right) + \phi \right) \right)r^2} \! r{\rm d}\phi {\rm d}r = \frac{1}{2}{\text{Ei}}\!\left(\frac{\pi h^2}{2}\right) - \int_h^\infty \!\frac{1}{r}e^{-\left(\frac{3\pi}{2}-2\arccos\left(\frac{h}{r}\right)\right)r^2} \! {\rm d}r,$$ where ${\text{Ei}}\!\left(x\right)\!=\!\int_x^\infty \frac{e^{-t}}{t}{\rm d}t, x\!>\!0$ is the exponential integral.
In order to lower bound the right-hand side of the equation above, we need to upper bound the second term. A rather trivial upper bound is obtained using a piecewise function to upper-bound $\arccos\!\left(\frac{h}{r}\right)$, i.e, $\frac{\pi}{3}$ for $h\!\leq\! r\!\leq\! 2h$ and $\frac{\pi}{2}$ for $r\!>\! 2h$. $$\int_h^\infty \!\frac{1}{r}e^{-\left(\frac{3\pi}{2}-2\arccos\left(\frac{h}{r}\right)\right)r^2} \! {\rm d}r \!<\! \frac{1}{2}\left({\text{Ei}}\!\left(\frac{5\pi h^2}{6}\right) - {\text{Ei}}\!\left(\frac{10\pi h^2}{3}\right) + {\text{Ei}}\!\left(2\pi h^2\right) \right)$$
After summing up the contributions from the three parts of the half-plane we get $$\label{eq:Boundh}
\begin{array}{ccl}
\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\} &>& 1 - \frac{1}{2} e^{-\pi h^2} + \frac{1}{2}\Big( {\text{Ei}}\!\left(\frac{10\pi h^2}{3}\right) - {\text{Ei}}\!\left(\frac{5\pi h^2}{6}\right) + \\
& & \,\,\, {\text{Ei}}\!\left(\frac{\pi h^2}{2}\right)-{\text{Ei}}\!\left(2\pi h^2\right)\Big).
\end{array}$$
The right-hand side of can be evaluated at arbitrary precision. When the distance $h$ to the boundary is around $h\!=\! 1$, we observe mean cell sizes larger than unity, see Fig. \[fig:MeanH\].
In Fig. \[fig:Mean\], we see that the integral-based calculation matches quite well the simulation results even for a moderate average number of points, $\lambda L^2\!=\! 100$, inside the square. Note that the probability of a void region touching opposite sides of the square is at most $\exp\!\left(-\lambda \pi L^2/2\right)$, thus negligible for our parameter settings.
Second moment of cell size
==========================
In order to calculate the second moment of the cell size, one has to consider two points $P_1\!\left(r_1,\phi_1\right), P_2\!\left(r_2,\phi_2 \right)$ interior to the cell $\mathcal{C}_0$. $$\mathbb{E}\left\{A^2\right\}\!=\!\int_{\mathbb{R}^2_+\times \mathbb{R}^2_+ }\mathbb{P}\left(P_1,P_2\in\mathcal{C}_0\right){\rm d}P_1{\rm d}P_2 \!=\! \int_{\mathbb{R}^2_+\times \mathbb{R}^2_+} e^{-V\left(P_1,P_2\right)}{\rm d}P_1{\rm d}P_2,$$ where $V\!\left(P_1,P_2\right)\!=\! \left[D\left(P_1,d\left(P_1,S_0\right)\right) \cup D\left(P_2,d\left(P_2,S_0\right)\right)\right] \cap\mathbb{R}^2_+$ is the size of the intersection area of the two disks and the quadrant, and the points $S_0,P_1,P_2$ cannot be collinear.
In the infinite plane, the calculation of the second moment using integral-based methods can be found in [@Brakke1986; @Hayen2002]. The computation of the void area $V\!\left(P_1,P_2\right)$ in a bounded domain is cumbersome. Nevertheless, when the seed $S_0$ is fixed either at the corner of the quadrant, $a\!=\!0$, or at the boundary of the half-plane, $h\!=\!0$, the second moment can still be calculated using few integration terms.
For a induced by a unit-intensity in the quadrant $\mathbb{R}^2_+$, the second moment of the size of the cell $\mathcal{C}_0$ when the seed $S_0$ is located at the corner is $$\mathbb{E}\left\{A^2\right\} \!=\! \int\nolimits_0^{\frac{\pi}{2}}\!\int\nolimits_{\theta-\frac{\pi}{2}}^\theta\!\int\nolimits_{-\omega_1}^{\frac{\pi}{2}-\theta}\!\!\frac{f\left(\omega_1,\omega_2\right) {\rm d}\omega_2 {\rm d}\omega_1 {\rm d}\theta}{V_1^2} + \! 2 \int\nolimits_{-\frac{\pi}{2}}^{0}\!\int\nolimits_{-\frac{\pi}{2}}^{\theta}\!\int\nolimits_{-\omega_1}^{\frac{\pi}{2}}\!\!\frac{f\left(\omega_1,\omega_2\right) {\rm d}\omega_2 {\rm d}\omega_1 {\rm d}\theta}{V_2^2},$$ where $V_1 = \frac{2\theta + \sin\left(2\left(\theta-\omega_1\right)\right) + \sin\left(2 \omega_1\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_1} + \frac{\pi - 2\theta + \sin\left(2\left(\theta+\omega_2\right)\right) + \sin\left(2 \omega_2\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_2}$, $V_2\!=\!\frac{\pi + 2\sin\left(2\left(\theta+\omega_2\right)\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_2}$, and $f\left(\omega_1,\omega_2\right) \!=\! \frac{\sin\left( \omega_1+\omega_2\right)}{\cos^3\omega_1 \cos^3\omega_2 }$. \[lem:4\]
-- -- -- --
-- -- -- --
We transform the coordinate system as follows: $\left(z,\theta\right)$ are the polar coordinates of the point $Q$ which is the intersection point of the line passing through $P_1,P_2$ and its perpendicular line passing through the origin $S_0$, $\omega_1$ is the angle $QS_0P_1$ measured clockwise, and $\omega_2$ is the angle $QS_0P_2$ measured counter-clockwise, see Fig. \[fig:IntegralStd\] for example illustrations. The transformation can be read as $\phi_1 \!=\!\theta \!-\! \omega_1$, $\phi_2\!=\!\theta \!+\! \omega_2$, $r_1\!=\!\frac{z}{\cos\omega_1}$ and $r_2\!=\!\frac{z}{\cos\omega_2}$. The determinant of the Jacobian matrix of the transformation is $|J| \!=\! z^3 f\left(\omega_1,\omega_2\right)$, where $f\left(\omega_1,\omega_2\right) \!=\! \frac{\sin\left( \omega_1+\omega_2\right)}{\cos^3\omega_1 \cos^3\omega_2 }$.
Due to the fact that $r_1\!=\!\frac{z}{\cos\omega_1}$ and $r_2\!=\!\frac{z}{\cos\omega_2}$, the size of the void can be written as $V_j z^2$, where $V_j$ is the size normalized for $z\!=\!1$. After integrating the probability of an empty void, $\int e^{-V_j z^2} z^3 f\left(\omega_1,\omega_2\right) {\rm d} P_1 {\rm d} P_2$, over $z\!\geq\!0$, we get $\int\frac{f\left(\omega_1,\omega_2\right)}{2 V_j^2} {\rm d}\omega_2 {\rm d}\omega_1 {\rm d}\theta$. In the infinite plane, or equivalently in the bulk of the deployment area, the size of the normalized void is $$V=\frac{\pi + 2\omega_1 + \sin\left(2\omega_1\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_1} \!+\! \frac{\pi + 2\omega_2 + \sin\left(2\omega_2\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_2}.$$
Using the above equation, the second moment of the cell size in the infinite plane can be calculated approximately equal to $1.28$ [@Brakke1986; @Hayen2002]. When the seed $S_0$ is located at the corner of the quadrant, even though both points $P_1,P_2$ are located in the upper-right quadrant, the angle $\theta$ can take values in $\left[-\frac{\pi}{2},\pi\right]$. The range of the variables $\omega_1,\omega_2$ depend on the quadrant where the point $Q$ lies. Therefore the computation of the void can be divided into three parts. When the point $Q$ lies in the upper-right quadrant, the angles $\omega_1, \omega_2$ could be positive or negative. Example illustrations are in Fig. \[fig:Integral21\], where the angle $\omega_2$ is positive and in Fig. \[fig:Integral22\], where $\omega_2$ is negative. In both figures, $\omega_1$ is positive. In order to calculate the size of the void inside the quadrant $\mathbb{R}^2_+$, we take the void generated by $P_1$ and subtract: (i) the shaded area under the x-axis, and (ii) the part of the void at the left of the line passing through $S_0$ and $Q$. In a similar manner, we can calculate the void contribution due to the point $P_2$. After summing up we get $$V_1 = \frac{2\theta + \sin\left(2\left(\theta-\omega_1\right)\right) + \sin\left(2 \omega_1\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_1} + \frac{\pi - 2\theta + \sin\left(2\left(\theta+\omega_2\right)\right) + \sin\left(2 \omega_2\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_2}.$$
When the angle $\theta$ is negative, e.g., in Fig. \[fig:Integral23\], $\omega_1$ becomes always negative and $\omega_2$ always positive. In Fig. \[fig:Integral23\], we may see that the point $P_1$ can be ignored, and the size of the void can be calculated solely based on $P_2$, i.e., $V_2\!=\!\frac{\pi + 2\sin\left(2\left(\theta+\omega_2\right)\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_2}$. Finally, when $\frac{\pi}{2}\leq \theta \leq \pi$, see Fig. \[fig:Integral24\], the size of the void depends only on $P_1$, and $V_3\!=\!\frac{\pi + 2\sin\left(2\left(\theta-\omega_1\right)\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_1}$. Due to symmetry, negative angles, $\theta\leq 0$ and angles larger than $\frac{\pi}{2}$ give equal contributions. In addition, every integral term must be multipled by two to consider each pair of points twice, and the Lemma is proved.
For a induced by a unit-intensity in the half-plane, the second moment of the size of the cell $\mathcal{C}_0$ when the seed $S_0$ is located at the boundary is $$\begin{array}{ccc}
\mathbb{E}\left\{A^2\right\} \!&\!=\!& \displaystyle\! \int\nolimits_0^{\frac{\pi}{2}}\!\!\int\nolimits_{\theta-\frac{\pi}{2}}^\theta\!\int\nolimits_{-\omega_1}^{\frac{\pi}{2}-\theta}\frac{2f\!\left(\omega_1,\omega_2\right) \!{\rm d}\omega_2 {\rm d}\omega_1 {\rm d}\theta}{V_1^2} + \int\nolimits_0^{\frac{\pi}{2}}\!\!\int\nolimits_{\theta-\frac{\pi}{2}}^\theta\!\int\nolimits_{\frac{\pi}{2}-\theta}^{\frac{\pi}{2}}\!\!\frac{2f\!\left(\omega_1,\omega_2\right) \!{\rm d}\omega_2 {\rm d}\omega_1 {\rm d}\theta}{V_2^2} + \\
& & \displaystyle \int\nolimits_0^{\frac{\pi}{2}}\!\!\int\nolimits_{-\frac{\pi}{2}}^{\theta-\frac{\pi}{2}}\!\!\int\nolimits_{-\omega_1}^{\frac{\pi}{2}}\!\!\frac{2f\left(\omega_1,\omega_2\right) {\rm d}\omega_2 {\rm d}\omega_1 {\rm d}\theta}{V_3^2} + \int\nolimits_{-\frac{\pi}{2}}^{0}\!\!\int\nolimits_{-\frac{\pi}{2}}^{\theta}\!\int\nolimits_{-\omega_1}^{\frac{\pi}{2}}\!\!\frac{2f\left(\omega_1,\omega_2\right) {\rm d}\omega_2 {\rm d}\omega_1 {\rm d}\theta}{V_4^2},
\end{array}$$ where $$\begin{array}{ccl}
V_1 &\!=\!& \frac{2\theta + \sin\left(2\left(\theta-\omega_1\right)\right) + \sin\left(2 \omega_1\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_1} \!+\! \frac{\pi+2\omega_2+\sin\left(2\omega_2\right) }{2\cos^2\omega_2} \\
V_2 &\!=\!& \frac{2\theta + \sin\left(2\left(\theta-\omega_1\right)\right) + \sin\left(2 \omega_1\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_1} \!+\! \frac{2\pi-2\theta + \sin\left(2 \omega_2\right) - \sin\left(2 \left( \theta+\omega_2\right)\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_2} \\
V_3 &\!=\!& \frac{\pi + 2\omega_1 + \sin\left(2 \omega_1\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_1} \!+\! \frac{2\pi-2\theta + \sin\left(2 \omega_2\right) - \sin\left(2 \left( \theta+\omega_2\right)\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_2} \\
V_4 &\!=\!& \frac{\pi+2\theta+2\omega_2 +\sin\left(2\left(\theta+\omega_2\right)\right)} {2\cos^2\omega_2}.
\end{array}$$ \[lem:5\]
-- -- -- --
-- -- -- --
We consider same coordinate system with Lemma \[lem:4\], with the seed $S_0$ being the origin. We separate between angles $-\frac{\pi}{2}\leq\theta\leq\frac{\pi}{2}$ and $\frac{\pi}{2}\leq\theta\leq\frac{3\pi}{2}$. Due to symmetry, it is sufficient to carry out the computation only for $-\frac{\pi}{2}\leq\theta\leq\frac{\pi}{2}$. For $0\leq\theta\leq\frac{\pi}{2}$, all configurations of points $P_1,P_2$ can be divided into three cases: Both points are located at the upper-right quadrant, $\left\{\phi_1\leq\frac{\pi}{2},\phi_2\leq\frac{\pi}{2}\right\}$, point $P_1$ is located at the upper-right and point $P_2$ at the upper-left quadrant, $\left\{\phi_1\leq\frac{\pi}{2},\frac{\pi}{2}\leq\phi_2\leq\pi\right\}$, and both points are located at the upper-left quadrant, $\left\{\frac{\pi}{2}\leq\phi_1\leq\pi,\frac{\pi}{2}\leq\phi_2\leq\pi\right\}$. An example configuration for the first case is depicted in Fig. \[fig:Integral25\], where the void due to the point $P_2$ is not anymore limited from a boundary along the y-axis, thus $$V_1 \!=\! \frac{2\theta + \sin\left(2\left(\theta-\omega_1\right)\right) + \sin\left(2 \omega_1\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_1} \!+\! \frac{\pi+2\omega_2+\sin\left(2\omega_2\right) }{2\cos^2\omega_2}.$$
In the second case, both voids due to points $P_1$ and $P_2$ are truncated from the boundary, see Fig. \[fig:Integral26\]. After some straightfoward calculation we get the size of the associated void, $$V_2 \!=\! \frac{2\theta + \sin\left(2\left(\theta-\omega_1\right)\right) + \sin\left(2 \omega_1\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_1} \!+\! \frac{2\pi-2\theta + \sin\left(2 \omega_2\right) - \sin\left(2 \left( \theta+\omega_2\right)\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_2}.$$ In the third case, see Fig. \[fig:Integral27\], only the void of point $P_2$ is affected from the boundary $$V_3\!=\!\frac{\pi + 2\omega_1 + \sin\left(2 \omega_1\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_1} \!+\! \frac{2\pi-2\theta + \sin\left(2 \omega_2\right) - \sin\left(2 \left( \theta+\omega_2\right)\right)}{2\cos^2\omega_2}.$$
Finally, for $\theta\!<\!0$, see Fig. \[fig:Integral28\], the void is determined only from point $P_2$ and $V_4\!=\!\frac{\pi+2\theta+2\omega_2 +\sin\left(2\left(\theta+\omega_2\right)\right)} {2\cos^2\omega_2}$. After multiplying every term by four to consider angles $\frac{\pi}{2}\leq\theta\leq\frac{3\pi}{2}$ and to count every pair of points twice and summing up we get the result of the Lemma.
After carrying out the numerical integration we get $\mathbb{E}\left\{A^2\right\} \!=\! 0.23781$ in Lemma \[lem:4\] and $\mathbb{E}\left\{A^2\right\} \!=\! 0.54508$ in Lemma \[lem:5\]. The associated mean values at the corner of the quadrant and at the boundary of the half-plane are given in equations and respectively. After fitting the first two moments of the cell size to the Gamma distribution, $\frac{x^{k-1}e^{-x/\nu} }{\nu^k\Gamma\left(k\right)}$, one can compute the parameters $k\!=\!\frac{\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\}^2} {\mathbb{V}{\text{ar}}\left\{A\right\}}$ and $\nu\!=\!\frac{\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\}}{k}$, and use them to approximate the distribution of the cell size.
\[table:Table1\] $\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\}$ $\mathbb{V}{\text{ar}}\left\{A\right\}$ $k$ $\nu$
------------------ ------------------------------ ----------------------------------------- ----------- -----------
Corner $0.36351$ $0.10567$ $1.25052$ $0.29069$
Edge $0.61082$ $0.17198$ $2.16935$ $0.28157$
Bulk $1$ $0.28018$ $3.56918$ $0.28018$
: Fitting the Gamma distribution to the distribution of the size of the cell $\mathcal{C}_0$.
![Distribution of the area of the Voronoi cell $\mathcal{C}_0$ at different locations using simulations and the Gamma distribution with fitted parameters, see Table \[table:Table1\]. In the subfigure, we depict the approximation error between the simulated and approximated , i.e., $F_{\text{sim}}\!-\! F_{\text{app}}$, where $F$ is the , at the corner (blue), at the edge (red) and in the bulk (black). It indicates that with the selected parameters the distributions are not Gamma.[]{data-label="fig:Distributions"}](Distributions.pdf){width="4.0in"}
The mean and the variance of the cell size as well as the Gamma parameters $k,\nu$ at the corner of the quadrant, at the edge of the half-plane, and in the infinite plane (i.e. in the bulk) are summarized in Table \[table:Table1\]. We see that the parameter $k$ depends clearly on the location while the parameter $\nu$ is not that sensitive. In the bulk, it is already known that the Gamma distribution gives a good fit with parameters $k=\nu^{-1}=3.61$ [@Weaire1986] estimated by simulations, and $k=\nu^{-1}=3.575$ [@Pineda2004] estimated by integration. These values are also close to the parameters in Table \[table:Table1\]. The parameterized Gamma distributions at the corner and at the edge are to the best of our knowledge new. In Fig. \[fig:Distributions\], we have simulated $10\, 000$ over a square with side $L\!=\!10$ and intensity equal to unity. We see that the Gamma distribution with fitted mean and variance provides a good approximation for the distribution of the cell size also at the corner and at the edge. The simulated mean and variance at the corner are $0.36125$ and $0.10271$ respectively, while at the edge the related values are $0.60796$ and $0.16928$.
The numerical calculation of the mean and the variance of the cell size close to the boundary and the corner of the quadrant involves the size of void areas which are tedious to express in closed-form. In Fig. \[fig:Grid\], we have simulated the contour plots for the mean and the standard deviation of cell size for a grid of seeds close to the corner of the quadrant. The coordinates of the seed $S_0$ are $\left(i\Delta x,j\Delta y\right)$, where $\Delta x\!=\!\Delta y\!=\! 0.3$ and $i=0,1,\ldots, 10, j=0,1,\ldots, 10$. As expected, the mean and the variance of the cell size are maximized when the seed is located close to the boundary and also close to the corner of the quadrant. In addition, we see in Fig. \[fig:GridMean\] that the mean cell size converges quickly to unity as we move towards the bulk.
-- --
-- --
Application to secrecy
======================
Physical layer security without exchanging secret keys was first proposed by Wyner [@Wyner1975] and refers to the protection of information messages against eavesdropping with the aid of channel coding. Physical layer security would be well-suited for devices with light computational power, e.g., in certain types of sensor networks, where conventional security techniques, e.g., based on cryptography fail to adapt due to their high complexity [@Trappe2015].
Let us consider an entity $A$ that wants to send a message to entity $B$. The message is protected against the $i$-th eavesdropper $E_i$, if the eavesdropper fails to extract useful information from the message it receives. We will assume that A succeeds to send the message in a secure manner, if the distance between A and B is smaller than the distance between A and the eavesdropper closest to A, i.e., $d\left(A,B\right)<d\left(A,E_i\right) \forall i$. The distance-based criterion for secure connectivity corresponds to the case where the fading statistics are neglected, the noise power levels at the legitimate users and at the eavesdroppers are equal, and the secrecy rate threshold is zero [@Pinto2012].
We consider the of legitimate users, $\Pi_l$, and eavesdroppers, $\Pi_e$, with densities $\lambda_l$ and $\lambda_e$. Let $p\!=\!\frac{\lambda_l}{\lambda_e}$. We place a [*[virtual node]{}*]{} at $S_0$, either at the corner of a quadrant or at the edge of the half-plane, to study secure in- and out-connectivity at that location. For instance, this could be the location of an aggregator where all sensors (legitimate users) want to transmit measurement data. The number of legitimate users connected securely to the [*[virtual node]{}*]{} describes the in-degree with secrecy. We will study the moments of the in-degree and its over the ensemble of all possible realizations of $\Pi_l, \Pi_e$.
A legitimate user has secure in-connection to the [*[virtual node]{}*]{}, if their distance separation is smaller than the distance between that user and any eavesdropper [@Pinto2012]. The in-degree accepts an elegant geometric interpretation using the : It is equal to the number of legitimate users that fall inside the Voronoi cell $\mathcal{C}_0$ of the point process $\Pi_e \cup \left\{S_0\right\}$ [@Pinto2012]. Conditioned on the size of the cell $\mathcal{C}_0$, the describing the in-degree, $N_{in}$, follows the Poisson distribution ${\text{Po}\!\left(\lambda_l |\mathcal{C}_0|\right)}$ or ${\text{Po}\!\left(p A\right)}$, where $A$ is the size of cell $\mathcal{C}_0$ induced by a unit intensity .
The mean and the variance of the in-degree can be expressed in terms of the moments of the cell size $\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\}$ and $\mathbb{E}\left\{A^2\right\}$. One has to average the mean and variance of the Poisson distribution ${\text{Po}\!\left(p A\right)}$ over the cell size $A$ $$\label{eq:MeanVarNin}
\begin{array}{ccl}
\mathbb{E}\left\{N_{{\text{in}}}\right\} &\!\!\!=\!\!\!& p \, \mathbb{E}\left\{A \right\}\\
\mathbb{V}{\text{ar}}\left\{N_{{\text{in}}}\right\} &\!\!\!=\!\!\!& p \, \mathbb{E}\left\{A \right\} + p^2 \, \mathbb{E}\left\{A^2 \right\} -p^2\mathbb{E}\left\{A \right\}^2.
\end{array}$$
The probability of in-isolation can be approximated as $\mathbb{P}_{{\text{in-isol}}}\!\approx\! \frac{1}{\left(1+p\,\nu\right)^k}$, where $k,\nu$ are parameters of the Gamma distribution shown in Table \[table:Table1\].
The of the in-degree $f_{N_{\text{in}}}\!\left(n\right)$ can be approximated after averaging the Poisson distribution ${\text{Po}\!\left(p A\right)}$ over the Gamma approximation for the of the cell size $A$. $$f_{N_{\text{in}}}\!\left(n\right) \approx \displaystyle \int\limits_0^\infty \frac{\left(p\, A\right)^n e^{-p\, A}}{n!} \, \frac{ A^{k-1} e^{-A/ \nu}}{\nu^k \Gamma\left(k\right)} {\rm d}A \!=\! \frac{\left( p\,\nu \right)^n \, \Gamma\left(k+n\right) }{ n!\, \Gamma\left(k\right) \left(1+p\,\nu\right)^{n+k}}.$$
Using the Gamma approximation, the probability of in-isolation is obtained after setting $n\!=\! 0$ users with secure in-connectivity in the calculated above; $\mathbb{P}_{{\text{in-isol}}}\!\approx\!f_{N_{\text{in}}}\!\left(0\right)\!=\!\frac{1}{\left(1+p\,\nu\right)^k}$.
The of the in-degree can be expressed in terms of the Gaussian hypergeometric function ${}_2F_1$, see for instance [@Abramowitz1972 pp. 556] $$\label{eq:2DInDegreeCDF}
F_{N_{\text{in}}}\!\left(n\right) \approx \displaystyle 1 - \frac{\left(p\,\nu\right)^{1+n} \Gamma\left(1+k+n\right) {}_2F_1\left(1,1+k+n;2+n;\frac{p\,\nu}{1+p\,\nu}\right)}{\left(1+p\,\nu\right)^{1+k+n} \Gamma\left(k\right) \Gamma\left(2+n\right)}.$$
In Fig. \[fig:Distributions\] we depict the approximation accuracy of equation at the corner, at the edge and in the bulk, with parameters $k,\nu$ available in Table \[table:Table1\].
![ of the in-degree with physical layer security at different locations. The intensities for the legitimate users and the eavesdroppers are $\lambda_l\!=\!10$ and $\lambda_e\!=\!1$. In the simulations, we consider a square with side $L\!=\! 10$ and we place the virtual node at the corner $\left(0,0\right)$, at the edge $\left(L/2,0\right)$, and in the middle of the square $\left(L/2,L/2\right)$. In the approximations, equation is used with parameters $k,\nu$ available in Table \[table:Table1\] for the different locations.[]{data-label="fig:InDegreeCDF"}](InDegreeCDF.pdf){width="4.0in"}
The number of legitimate users where the [*[virtual node]{}*]{} can securely transmit to describes the out-degree with secrecy. Following the same assumptions used to study in-connectivity with secrecy, the [*[virtual node]{}*]{} can securely transmit to a legitimate user if their distance is smaller than the distance between the [*[node]{}*]{} and any eavesdropper. The distribution of the out-degree is independent of the location $S_0$ of the [*[node]{}*]{}: The quantity $\frac{\lambda_l}{\lambda_e+\lambda_l}\!=\! \frac{p}{1+p}$ is the probability that the next user we meet as we move away from the [*[node]{}*]{} is legitimate. Therefore the out-degree is equal to $n$ if we succeed in meeting $n$ legitimate users before the first eavesdropper. It follows that the distribution of the out-degree is Geometric with parameter $\frac{p}{1+p}$ [@Pinto2012; @Haenggi2009]. $$\label{eq:InDegreeCase1}
\begin{array}{ccccc}
f_{N_{\text{out}}}\!\left(n\right) &=& \left(\frac{p}{1+p}\right)^n \frac{1}{1+p}, \,\,\, F_{N_{\text{out}}}\!\left(n\right) &=& 1 - \left(\frac{p}{1+p}\right)^{1+n}, \,\, n\geq 0.
\end{array}$$
From equations we get $\mathbb{E}\left\{N_{{\text{out}}}\right\} = p, \mathbb{V}{\text{ar}}\left\{N_{{\text{out}}}\right\}=p\left(1+p\right)$, and the probability of out-isolation is $\mathbb{P}_{{\text{out-isol}}}\!=\!f_{N_{\text{out}}}\!\left(0\right)\!=\! \frac{1}{1+p}$.
In areas with boundaries the mean in- and out-degree with secrecy are not necessarily equal.
Since $\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\}<1$ along the boundary of a quadrant, see Lemma \[lem:2\], $\mathbb{E}\left\{N_{{\text{out}}}\right\}\!=\!p\!>\!p\,\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\}\!\stackrel{(a)}{=}\!\mathbb{E}\left\{N_{{\text{in}}}\right\}$, where $(a)$ follows from equation . On the other hand, close to the boundary and far from the corner, we may have $\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\}>1$, see Lemma \[lem:3\], thus $\mathbb{E}\left\{N_{{\text{out}}}\right\}<\mathbb{E}\left\{N_{{\text{in}}}\right\}$. Finally, in the bulk, $\mathbb{E}\left\{A\right\}\!=\!1$, and $\mathbb{E}\left\{N_{{\text{out}}}\right\}=\mathbb{E}\left\{N_{{\text{in}}}\right\}=p$.
The relation between the probabilities for in- and out-isolation depends on the location and the intensity ratio $p$. Verifying the results in [@Pinto2012], it is more probable to be in-connected than out-connected in the bulk, see Fig. \[fig:IsolationProb\]. However, this is not true in general. In Fig. \[fig:IsolationProb\] we see that at the corner of a quadrant and at the edge of the half-plane it is more likely to be out-connected than in-connected (for a moderate to high intensity of eavesdroppers). A single eavesdropper located close to the [*[virtual node]{}*]{} makes it out-isolated, while the [*[virtual node]{}*]{} can still be in-connected provided that legitimate users are located far from the eavesdropper. At the corner and at the edge, the probability to be in-connected is reduced, because the possible locations for the legitimate users close to the boundaries are less as compared to the bulk.
![Probability of isolation w.r.t. to the intensity of eavesdroppers while the intensity of legitimate users is $\lambda_l\!=\!10$. The probability of in-isolation is approximated by $\mathbb{P}_{{\text{in-isol}}}\!\approx\!\frac{1}{\left(1+p\,\nu\right)^k}$. The probability of out-isolation is $\mathbb{P}_{{\text{out-isol}}}\!=\!\frac{1}{1+p}$.[]{data-label="fig:IsolationProb"}](IsolationProb.pdf){width="4.0in"}
Conclusions
===========
Instead of using extensive simulations, this letter uses a low-complexity numerical method for computing the mean cell size in a homogeneous Poisson Voronoi tessellation for seeds located along and/or close to the boundary of a quadrant. Besides the application on physical layer security detailed in the paper, these results can also be used in the performance analysis of finite area cellular networks, e.g., modeling the mean network load for base stations located close to the network borders. In the foreseen deployments of indoor ultra-dense networks, the impact of boundaries cannot be neglected. In addition, the calculation of the second moment of the cell size at the corner of a quadrant and at the boundary of the half-plane, and the illustration of the good fit of the Gamma distribution, may give enough evidence to continue studying the distribution of cell size in other locations and more complex bounded geometries, e.g., three-dimensional Voronoi cells, cell size distribution in hyperbolic spaces, etc.
[99]{} J. M[ø]{}ller, “Random tessellations in Rd”, *Advances in Applied Probability*, vol. 21, pp. 37-73, 1989. V.M. Lieshout, “An introduction to planar random tessellation models”, *Spatial Statistics* vol. 1, pp. 40-49, 2012. F.P. Schoenberg, C. Barr, and J. Seo, “The distribution of Voronoi cells generated by southern California earthquake epicenters”, *Environmetrics*, vol. 20(2) p. 159-171, 2008. M. Ramella [*[et. al.]{}*]{}, “Finding galaxy clusters using Voronoi tessellations”, DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010071, 2001. F. Baccelli, and B. B[ł]{}aszczyszyn, “On a coverage process ranging from the Boolean model to the Poisson Voronoi tessellation with applications to wireless communications”, *Advances Applied Probabability*, vol. 33, pp. 293-323, 2001. J.L. Meijering, “Interface area, edge length, and number of vertices in crystal aggregates with random nucleation”, Philips Res. Rep. 8, 270-290, 1953. E.N. Gilbert, “Random subdivisions of space into crystals”, Annals of Mathematical Statistics 33, 958-972, 1962. D. Weaire, J.P. Kermode and J. Wejchert, “On the distribution of cell areas in a Voronoi network”, *Philosophical Magazine Part B*, 53:5, L101-L105, DOI: 10.1080/13642818608240647. M. Tanemura, “Statistical distributions of Poisson Voronoi cells in two and three dimensions”, *Forma*, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 221-247, 2003. S. Kumar, S.K. Kurtz, J.R. Banavar, and M.G. Sharma,”Properties of a three-dimensional Poisson Voronoi tessellation: A Monte-Carlo study “, *Journal of Statistical Physics*, vol. 67, Nos. 3/4, 1992. J.S. Ferenc and Z. Neda, “On the size distribution of Poisson Voronoi cells,” *Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications*, vol. 385, no. 2, pp. 518-526, 2007. K.A. Brakke, “Statistics of random plane Voronoi tessellations”, *unpublished*, available at <http://facstaff.susqu.edu/brakke/aux/downloads/papers/vorplane.pdf>. P.N. Rathie, “On the volume distribution of the typical Poisson-Delaunay cell”, *Journal of Applied Probability*, vol. 29(3), pp. 740-744, 1992. L. Muche, “Distributional properties of the three-dimensional Poisson Delaunay cell”, *Journal Statistical Physics*, vol. 84, 1996. J.G. Andrews, F. Baccelli, and R.K. Ganti, “A Tractable approach to coverage and rate in cellular networks”, *IEEE Transactions on Communications*, vol. 59, Nov. 2011, pp. 3122-3134. D. Cao, S. Zhou, and Z. Niu, “Optimal combination of base station densities for energy-efficient two-tier heterogeneous cellular networks”, *IEEE Transactions Wireless Communications*,vol. 12, Sept. 2013, pp. 4350-4362. P.C. Pinto, J. Barros, and M.Z. Win, “Secure communication in stochastic wireless networks $-$ Part I: Connectivity”, *IEEE Transactions Information Forensics and Security*, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 125-138, Feb. 2012. L. Devroye, L. Györfi, G. Lugosi, and H. Walk, “On the meansure of Voronoi cells”, *Journal of Applied Probability*, vol. 54(2), pp. 394-408, 2017. A.D. Wyner, “The wire-tap channel”, *The Bell System Technical Journal*, vol. 54, no. 8, pp. 1355-1387, Oct. 1975. D. Stoyan, W. S. Kendall, and J. Mecke, “Stochastic geometry and its applications”, ISBN 0-471-95099-8, 1995. A. Hayen, and M.P. Quine, “Areas of components of a Voronoi polygon in a homogenenous Poisson process in the plane”, *Advances in Applied Probability*, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 281-291, 2002. E. Pineda, P. Bruna, and D. Crespo, “Cell size distribution in random tessellations of space”, *Physical Review E*, 70, 066119, 2004. W. Trappe, “The challenges facing physical layer security”, *IEEE Commun. Magazine*, vol. 53, pp. 16-20, Jun. 2015. M. Abramowitz, and I.A. Stegun. Handbook of mathematical functionswith formulas, graphs and mathematical tables. 1972. M. Haenggi, “The secrecy graph and some of its properties”, *IEEE International Symposium Information Theory*, pp. 539-543, 2008.
[^1]: K. Koufos and C.P. Dettmann are with the School of Mathematics, University of Bristol, BS8 1TW, Bristol, UK. {K.Koufos, Carl.Dettmann}@bristol.ac.uk
[^2]: This work was supported by the EPSRC grant numbers EP/N002458/1 and EP/N002350/1 for the project Spatially Embedded Networks.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The Abstract paragraph should be indented 0.25 inch (1.5 picas) on both left and right-hand margins. Use 10 point type, with a vertical spacing of 11 points. [**Abstract**]{} must be centered, bold, and in point size 12. Two line spaces precede the Abstract. The Abstract must be limited to one paragraph.'
title: Instructions for Authors
---
GENERAL FORMATTING INSTRUCTIONS
===============================
Papers are in 2 columns with the overall line width of 6.75 inches (41 picas). Each column is 3.25 inches wide (19.5 picas). The space between the columns is .25 inches wide (1.5 picas). The left margin is 1 inch (6 picas). Use 10 point type with a vertical spacing of 11 points. Times Roman is the preferred typeface throughout.
Paper title is 16 point, caps/lc, bold, centered between 2 horizontal rules. Top rule is 4 points thick and bottom rule is 1 point thick. Allow 1/4 inch space above and below title to rules.
Reviewing is double-blind, so do not include author names, affiliations, or any other identifying information in the original submission. If you include urls to supplementary material, make sure the urls also do not disclose your identity.
After a paper is accepted, for the camera-ready submission, Authors’ names are centered, initial caps. The lead author’s name is to be listed first (left-most), and the Co-authors’ names (if different address) are set to follow. If only one co-author, center both the author and co-author, side-by-side.
One-half line space between paragraphs, with no indent.
FIRST LEVEL HEADINGS
====================
First level headings are all caps, flush left, bold and in point size 12. One line space before the first level heading and 1/2 line space after the first level heading.
SECOND LEVEL HEADING
--------------------
Second level headings must be flush left, all caps, bold and in point size 10. One line space before the second level heading and 1/2 line space after the second level heading.
### Third Level Heading
Third level headings must be flush left, initial caps, bold, and in point size 10. One line space before the third level heading and 1/2 line space after the third level heading.
.5pc Fourth Level Heading
Fourth level headings must be flush left and initial caps. One line space before the fourth level heading and 1/2 line space after the fourth level heading.
CITATIONS, FIGURES, REFERENCES
------------------------------
### Citations in Text
Citations within the text should include the author’s last name and year, e.g., (Cheesman, 1985). Reference style should follow the style that you are used to using, as long as the citation style is consistent.
For the original submission, take care not to reveal the authors’ identity through the manner in which one’s own previous work is cited. For example, writing “In (Bovik, 1970), we studied the problem of AI” would be inappropriate, as it reveals the author’s identity. Instead, write “(Bovik, 1970) studied the problem of AI.”
### Footnotes
Indicate footnotes with a number[^1] in the text. Use 8 point type for footnotes. Place the footnotes at the bottom of the page on which they appear. Precede the footnote with a 0.5 point horizontal rule 1 inch (6 picas) long.[^2]
### Figures
All artwork must be centered, neat, clean, and legible. Figure number and caption always appear below the figure. Leave 2 line spaces between the figure and the caption. The figure caption is initial caps and each figure numbered consecutively.
Make sure that the figure caption does not get separated from the figure. Leave extra white space at the bottom of the page rather than splitting the figure and figure caption.
### Tables
All tables must be centered, neat, clean, and legible. Table number and title always appear above the table. See Table \[sample-table\].
One line space before the table title, one line space after the table title, and one line space after the table. The table title must be initial caps and each table numbered consecutively.
[ll]{} &\
\
Dendrite &Input terminal\
Axon &Output terminal\
Soma &Cell body (contains cell nucleus)\
### Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
Use unnumbered third level headings for the acknowledgements title. All acknowledgements go at the end of the paper.
### References {#references .unnumbered}
References follow the acknowledgements. Use unnumbered third level heading for the references title. Any choice of citation style is acceptable as long as you are consistent.
J. Alspector, B. Gupta, and R. B. Allen (1989). Performance of a stochastic learning microchip. In D. S. Touretzky (ed.), [*Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 1*]{}, 748-760. San Mateo, Calif.: Morgan Kaufmann.
F. Rosenblatt (1962). [*Principles of Neurodynamics.*]{} Washington, D.C.: Spartan Books.
G. Tesauro (1989). Neurogammon wins computer Olympiad. [*Neural Computation*]{} [**1**]{}(3):321-323.
[^1]: Sample of the first footnote
[^2]: Sample of the second footnote
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We discuss top-quark physics at the ILC with a focus on the full off-shell processes for $t\bar{t}$ and $t\bar{t}H$ production, including top-quark decays and also leptonic $W$ decays. A special focus is on the matching of the resummed vNRQCD threshold calculation and the fixed-order NLO QCD continuum calculation, where we present an update on the validation of the matching. All of the calculations have been performed in the event generator framework.'
author:
- 'Jürgen Reuter, Bijan Chokoufé Nejad, Christian Weiss'
subtitle: 'Talk presented at the International Workshop on Future Linear Colliders (LCWS2016), Morioka, Japan, 5-9 December 2016. C16-12-05.4.'
title: 'NLO QCD Corrections to Off-shell $t\,\bar{t}$ and $t\,\bar{t}\,H$ at the ILC'
---
The event generator at NLO
==========================
[@Kilian:2007gr; @Moretti:2001zz] is a multi-purpose event generator for both lepton and hadron colliders. At leading-order, it can compute arbitrary SM processes and supports a multitude of BSM physics (e.g. using automated interfaces [@Christensen:2010wz]). For QCD processes, it uses the color-flow formalism [@Kilian:2012pz]. It has its own implementation of an analytic parton shower [@Kilian:2011ka]. Moreover, it can perform simulations for a broad class of processes at next-to-leading order. The modern release series (v2) has been developed to meet the demands of LHC physics analysis, while its treatment of beam-spectra and initial-state photon radiation makes it especially well suited for lepton collider physics.
The generic next-to-leading order (NLO) framework in builds upon the FKS subtraction scheme [@hep-ph/9512328; @0908.4272], which partitions the phase space into regions wherein only one divergent configuration is present. This divergence is then regulated using plus-distributions. FKS subtraction synergizes with ’s optimized multi-channel phase-space generator for the underlying Born kinematics, from which real kinematics are generated. It is also very well suited to the parton shower matching procedures employed, as described below. supports [@Cascioli:2011va], [@Cullen:2014yla; @Cullen:2011ac] and [@Actis:2012qn; @Actis:2016mpe] as one-loop matrix element providers as well as for the computation of color- and spin-correlated Born matrix elements. At tree-level, they can also be used as alternatives to ’s standard matrix-element generator [@Moretti:2001zz].
For event generation, can produce weighted fixed-order NLO QCD events that are written to e.g. [@Dobbs:2001ck] files. This allows for flexible phenomenological fixed order studies, especially in combination with ’s [@1003.0694] generic event analysis capabilities. Matching to parton showers is achieved with an independent implementation [@1510.02739] of the matching method [@hep-ph/0409146].
Apart from scattering processes, is also able to compute decay widths for processes at NLO. The final-state phase space is built in the usual fashion, whereas the initial-state phase space is adapted for decays. Computing decay widths directly in allows for a consistent treatment of top and gauge boson widths in an NLO calculation.
The and continuum at NLO QCD
============================
The new FKS implementation has been applied to an extensive study of fully off-shell $\ttb$ and $\tth$ production at a lepton collider [@Nejad:2016bci]. Top-quark and leptonic $W$ decays are taken into account including the full irreducible background. The (loop) matrix elements are obtained from , which has been applied to a lepton collider process including hexagon diagrams for the first time. Moreover, the resonance-aware modification of FKS subtraction [@Jezo:2015aia] is used to treat intermediate top, Higgs and $Z$ resonances.
On the left-hand side of \[fig:continuum\], we show a scan of the total inclusive cross section for the on-shell process $\epem \to \ttb$ and the off-shell process $\epem \to \wbwb$ as computed by . The most striking feature is that right above the production threshold $\sqrts = 2m_t$, both LO and NLO cross sections are strongly enhanced. Moreover, in the limit $\sqrts \to 2m_t$ the NLO corrections to the on-shell process diverge due to non-relativistic threshold corrections, which manifest themselves as large logarithmic contributions to the virtual one-loop matrix element. In the off-shell process, the Coulomb singularity is regularized by the top-quark width, so that NLO corrections remain finite. Nevertheless, threshold corrections introduce a distinct peak in the K-factor at $\sqrts = 2m_t$, with a maximimum of about $2.5$.
The process $\epem \to \tth$ provides a unique opportunity to measure the top Yukawa coupling $y_t$ [@Agashe:2013hma; @1409.7157] at the per cent level. Many new physics models, such as generic 2HDMs, the MSSM or composite and Little Higgs models, predict significant deviations of $y_t$ from its standard model value $y_t^\mathrm{SM} = \sqrt{2}m_t/v$. The right-hand side of \[fig:continuum\] shows the dependence of the off-shell process on $y_t$, parametrized as $y_t=\xi_t
y_t^\mathrm{SM}$, both at leading and next-to-leading order. The linear fit can be used to extract the parameter $\kappa$, defined via [@1409.7157; @1307.7644] $$\label{eq:yukawa-dep}
\frac{\Delta y_t}{y_t} = \kappa \frac{\Delta \sigma}{\sigma}\;.$$ $\kappa$ contains contributions from signal, background and inteference terms. Since the $y_t$-dependence of the cross section on $y_t$ is approximately quadratic, $\kappa$ is close to $0.5$. In the above plot, we find NLO QCD corrections to $\kappa$ to be significant. They decrease $\kappa$ from the value $0.52$ at LO by about $4.6\%$ to $\kappa = 0.497$ at NLO. A detailed analysis [@Nejad:2016bci] reveals that these negative corrections have to originate from interference terms.
Far above the threshold, the NLO corrections are rather small for both the on-shell and the off-shell processes. For , the corrections remain positive for all , approaching the universal massless quark pair-production factor $\alpha_s / \pi$ as the top mass becomes negligible. In contrast, the NLO corrections to decrease significantly faster for large , are at the per cent level for $\sqrts=\ValGeV{1500}$, and come close to zero at $\sqrts=\ValGeV{3000}$.
![In the left plot, we show the total cross section for on-shell and off-shell $t\,\bar{t}$ production as a function of $\sqrts$. In the lower panels, we display the K-factor for $t\,\bar t$ and $\wbwb$ in green and red, respectively, as well as the ratio of off-shell to on-shell results for LO and NLO in blue and red. In the right plot, we present the LO and NLO cross sections as a function of the top Yukawa coupling modifier $\xi_t=y_t/y_t^\text{SM}$, as well as a linear fit. []{data-label="fig:continuum"}](plots/tt-scan-combined-3000 "fig:"){width="45.00000%"} ![In the left plot, we show the total cross section for on-shell and off-shell $t\,\bar{t}$ production as a function of $\sqrts$. In the lower panels, we display the K-factor for $t\,\bar t$ and $\wbwb$ in green and red, respectively, as well as the ratio of off-shell to on-shell results for LO and NLO in blue and red. In the right plot, we present the LO and NLO cross sections as a function of the top Yukawa coupling modifier $\xi_t=y_t/y_t^\text{SM}$, as well as a linear fit. []{data-label="fig:continuum"}](plots/yukawa_scan_WbWbH "fig:"){width="45.00000%"}
Top-Quark threshold resummation and NLO matching
================================================
The large NLO corrections encountered in the previous section are well-known to arise from gluon exchange in the virtual correction to the top-quark production diagram. They appear as logarithms of the non-relativistic velocity $v$ and the strong coupling $\alpha_s$, which can be resummed. One approach for this is vNRQCD [@hep-ph/9910209; @hep-ph/9912226; @hep-ph/0003032; @hep-ph/0003107], in which an effective Lagrangian for the interaction of non-relativistic heavy quark pairs is constructed. The result of the resummation can, up to NLL, be included as a simple form factor $F_i$ for $t\,\bar{t}$ production. Hereby, $i = \{\mathrm{LL},\mathrm{NLL}\}$ denotes the order of resummation. The vNRQCD results can be used in by embedding $F_i$ within a gauge-invariant description of $t\,\bar{t}$ production, as elaborated further below. In this section, we report on the recent development of the combination of the resummation with fixed-order NLO results to achieve a consistent treatment of top production at a lepton collider at all center-of-mass energies.
Setup of the calculation
------------------------
### Relativistic embedding of the form factor
The resummed form factor is included in a gauge invariant way by factorizing the full matrix element into a production and a decay contribution, $$\label{eq:factorized}
\ME =
\underbrace{\braketop{\epem}{\mathcal{T}_\T{NRQCD}}{{\ttb}}}_{\equiv \MEprod}
\braketop{{\ttb}}{\mathcal{T}}{\wbwb},$$ where the form factor only enters the production matrix element . The remaining factor $\braketop{{\ttb}}{\mathcal{T}}{\wbwb}$ contains propagators and decay matrix elements for both top-quark lines. is represented diagrammatically in \[fig:factorized\]. Specifically, we are using a double-pole approximation (DPA) [@Stuart1991; @hep-ph/9312212; @hep-ph/9811481; @hep-ph/9912261]. Hereby, the momenta of the top quarks and their decay products have to be projected on-shell in the matrix elements to remove gauge-dependent contributions. In the denominators of the top propagators and the phase-space Jacobians, the off-shell momenta are used. We extend the DPA also below threshold by evaluating the matrix elements with momenta at threshold. This can be seen as the closest gauge-invariant extension of the DPA that is non-zero below threshold. For comparison, we also show results in the validation that can be obtained if a gauge-dependent approach, i.e. signal diagram with off-shell momenta, is used.
![Depiction of the factorized computation in the double pole approximation. Double lines indicate top propagators and a dashed line crossing them a factorized computation with on-shell projection.[]{data-label="fig:factorized"}](Diags/factorized-crop){width="45.00000%"}
### Matching
The matching procedure combines the (N)LL expressions $\sigma_{\mathrm{NRQCD}}$, including the (N)LO decay, with the full fixed-order (N)LO results $\sigma_{\mathrm{FO}}$ for including all irreducible background processes and interferences.
By construction, the resummed result is only a valid approximation for $v \sim \alpha_s$. Its contribution, therefore, has to become negligible for $\abs{\sqrts-2m_t}\gg \Gamma_t$. This can be achieved by introducing a switch-off function $f_s(v)$, which is multiplied to each strong coupling constant in the resummed computation[^1]. The explicit form is arbitrary, with the minimal requirements $$\label{eq:switch-off}
f_s\left(v_\T{min}\right) = 1 \quad \text{and} \quad f_s(v=1) = 0,$$ whereby the velocity $v$ takes its minimal value at threshold. Due to the presence of the width, $v_\T{min} \sim 0.1 > 0$. For a realistic phenomenological description, we will switch off not too close to threshold in order to use resummed results in a region as wide as possible, but also not too far from threshold where any NRQCD loses predictivity and validity. The next cornerstone of the matching procedure is the treatment of the first order in $\alpha_s$. As both the resummed and the fixed-order result contain it, a naive addition of both results yields a double counting of $\Op(\alpha_s)$-terms. To solve this problem, we use , the resummed cross section expanded to $\Op(\alpha_s)$. Thus, the master formula for the matched cross section is $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:matched_simple}
\XSmatched = \XSfo\of{\AShard}
&+ \XSresummed\of{\switch\,\AShard,\;\switch\,\ASsoft,\;\switch\,\ASusoft} \no
&- \XSexpanded\of{\switch\,\AShard},\end{aligned}$$ where in the full NRQCD calculation, the strong coupling has to be evaluated at hard (H), soft (S) and ultra-soft (US) scales. To remove the double counting and to ensure the NLL validity of , has to be evaluated at the same (hard) scale as . Note that in eq. , all strong couplings in the NRQCD terms are already multiplied with $f_s$.
Diagramatically, eq. takes the form $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:NLONLL}
\XSNLONLL &= \XSNLO + \realOfDiagrams[\textcolor{blue}
{\left(\FFNLLmO - \FFexpNLLmOne\right)}\hspace{-1.3em}]
{factorizedLessDetail}{LOfullFlipped}\no
&+ \abs{\FFNLLmOne\diagram{factorizedLessDetail}}^2 \no
&+ \realOfCurly{\FFNLLmOne{}\extraspace{}\left(\diagram{factorizedVirtual}
+ \lessspace\diagram{factorizedVirtualOtherLeg}\right)}
{\diagram{factorizedLessDetailFlipped}\lessspace{}\FFNLLmOne{}\extraspace{}}\no
&+ \abs{\FFNLLmOne{}\diagram{factorizedReal}}^2
+ \abs{\FFNLLmOne{}\diagram{factorizedRealOtherLeg}}^2,\end{aligned}$$ with $\FFNLLmO{} = \FFNLL - 1$. The first summand after is the interference term between the factorized computation, \[eq:factorized\], and the full LO amplitude, including all $2 \to 4$ contributions, indicated by the gray blob. This term contains both the full form factor as well as its expansion. On the second line, we have the square of $\tilde F$, which is followed by its hard NLO corrections to the top decay: In the third line, we find the virtual component, indicated by the small gray blob with $\alpha_s$ inside. They operate only on the legs they are attached to, i.e. each blob consists of one gluon loop connecting the bottom and top quark. Finally, in the last line, there are the squared real amplitudes. Here, each gray blob represents two diagrams for gluon emission from the bottom and the top quark, respectively. Note that interference terms between the real diagrams are discarded, as they would introduce infrared divergences not cancelled by the virtual diagrams.
Implementation in
------------------
The form factor only has an analytical expression at LL, while at higher logarithmic orders, only numerical computations are possible. A dedicated tool for this is [@hep-ph/9904468], which is included in the distribution.
The factorized tree-level matrix elements are calculated by modified codes. We obtain loop matrix elements from . For this purpose, a dedicated matrix element library for polarized top decays is used, especially for spin correlations in top decays, which is publicly available. The one-loop decay amplitudes are then combined with the same code for the production matrix element as for tree level amplitudes.
We use the FKS setup of to evaluate eq. . The treatment of the fixed-order NLO cross section is identical to the previous section and . Thus, we can use the standard algorithm and add the result to the rest of the formula. For the remainder, slight modifications have to be made to the subtraction. They can be summed up as the following.
#### On-shell generation of the real-emission phase space
Like the Born matrix element, the real-emission matrix element has to be evaluated using on-shell momenta. In FKS, the phase space with an additional gluon $\Phi_{n+1}$ is constructed based on the underlying Born phase space for each possible emitter. Therefore, we already start with an on-shell projected phase space. The emission mapping then has to ensure that this property is kept. For this purpose, we use the same phase-space construction as in the resonance-aware FKS approach. There, $\Phi_{n+1}$ is constructed so that the invariant mass of the resonance associated with the emission is conserved. Fixing the invariant mass automatically ensures that an on-shell phase space stays an on-shell phase space, so that we just adopt the same mappings outlined in .
#### Decay subtraction
The divergences in the factorized calculation all originate from the $t \to bWg$ matrix element. It consists of two Feynman diagrams, one in which the gluon is emitted from the top quark and another one in which it is emitted from the bottom. Divergences can only occur in emissions from particles with on-shell momenta and zero width. Therefore, in the full matrix element, emissions from internal top quarks do not yield divergences, as they are regulated by the width. However, in the factorized approach, the gluon emission from the top quark is a singular contribution, which needs to be subtracted. We call this additional singular region a pseudo-ISR region. This way, each FKS pair $(b,g)$ and $(\bar{b},g)$ is associated with a pseudo-ISR pair $(b,g)^*$ and $(\bar{b},g)^*$, in which the gluon radiation occurs not from the bottom, but from the top quark. This means that in the corresponding singular region, the FKS phase-space contribution $d_{ij}$ is evaluated with $p_i \to p_{\mathrm{top}} = p_b + p_W$.
#### Omission of interference terms
As outlined above, interference terms between emissions from different top-quark lines are not included in our calculation. Therefore, they also need to be dropped from the soft expressions in which mixed-emitter eikonal integrals appear.
Validation and results
----------------------
![Comparison of analytic results with the implementation in with the factorized and the signal-diagram approach for $\Delta_{m_t} =
\ValGeV{30}$ and $\Delta_{m_t} = \ValGeV{100}$ using an expanded, LL or NLL form factor. The bands correspond to the envelope of the scale variations mentioned in the text. []{data-label="fig:validation_dm_fixed"}](plots/validation_dm30_expanded "fig:"){width="43.00000%"} ![Comparison of analytic results with the implementation in with the factorized and the signal-diagram approach for $\Delta_{m_t} =
\ValGeV{30}$ and $\Delta_{m_t} = \ValGeV{100}$ using an expanded, LL or NLL form factor. The bands correspond to the envelope of the scale variations mentioned in the text. []{data-label="fig:validation_dm_fixed"}](plots/validation_dm100_expanded "fig:"){width="43.00000%"}\
![Comparison of analytic results with the implementation in with the factorized and the signal-diagram approach for $\Delta_{m_t} =
\ValGeV{30}$ and $\Delta_{m_t} = \ValGeV{100}$ using an expanded, LL or NLL form factor. The bands correspond to the envelope of the scale variations mentioned in the text. []{data-label="fig:validation_dm_fixed"}](plots/validation_dm30_LL "fig:"){width="43.00000%"} ![Comparison of analytic results with the implementation in with the factorized and the signal-diagram approach for $\Delta_{m_t} =
\ValGeV{30}$ and $\Delta_{m_t} = \ValGeV{100}$ using an expanded, LL or NLL form factor. The bands correspond to the envelope of the scale variations mentioned in the text. []{data-label="fig:validation_dm_fixed"}](plots/validation_dm100_LL "fig:"){width="43.00000%"}\
![Comparison of analytic results with the implementation in with the factorized and the signal-diagram approach for $\Delta_{m_t} =
\ValGeV{30}$ and $\Delta_{m_t} = \ValGeV{100}$ using an expanded, LL or NLL form factor. The bands correspond to the envelope of the scale variations mentioned in the text. []{data-label="fig:validation_dm_fixed"}](plots/validation_dm30_NLL "fig:"){width="43.00000%"} ![Comparison of analytic results with the implementation in with the factorized and the signal-diagram approach for $\Delta_{m_t} =
\ValGeV{30}$ and $\Delta_{m_t} = \ValGeV{100}$ using an expanded, LL or NLL form factor. The bands correspond to the envelope of the scale variations mentioned in the text. []{data-label="fig:validation_dm_fixed"}](plots/validation_dm100_NLL "fig:"){width="43.00000%"}
The implementation in can be checked against the analytical calculation of . For reliable numerical predictions, a cut $\Delta_{m_t}$ on the reconstructed top invariant mass is required [@1002.3223], fulfilling $$\label{eq:DeltaMcut}
\left|\sqrt{\left(p_{W^+} + p_b\right)^2} - \mOneS\right| \leq \Delta_{m_t} \quad \text{and} \quad
\left|\sqrt{\left(p_{W^-} + p_{\bar{b}}\right)^2} - \mOneS\right| \leq \Delta_{m_t}\;.$$ We stress that although this cut depends on $\mOneS$, the invariant mass distributions will be centered around the pole mass $m_t$. While \[eq:DeltaMcut\] is exact in , in the analytic calculation, we implement a cut on the nonrelativistic invariant masses, $$\label{eq:def-nonrel-mass}
t_{1,2} = 2m_t \left(E_{1,2} - \frac{\vec{p}\,^2}{2m_t}\right),$$ by requiring that $$\label{eq:cut-def-nonrel}
\left|t_{1,2}\right| \leq 2\mOneS \Delta_{m_t} - \frac{3}{4}\Delta_{m_t}^2 + \Op(v^2).$$ Here, $E_{1,2}$ are the kinetic energies of the top and anti top quark, respectively, and $\vec{p}$ is the top quark three momentum. These different cut implementations are one source of disagreement between the Monte Carlo and the analytic results. In the threshold region, the difference should, however, be of higher order.
![The fully matched total cross section for $\epem \to \wbwb$ including NLO decays, the NLL form factor and the full NLO computation according to \[eq:NLONLL\]. In addition to the three curves that are obtained for each of the three choices of the matching parameters $(v_1,v_2)$, we show the curve of pure fixed-order NLO and lines for NLL (red, dashed) and the matched result without switching off (black, dotted). []{data-label="fig:matched"}](plots/matched_nlofull_nlodecay_newscale2){width=".8\textwidth"}
In \[fig:validation\_dm\_fixed\], we show -scans for a fixed value of $\Delta_{m_t}$. We have two different cut choices, a moderate, $\Delta_{m_t} =
\ValGeV{30}$, and a loose cut, $\Delta_{m_t} = \ValGeV{100}$. A detailed analysis shows that the analytic computation is only reliable for moderate cuts. The plots in fig. \[fig:validation\_dm\_fixed\], show perfect agreement between the analytic computation and for the moderate cut (${\Delta_{m_t} = \ValGeV{30}}$) within a window around threshold of at least $\ValGeV{10}$. For the loose cut, this range is reduced due to additional nonphysical contributions below threshold in the analytic results. For comparison, we also show the gauge-dependent results that can be obtained when embedding the form factor naively into the signal diagram, which leads to systematically lower results.
Finally, in fig. \[fig:matched\], we present the matched total cross section as a scan over around threshold. The matched curve is similar to the pure NLL computation with LO decay around $\sqrts = 2\mOneS{}$ and then smoothly approaches the fixed-order line. To estimate the error due to the arbitrary switch-off function, we have performed the computation for different values of start, $v_1$, and end, $v_2$, of the switch-off. We have experienced, furthermore, that shifting the switch-off parameters to significantly lower values, like $v_1=0.1, v_2=0.2$, cuts away too much of the threshold region and is far from the matching curve. Note that we have used $\mOneS\sqrt{\abs{v}}$ as hard scale for $\XSfo$ and in eq. instead of the more conventional hard scale $\mOneS$. This is the geometric mean of the hard and the soft scale and thus a more consistent choice if one aims to combine NLL and NLO results. With this choice NLO and NLL approach each other and overlap at $\sim\SI{357}{\GeV}$. After this overlap, we expect the NLO to give the more reliable results for higher $\sqrt{s}$. Thus, higher values of the switch-off parameters are in principle possible but likely unnecessary. Overall, we observe fairly mild matching variation uncertainties as long as it contains the important physical regions. Finally, we want to emphasize that the matched computation, even without switch-off, realized as ($v_1=1000,v_2=10000$), does not have to be in between NLL and NLO as it is not a naive interpolation of these results but the implementation of \[eq:NLONLL\].
[99]{}
W. Kilian, T. Ohl and J. Reuter, Eur. Phys. J. C **71**, 1742 (2011) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1742-y \[arXiv:0708.4233 \[hep-ph\]\]. M. Moretti, T. Ohl and J. Reuter, hep-ph/0102195. N. D. Christensen, C. Duhr, B. Fuks, J. Reuter and C. Speckner, Eur. Phys. J. C **72**, 1990 (2012) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1990-5 \[arXiv:1010.3251 \[hep-ph\]\]. W. Kilian, T. Ohl, J. Reuter and C. Speckner, JHEP **1210**, 022 (2012) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2012)022 \[arXiv:1206.3700 \[hep-ph\]\]. W. Kilian, J. Reuter, S. Schmidt and D. Wiesler, JHEP **1204**, 013 (2012) doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2012)013 \[arXiv:1112.1039 \[hep-ph\]\]. S. Frixione, Z. Kunszt and A. Signer, Nucl. Phys. B **467**, 399 (1996) doi:10.1016/0550-3213(96)00110-1 \[hep-ph/9512328\]. R. Frederix, S. Frixione, F. Maltoni and T. Stelzer, JHEP **0910**, 003 (2009) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/10/003 \[arXiv:0908.4272 \[hep-ph\]\]. F. Cascioli, P. Maierhofer and S. Pozzorini, Phys. Rev. Lett. **108**, 111601 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.111601 \[arXiv:1111.5206 \[hep-ph\]\]. G. Cullen *et al.*, Eur. Phys. J. C **74**, no. 8, 3001 (2014) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3001-5 \[arXiv:1404.7096 \[hep-ph\]\]. G. Cullen, N. Greiner, G. Heinrich, G. Luisoni, P. Mastrolia, G. Ossola, T. Reiter and F. Tramontano, Eur. Phys. J. C **72**, 1889 (2012) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1889-1 \[arXiv:1111.2034 \[hep-ph\]\]. S. Actis, A. Denner, L. Hofer, A. Scharf and S. Uccirati, JHEP **1304**, 037 (2013) doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2013)037 \[arXiv:1211.6316 \[hep-ph\]\]. S. Actis, A. Denner, L. Hofer, J. N. Lang, A. Scharf and S. Uccirati, Comput. Phys. Commun. **214**, 140 (2017) doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2017.01.004 \[arXiv:1605.01090 \[hep-ph\]\].
M. Dobbs and J. B. Hansen, Comput. Phys. Commun. **134**, 41 (2001). doi:10.1016/S0010-4655(00)00189-2 A. Buckley, J. Butterworth, L. Lonnblad, D. Grellscheid, H. Hoeth, J. Monk, H. Schulz and F. Siegert, Comput. Phys. Commun. **184**, 2803 (2013) doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2013.05.021 \[arXiv:1003.0694 \[hep-ph\]\]. B. Chokoufe Nejad, W. Kilian, J. Reuter and C. Weiss, PoS EPS **-HEP2015**, 317 (2015) \[arXiv:1510.02739 \[hep-ph\]\]. P. Nason, JHEP **0411**, 040 (2004) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2004/11/040 \[hep-ph/0409146\]. B. Chokoufé Nejad, W. Kilian, J. M. Lindert, S. Pozzorini, J. Reuter and C. Weiss, JHEP **1612**, 075 (2016) doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2016)075 \[arXiv:1609.03390 \[hep-ph\]\]. T. Ježo and P. Nason, JHEP **1512**, 065 (2015) doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2015)065 \[arXiv:1509.09071 \[hep-ph\]\]. K. Agashe *et al.* \[Top Quark Working Group\], arXiv:1311.2028 \[hep-ph\]. T. Price, P. Roloff, J. Strube and T. Tanabe, Eur. Phys. J. C **75**, no. 7, 309 (2015) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3532-4 \[arXiv:1409.7157 \[hep-ex\]\]. P. Roloff and J. Strube, arXiv:1307.7644 \[hep-ex\]. M. E. Luke, A. V. Manohar and I. Z. Rothstein, Phys. Rev. D **61**, 074025 (2000) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.61.074025 \[hep-ph/9910209\]. A. V. Manohar and I. W. Stewart, Phys. Rev. D **62**, 014033 (2000) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.62.014033 \[hep-ph/9912226\]. A. V. Manohar and I. W. Stewart, Phys. Rev. D **62**, 074015 (2000) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.62.074015 \[hep-ph/0003032\]. A. V. Manohar and I. W. Stewart, Phys. Rev. D **63**, 054004 (2001) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.63.054004 \[hep-ph/0003107\]. R. G. Stuart, Phys. Lett. B **262**, 113 (1991). doi:10.1016/0370-2693(91)90653-8 A. Aeppli, G. J. van Oldenborgh and D. Wyler, Nucl. Phys. B **428**, 126 (1994) doi:10.1016/0550-3213(94)90195-3 \[hep-ph/9312212\]. W. Beenakker, F. A. Berends and A. P. Chapovsky, Nucl. Phys. B **548**, 3 (1999) doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(99)00110-8 \[hep-ph/9811481\]. A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, M. Roth and D. Wackeroth, Phys. Lett. B **475**, 127 (2000) doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(00)00059-9 \[hep-ph/9912261\]. A. H. Hoang and T. Teubner, Phys. Rev. D **60**, 114027 (1999) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.60.114027 \[hep-ph/9904468\]. A. H. Hoang and M. Stahlhofen, JHEP **1405**, 121 (2014) doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2014)121 \[arXiv:1309.6323 \[hep-ph\]\]. A. H. Hoang, C. J. Reisser and P. Ruiz-Femenia, Phys. Rev. D **82**, 014005 (2010) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.014005 \[arXiv:1002.3223 \[hep-ph\]\].
[^1]: $\switch$ can in principle also be directly multiplied to the matrix elements, yet associating them with the couplings ensures a smoother switch-off.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
In the context of top-color assisted technicolor ($TC2$) models, we calculate the contributions of the neutral top-pion $ \pi_{t}^{0}$ to $t\gamma$ and $tz$ production via the processes $ ep\rightarrow \gamma c \rightarrow t\gamma $ and $
ep\rightarrow \gamma c \rightarrow tz$ at the $HERA$ and $THERA$ colliders. Our results show that the cross sections $\sigma_{t\gamma}(s)$ and $\sigma_{tz}(s)$ are very small at the $HERA$ collider with $\sqrt{s}=320GeV $. However, in most of the parameter space, $\sigma_{t\gamma}(s)$ or $\sigma_{tz}(s)$ is in the range of about $0.1pb \sim 1 pb$ at the $THERA$ collider with $\sqrt{s}=1000GeV$.
author:
- |
Chongxing Yue, Dongqi Yu, Zhengjun Zong\
[Department of Physics, Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029. P.R.China]{} [^1]
title: 'Neutral top-pion $ \pi_{t}^{0}$ and $t\gamma(z)$ production at the HERA and THERA colliders'
---
Single top quark production is very sensitive to the anomalous top quark couplings $tqv$, in which $q$ represents the up quark or charm quark and $v$ represents the gauge bosons $z$, $\gamma$, or $g$\[1\]. This type of couplings can be generated in supersymmetry, top-color scenario, and other specific models beyond the standard model($SM$). Thus, studying the contributions of the $tqv$ couplings to single top production is of interest. This fact has led to many studies involving single top production via the $tqv$ couplings in lepton colliders\[2,3\] and hadron colliders\[4,5\].
The $HERA$ collider and the $THERA$ collider\[6\] with the center-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}=320GeV$ and $1000 GeV$, respectively, are the experimental facilities where high energy electron-proton and positron-proton interactions can be studied. It is well known that, in the $SM$, single top quark can not be produced at an observable rate in these high energy colliders. However, it has been shown that the $HERA$ collider and the $THERA$ collider can provide a very good sensitivity on the $tqv$ couplings via single top production\[7\]. This type of single top production may be detected in these colliders\[5,8\]. The $HERA$ and $THERA$ colliders are powerful tools for searching for the anomalous top quark couplings $tqv$.
The presence of the top-pions $\pi_{t}^{0,\pm}$ in low-energy spectrum is an inevitable feature of top-color scenario\[9\]. These new particles have large Yukawa couplings to the third family quarks and can induce the tree-level flavor changing($FC$) couplings, which have significant contributions to the anomalous top quark couplings $tqv$\[10\]. In Ref.\[5\] we study the contributions of the $tqv$ couplings generated by $\pi^{0}_{t}$ exchange to single top production via the t-channel process $eq\rightarrow$ et at the $HERA$ and $THERA$ colliders. We have shown that it can generate significant effects on the process $ec
\rightarrow$ et, which may be observable in the $THERA$ collider. The aim of this Letter is to consider the contributions of the $tcv$ couplings given by $\pi^{0}_{t}$ exchange to the processes $ep\rightarrow \gamma c \rightarrow t \gamma$ and $ep\rightarrow
\gamma c\rightarrow tz$ in the context of topcolor-assisted technicolor ($TC2$) models\[11\], and see whether the effects of the neutral top-pion $\pi^{0}_{t}$ on $t\gamma$ and $tz$ production can be detected in the $HERA$ collider or the $THERA$ collider.
For $TC2$ models\[9,11\], the underlying interactions, topcolor interactions, are assumed to be chiral critically strong at the scale about 1 $TeV$ and coupled preferentially to the third generation, and therefore do not posses $GIM$ mechanism. The non-universal gauge interactions result in the tree-level $FC$ coupling vertices when one writes the interactions in the mass eigen-basis, which can induce the anomalous top quark couplings $tuv$ and $tcv$. However, the $tuv$ couplings can be neglected because the $FC$ scalar coupling $\pi^{0}_{t}$ $tu$ is very small \[12\]. The effective forms of the $tc \gamma$ and $tcz$ coupling vertices $\Lambda_{tc\gamma}$, $\Lambda_{tcz}$ have been given in $Eq$.\[4\] and $Eq$.\[5\] of Ref.\[10\].
From the above discussion, we can see that the neutral top-pion $\pi^{0}_{t}$ can generate contributions to the subprocesses $\gamma c\rightarrow t\gamma$ and $\gamma c\rightarrow tz$ via the anomalous top quark couplings $tc\gamma$ and $tcz$ generated by the $\pi^{0}_{t}$ $\bar{t}c$ coupling. The relevant Feynman diagrams are shown in Fig.1.
For the subprocesses $c(p_{c})+\gamma(p_{\gamma}) \rightarrow
t(p_{t})+\gamma(p_{\gamma}')$ and $c(p_{c})+\gamma(p_{\gamma})\rightarrow t(p_{t}')+z(p_{z})$, we define the kinematical invariants $\hat{s}=(p_{t}+p_{\gamma}')^{2}=(p_{t}'+p_{z})^{2},
t=(p_{\gamma}-p_{t})^{2},$ and $t'=(p_{\gamma}-p_{t}')^{2}$. The renormalized amplitudes for these processes can be written as: $$\begin{aligned}
M^{t\gamma}=M_{s}^{t\gamma}+M_{t}^{t\gamma}&=&
\bar{u}_{t}\Lambda_{tc\gamma}^{\mu}i\varepsilon_{\mu}
\frac{i[\gamma\cdot(p_{t}+p_{\gamma}')+m_{c}]}{\hat{s}-m_{c}^{2}+i\mu}i
\varepsilon^{\nu}(\frac{2}{3}ie\gamma_{\nu})u_{c}\nonumber\\
&&+\bar{u}_{t}(\frac{2}{3}ie\gamma^{\mu})i\varepsilon_{\mu}\frac{i[\gamma
\cdot(p_{t}+p_{\gamma}')+m_{t}]}{\hat{s}-m_{t}^{2}+im_{t}\Gamma_{t}}i
\varepsilon^{\nu}\Lambda_{tc\gamma,\nu}u_{c}\nonumber\\
&&+\bar{u}_{t}\Lambda_{tc\gamma}^{\mu}i\varepsilon_{\mu}\frac{i[\gamma\cdot(p_{\gamma}-p_{t})
+m_{c}]}{t-m_{c}^{2}+i\mu}i
\varepsilon^{\nu}(\frac{2}{3}ie\gamma_{\nu})u_{c}\nonumber\\
&&+\bar{u}_{t}(\frac{2}{3}ie\gamma^{\mu})i\varepsilon_{\mu}\frac{i[\gamma
\cdot(p_{\gamma}-p_{t})+m_{t}]}{t-m_{t}^{2}+im_{t}\Gamma_{t}}i
\varepsilon^{\nu}\Lambda_{tc\gamma,\nu}u_{c},\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
M^{tz}=M_{s}^{tz}+M_{t}^{tz}&=&
\bar{u}_{t}\Lambda_{tc\gamma}^{\mu}i\varepsilon_{\mu}
\frac{i[\gamma\cdot(p_{t}'+p_{z})+m_{c}]}{\hat{s}-m_{c}^{2}+i\mu}i
\varepsilon^{\nu}(\frac{2}{3}ie\gamma_{\nu})u_{c}\nonumber\\
&&+\bar{u}_{t}\Lambda_{tcz}^{\mu}i\varepsilon_{\mu}\frac{i[\gamma
\cdot(p_{t}'+p_{z})+m_{t}]}{\hat{s}-m_{t}^{2}+im_{t}\Gamma_{t}}i
\varepsilon^{\nu}\Lambda_{tc\gamma,\nu}u_{c}\nonumber\\
&&+\bar{u}_{t}\Lambda_{tc\gamma}^{\mu}i\varepsilon_{\mu}\frac{i[\gamma\cdot(p_{\gamma}-p_{t}')
+m_{c}]}{t'-m_{c}^{2}+i\mu}i
\varepsilon^{\nu}\Lambda_{zc\bar{c},\nu}u_{c}\nonumber\\
&&+\bar{u}_{t}(\frac{2}{3}ie\gamma^{\mu})i\varepsilon_{\mu}\frac{i[\gamma
\cdot(p_{\gamma}-p_{t}')+m_{t}]}{t'-m_{t}^{2}+im_{t}\Gamma_{t}}i
\varepsilon^{\nu}\Lambda_{tcz,\nu}u_{c}\end{aligned}$$ with $$\Lambda_{zc\bar{c}}^{\mu}=\Lambda_{zt\bar{t}}^{\mu}=\frac{e}{s_{W}c_{W}}
[(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{2}{3}s_{W}^{2})\gamma^{\mu}\frac{1-\gamma_{5}}{2}-
\frac{2}{3}s_{W}^{2}\gamma^{\mu}\frac{1+\gamma_{5}}{2}].$$ Where $\mu$ is a real parameter, which is introduced to make the integral convergent. $\Gamma_{t}$ is the total decay width of the top quark.
After calculating the cross section $\hat{\sigma}_{i}(\hat{s})$ of the subprocesses $\gamma c\rightarrow t\gamma$ or $\gamma
c\rightarrow tz$, the total cross section $\sigma_{i}(s)$ of $t\gamma$ production or $tz$ production can be obtained by folding $\hat{\sigma}_{i}(\hat{s})$ with the charm quark distribution $f_{c/p}(x)$ in proton and the backscattered high energy photon spectrum $f_{\gamma/e}(\frac{\tau}{x})$:$$\sigma_{i}(s)=
\int^{0.83}_{\tau_{min}}d\tau\int^{1}_{\tau/0.83}\frac{dx}{x}
f_{\gamma/e}(\frac{\tau}{x})f_{c/p}(x)\hat{\sigma}_{i}(\hat{s})$$ with $\hat{s}=\tau s,\ \ \tau_{min}=\frac{m_{t}^{2}+m_{v}^{2}}{s}$ and $f_{\gamma/e}(x)$ can be written as \[13\]: $$f_{\gamma/e}(x)=\frac{1}{1.84}[1-x+\frac{1}{1-x}[1-\frac{4x}{x_{0}}
(1-\frac{x}{x_{0}(1-x)})]] \ \ \ (x_{0}=4.83).$$ The parton distribution function $f_{c/p}(x)$ of the charm quark runs with the energy scale. In our calculation, we will take the CTEQ5 parton distribution function for $f_{c/p}(x)$\[14\].
To obtain numerical results, we take the fine structure constant $\alpha_{e}=\frac{1}{128.8},$ $m_t=175GeV$, $m_c=1.2GeV$, $m_z=91.2GeV$, and assume that the total decay width $\Gamma_{t} $ of the top quark is dominated by the decay channel $t\rightarrow
wb$, which has been taken $\Gamma (t\rightarrow wb)=1.56GeV$ \[15\]. The limits on the mass $m_{\pi_{t}}$ of the top-pion $\pi^{0}_{t}$ may be obtained via studying it’s effects on observables\[9\]. It has been shown that $m_{\pi_{t}}$ is allowed to be in the range of a few hundred $GeV$ depending on the models. For $TC2$ models, top-color interactions make small contributions to electroweak symmetry breaking and give rise to the main part of the top quark mass, (1-$\varepsilon$)$m_{t}$, with the parameter $\varepsilon\ll1$. As numerical estimation, we will take $m_{\pi_{t}}$ and $\varepsilon$ as free parameters.
Our numerical results are summarized in Fig.2-Fig.5. From these figures, we can see that the cross sections $\sigma_{t\gamma}(s) $ and $ \sigma_{tz}(s)$ of $t\gamma$ and $tz$ production at the $HERA$ and $THERA$ colliders increase as the parameter $\varepsilon$ increases and $m_{\pi_{t}}$ decreases. In all of the parameter space, we have that the cross section $\sigma_{t\gamma}(s)$ of the process $ep\rightarrow\gamma
c\rightarrow t\gamma$ is larger than the cross section $\sigma_{tz}(s)$ of the process $ep\rightarrow\gamma c\rightarrow
tz$. For $\varepsilon\leq0.08$ and $m_{\pi_{t}}\geq200GeV$, $\sigma_{t\gamma}(s)$ and $\sigma_{tz}(s)$ at the $HERA$ collider are smaller than 0.14$pb$ and 0.066$pb$, respectively. However, at the $THERA$ collider with $\sqrt{s}=1000GeV$, $\sigma_{t\gamma}(s)$ and $\sigma_{tz}(s)$ are in the ranges of 0.14$pb\sim1.37pb$ and $0.13pb\sim1.35pb$, respectively, for $0.02\leq\varepsilon\leq0.08$ and $200GeV\leq
m_{\pi_{t}}\leq400GeV$.
If we assume that the $HERA$ collider with $\sqrt{s}=320GeV$ has a yearly integrated luminosity of $ \pounds=160pb^{-1}$ and the $THERA$ collider with $\sqrt{s}=1000GeV$ has a yearly integrated luminosity of $\pounds=470pb^{-1}$\[6\], then the yearly production events of $t\gamma$ and $tz$ can be easily estimated. In most of the parameter space of $TC2$ models, there may be only about 10 or less of $t\gamma$ events or $tz$ events generated a year in the $HERA$ collider, which is very difficult to detect. However, there may be hundreds of $t\gamma$ events or $tz$ events to be generated a year in the $THERA$ collider. For example, for $m_{\pi_{t}}=300GeV$ and $\varepsilon=0.05$, the $THERA$ collider can generate 252 $t\gamma$ events and 240 $tz$ events. Thus, the effects of the neutral top-pion $\pi_{t}^{0}$ on $t\gamma$ production and $tz$ production may be detected at the $THERA$ collider.
In conclusion, $TC2$ models predict the existence of the neutral top-pion $\pi_{t}^{0}$, which can induce the anomalous top quark couplings $tc\gamma$ and $tcz$ and further contribute to single top quark production. In this letter, we calculated the contributions of $\pi_{t}^{0}$ to $t\gamma$ production and $tz$ production via the processes $ep\rightarrow\gamma c\rightarrow
t\gamma$ and $ep\rightarrow\gamma c\rightarrow t z$ at the $HERA$ and $THERA$ colliders. We find that the cross sections of $t\gamma$ and $tz$ production are very small at the $HERA$ collider. The effects of the neutral top-pion $\pi_{t}^{0}$ on $t\gamma$ and $tz$ production can not be observed at the $HERA$ collider. However, $\pi_{t}^{0}$ exchange can generate several hundred $t\gamma$ or $tz$ events at the $THERA$ collider.
[**Acknowledgments**]{}
Dongqi Yu would like to thank Professor Xuelei Wang for useful discussions. We thank the referee for carefully reading the manuscript. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (90203005) and the Natural Science Foundation of the Liaoning Scientific Committee(20032101).
[99]{} For reviews see M. Beneke et al.(conveners), A. Ahmadov et al., Top quark physics, hep-ph/0003033. K. J. Abraham, K. Whisnant, B. - L. Young, [*Phys. Lett B*]{} [**419**]{} (1998) 381; V. F. Obraztsov, S. R. Slabospitsky, O. P. Yushchenko, [*Phys. Lett B*]{} [**426**]{} (1998) 393; T. Han, J. L. Hewett, [*Phy. Rev. D*]{} [**60**]{} (1999) 074051; S. Bar-Shalom, J.Wudka, [*Phy. Rev. D*]{} [**60**]{} (1999) 094916; J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra, [*Phys. Lett B*]{} [**502**]{} (2001) 115; J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra, T. Riemann, hep-hp/0102197; J. J. Cao, Z. H. Xiong, J. M. Yang, [*Nucl. Phys. B*]{} [**651**]{} (2003) 87; J. J. Cao, G. L. Liu, J. M. Yang, hep-ph/0311166. C. Yue, et al., [*Phys. Lett. B*]{} [ **496**]{}(2000)93; C. Yue, et al., [*Phys. Lett. B*]{} [ **525**]{}(2002)301 E. Malkawi, T. Tait, [*Phys. Rev D*]{} [**54**]{} (1996) 5758; T. Han, et al., [*Phys. Lett B*]{} [**385**]{} (1996) 311; T. Tait, C.-P. Yuan, [*Phys. Rev D*]{} [**55**]{} (1997) 7300; M. Hosch, K. Whisnant, B.-L. Young, [*Phys. Rev. D*]{}[**56**]{}(1997) 5725; T. Han, et al., [*Phys. Rev. D*]{} [**58**]{} (1998)073008; F. del Aguila, J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra, [*Phys. Lett B*]{} [**462**]{} (1999) 310; T. Tait, C.-P. Yuan, [*Phys. Rev.D*]{} [**63**]{} (2000)014018; F. del Aguila, J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra, [*Nucl. Phys. B*]{} [**576**]{} (2000) 56; C. S. Li, X. Zhang and S. H. Zhu, [*Phys. Rev D*]{} [**60**]{} (2000)077702; Zhou Hong, Ma Wen-Gan, Jiang Yi, Zhang Ren-You and Wan Lang-Hui, [*Phys. Rev D*]{} [**64**]{} (2001)095006; J. J. Cao, Z. H. Xiong, J. M. Yang, [*Phys. Rev D*]{} [**67**]{} (2003)071701; N. Kidonakis and A. Belyaev, hep-ph/0310299.
Chongxing Yue, Hongjie Zong, Wei Wang, [*Nucl. Phys.B*]{} [**667**]{} (2003) 349. A. K. Cifici, S. SuHandoy, $\ddot{O}$. Yavas, in: Proc. of EPAC2000, 2000, p. 388; P. J. Bussey, Int. J. Mod. [*Phys. A*]{} [**17**]{} (2002) 1065. A. Belyaev, N. Kidonakis, [*Phys. Rev. D*]{} [**65**]{} (2002) 037501. H. Fritzsch, D. Holtmannsp $\ddot{O}$tter, [*Phys. Lett B*]{} [**457**]{} (1999) 186; O.Cakir, S. Sultansoy, M. Yilmaz, hep-ph/0105130. A. T. Alan, A. Senol, [*Europhys. Lett*]{}. [**59**]{} (2002) 669
K. Lane, Technicolor 2000, in: Nuclear, Subnuclear and Astroparticle Physics, Frascati, 2000, pp, 235-280; C. T. Hill, E. H. Simmons, [*Phys. Rep*]{}. [**381**]{} (2003) 235, \[Erratum-ibid, 390 (2004) 553\]. Chongxing Yue, Yuanben Dai, Qingjun Xu, Guoli liu, [*Phys. Lett B*]{} [**525**]{} (2002) 301. C. T. Hill, [*Phys. Lett B*]{} [**345**]{} (1999) 483; K. Lane, T. Eichten, [*Phys. Lett B*]{} [**352**]{} (1995) 382; K. Lane, [*Phys. Lett B*]{} [**433**]{} (1998) 96; G. Cveti$\check{c}$, [*Rev. Mod. Phys*]{}. [**71**]{} (1999) 513. H.-J. He, C.-P. Yuan, [*Phys. Rev. Lett*]{}. [**83**]{} (1999) 28; G. Burdman, [*Phys.Rev. Lett*]{}. [**83**]{} (1999) 2888. O. J. P. Eboli, et al., [*Phys. Rev. D*]{} [**47**]{} (1993) 889; King-Man Cheuny, Phys. Rev. D [**47**]{} (1993) 3750. CTEQ Collaboration, H. L. Lai, et al., [*Eur. Phys.*]{} [**12**]{} (2000) 375; J. Pumplin, D. R. Stump, J. Huston, H. L. Lai, P. Nadolsky, W. K. Tung, JHEP [**0207**]{} (2002) 012, hep-ph/02011195. Particle Data Group, D. E. Groom, et at., [*Eur. Phys.*]{} J.C [**15**]{} (2000) 1; K. Hagiwara, et at, [*Phys. Rev. D*]{} [**66**]{} (2002) 010001
[^1]: E-mail:[email protected]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We suggest that some observational features of high-energy radiation from pulsars should be explained in terms of three dimensional geometric models, e.g. the phase-resolved X-ray and $\gamma$-ray spectra and the energy dependent light curves from various pulsars. In this paper, we present a three dimensional pulsar outer-magnetospheric gap model to explain these observational features. The outer-magnetospheric gap is proposed to form near the null charged surface and extend toward the light cylinder. The other two geometric dimensions of the outer-magnetospheric gap, i.e. the vertical size and the azimuthal extension can be determined self-consistently. We apply this model to explain the observed phase-dependent spectra and the energy-dependent light curves of various pulsars.'
address: 'Department of Physics, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China'
author:
- 'K.S. Cheng'
title: 'HIGH-ENERGY RADIATION FROM PULSARS : A THREE DIMENSIONAL MODEL APPROACH'
---
INTRODUCTION
============
The non-thermal high-energy radiation from rotation-powered pulsars is believed to be emitted from their magnetosphere. In the past one decade, there has been a lot of progress in detecting and understanding high-energy radiation from rotation powered pulsars. In particular, the X-ray and $\gamma$-ray data obtained by the satellite observatories ROSAT, ASCA, RXTE, BeppoSAX, RXTE, CGRO, Chandra and XMM-Newton provide very important constraints for the theoretical models, which are used to explain the high-energy radiation from rotation powered pulsars. The observed data is so rich that the local properties in the magnetosphere, e.g. retarded relativistic effect, the time of flight, the strength of the local magnetic field, the local radius of curvature, the local soft photon density etc., are necessarily to be used in order to explain the observed phase-dependent spectra and energy-dependent light curves from pulsars. These local properties associated with the observed photons not only depend on the global pulsar parameters, i.e. rotation period and surface magnetic field, but also depend on the angle between the magnetic axis and the rotation axis (the inclination angle $\alpha$) as well as the viewing angle ($\zeta$).
EGRET has observed the phase-resolved emission characteristics such as pulse profiles and phase-resolved spectra of Crab, Vela and Geminga Pulsars (Thompson et al. 1996). Fierro et al. (1998) have divided the observed photons of the Crab pulsar in the energy range from 100 MeV to 10 GeV into eight different phase bins and have shown that the spectra of each phase bin is very different. If a power-law fitting is used, the spectral indices of these phase bin can vary from -1.71 to -2.65. The observations of X-ray emission from the Crab pulsar also indicate that its spectral energy distribution is changing within its double peak pulse profile. Pravdo et al. (1997) analyzed the RXTE data between 5 and 250 keV, and showed an evolution of the spectral index across the X-ray pulse in a reverse S shape. Massaro et al. (2000) presented the phase-resolved analysis results based on BeppoSAX data. Kuiper et al. (2001) have summarized the basic observational properties of the Crab pulsar from soft X-rays to high-energy gamma-rays. Here, we summarize the basic observed properties at X-rays are as follows: (i) a double pulse profile with a bridge separated by $\sim 0.4$ in phase has been observed; (ii) the spectra of the two peaks soften and the softest spectrum is the first peak; (iii) the spectrum the peaks hardens; and (iv) spectral indices are clearly increasing with energy over all the phase interval. The Chandra X-Ray Observatory has also observed the Crab pulsar using the Low-Energy Transmission Grating with the High-Resolution Camera. Time-resolved zeroth-order images reveal the pulsar emits X-rays at all pulse phases (Tennant et al. 2001). A preliminary analysis of the dispersed data indicates that the spectral indices evolve as a function of pulse phase (Weisskopf, 2002). The Chandra result is in semi-quantitative agreement with previous measurements (e.g. Pravdo et al. 1997; Massaro et al. 2000) at various energies. However, the Chandra results extend the phase coverage through pulse minimum. In summary, observations strongly suggest that these phase-dependent properties come from different parts of the pulsar magnetosphere. The question is how to explain theoretically the phase dependent properties of the observed high-energy radiation from the Crab pulsar as well as from other gamma-ray pulsars. We suggest that the above examples indicate the necessity of using three dimensional outer magnetospheric gap (hereafter outer gap) models to explain the observed data.
THREE DIMENSIONAL OUTER GAP MODELS
==================================
The outer gaps, powerful acceleration regions, can form in the vicinity of “null charge surface" (${\bf{\Omega}}\cdot{\bf{B}}=0$) (Holloway, 1973; Cheng et al. 1976) because the charged carriers on each side of the null charge surface have opposite charges. In fact, the charge density of the magnetosphere in the corotating frame of a neutron star is (Goldreich and Julian, 1969) $\rho_0\sim
-({\bf{\Omega}}\cdot{\bf{B}}/ 2\pi c)$, where ${\bf{B}}$ and ${\bf{\Omega}}$ are the magnetic field and angular velocity of the neutron star. The charge density will change sign when a global current flows through the null surface where ${\bf{\Omega}}\cdot{\bf{B}}=0$. As a result, a charge-deficient region ($\rho\approx 0$) in the outer magnetosphere near the null surface will be formed. Any deviation of the charge density from $\rho_0$ results in an electric field along [**[B]{}**]{}. Cheng et al. (1986a,b, hereafter CHRI and CHRII respectively) argue that this electric field can become strong enough to accelerate $e^{\pm}$ pairs to ultra relativistic energies. These $e^{\pm}$ pairs could radiate $\gamma$-ray tangential to the curved [**[B]{}**]{} field lines. These “curvature $\gamma$-rays" are further converted into $e^{\pm}$ pairs via $\gamma + \gamma\rightarrow e^+ + e^-$. Therefore, in order to keep a steady state current flow and the charge density $\rho_0$ in the regions outside the gap, the gap will grow until it is large enough and the electric field is strong enough to maintain a copious supply of charges to the rest of the open field line region. If the gap ends in a region $\rho_0\neq 0$, charges from the surrounding region will flow in through the end. If both ends are located on the null surface, any $e^{\pm}$ produced in the gap will act to replace the charge deficiency inside the gap, and finally the gap will be filled up. However, if a vacuum gap extends to the light cylinder, charged particles created in the gaps will escape from the magnetosphere, so the gap will not be quenched. Hence, stable outer gaps (if they exist) are those from the null surface to the light cylinder along the last closed field lines. In each outer gap, the inner boundary of the outer gap lies near the intersection of the null surface where $\rho=0$ and the boundary of the closed field lines of the star on which the magnetosphere current does not flow. The thickness of the outer gap is bounded from above by a layer of electric current which contributes a surface charge density.
According to CHR model, four outer gaps exist in the open zone in the plane of (${\bf{\Omega}}$, ${\bf{\mu}}$) (two of them are topologically connected in three dimensional space), but only two longer outer gaps should give observed fan beams. They argued that these two longer outer gaps may create enough $\gamma$-ray and $e^{\pm}$ pairs to quench the two shorter, less powerful ones. In the CHR model, the $\gamma$-ray emission is approximated to occur only along the last closed field line in the plane of the dipole and rotation axes. Because the charged particles of both positive and negative charges are accelerated in the gap, the emissions should beam both toward and away from the pulsar. Therefore, the observed fan beams consist of those coming from different gaps and the measured phase separation between the two peaks is determined by the time travel difference between these two outer gaps, relativistic aberration of emission and the bending of the magnetic field lines near the light cylinder. The emission from each peak is highly cusped because of the relativistic aberration, so there will be some bridge emission but very little other offpulse emission. Obviously, the pulse profiles of CHR model are not consistent with the observed those. So the three dimensional description of the outer gaps is necessary.
After studying the $\gamma$-ray production and light curves for various magnetosphere geometries based on the CHR model, Chiang and Romani (1992) assumed that gap-type regions could be supported along all field lines which define the boundary between the closed region and open field line region rather than just on the bundle of field lines lying in the plane containing the rotation and magnetic dipole axes. In this case, photons are generated which travel tangential to the local magnetic field lines, and there are beams in both the outward (away from the neutron star) and inward directions, because the accelerating gaps are populated by pair production. They considered the pulse profile of radiation produced in the outer gap and showed that a single pole will produce a broad, irregularly-shaped, emission which is particularly dense near the edge. As a result, double $\gamma$-ray pulses will be observed when the line of sight from the Earth crosses these enhanced regions of the $\gamma$-ray beam, while the inner region of the beam provides a significant amount of emission between the pulses. With a proper choice of the observer viewing angle, a wide range of peak phase separations can be accommodated. Furthermore, Chiang and Romani (1994) refined the calculation of high-energy emission from the rotation-powered pulsars based on the CHR model. Their major refinements include (i) the approximate location of the emission at each point in phase along a given line of sight was inferred by using a pulse phase map, and (ii) because the spectral emissivities at different emission points will differ, so the outer gap is divided into small subzones in the plane containing the rotation and dipole axes. The photon densities and beaming directions for different zone are also different, in which case the particle transport needs to be considered. Under their refinements, they found that the spectral variation of the $\gamma$-radiation over the pulsar period is the result of the different emission processes which play a role throughout the outer magnetosphere, however, they were not able to obtain a self-consistent spectrum which resembled the observed high-energy spectra, and they attributed this shortcoming to the inability to model appropriately the extremely complex emission processes and their interactions. Subsequently, Romani and his co-workers (Romani and Yadigaroglu, 1995; Yadigaroglu and Romani, 1995; Romani, 1996) have improved their three dimensional models and successfully explain the high-energy emission features of pulsars including the phase-resolved spectra of the Vela pulsar. However, in their model they have assumed that there is only one single outer gap and only outgoing current. These two assumptions do not have real physical justification.
CRZ MODEL
=========
Cheng et al. (2000 hereafter CRZ) re-consider the three dimensional magnetospheric outer gap model, following the important ground-breaking work of Romani and co-workers. But instead of assuming a [*[single]{}*]{} outer gap with [*[only]{}*]{} an outgoing current, and no restriction on azimuthal directions, they use various physical processes (including pair production which depends sensitively on the local electric field and the local radius of curvature, surface field structure, reflection of $e^{\pm}$ pairs because of mirroring and resonant scattering) to determine the three-dimensional geometry of the outer gap. In their model, two outer gaps and both outgoing and incoming currents are in principle allowed, but it turns out that outgoing currents dominate the emitted radiation intensities. Furthermore, the three dimensional structure of outer gaps is completely determined by pair production conditions. Since the potential drop of the gap is $\Delta V\approx 6.6\times 10^{12}f^2_0B_{12}P^{-2}\;{\mbox{Volts}}$, where $P=2\pi /\Omega $ is the rotation period, $\Omega$ is the rotation angular velocity, $B_{12}$ is the surface magnetic field in units of 10$^{12}$ Gauss, $f_0=h(<r>)/R_L$, $h(<r>)$ is the average vertical separation of the gap boundaries in the (${\bf{\Omega}}$, ${\bf{\mu}}$) plane and $R_L=c/\Omega$ is the light cylinder radius, and $<r>$ is the average distance to the gap; its value depends on magnetic inclination angle $\alpha$ ($<r>\sim R_L/2$). The particle current passing through the gap is $\dot{N}_{gap}=3\times 10^{30}f_0\xi B_{12}P^{-2}\;{\mbox{s$^{-1}$}}$, where $\xi=\Delta\Phi/2\pi$; $\Delta\Phi$ is the transverse ($\phi$-direction) extension of the gap. Each of the charged particles inside the gap will radiate high-energy curvature photons with a characteristic energy $E_{\gamma}(f_0)=2\times 10^8 f^{3/2}_0B^{3/4}_{12}P^{-7/4}\;{\mbox{eV}}$. About half of $\dot{N}_{gap}$ will move toward the star. Although they continue to radiate their energies on the way to the star, they still carry 10.5$P^{1/3}$ ergs of energy on to the stellar surface. The energy will be radiated back out in hard X-rays. However, resonant scattering with pairs near the star may reflect hard X-rays back to the stellar surface (Cheng et al. 1998; Wang et al. 1998), to be re-emitted as soft X-rays with a temperature $T_s\approx 3.8\times 10^6f^{1/4}_0\xi^{1/4}B^{1/2}_{12}P^{-5/12}\;{\mbox{K}}$.
The X-ray photon density is very low but each pair produced by an X-ray-curvature photon collision in the outer gap will emit almost $10^5$ curvature $\gamma$-rays for further pair creation in that gap. Once the pair production threshold condition $kT_sE_{\gamma}\ge(m_ec^2)^2$ is satisfied, the gap is unlikely to grow much larger. This pair production condition gives $f_0=5.5P^{26/21}B^{-4/7}_{12}\xi^{1/7}$. Here, $\xi$ is still an unknown quantity. However, $f_0$ is weakly dependent on $\xi$ which is likely of order of unity. In first approximation, they assume $f_0=5.5P^{26/21}B^{-4/7}_{12}$ (Zhang and Cheng, 1997). To determine $\xi$, they consider local pair production processes. The pair production per unit length inside the gap is a decreasing function of $r$. According to CHR model, $E_{||}\propto r^{-1/2}$ for the thin outer gap (e.g. the Crab pulsar), which gives $E_{\gamma}(r)\propto
r^{-1/8}$ after using the large $r$ limit $s(r)=(rR_L)^{1/2}$. Since $E_{\gamma}$ is only weakly dependent on $r$, they assume $\sigma_{\gamma\gamma}\approx const$. The local pair production per unit length is $N_{e^{\pm}}(r)=(1-e^{-\tau_{\gamma\gamma}})N_{\gamma}(r)
\approx \tau_{\gamma\gamma}N_{\gamma}(r)$, where $\tau_{\gamma\gamma}=n_X(r)\sigma_{\gamma\gamma}l(r)$ is the local optical depth, $n_X=R^2T^4_s\sigma/r^2kT_sc$ is the X-ray number density at $r$, $l(r)\approx (2s(r)f(r)R_L)^{1/2}$ is the local optical path, $f(r)=h(r)/R_L$ is the local vertical extension of the gap (since $B(r)h^2(r)$ is a constant, which gives $f(r)\propto r^{3/2}$ and $f_0\sim
f(R_L/2)$ ), and $N_{\gamma}=eE_{||}(r)/E_{\gamma}(r)$ is the number of curvature photons emitted at $r$ per $e^+/e^-$ per unit length. Then $N_{e^{\pm}}(r)\propto r^{-11/8}$. Since most pairs are produced near the null surface where $r=r_{in}$, so the pair production take place mainly in the range $r_{in}\leq r\leq r_{lim}$ where $r_{lim}$ is estimated as $r_{lim}N_{e^{\pm}}(r_{lim})/r_{in}N_{e^{\pm}}(r_{in})\sim
(r_{lim}/r_{in})^{-3/8}\sim 1/2$, which gives $r_{lim}\sim 6r_{in}$. This limits pair production both along the field lines and in transverse directions, and gives $\Delta\Phi\sim 160^{\circ}$ by using the parameters of the Crab pulsar.
Within the pair production regions, outgoing and incoming directions for particle flows are allowed. For $r>r_{lim}$ only outgoing current is possible. Figure 1 shows our 3D outer gap structure. Two pencil beams represent radio beams. The light budge grey shadow is the surface of last closed magnetic field lines, two dark surfaces represent the upper boundaries of two outer gaps. So the structure of the outer gap starts from the null surface and end at the light cylinder. The lower boundary is last closed field surface and the upper boudary is shown in Figure 1.
{width="75mm"}
[Fig. 1. 3D structure of the outer-magnetospheric gaps.\[fig:f1\]]{}
{width="110mm"}
[Fig. 2. Emission projection onto the ($\zeta $, $\Phi $) plane and pulse profile. The emission consists of the emission outwards from both outer gaps and inwards only from the region ($r_{lim}-r_{in}$) of both outer gaps. The outer gaps are limited along the azimuthal direction by pair production. Crab parameters, $\alpha=65^\circ $, $\zeta =82^\circ $ and $\Delta \Phi =160^\circ $ are used.\[fig:f2\]]{}
EMISSION MORPHOLOGIES AND LIGHT CURVES
======================================
In this section, we discuss the morphological features of emission from the three dimensional outer gaps. It is important to note that in order to properly describe the three-dimensional pulsar magnetosphere three-dimensional rotating dipolar magnetic field must be used. Chiang and Romani (1994) and Romani and Yadigaroglu (1995) assumed the entire locus of points on the last closed surface bounded by the null surface and the light cylinder as giving emission in an outer gap. In our model, the emission-producing outer gaps are limited along both radial and the $\phi$-directions. For example, the extension of the outer gap on the $\phi$-direction is about 160$^{\circ}$ for Crab parameters with $\alpha=65^{\circ}$. We describe the new photon emission morphologies below.
High-energy photons will be emitted nearly tangent to the magnetic field lines in the corotating frame because of the relativistic $1/\gamma$ beaming inherent in high energy processes unless $|\bf{E}\times\bf{B}|\sim B^2$. Then following Romani and Yadigaroglu (1995), we assume relativistic charged particles in the open zone radiate in their direction of propagation, i.e. along the magnetic field lines in the corotating frame. For each location within the open zone the direction of emission expressed as ($\zeta$,$\Phi$) is calculated, where $\zeta$ is the polar angle from the rotation axis and $\Phi$ is the phase of rotation of the star. Effects of the time of flight and aberration are taken into account. A photon with velocity ${\bf{u}}=(u_x,u_y,u_z)$ along a magnetic field line with a relativistic addition of velocity along the azimuthal angle gives an aberrated emission direction ${\bf{u'}}=(u'_x,u'_y,u'_z)$. The time of flight gives a change of the phase of the rotation of the star. Combining these two effects, and choosing $\Phi=0$ for radiation in the (x,z) plane from the center of the star, $\zeta$ and $\Phi$ are given by $\cos\zeta = u'_z$ and $\Phi =-\phi_{u'}-{\vec{r}}\cdot{\hat{u'}}$, where $\phi_{u'}$ is the azimuthal angle of $\hat{u'}$ and $\vec{r}$ is the emitting location in units of $R_L$. We project photon emissions on the ($\zeta$, $\Phi$) plane and observe the emission patterns on the sky. In ($\zeta$, $\Phi$) plane, the null surface can be determined easily because it consists of the points at which magnetic field lines are perpendicular to the rotation axis. For a field line, the null charge crossing is where the projected line crosses the equatorial line ($\zeta=90^{\circ}$). As an example, we show the projections of photon emission both outwards and inwards from one outer gap in ($\zeta$, $\Phi$) plane for the magnetic inclination angle ($\alpha=65^{\circ}$) in the upper panel of Figure 2, where the extension of the outer gaps on the $\phi$-direction is assumed to be $180^{\circ}$ and $(r_{lim}-r_{in})\sim 0.55R_L$(CRZ). As mentioned above, the pulse profile depends on emission location and viewing angle. Here we use Crab parameters and the viewing angle $\zeta=82^{\circ}$ ( the dashed line in panel A of Figure 2) to construct the light curve. The intensity of the light curve at each phase (panel B of Figure 2) is proportional to the number of interceptions between the dashed line and the solid lines in panel A of Figure 2.
PHASE-RESOLVED SPECTRA OF THE CRAB PULSAR
=========================================
In this section, we describe how to calculate the phase-dependent spectra of pulsars. We will use the parameters of the Crab pulsar as example. Because the Crab pulsar outer gaps are thin, we use the electric field of the CHR model: $$E_{||}(r)={\Omega B(r)a^2(r)\over c s(r)}= {\Omega B(r)f^2(r)R^2_L\over c
s(r)},$$ where $a(r)$ is the thickness of the outer gap at position $r$, the radius of the curvature $s\sim (rR_L)^{1/2}$, and $f(r)\equiv a(r)/R_L$ is the local fractional size of the outer gap. Since the magnetic flux subtended in the outer gap should be constant in the assumed steady state, $$f(r)\sim f(R_L)\left({r\over R_L}\right)^{3/2},$$ where $f(R_L)$ is estimated by the pair production condition described in previous section(N.B. There are two possible ways to determine $f(R_L)$, Eq. (6.7) of CHR II or Eq. (22) of Zhang and Cheng (1997), but they come out very close to each other.). The local Lorentz factor of the accelerated electrons/positrons in the outer gap is $$\gamma_e(r)=\left({3\over 2}{s^2\over e^2c}eE_{||}(r)c\right)^{1/4}.$$ Because of the high soft photon density, the high-energy emission from the Crab pulsar is described by synchrotron self-Compton process.
In an outer gap, the number of primary charged particles in a volume element $\Delta V$ is roughly given by $dN=n_{GJ}\Delta A\Delta l$, where $n_{GJ}={\bf{\Omega}}\cdot{\bf{B}}/2\pi e c$ is the local Goldreich-Julian number density, $B\Delta A$ is the magnetic flux through the accelerator and $\Delta l$ is the path length along its magnetic field lines. Using the thin gap approximation, the total number of charged particles in the outer gap is $$N\sim {\Omega \Phi\over 4\pi c e}R_L,$$ where $\Phi \sim f(R_L)B(R_L)R^2_L\Delta \phi$ and $\Delta \phi$ is the angular range of the outer gap extending along the azimuthal direction, estimated in previous section. These primary $e^{\pm}$ pairs will lose their energy by radiating curvature photons with a characteristic energy $$E_{cur}(r)={3\over 2}\hbar\gamma^3_e(r){c\over s(r)}.$$ The power into curvature radiation for $dN$ $e^{\pm}$ pairs through in A unit volume is $${dL_{cur}\over dV}\approx l_{cur} n_{GJ}(r),$$ where $l_{cur}=eE_{||}(r)c$, is the local power into the curvature radiation from a single electron/positron. The spectrum of primary photons from a unit volume is $${d^2\dot{N}\over dVdE_{\gamma}}\sim {l_{cur}n_{GJ}\over E_{cur}}{1\over
E_{\gamma}}$$ where $E_{\gamma}\leq E_{cur}$. These primary curvature photons collide with the soft photons produced by synchrotron radiation of the secondary $e^{\pm}$ pairs, and produce the secondary $e^{\pm}$ pairs by photon-photon pair production. Although pair production inside an outer gap is limited to a small region ($r_{in}\leq r \leq r_{lim}$), pair production outside the outer gap can cover a much wider range because the synchrotron photons produced by the secondary pairs are more abundant than the thermal photons from the stellar surface. The former cannot get into the outer gap because of the field line curvature (cf. CHR I) but they can convert most curvature photons from the outer gap into the secondary pairs. In a steady state the distribution of secondary electrons/positrons in a unit volume $${d^2N\over dVdE_e}\approx {1\over \dot{E}_e}\int
{d^2\dot{N}(E'_{\gamma}=2E'_e)\over dVdE_{\gamma}}dE'_e
\sim {1\over \dot{E}_e}{l_{cur}n_{GJ}\over E_{cur}}\ln\left({E_{cur}\over
E_e}\right),$$ with $\dot{E}_e$ the electron energy loss into synchrotron radiation, $$\dot{E}_e=-{2\over 3}{e^4B^2(r)\sin^2\beta(r)\over m^2c^3}
\left({E_e\over mc^2}\right)^2,$$ $B(r)$ is the local magnetic field and $\beta (r)$ the local pitch angle, $$\sin\beta(r)\sim \sin\beta(R_L)\left({r\over R_L}\right)^{1/2}.$$ $\sin\beta(R_L)$ is the pitch angle at the light cylinder. Then the energy distribution of the secondary electrons/positrons in volume $\Delta V (r)$, $$\left({dN(r)\over dE_e}\right)\approx {d^2N\over dVdE_e}\Delta V(r)
\sim {1\over \dot{E}_e}{l_{cur}n_{GJ}\Delta V(r)\over
E_{cur}}\ln\left({E_{cur}\over E_e}\right).$$ The corresponding photon spectrum of the synchrotron radiation is $$F_{syn}(E_{\gamma},r)={3^{1/2}e^3B(r)\sin\beta \over mc^2 h}{1\over
E_{\gamma}}\int^{E_{max}}_{E_{min}}\left({dN(r)\over
dE_e}\right) F(x)dE_e$$ where $x=E_{\gamma}/E_{syn}$. $$E_{syn}(r)={3\over 2}\left({E_e\over mc^2}\right)^2{h e B(r)\sin\beta
(r)\over mc}$$ is the typical photon energy, and $F(x)=x\int^{\infty}_xK_{5/3}(y)dy$, where $K_{5/3}(y)$ is the modified Bessel function of order 5/3. Similarly, the spectrum of inverse Compton scattered photons in the volume $\Delta V(r)$ is $$F_{ICS}(E_{\gamma}, r)=\int^{E_{max}}_{E_{min}}
\left({dN(r)\over dE_e}\right)\left({d^2N_{ICS}(r)\over
dE_{\gamma}dt}\right)
dE_e,$$ where $${d^2N(r)_{ICS}\over dE_{\gamma}dt}=\int^{\epsilon_2}_{\epsilon_1}
n_{syn}(\epsilon,r)F(\epsilon, E_{\gamma}, E_e)d\epsilon,$$ and $$F(\epsilon, E_{\gamma}, E_e)={3\sigma_Tc\over 4 (E_e/mc^2)^2}{1\over
\epsilon}\left[2q\ln q +(1+2q)(1-q)+{(\Gamma q)^2(1-q)\over 2(1+\Gamma
q)}\right],$$ with $\Gamma=4\epsilon(E_e/mc^2)/mc^2$, $q=E_1/\Gamma (1-E_1)$ with $E_1=E_{\gamma}/E_e$ and $1/4(E_e/mc^2) < q <1$. The number density of the synchrotron photons with energy $\epsilon$ is $$n_{syn}(\epsilon, r)={F_{syn}(\epsilon)\over cr^2\Delta\Omega},$$ where $F_{syn}$ is the calculated synchrotron radiation flux, and $\Delta \Omega$ is the usual beam solid angle.
Since the outer gap of the Crab pulsar is very thin, it is sufficient to use one representative surface to calculate the high-energy radiation. For a given viewing angle not only the light curve can be determined but also the exact emission regions in the outer gap are known. Figure 3 shows the emission trajectories in the outer gap. Once the radial distances of the emission regions are determined, the spectrum of photon emission can be calculated for a given radial distance $r$. Figure 4 shows the comparison between the observed phase-resolved spectra of the Crab pulsar and the calculated spectra in the energy range of 10 MeV to 10 GeV (Zhang et al. 2000). The more detailed phase-resolved spectra only in the energy range of EGRET can be found in CRZ. Figure 5 show the model energy dependent light curves of X-rays in four different energy channels (Zhang and Cheng, 2001b). Figure 6 shows the phase dependent spectral indices of X-rays in four different energy ranges.
[Fig. 3. The variation of radial distance with pulse phase for the Crab. The inclination angle is $65^\circ $. Five regions for different pulse phase are indicated.\[fig:f3\]]{}
{width="176mm"}
[Fig. 4. Phase-resolved $\gamma $-ray spectra from $10$MeV to $10$GeV for peak 1, bridge, peak 2 and phase-average of the Crab pulsar. Observed data are taken from Ulmer et al. (1995).\[fig:f4\]]{}
{width="110mm"}
[Fig. 5. Expected X-ray pulse profiles of Crab pulsar for four different energy bands. The first model light curve in the energy band from $0.3-4.2$ keV corresponds to the energy range of the Chandra detector. The other three curves correspond to the energy ranges of the BeppoSAX detectors. The magnetic inclination and viewing angles are assumed to be $65^\circ $ and $82^\circ $.\[fig:f5\]]{}
{width="110mm"}
[Fig. 6. Comparison of expected spectral indices with the observed data. The magnetic inclination and viewing angles are assumed to be $65^\circ $ and $82^\circ $ for the Crab pulsar. The observed data are taken from Massaro et al. (2000) and Weisskopf (2002).\[fig:f6\]]{}
THE PHASE-RESOLVED SPECTRA OF THE GEMINGA PULSAR
================================================
Fierro et al. (1998) have shown the observed light curve and phase-resolved spectra of high-energy $\gamma$-rays of Geminga pulsar detected by EGRET. The observed pulse profile by EGRET indicates that the phase separation is $0.49\pm 0.05$. In order to obtain the observed phase-resolved spectra, Fierro et al. (1998) divided Geminga pulsar phase into 8 parts: leading wing 1 (LW1), peak 1 (P1), trailing wing 1 (TW1), bridge, leading wing 2 (LW2), peak 2 (P2), trailing wing 2 (TW2) and offpulse (OP). The phase intervals widths of all these parts are 0.11, 0.09, 0.11, 0.15, 0.13, 0.13, 0.08 and 0.21 respectively. They have obtained the spectra for these different phase intervals and shown that the spectral indices change as a function of phase.
[Fig. 7a. The variation of radial distance with the pulse phase for different outer gap surfaces of the Geminga pulsar. The inclination angle is $50^\circ $. Five regions for different pulse phases which are the same as observed those are indicated.\[fig:f7a\]]{}
{width="160mm"}
[Fig. 7b. Phase-resolved $\gamma $-ray spectra for different phases (peak one, trailing wing one, bridge, leading wing two, peak 2 and phase-average) of the Geminga pulsar. Observed data are taken from Fierro et al. (1998).\[fig:f7b\]]{}
Now we apply to this model to explain the pulse profile and phase-resolved spectra of the Geminga pulsar. The key differences between the Geminga pulsar and the Crab pulsar are: (1) According to the model described in previous section, we can find that the fractional height of the outer gap for Geminga is $f_0\sim 0.7$,which is a very thick gap. Certainly we cannot use a single surface to represent the emission regions. We have used five layers to approximate the emission regions (cf. Figure 7a). (2) The mean free path of the primary photons from the gap is longer than the light cylinder. So the observed $\gamma$-rays are curvature photons from primary charged particles instead of synchrotron photons from the secondary pairs like in the case of the Crab pulsar. In order to calculate the light curve and phase-resolved spectra, we also need to know $\alpha$ and $\zeta$. Since the Geminga pulsar is a radio-quiet pulsar, these two parameters are difficult to know. Cheng and Zhang (1999) proposed a model for X-ray emission from rotation-powered pulsars. They applied this model to the Geminga pulsar and found that the magnetic inclination angle is $\sim 50^{\circ}$. Here, we use this value of the magnetic inclination angle. Furthermore the $\gamma$-ray light curve of Geminga is nearly $\sim 180^{\circ}$ so the viewing angle must be very close to $\sim
90^{\circ}$, which is consistent to the fact that its radio beam cannot be within the line of sight. In Figure 7b, we have compared the model phase-resolved spectra and the observed data. The more detailed calculations on the X-ray and $\gamma$-ray light curves of the geminga pulsar can be found in Zhang and Cheng (2001a).
APPLICATIONS TO OTHER CRAB-LIKE PULSARS: PSR B0540-69 AND PSR B1509-58
======================================================================
We have also applied this three dimensional outer gap model to other Crab-like pulsars:PSR B1509-58 and PSR B0540-69, and model the light curves and the spectra of optical, X-rays and $\gamma$-rays from these two pulsars (Zhang and Cheng, 2001b). Although the mean free path of the primary photons from the outer gaps of these two pulsars is much shorter than the light cylinder and hence the radiation from secondary pairs still dominate in the observed spectrum, the thickness of the outer gap in these two pulsars are 0.25 and 0.3 respectively. Again the emission regions cannot be approximated by a single surface. In Figure 8, we have compared the model spectra and the observed spectra of PSR B0540-69 from optical to gamma-rays. The more detailed comparison between model results and the observed data of PSR B1509-58 and PSR B0540-69 can be found in Zhang and Cheng (2001b)
[Fig. 8. The comparison of predicted phase-averaged spectrum with the observed data for PSR B0540-69. Observed data at optical waveband are taken from Middleditch et al. (1987), Hill et al. (1997). The data at ROSAT energy range, BeppoSAX energy range, COMPTEL and EGRET are taken from Finley et al. (1993), Mineo et al. (1999), Hermsen et al. (1994) and Thompson et al. (1994) respectively. The solid curve represents phase-averaged spectrum. The dot-dashed, long-dashed and short-dashed curves represent photon spectra in different phases.\[fig:f8\]]{}
SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION
======================
We use a 3-D model magnetosphere to model the observed light curve and the phase-resolved spectra of the $\gamma$-ray pulsars. In our model, the local photon-photon pair production in the outer gaps limits the extension of the outer gaps along the azimuthal direction. We find that the two topological disconnected outer gaps, with some extension along the azimuthal ($\phi$) direction, exist in the pulsar magnetosphere. Double-peaked pulse profiles with varying phase separation, depending on viewing angle, and strong bridge emission occur naturally, as in the single pole outer gap model. In case of the Crab pulsar, pair production is not limited to inside the outer gap because the intense X-rays produced by secondary pairs in the outer-magnetosphere of the Crab pulsar can convert most curvature photons into pairs outside the gap. The observed spectrum of the Crab pulsar results from a synchrotron-self-Compton mechanism. We (Cheng et al. 2000) have tried to apply the 3D outer gap model to explain the Crab pulsar’s phase-resolved spectra and find some discrepancies between model results and the observed data. One possibility is that the data presented by Fierro et al. (1998) contains the DC emission from the Crab/Nebula.
Although our three dimensional model can explain the observed phase-resolved spectra and the energy dependent light curves of various gamma-ray pulsars including the Crab pulsar and the Geminga pulsar reasonably well, the present model is subjected to number of limitations. First, the photons in the trailing wing 1, off-pulse and leading wing 1 in the light curve of the Crab pulsar (Fierro et al. 1998) cannot be explained by this model. Secondly, although the model Chandra light curve of the Crab pulsar and the observed one (cf. Figure 4 of Weisskopf, 2002) are very similar, we can only fit the phase-dependent spectral indices in half of the period (cf. Figure 6). Again, we can explain the spectra of PSR B0540-69 and PSR B1509-58 reasonably well but the model X-ray light curves are narrower than the observed ones.
In order to explain these discrepancies between the model results and the observed data, some improvements can be made in our model. (1) In our calculations, photons are assumed to be emitted tangent to the local field lines. Therefore, the emission light curves (cf. Figure 3) have sharp edges in both ends. In fact, some of secondary pairs have quite large pitch angles whose emission will not be tangent to the local field lines. Also for those pairs created near the null charged surface even they begins with small pitch angles, but when they stream towards the star and part of them will reflect back outwards due to the magnetic mirroring effect (Ho, 1988). Then they could end up with very large pitch angles. (2) The realistic magnetic field configuration in the pulsar magnetosphere could be different from a simply rotating dipolar magnetic field structure. (3) The particle energy density and the magnetic energy density are comparable near the light cylinder. Charged particles are not necessary straightly moving along the field lines. These pairs will have a much larger pitch angles and their radiation should not be restricted between pulses. (4) The charged current inside the outer-magnetospheric gap is assumed to be Goldreich-Julian current (1969), which must be the maximum value. In order to determine the real current flow inside the gap, it is necessary to solve a more consistent electro-dynamic model (Hirotani, 2002).
Finally, we would like to make a few remarks. The better test of the three dimensional outer gap model is to compare the model results with the phase-resolved spectrum from X-ray band to $\gamma$-ray band together, instead of comparing them separately. For the Crab pulsar, Kuiper et al. (2001) have published a full observational (phase-resolved) picture from soft X-rays up to high-energy gamma-rays. For the Geminga Pulsar, Jackson et al. (2002) have presented the combined data of ASCA, CGRO and RXTE. For other Crab-like pulsars, e.g. PSR B1509-58 ( Kuiper et al. 1999; Cusumano et al. 2001) and PSR B0540-69 (de Plaa et al. 2003), more X-ray and $\gamma$-ray have been reported. We must carefully analyze these new data to see if they really support a simple three dimensional outer gap model. In fact, de Plaa et al. (2003) have point out that there are noticeable discrepancy between latest data and model predictions (Cheng et al. 2000). They suggest that these discrepancies may result from the uncertainties in the pulsar geometry.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We thank S.F. Ko, M. Ruderman and L. Zhang for useful discussion and suggestions. This work is partially supported by an RGC grant of the Hong Kong Government.
Cheng, A.F., M.A. Ruderman and P.G. Sutherland, Current flow in pulsar magnetospheres, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**203**]{}, 209-212, 1976.
Cheng, K.S., C. Ho and M.A. Ruderman, Energetic radiation from rapidly spinning pulsars. I - Outer magnetosphere gaps. II - VELA and Crab, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**300**]{}, 500-521, 1986a. (CHR I)
Cheng, K.S., C. Ho and M.A. Ruderman, Energetic radiation from rapidly spinning pulsars. II. VELA and Crab, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**300**]{}, 522-539, 1986b. (CHR II)
Cheng, K.S., M. Ruderman and L. Zhang, A three-dimensional outer magnetospheric gap model for gamma-ray pulsars: Geometry, pair production, emission morphologies, and phase-resolved spectra, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**537**]{}, 964-976, 2000. (CRZ)
Cheng, K.S., J. Gil and L. Zhang, Non-thermal origin of X-rays from rotation-powered neutron stars, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**493**]{}, L35-L38, 1998.
Cheng, K.S. and L. Zhang, Multicomponent X-ray emissions from regions near or on the pulsar surface, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**515**]{}, 337-350, 1999.
Chiang, J. and R.W. Romani, Gamma radiation from pulsar magnetospheric gaps, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**400**]{}, 629-637, 1992.
Chiang, J. and R.W. Romani, An outer gap model of high-energy emission from rotation-powered pulsars, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**436**]{}, 754-761, 1994.
Cusumano, G., T. Mineo, E. Massaro, et al., The curved X-ray spectrum of PSR B1509-58 observed with BeppoSAX, [*Astron. Astrophys.*]{}, [**375**]{}, 397-404, 2001.
Fierro, J.M., P.F. Michelson, P.L. Nolan, et al., Phase-resolved studies of the high-energy gamma-ray emission from the Crab, Geminga, and VELA pulsars, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**494**]{}, 734-746, 1998.
Finley, J.P., H. Oegelman, G. Hasinger, et al., ROSAT observations of the LMC pulsar PSR 0540-69, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**410**]{}, 323-327, 1993.
Goldreich, P. and W.H. Julian, Pulsar electrodynamics, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**157**]{}, 869-880, 1969.
Hermsen, W., L. Kuiper, R. Diehl, et al., Gamma-ray pulsar studies with COMPTEL, [*Astrophys. J. Supp.*]{}, [**92**]{}, 559-566, 1994.
Hill, R.J., J.F. Dolan and P.T. Bless, et al., The spectrum of the Large Magellanic Cloud pulsar B0540-69, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**486**]{}, L99-L102, 1997.
Hirotani, K., private communication, 2002.
Ho, C., Angular momentum transfer in non-axisymmetric accretion, [*Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.*]{}, [**232**]{}, 91-110, 1988.
Holloway, N.J., Pulsars-p-n junctions in pulsar magnetospheres, [*Nature Physical Science*]{}, [**246**]{}, 6, 1973.
Jackson, M. S., J.P. Halpern, E.V. Gotthelf, et al., A high-energy study of the Geminga pulsar, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**578**]{}, 935-942, 2002.
Kuiper, L. M., W. Hermsen, J.M. Krijger, et al., COMPTEL detection of pulsed gamma -ray emission from PSR B1509-58 up to at least 10 MeV, [*Astron. Astrophys.*]{}, [**351**]{}, 119-132, 1999.
Kuiper, L. M., W. Hermsen, G. Cusumano, et al., The Crab pulsar in the 0.75-30 MeV range as seen by CGRO COMPTEL. A coherent high-energy picture from soft X-rays up to high-energy gamma-rays, [*Astron. Astrophys.*]{}, [**378**]{}, 918-935, 2001.
Massaro, E., G. Cusumano, M. Litterio, et al., Fine phase resolved spectroscopy of the X-ray emission of the Crab pulsar (PSR B0531+21) observed with BeppoSAX, [*Astron. Astrophys.*]{}, [**361**]{}, 695-703, 2000.
Middleditch, J., C.R. Pennypacker and M.S. Burns, Optical color, polarimetric, and timing measurements of the 50 MS Large Magellanic Cloud pulsar, PSR 0540-69, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**315**]{}, 142-148, 1987.
Mineo, T., G. Cusumano and E. Massaro et al., Timing and spectral properties of PSR B0540-69 observed with BeppoSAX, [*Astron. Astrophys.*]{}, [**348**]{}, 519-523, 1999.
de Plaa, J., L. Kuiper and W. Hermsen, Hard X-ray timing and spectral properties of PSR B0540-69, [*Astron. Astrophys.*]{}, [**400**]{}, 1013-1019, 2003.
Pravdo, S.H., L. Angelini and A.K. Harding, X-ray spectral evolution of the Crab pulse, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**491**]{}, 808-815, 1997.
Romani, R.W., Gamma-ray pulsars: Radiation processes in the outer magnetosphere, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**470**]{}, 469-478, 1996.
Romani, R.W. and I.-A. Yadigaroglu, Gamma-ray pulsars: Emission zones and viewing geometries, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**438**]{}, 314-321, 1995.
Tennant, A.F., W. Becker, M. Juda, et al., Discovery of X-ray emission from the Crab pulsar at pulse minimum, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**554**]{}, L173-L176, 2001.
Thompson, D.J., Z. Arzoumanian and D.L. Bertsch et al., EGRET high-energy gamma-ray pulsar studies. 1: Young spin-powered pulsars, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**436**]{}, 229-238, 1994.
Thompson , D.J., M. Bailes, D.L. Bertsch, et al., EGRET observations of high-energy gamma radiation from PSR B1706-44, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**465**]{}, 385-392, 1996.
Ulmer, M.P., S.M. Matz, D.A. Grabelsky, et al., Compton Gamma-Ray Observatory observations of the Crab pulsar, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**448**]{}, 356-364, 1995.
Wang, F.Y.-H., M. Ruderman, J.P. Halpern, et al., Models for X-ray emission from isolated pulsars, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**498**]{}, 373-384, 1998.
Weisskopf, M.C., Proceedings of the 270. WE-Heraeus Seminar on [*“Neutron stars, pulsars, and supernova remnants” Physikzentrum Bad Honnef, Germany, Jan. 21-25, 2002*]{}, edited by W. Becker, H. Lesch, and J. Trumper, MPE Report [**278**]{}, 58-63, 2002.
Yadigaroglu, I.-A. and R.W. Romani, Gamma-ray pulsars: Beaming evolution, statistics, and unidentified EGRET sources, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**449**]{}, 211-215, 1995.
Zhang, L. and K.S. Cheng, High-energy radiation from rapidly spinning pulsars with thick outer gaps, [*Astrophys. J.*]{}, [**487**]{}, 370-379, 1997.
Zhang, L. and K.S. Cheng, Gamma-ray pulsars: the pulse profiles and phase-resolved spectra of Geminga, [*Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.*]{}, [**320**]{}, 477-484, 2001a.
Zhang, L. and K.S. Cheng, Cosmic-ray positrons from mature gamma-ray pulsars, [*Astron. Astrophys.*]{}, [**368**]{}, 1063-1070, 2001b.
Zhang, L., K.S. Cheng and D.C. Mei, The light curve and spectra of X-rays and gamma-rays from the Crab pulsar, [*Chinese Phys. Lett.*]{}, [**17**]{}, 544-546, 2000.
E-mail address of K.S. Cheng: [email protected]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'As is well known, energy cost can greatly impact the deployment of battery-powered sensor networks in remote environments such as rivers or oceans. Motivated by this, we propose here an energy-based metric and associate energy-based Voronoi partitions with mobile vehicles in constant flows. The metric corresponds to the minimum energy that a vehicle requires to move from one point to another in the flow environment, and the resulting partition can be used by the vehicles in cooperative control tasks such as task assignment and coverage. Based on disk-based and asymptote-based approximations of the Voronoi regions, we determine a subset (or lower bound) and superset (or upper bound) of an agent’s Voronoi neighbors. We then show that, via simulations, the upper bound is tight and its cardinality remains bounded as the number of generators increases. Finally, we propose efficient algorithms to compute the upper bound (especially when the generators dynamically change), which enables the fast calculation of Voronoi regions.'
author:
- Yu Ru and Sonia Martinez
bibliography:
- 'IEEEabrv.bib'
- 'yru\_journal.bib'
---
Introduction {#section1}
============
Due to the proliferation of low-cost sensing, communication, and computation devices, large groups of mobile vehicles equipped with sensors can be deployed into flow environments (e.g., rivers, lakes, oceans) to efficiently perform monitoring tasks. Depending on the nature of the application, multiple mobile vehicles can be coordinated based on different objectives. For search and rescue missions, a priority is to find/reach the target within the shortest time. However, for non-urgent tasks such as the monitoring of harmful algae blooms, maximizing the lifetime of the whole group of mobile vehicles can be more critical, as mobile vehicles are commonly powered by batteries with limited capacity. This motivates the study of minimum energy cooperative control algorithms for mobile vehicles in flow environments. In this paper, we study a Voronoi partition associated with the minimum energy required for a vehicle to move from one point to another in a constant flow environment. We first derive an explicit expression for the energy-based metric, and study the Voronoi partition based on this metric using the vehicle locations as the set of generators. Similar to the time metric counterpart [@yru_journal:Frazzoli_2004], the Voronoi partition can then be used in the design of efficient target-assignment (or task allocation) algorithms (e.g., some other work [@yru_journal:Sayyaadi_2011; @yru_journal:Pavone_2011]). By assigning a vehicle to the targets that fall into its Voronoi region and guiding its motion appropriately, the vehicles can minimize the average energy spent by the group in servicing stochastic tasks that arrive according to a slow-rate Poisson distribution. However, contrary to the Euclidean case [@yru_journal:Frazzoli_2004], the Voronoi region defined by a general metric can be very involved. On the other hand, upper and lower approximations of the regions can be just enough to implement a coverage or target assignment algorithm; see [@yru_journal:Nowzari_2011]. Motivated by this, we propose methods to bound the set of Voronoi neighbors of a vehicle, which simplifies the calculation of Voronoi cells by vehicles. These are based on the following considerations: (i) the characterization of Voronoi region boundaries as hyperbolas, (ii) approximations of Voronoi regions by means of circles and polygons, and (iii) the derivation of a simple test (refer to Theorem \[case\_1\], Corollary \[case\_2\], and Proposition \[prop:special\_case\]) that allows to discard vehicles that cannot be Voronoi neighbors. The test leads to an upper bound on the set of Voronoi neighbors of a vehicle. By generating vehicle locations (i.e., the set of generators for the Voronoi partition) independently according to a uniform distribution, we show that the average number of generators in the upper bound is bounded (via simulations) by $4.5$. Since the set of generators in the upper bound is sufficient for calculating Voronoi cells, the approach based on this upper bound (instead of using all generators) can save significant amount of time when calculating Voronoi cells, especially for applications with large amount of mobile vehicles. Therefore, we propose different algorithms to calculate the upper bound, especially when dealing with constantly changing generators.
Previously, Voronoi partitions in flow environments have been studied in connection to the shortest traveling time metric [@yru_journal:Zermelo_1931; @yru_journal:McGee_2006; @yru_journal:Techy_2009; @yru_journal:Kwok_2010; @yru_journal:Bakolas_2010_Voronoi_j]. In contrast, there are relatively fewer works on the energy metric [@yru_journal:Bongiorno_1967; @yru_journal:Rowe_1990; @yru_journal:Rowe_2000; @yru_journal:Sun_2005; @yru_journal:Ru_2011_b]. For example, in [@yru_journal:Rowe_1990; @yru_journal:Rowe_2000; @yru_journal:Sun_2005], the goal is to find a path with the minimum energy loss between given source and destination points in piecewise constant regions; in [@yru_journal:Ru_2011_b], the minimum energy metric (which is the same as this work) is used but the flow is modeled as a quadratic function (in this case, there is no explicit expression for the energy metric). In terms of approximating Voronoi cells, the work in [@yru_journal:Evans_2008; @yru_journal:Nowzari_2011] propose methods to deal with Voronoi partitions induced by the Euclidean distance metric (called standard Voronoi partitions). In [@yru_journal:Cao_2003_rep; @yru_journal:Bash_2007; @yru_journal:Alsalih_2008], distributed algorithms to calculate the standard Voronoi partitions are provided. For example, in [@yru_journal:Cao_2003_rep], explicit stopping criteria are proposed for a generator to calculate its own Voronoi cell without message broadcasting or routing. In contrast, the work in [@yru_journal:Bash_2007; @yru_journal:Alsalih_2008] requires explicitly broadcasting generators or geographic routing. In our work, we assume that generator information is available (via either direct sensing or communication). As discussed in Section \[section3\_special\], the energy-based Voronoi partition can also be obtained via a slightly modified metric, which happens to be an additively weighted metric as in [@yru_journal:Okabe_2000]. Methods such as [@yru_journal:Fortune_1987; @yru_journal:Karavelas_2002] can then be used to calculate the Voronoi partition based on the modified metric in a centralized fashion; however, to the best of our knowledge, there is no known distributed algorithm on calculating such partitions.
The contributions of this work are the following. i) An energy metric is proposed to study Voronoi partitions, which arises naturally in battery powered mobile vehicle applications in flow environments. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work on Voronoi partition based on the minimum energy required for a vehicle to move from one point to another. In contrast, the traveling time based metric has been studied extensively for constant flows [@yru_journal:Zermelo_1931; @yru_journal:McGee_2006; @yru_journal:Techy_2009], piecewise constant flows [@yru_journal:Kwok_2010], and time varying flows [@yru_journal:Bakolas_2010_Voronoi_j]. ii) In addition to deriving the lower bound on the set of Voronoi neighbors using a disk-based lower approximation of Voronoi cells, an upper bound on the set of Voronoi neighbors is proposed utilizing asymptote-based lower and upper approximations of Voronoi cells. When deriving the upper bound, we introduce a dominance relation among Voronoi generators and provide a complete characterization for the dominance relation. iii) Since the upper bound is essential for a vehicle to compute its own Voronoi cell, we propose an efficient algorithm based on sorting generators (i.e., Algorithm \[algorithm\_efficient\]) besides the method based on checking generators sequentially (i.e., Algorithm \[algorithm\_simple\]). iv) To handle dynamically moving vehicles (namely, dynamically changing generators), we introduce a dominance graph for recomputing Voronoi cells only when absolutely necessary, which potentially avoids the recomputation due to any single change of the set of generators.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section \[section2\], we define the minimum energy metric and formulate the Voronoi partition problem. Then we characterize the minimum energy metric and study the Voronoi partition for two generators in Section \[section3\]. In Section \[section4\], we propose a disk based approximation for Voronoi cells and provide a lower bound on the set of Voronoi neighbors. To facilitate the calculation of Voronoi partitions in a distributed fashion, we study an asymptote based approximation of Voronoi cells, introduce the dominance relation and its characterization, and provide an upper bound on the set of Voronoi neighbors in Section \[section5\]. In Section \[section6\] we propose algorithms to calculate the upper bound, and show that the average number of generators in the upper bound is very small via simulations in Section \[section7\]. Finally, we summarize the work in Section \[section8\].
Problem Formulation {#section2}
===================
In the Cartesian coordinate system, the studied flow environment is described by $\mathds{R}^2$. The constant velocity field is a mapping $v: (x~y)^T \in \mathds{R}^2 \mapsto (B~0)^T$, where $B$ is a positive constant. A vehicle runs at speed $U = (U_x~U_y)^T$ relative to the velocity field, and then the dynamic of the vehicle in the flow environment can be described by $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{dx}{dt} &= U_x + B~, \label{eq:dynamicsx}\\
\frac{dy}{dt} &= U_y~. \label{eq:dynamicsy}\end{aligned}$$ We assume that vehicles can run against the flow.
To study Voronoi partitions, we introduce the following (pseudo)-metric.
Given two points $p^1$ and $p^2$ in the flow environment $\mathds{R}^2$, the energy metric $J(p^1, p^2)$ is defined as $J(p^1, p^2) = \min \int_{0}^{t_f} U^T U d t$, where $t_f$ is free, $U$ satisfies Eqs. (\[eq:dynamicsx\]) and (\[eq:dynamicsy\]), and $x(0) = x_{p^1}$ (i.e., the $x$ coordinate of $p^1$), $y(0) = y_{p^1}$ (i.e., the $y$ coordinate of $p^1$), $x(t_f)
= x_{p^2}, ~y(t_f) = y_{p^2}$. \[def:metric\]
The energy metric $J(p^1, p^2)$ is the minimum amount of energy required for the vehicle to move from its initial location $p^1$ to its final location $p^2$ among all possible controls. Note that there is no explicit constraint on $U$; however, as shown in Remark \[remark:finite\_energy\], the optimal control $U$ that achieves $J(p^1, p^2)$ is bounded by two times the flow velocity. The explicit expression for the energy metric is derived in Section \[section3\]. With this energy metric, now we can define the following Voronoi partition.
Let $P = \{p^1, p^2, ..., p^n\} \subset \mathds{R}^2$ be a set of distinct points, where $n \geq 2$. We call the region given by $$V(p^i) = \{p \in \mathds{R}^2~|~ J(p^i, p) \leq J(p^j, p)~\mathrm{for}~j\neq i, j \in I_n \}$$ the energy-based Voronoi cell associated with $p^i$, where $I_n := \{1, 2, ..., n\}$, and the set given by $\mathcal{V} = \{V(p^1), V(p^2), ..., V(p^n)\}$ the energy-based Voronoi partition generated by $P$. \[def:Voronoi\]
Note that if $J(p^i, p)$ is replaced with $d_{p^i p} := \sqrt{(x_{p^i} - x_{p})^2 + (y_{p^i} - y_{p})^2}$, the partition is called a standard Voronoi partition. For simplicity, we use Voronoi partition to refer to the energy-based Voronoi partition in the rest of the paper.
Besides calculating the Voronoi partition $\mathcal{V}$ given the set of points $P$, we are especially interested in calculating each Voronoi cell $V(p^i)$ for $i = 1, ..., n$ given $\mathds{P} = P \setminus \{p^i\}$. For example, if $p^i$ is the location of a vehicle $V^i$ in the constant flow environment, $V(p^i)$ can be interpreted as the set of points that can be reached by $V^i$ with fewer energy consumption than by any other vehicle. If a task (e.g., taking measurements) has to be done at a point $p$ belonging to $V(p^i)$ and vehicle $V^i$ is assigned to the task, the energy consumption is minimized for this task. In this context, the challenge of computing the Voronoi cells lies in the fact that since the vehicles are moving, the generators $p^i$ for $i = 1, 2, ..., n$ are constantly changing. Without loss of generality, we formulate the following Voronoi cell calculation problem.
Given a fixed point $p^1$ and a set of points $\mathds{P} = \{p^2, p^3, ..., p^n\}$, calculate the Voronoi cell $V(p^1)$ as defined in Definition \[def:Voronoi\]. \[problem:distributed\_calculation\]
Energy-Based Metric and Voronoi Partition with Two Generators {#section3}
=============================================================
In this section, we first study the minimum energy control problem and provide an expression for the metric $J(p^1, p^2)$, and then derive the Voronoi boundary between two generators.
Energy Metric: Expression
-------------------------
The energy metric in Definition \[def:metric\] is given below.
Given two points $p^1$ and $p^2$ in the flow environment $\mathds{R}^2$ with the velocity field $v$ satisfying $v_x(x, y) = B > 0$ and $v_y(x, y) = 0$, the minimum energy $J(p^1, p^2) = \min \int_{0}^{t_f} U^T U d t$ is $$J(p^1, p^2) = 2B(d_{p^1 p^2} + x_{p^1} - x_{p^2})~, \label{eq:min_energy}$$ and the optimal control is $U(t) = -\frac{1}{2}
\begin{bmatrix} C_1\\C_2\end{bmatrix}$ for $t \in [0, t_f]$, where $$\begin{aligned}
C_1 = 2B(1 + \frac{x_{p^1} - x_{p^2}}{d_{p^1p^2}}),~~ C_2 = \frac{2B(y_{p^1} - y_{p^2})}{d_{p^1p^2}}, ~~t_f = \frac{d_{p^1 p^2}}{B}~.\label{eq:tf}\end{aligned}$$ \[prop:metric\]
Refer to the Appendix.
Note that the quantity $J(p^1, p^2)$ is not a real metric because i) $J(p^1, p^2) = 0$ does not imply $p^1 = p^2$, and ii) $J(p^1, p^2)$ is not the same as $J(p^2, p^1)$ in general. More specifically, if $y_{p^1} = y_{p^2}$ and $x_{p^1} < x_{p^2}$, Eq. reduces to $2B(x_{p^2} - x_{p^1} + x_{p^1} - x_{p^2}) = 0$. This is consistent with the fact that no control is necessary if $p^2$ lies downstream of $p^1$. In addition, it can be verified that only when $x_{p^1} = x_{p^2}$, $J(p^1, p^2) = J(p^2, p^1)$. The magnitude of $U$ satisfies $\| U \| = \frac{\sqrt{C_1^2 + C_2^2}}{2} = B \sqrt{2 + \frac{2(x_{p^1} - x_{p^2})}{d_{p^1 p^2}}} \leq 2B$. Therefore, the optimal control is bounded. $\diamondsuit$ \[remark:finite\_energy\]
Voronoi Partition: Two Generators {#section3_special}
---------------------------------
Based on the metric $J(p^1, p^2)$ given in Eq. (\[eq:min\_energy\]), we now study the Voronoi partition given two generators $p^1, p^2$. Following Definition \[def:Voronoi\], we have $V(p^1) = \{p \in \mathds{R}^2~|~ J(p^1, p) \leq J(p^2, p)\}$. Using Eq. , $J(p^1, p) \leq J(p^2, p)$ can be rewritten as $$\begin{aligned}
2B(d_{p^1 p} + x_{p^1} - x_{p}) &\leq 2B(d_{p^2 p} + x_{p^2} - x_{p})~, \nonumber\\
d_{p^1 p} + x_{p^1} &\leq d_{p^2 p} + x_{p^2}~, \label{eq:1}\\
d_{p^1 p} - d_{p^2 p} &\leq x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}~, \label{eq:3}\end{aligned}$$ where we obtain Eq. (\[eq:1\]) because $B > 0$.
Based on Eq. (\[eq:1\]), we can also use the metric $d_{p^1 p} +
x_{p^1}$ to obtain the same Voronoi partition. In [@yru_journal:Okabe_2000], this metric falls into the category of additively weighted distances. Therefore, given the set of points $P$, the Voronoi partition in Definition \[def:Voronoi\] can be calculated using existing methods such as [@yru_journal:Fortune_1987; @yru_journal:Karavelas_2002]. Straightforward application of such methods to Problem \[problem:distributed\_calculation\] can be very inefficient because all Voronoi cells have to be computed in order to just obtain $V(p^1)$. Another simple idea to solve Problem \[problem:distributed\_calculation\] is that we consider one point at a time and keep refining $V(p^1)$ until all points have been taken into account. However, as we show in Section \[section5\], only a subset of points are necessary for calculating $V(p^1)$. More details on comparing different methods to solve Problem \[problem:distributed\_calculation\] are provided in Section \[section7\].
Now we can rewrite $V(p^1)$ as $V(p^1) = \{p \in \mathds{R}^2~|~ d_{p^1 p} - d_{p^2 p} \leq x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}\}$, and the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^2$ is $B(p^1, p^2) := \{p \in \mathds{R}^2~|~ d_{p^1 p} - d_{p^2 p} = x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}\}$. Without loss of generality, we assume that $x_{p^1} \leq x_{p^2}$ and $y_{p^1} \leq y_{p^2}$. Depending on the relative position between $p^1$ and $p^2$, there are three different cases for the Voronoi cells and the boundary between these cells.
**Case I**: $x_{p^1} < x_{p^2}$ **and** $y_{p^1} < y_{p^2}$. For any point $p$ on the boundary we have $d_{p^1 p} - d_{p^2 p} =
x_{p^2} - x_{p^1} > 0$. It can be verified that the boundary is a hyperbolic curve. To derive an equation, we first transform the coordinate from $(x, y)$ to $(x', y')$ such that the origin is at $(\frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}, \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2})$ and the positive $x'$ direction is from $p^1$ to $p^2$. Essentially the transformation involves shifting the origin and rotating the $x, y$ axes. As shown in Fig. \[fig0\](a), we use $\alpha$ to denote the rotation angle $\angle p^3p^1p^2$, where $p^1p^3$ is parallel to the $x$ axis, and we have $\tan \alpha = \frac{y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}}$. Then for any point $p$ with coordinates $(x_p, y_p)$, its coordinate in the $(x', y')$ plane is given as $$\begin{aligned}
x_p' &= (x_p - \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}) \cos \alpha + (y_p - \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}) \sin \alpha~, \label{eq:x_new}\\
y_p' &= -(x_p - \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}) \sin \alpha + (y_p -
\frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}) \cos \alpha~. \label{eq:y_new}\end{aligned}$$ In the transformed coordinate, the boundary is shown as the red dotted hyperbola in Fig. \[fig0\](b), and can be described by the equation $\frac{(x_p')^2}{a^2} - \frac{(y_p')^2}{b^2} = 1$, where $a =
\frac{x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}}{2}$, $c = \frac{d_{p^1 p^2}}{2}$, $b = \sqrt{c^2
- a^2} = \frac{y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}}{2}$, and $x_p' \geq a$. Note that in Fig. \[fig0\](b), the coordinate for $p^*$ (namely, the intersection point between the boundary and the $x'$ axis) is $(a,
0)$. Therefore, in the original coordinate, the boundary can be described as $$\resizebox{.9\hsize}{!}{$\frac{((x_p - \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}) \cos \alpha + (y_p -
\frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}) \sin \alpha)^2}{(\frac{x_{p^2} -
x_{p^1}}{2})^2} - \frac{(-(x_p - \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}) \sin
\alpha + (y_p - \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}) \cos
\alpha)^2}{(\frac{y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}}{2})^2} = 1$}\label{eq:boundary}$$ with the constraint that $$(x_p - \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}) \cos
\alpha + (y_p - \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}) \sin \alpha \geq \frac{x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}}{2}~.
\label{eq:boundary_constraint}$$
Now we apply the above equations of the boundary to specific scenarios.
**Case II**: $x_{p^1} = x_{p^2}$ **and** $y_{p^1} < y_{p^2}$. In this case, $\alpha = \frac{\pi}{2}$, Eq. (\[eq:boundary\]) reduces to $y_p = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}$, and Eq. (\[eq:boundary\_constraint\]) holds trivially. In other words, the boundary is a perpendicular bisector of the line segment $p^1p^2$, as shown in Fig. \[fig1\](a).
**Case III**: $x_{p^1} < x_{p^2}$ **and** $y_{p^1} = y_{p^2}$. In this case, $\alpha = 0$, Eq. (\[eq:boundary\]) reduces to $y_p = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2} = y_{p^2}$, and Eq. (\[eq:boundary\_constraint\]) reduces to $x_{p} \geq x_{p^2}$. The boundary is a half line given by $\{p \in \mathds{R}^2~|~x_{p} \geq
x_{p^2}, y_{p} = y_{p^2}\}$, as shown in Fig. \[fig1\](b).
It is straightforward to obtain similar equations for the cases with $x_{p^1} > x_{p^2}$ and/or $y_{p^1} > y_{p^2}$.
Disk-Based Lower Approximation of Voronoi Cells and Lower Bound on Voronoi Neighbors {#section4}
====================================================================================
In this section, we first study disk-based lower approximation of Voronoi cells, and then derive a lower bound on the set of Voronoi neighbors.
Disk-Based Lower Approximation
------------------------------
The disk-based lower approximation of $V(p^i)$ is given as $D(p^i, r_{p^i}) = \{p \in \mathds{R}^2~|~d_{p^i p} \leq r_{p^i}\}$, i.e., a disk centered at $p^i$ with radius $r_{p^i}$, such that $D(p^i, r_{p^i}) \subseteq V(p^i)$.
We first study the case with two points $p^1$ and $p^2$ satisfying $x_{p^1} \leq x_{p^2}$. Since in general the boundary between the two Voronoi cells is a hyperbola as shown in Fig. \[fig0\](b), the radius for $p^1$ can be chosen to be $r_{p^1} = c + a = \frac{d_{p^1 p^2}}{2} + \frac{x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}}{2}$, and the radius for $p^2$ can be chosen to be $r_{p^2} = c - a = \frac{d_{p^1 p^2}}{2} + \frac{x_{p^1} - x_{p^2}}{2}$. Note that the hyperbola boundary intersects with the disk $D(p^2, r_{p^2})$ only at one point (namely, the point $p^*$ in Fig. \[fig0\](b); we denote the point as $p^*(p^1, p^2)$) because the focus of the hyperbola is the same as the center of the disk and the eccentricity of a hyperbola is larger than $1$. We have $r_{p^2} = d_{p^2 p^*(p^1, p^2)}$. It can be verified that the hyperbola boundary intersects with the disk $D(p^1, r_{p^1})$ also only at the point $p^*(p^1, p^2)$ and $r_{p^1} = d_{p^1 p^*(p^1, p^2)}$. In the original coordinate, we have $p^*(p^1, p^2) = p^1 + \frac{c+a}{2c} (p^2 - p^1)$, where $a = \frac{x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}}{2}$ and $c = \frac{d_{p^1 p^2}}{2}$.
If $x_{p^1} = x_{p^2}$ and $y_{p^1} < y_{p^2}$ (i.e., **Case II** as discussed in Section \[section3\_special\]), then we have $r_{p^1} = r_{p^2} = \frac{d_{p^1 p^2}}{2}$. If $x_{p^1} < x_{p^2}$ and $y_{p^1} = y_{p^2}$ (i.e., **Case III** as discussed in Section \[section3\_special\]), then we have $r_{p^1} = d_{p^1 p^2}$ and $r_{p^2} = 0$. It can be verified that the above results also hold if $x_{p^1} > x_{p^2}$.
If there are $n$ points $p^1, p^2, ..., p^n$, we can choose the radius $r_{p^i} = \min_{j \in \{1, 2, ..., n\} \setminus \{i\}} (\frac{d_{p^i p^j}}{2} + \frac{x_{p^j} - x_{p^i}}{2})$. Therefore, $D(p^i, r_{p^i}) \subseteq V(p^i)$.
Lower Bound on Voronoi Neighbors
--------------------------------
Now we focus on $V(p^1)$ and let $$\mathcal{N}_D(p^1) = \underset{p^j \in \{p^2, ..., p^n\}}{\operatorname{argmin}} (\frac{d_{p^1 p^j}}{2} + \frac{x_{p^j} - x_{p^1}}{2})~. \label{eq:NDp1}$$ In general, $\mathcal{N}_D(p^1)$ could be a set with multiple elements. Before analyzing $\mathcal{N}_D(p^1)$, we first define the set of Voronoi neighbors of $p^1$.
Given a fixed point $p^1$ and a set of points $\mathds{P} = \{p^2, p^3, ..., p^n\}$, a point $p \in \mathds{P}$ is a Voronoi neighbor of $p^1$ if $V(p^1) \cap V(p)$ is non-empty and non-trivial (i.e., not a single point). We use $\mathcal{N}_{V}(p^1)$ to denote the set of Voronoi neighbors of $p^1$. \[def:Voronoi\_neighbor\]
Note that in our setting, $V(p^1) \cap V(p)$ could be empty, a single point, a line segment, or part of a hyperbola. In our definition of Voronoi neighbors, we treat two points as neighbors only when the intersection of their Voronoi cells is nonempty and nontrivial (i.e., not a single point). This is because we are primarily interested in calculating Voronoi cells and ruling out this trivial case does not affect the calculation. A definition of Voronoi neighbors in the same spirit is used in [@yru_journal:Bakolas_2010_Voronoi_j]. $\diamondsuit$
Now we are ready to state the relationship between $\mathcal{N}_D(p^1)$ and $\mathcal{N}_V(p^1)$.
Given a fixed point $p^1$ and a set of points $\mathds{P} = \{p^2, p^3, ..., p^n\}$, $\mathcal{N}_D(p^1) \subseteq \mathcal{N}_V(p^1)$, where $\mathcal{N}_D(p^1)$ is defined in Eq. . \[theorem:Voronoi\_neighbor\_lower\]
Refer to the Appendix.
Now it is clear that $\mathcal{N}_D(p^1)$ is a lower bound on the set of Voronoi neighbors of $p^1$. Even if a point $p^k$ may not minimize the radius of the disk that lower approximates $V(p^1)$, $p^k$ can still be a Voronoi neighbor of $p^1$. Thus $\mathcal{N}_D(p^1)$ could potentially be augmented to a larger set $\overline{\mathcal{N}_D(p^1)}$ while still satisfying $\overline{\mathcal{N}_D(p^1)} \subseteq \mathcal{N}_V(p^1)$. It can be verified that the following sufficient condition for testing if $p^k$ is a Voronoi neighbor of $p^1$ holds.
Given a fixed point $p^1$ and a set of points $\mathds{P} = \{p^2, p^3, ..., p^n\}$, a point $p^k$ for $k \in \{2, 3, ..., n\}$ is a Voronoi neighbor of $p^1$ if for any $l \in \{2, 3, ..., n\} \setminus \{k\}$ we have $J(p^k, p^*(p^1, p^k)) < J(p^l, p^*(p^1, p^k))$. \[prop:neighbor\_lower\]
Refer to the Appendix.
Essentially, the condition verifies that for a point $p^k$, the energy required to reach the specific point $p^*(p^1, p^k)$ (which belongs to the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^k$) from any point other than $p^k$ is strictly larger than the energy from $p^k$. Based on this condition, we can construct $\overline{\mathcal{N}_D(p^1)}$ by starting with $\mathcal{N}_D(p^1)$, and adding a point $p^k$ to $\mathcal{N}_D(p^1)$ if the condition in Proposition \[prop:neighbor\_lower\] holds.
Asymptote-Based Approximations of Voronoi Cells and Upper Bound on Voronoi Neighbors {#section5}
====================================================================================
In this section, we first propose asymptote-based lower and upper approximations of Voronoi cells, and then introduce a dominance relation to upper bound the set of Voronoi neighbors.
Asymptote-Based Approximations of Voronoi Cells
-----------------------------------------------
Since in general the boundary is a hyperbola, another way to approximate the Voronoi cells is to use the asymptotes of the hyperbola. Here, we focus on two points $p^1$ and $p^2$ satisfying $x_{p^1} < x_{p^2}$ and $y_{p^1} < y_{p^2}$. In the $x'-y'$ plane of Fig. \[fig0\](b), the equation for the asymptote $l_1$ (or $l_2$) is $y' = \frac{b}{a}x'$ (or $y' = -\frac{b}{a}x'$), where $a = \frac{x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}}{2}$ and $b = \frac{y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}}{2}$. It can be shown that the region described by ${D_{\textup{lower}}}'(p^1 | p^2) = \{(x'~y')^T \in \mathds{R}^2~|~x' \leq \frac{a}{b} y'~\mathrm{if}~y' \geq 0, x' \leq -\frac{a}{b} y'~\mathrm{if}~y' < 0\}$ satisfies ${D_{\textup{lower}}}'(p^1 | p^2) \subseteq V'(p^1)$, where $V'(p^1)$ is the Voronoi cell $V(p^1)$ in the transformed $x'-y'$ plane. Going back to the original $x-y$ plane, we have ${D_{\textup{lower}}}(p^1 | p^2) \subseteq V(p^1)$. At the same time, we get an upper approximation for $V(p^2)$ as ${D_{\textup{upper}}}(p^2 | p^1) = \mathds{R}^2 \setminus {D_{\textup{lower}}}(p^1 | p^2)$.
To obtain an upper approximation for $V(p^1)$, we use $l_3$ (which is parallel to $l_1$) and $l_4$ (which is parallel to $l_2$) that pass through the point $p^*$ in Fig. \[fig0\](b). The equation for $l_3$ (or $l_4$) is $y' = \frac{b}{a} (x' - a)$ (or $y' = -\frac{b}{a} (x' - a)$). It can be shown that the region described by ${D_{\textup{upper}}}'(p^1|p^2) = \{(x'~y')^T \in \mathds{R}^2~|~x' \leq \frac{a}{b} y' + a~\mathrm{if}~y' \geq 0, x' \leq -\frac{a}{b} y' + a~\mathrm{if}~y' < 0\}$ satisfies $V'(p^1) \subseteq {D_{\textup{upper}}}'(p^1|p^2)$. Going back to the original $x-y$ plane, we have $V(p^1) \subseteq {D_{\textup{upper}}}(p^1|p^2)$. At the same time, we get a lower approximation for $V(p^2)$ as ${D_{\textup{lower}}}(p^2) = \mathds{R}^2 \setminus {D_{\textup{upper}}}(p^1)$.
If there are $n$ points, we can lower approximate $V(p^i)$ using ${V_{\textup{lower}}}(p^i) = \cap_{j \in I_n \setminus \{i\}} {D_{\textup{lower}}}(p^i | p^j)$, and upper approximate $V(p^i)$ using ${V_{\textup{upper}}}(p^i) = \cup_{j \in I_n \setminus \{i\}} {D_{\textup{upper}}}(p^i | p^j)$, where $D(p^i | p^j)$ is the approximation of $V(p^i)$ given the point $p^j$.
Since $l_1, \dots, l_4$ play a very important role in the approximations, we study their equations in the $x-y$ plane. Here we focus on $l_1$ and $l_2$ since $l_3$ (or $l_4$) is parallel to $l_1$ (or $l_2$). For $l_1$, we are interested in $y' = \frac{b}{a}x'$ for $y' \geq 0$, while for $l_2$, we are interested in $y' = -\frac{b}{a}x'$ for $y' \leq 0$.
Given two points $p^1$ and $p^2$ in the flow environment $\mathds{R}^2$ satisfying $x_{p^1} < x_{p^2}$ and $y_{p^1} < y_{p^2}$, two asymptotes of the hyperbolic boundary between the Voronoi cells of $p^1$ and $p^2$ are $$y - \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2} = (x - \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}) \tan2 \alpha~\mathrm{with}~y \geq \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}~, \label{eq:l1}$$ where $\alpha = \arctan \frac{y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}}$, and $$y = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}~\mathrm{and}~x \geq \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}~. \label{eq:l2}$$ \[prop:asymptotes\]
Refer to the Appendix.
If $x_{p^1} < x_{p^2}$ and $y_{p^1} = y_{p^2}$, which implies that $\alpha = 0$, then Eq. becomes $y = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}$, and $x \geq \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}$ because $x' \geq 0$, while Eq. remains the same. In this case, the two asymptotes coincide and form the exact boundary as shown in Fig. \[fig1\](b). If $x_{p^1} = x_{p^2}$ and $y_{p^1} < y_{p^2}$, which implies that $\alpha = \frac{\pi}{2}$, then Eq. becomes $y = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}$, and $x \leq \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}$ because $y' \geq 0$, while Eq. remains the same. In this case, the two asymptotes form a straight line and are also the exact boundary as shown in Fig. \[fig1\](a). $\diamondsuit$
Note that the two asymptotes pass through the middle point of $p^1p^2$. One is always parallel to the $x$ axis, while the other has the slope $\tan 2 \alpha$. $\diamondsuit$
Similarly, we can obtain asymptote equations if $x_{p^1} \geq x_{p^2}$ and/or $y_{p^1} \geq y_{p^2}$. In the next subsection, we introduce a dominance relation and provide conditions to check the dominance relation, in which the asymptote equations prove to be useful.
Dominance Relation and its Characterization {#section5_scenario}
-------------------------------------------
When we calculate the Voronoi cell $V(p^1)$ in Problem \[problem:distributed\_calculation\] by considering point $p^2$ first and then $p^3$, it is possible that the Voronoi cell of $p^1$ is not strictly refined when considering $p^3$ given $p^2$; in this scenario, $p^3$ is not necessary to compute $V(p^1)$, and potentially the calculation of $V(p^1)$ can be done more efficiently. Now we introduce a dominance relation which captures this scenario.
Given a fixed point $p^1$, and two points $p^2, p^3$ (that are different from $p^1$), we say $p^2$ dominates $p^3$ (denoted as $p^2 \succ p^3$) if $V(p^1~|~p^2) = V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3)$, where $V(p^1~|~p^2) = \{p \in \mathds{R}^2~|~J(p^1, p) \leq J(p^2, p)\}$ and $V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3) = \{ p \in \mathds{R}^2~|~J(p^1, p) \leq J(p^2, p), J(p^1, p) \leq J(p^3, p)\}$. \[def:dominance\]
By definition, $p^2$ dominates itself; if $p^2$ dominates $p^3$, then only $p^2$ matters when $p^1$ calculates its Voronoi cell (this is proved more generally in Theorem \[prop:Voronoi\_neighbor\]). Given a fixed point $p^1$, to check if $p^2$ dominates $p^3$, there are four scenarios:
- **Scenario A**: $y_{p^1} < y_{p^2}$. The iff condition is given in Theorem \[case\_1\];
- **Scenario B**: $y_{p^1} > y_{p^2}$. The iff condition is given in Corollary \[case\_2\];
- **Scenario C**: $y_{p^1} = y_{p^2}$ and $x_{p^1} > x_{p^2}$. The iff condition is given in part (a) of Proposition \[prop:special\_case\];
- **Scenario D**: $y_{p^1} = y_{p^2}$ and $x_{p^1} < x_{p^2}$. The iff condition is given in part (b) of Proposition \[prop:special\_case\].
Given a fixed point $p^1$, and two points $p^2, p^3$ that are different from $p^1$ and satisfy $y_{p^1} < y_{p^2}$, $p^2 \succ p^3$ iff $y_{p^3} \geq y_{p^2}$, and $$(y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}) \times (x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}) \leq (x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}) \times (y_{p^2} - y_{p^1})~.\label{eq:inequality}$$ \[case\_1\]
Refer to the Appendix.
Similarly, we can prove the following result for the case $y_{p^1} > y_{p^2}$.
Given a fixed point $p^1$, and two points $p^2, p^3$ that are different from $p^1$ and satisfy $y_{p^1} > y_{p^2}$, $p^2 \succ p^3$ iff $y_{p^3} \leq y_{p^2}$, and $(y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}) \times (x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}) \geq (x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}) \times (y_{p^2} - y_{p^1})$. \[case\_2\]
If $y_{p^1} = y_{p^2}$ for points $p^1$ and $p^2$, the following result can be verified.
Given a fixed point $p^1$, and two points $p^2, p^3$ that are different from $p^1$ and satisfy $y_{p^1} = y_{p^2}$ and
- $x_{p^1} > x_{p^2}$, $p^2 \succ p^3$ iff $y_{p^3} \neq y_{p^2}$, or $y_{p^3} = y_{p^2}$ and $x_{p^3} < x_{p^1}$.
- $x_{p^1} < x_{p^2}$, $p^2 \succ p^3$ iff $y_{p^3} = y_{p^2}$ and $x_{p^3} \geq x_{p^2}$.
\[prop:special\_case\]
Fig. \[fig6\] illustrates the region of point $p^3$ that is dominated by $p^2$ in Scenario A. There are three different cases depending on the $x$ coordinates of $p^1$ and $p^2$. If $x_{p^2} > x_{p^1}$ (or $x_{p^2} = x_{p^1}$, $x_{p^2} < x_{p^1}$, respectively), any point in the red dotted (or green solid, blue dashed, respectively) region in Fig. \[fig6\] is dominated by $p^2$. $\diamondsuit$
![Three different cases for Scenario A ($y_{p^1} < y_{p^2}$): $x_{p_a^2} > x_{p^1}$, $x_{p_b^2} = x_{p^1}$, and $x_{p_c^2} < x_{p^1}$.[]{data-label="fig6"}](SA.eps)
Upper Bound on Voronoi Neighbors
--------------------------------
In this subsection, we propose an upper bound on the set of Voronoi neighbors based on the dominance relation introduced earlier. We first show that the dominance relation is antisymmetric under certain conditions.
(Antisymmetry of Dominance) Given a fixed point $p^1$, and two points $p^2, p^3$ that are different from $p^1$, if $y_{p^1} \neq y_{p^2}$, or $y_{p^1} = y_{p^2}$ and $x_{p^1} < x_{p^2}$, then $p^2 \succ p^3$ and $p^3 \succ p^2$ implies that $p^2 = p^3$. \[prop:antisymmetry\]
Refer to the Appendix.
Given a fixed point $p^1$, and two points $p^2, p^3$ that are different from $p^1$, if $y_{p^1} = y_{p^2}$ and $x_{p^1} > x_{p^2}$ (namely, Scenario C in Section \[section5\_scenario\]), $p^2 \succ p^3$ and $p^3 \succ p^2$ may not imply $p^2 = p^3$. In fact, as long as $y_{p^1} = y_{p^2} = y_{p^3}$, $x_{p^1} > x_{p^2}$ and $x_{p^1} > x_{p^3}$, we have $p^2 \succ p^3$ and $p^3 \succ p^2$. The reason is that for any $p$ satisfying $y_{p} = y_{p^1}$ and $x_{p} < x_{p^1}$, $V(p^1|p) = \{(x~y)^T \in \mathds{R}^2~|~y = y_{p^1}, x\geq x_{p^1}\}$ which does not rely on the exact location of $p$. In this case, the Voronoi cell of $p^1$ is degenerated. To simplify the discussion, we make the following assumption, which guarantees that the Voronoi cell of $p^1$ is nonempty.
Given a fixed point $p^1$, and a set of points $\mathds{P} = \{p^2, p^3, ..., p^{n}\}$ satisfying points in $\mathds{P} \cup \{p^1\}$ are distinct, $\forall p \in \mathds{P}$, it holds that $y_{p} \neq y_{p^1}$, or $y_{p} = y_{p^1}$ and $x_{p} > x_{p^1}$. \[assumption\]
Given a fixed point $p^1$ and two points $p^2, p^3$, if $p^1, p^2, p^3$ satisfy Assumption \[assumption\], Proposition \[prop:antisymmetry\] guarantees that there are only three cases in terms of the dominance relation between $p^2$ and $p^3$, i.e., $p^2 \succ p^3$, $p^3 \succ p^2$, or $p^2$ and $p^3$ do not dominate each other.
Given a fixed point $p^1$ and a set of points $\mathds{P} = \{p^2, p^3, ..., p^n\}$ satisfying Assumption \[assumption\], we define $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ as the set of points satisfying that for any $p \in \mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ there does not exist another point $p' \in \mathds{P}$ that is different from $p$ and dominates $p$. \[def:NGp1\]
Now we are ready to state the relationship between $\mathcal{N}_G(p^1)$ and $\mathcal{N}_V(p^1)$.
Given a fixed point $p^1$ and a set of points $\mathds{P} = \{p^2, p^3, ..., p^n\}$ satisfying Assumption \[assumption\], $\mathcal{N}_V(p^1) \subseteq \mathcal{N}_G(p^1)$. \[prop:Voronoi\_neighbor\]
Refer to the Appendix.
Let $p^1 = (0~0)^T$, and generate a set $\mathds{P}$ of $11$ points that satisfy Assumption \[assumption\] in the square $[-10, 10]\times [-10, 10]$ as shown in Fig. \[fig10\](a). It can be verified that $\mathcal{N}_G(p^1)$ consists of points $6, 7, 9, 11$ (which are highlighted using the red color). By calculating the Voronoi cell of the point $p^1$ (the bounded version is shown in Fig. \[fig10\](b)), the Voronoi neighbors of $p^1$ are points $6, 7, 9, 11$, which are the same as the set of points $\mathcal{N}_G(p^1)$ (for this example). \[example:upper\_bound\] $\diamondsuit$
Calculation of the Upper Bound: Algorithms {#section6}
==========================================
In this section, we first discuss how to calculate the upper bound (on the set of Voronoi neighbors) in Theorem \[prop:Voronoi\_neighbor\] when the set of generators is fixed, and then propose algorithms to deal with dynamically changing generators.
Algorithms for Calculating the Upper Bound: Static Case {#section6_static}
-------------------------------------------------------
Since the set of Voronoi neighbors is important for solving Problem \[problem:distributed\_calculation\], it is necessary to develop algorithms to calculate the upper bound in Theorem \[prop:Voronoi\_neighbor\]. One simple algorithm is given in Algorithm \[algorithm\_simple\]. The algorithm just checks the condition in Theorem \[prop:Voronoi\_neighbor\]. More specifically, the variable $\mathit{sign}$ indicates whether the point $p^i$ belongs to $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$: $1$ if it does and $0$ otherwise. Steps 4-6 verify if $p^i$ is dominated by some point $p^j$: if it is, then the algorithm exits the inner **for** loop and does not add $p^i$ into $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$; otherwise (i.e., $\mathit{sign}$ is never set to be $0$), the algorithm adds $p^i$ to $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$. It can be verified that the algorithm has complexity $\mathcal{O}(n^2)$. The complexity $\mathcal{O}(n^2)$ is tight for the scenario in which none of $p^2, p^3, ..., p^n$ dominates any other point, i.e., $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1) = \mathds{P}$.
A fixed point $p^1$ and a set of points $\mathds{P} = \{p^2, p^3, ..., p^n\}$ satisfying Assumption \[assumption\]
$\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$
Initialize $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1) = \emptyset$;
Let $\mathit{sign} = 1$;
If $j \neq i$ and $p^j \succ p^i$, set $\mathit{sign} = 0$ and exit the inner **for** loop;
If $\mathit{sign} = 1$, set $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1) = \mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1) \cup \{p^i\}$;
Output $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$.
One natural question to ask is whether there exists more efficient algorithms to calculate the upper bound. Note that the conditions in Theorem \[case\_1\] require that $y_{p^3} \geq y_{p^2}$. Therefore, if we first sort the points according to $y$ coordinates, potentially we can obtain a faster algorithm.
Given the set of points $\mathds{P} = \{p^2, p^3, ..., p^n\}$, we first divide the set of points into three groups: points of which the $y$ coordinate is larger than $y_{p^1}$ (denoted as $\mathds{P}_+$), points of which the $y$ coordinate is the same as $y_{p^1}$ (denoted as $\mathds{P}_0$), and points of which the $y$ coordinate is smaller than $y_{p^1}$ (denoted as $\mathds{P}_-$).
We first focus on points in $\mathds{P}_+$. If $\mathds{P}_+$ is not empty, we sort the points in $\mathds{P}_+$ according to the ascending order of $y$ coordinates and according to the ascending order of $x$ coordinates for points that have the same $y$ coordinate. Suppose there are $m$ points in $\mathds{P}_+$ and the sorted point sequence is $p_1, p_2, ..., p_m$. We use the point $\mathit{anchor}$ to track the angle formed by the positive $x$ axis and the ray from $p^1$ to the point (if the point is $p$, we use $\angle p$ to denote this angle). Since $p_1$ has the smallest $y$, it must belong to $\mathcal{N}_G(p^1)$ due to Theorem \[case\_1\], and $\mathit{anchor}$ is initialized as $p_1$. Now we consider $p_2$: if $p_2$ is not dominated by the point $\mathit{anchor}$, then add $p_2$ into $\mathcal{N}_G(p^1)$ and update $\mathit{anchor}$ with $p_2$; otherwise, do nothing. We repeat this procedure for points $p_3, p_4, ..., p_m$.
For points in $\mathds{P}_-$, we can simply change the sign of the $y$ coordinates so that we can use the procedure for $\mathds{P}_+$ due to Corollary \[case\_2\]. For points in $\mathds{P}_0$, we add the point with the smallest $x$ coordinate into $\mathcal{N}_G(p^1)$. The detailed algorithm is given in Algorithm \[algorithm\_efficient\].
The correctness of the algorithm can be proved as below. The reason why $\mathds{P}$ can be divided into three subsets $\mathds{P}_+$, $\mathds{P}_0$, and $\mathds{P}_-$ is that for any point $p$ in each subset, it can only potentially be dominated by points in that subset due to the dominance characterizations in Theorem \[case\_1\], Corollary \[case\_2\], and part (b) of Proposition \[prop:special\_case\]. For points in $\mathds{P}_+$, we obtain $p_1, p_2, ..., p_m$ after sorting. Due to the condition in Theorem \[case\_1\], a point $p_i$ can only be dominated by points that have indices smaller than $i$. Thus, $p_1$ must belong to $\mathcal{N}_G(p^1)$ because it has the smallest index, and we initialize $\mathit{anchor}$ with $p_1$. When considering the point $p_i$ with $i = 2, 3, ..., m$, the variable $\mathit{anchor}$ keeps track of the point $p$ that has formed the largest angle $\angle p$ so far. If $p_i$ is dominated by the point $\mathit{anchor}$, it cannot belong to $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$. If $p_i$ is not dominated by the point $\mathit{anchor}$, then $p_i$ cannot be dominated by any point in $\mathds{P}_+$ (and we add $p_i$ into $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ and update $\mathit{anchor}$ with $p_i$); this is because
- $p_i$ can only be potentially dominated by points that have indices smaller than $i$,
- for any point $p$ with its index smaller than $i$, we have $y_{p_i} \geq y_p$ so we only need to check the second condition in Theorem \[case\_1\]; however, the second condition essentially just compares the angle $\angle p$ with the angle $\angle p_i$. If there exists a point $p_k$ such that $\angle p_k \geq \angle p_i$, then $p_i$ is dominated by $p_k$. Since the variable $\mathit{anchor}$ keeps track of the point which forms the largest angle so far, it is equivalent to compare the angle $\angle \mathit{anchor}$ with $\angle p_i$, which is the same as checking if $p_i$ is dominated by the point $\mathit{anchor}$.
Because the condition in Corollary \[case\_2\] is symmetric to the condition in Theorem \[case\_1\], we can just change the sign of the $y$ coordinates for points in $\mathds{P}_-$ and apply the procedure for points in $\mathds{P}_+$. For points in $\mathds{P}_0$, there is only one point (namely, the one with the smallest $x$ coordinate) that cannot be dominated by any other point due to part (b) of Proposition \[prop:special\_case\].
It can be verified that the algorithm has complexity $\mathcal{O}(n \log n)$ because the best sorting algorithms (e.g., merge sort) have complexity $\mathcal{O}(n \log n)$ and finding points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ using the sorted point sequence has complexity $\mathcal{O}(n)$.
A fixed point $p^1$ and a set of points $\mathds{P} = \{p^2, p^3, ..., p^n\}$ satisfying Assumption \[assumption\]
$\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$
Initialize $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1) = \emptyset$;
Divide the set of points in $\mathds{P}$ into three subsets $\mathds{P}_+$, $\mathds{P}_0$, and $\mathds{P}_-$;
Sort the points in $\mathds{P}_+$ into $p_1, p_2, ..., p_m$ (with $m = |\mathds{P}_+|$) according to the ascending order of $y$ coordinates and according to the ascending order of $x$ coordinates for points that have the same $y$ coordinate;
Add $p_1$ into $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ and set $\mathit{anchor} = p_1$;
If $p_i$ is not dominated by the point $\mathit{anchor}$, add $p_i$ into $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ and set $\mathit{anchor} = p_i$;
If $|\mathds{P}_0| > 0$, add the point with the smallest $x$ coordinate in $\mathds{P}_0$ into $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$;
If $|\mathds{P}_-| > 0$, let $\mathds{P}_-' = \{p~|~(x_p~-y_p)^T \in \mathds{P}_- \}$, and apply the procedure in Steps 3-9 by replacing $\mathds{P}_+$ with $\mathds{P}_-'$ and adding $(x_{p_i}~-y_{p_i})^T$ into $\mathcal{N}_G(p^1)$;
Output $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$.
Algorithms for Calculating the Upper Bound: Dynamic Case
--------------------------------------------------------
In this subsection, we study how to calculate the upper bound if the set of generators $\mathds{P}$ constantly changes. If we apply the algorithms in Section \[section6\_static\] to changing generators, the calculation has to be done for any single change in the generator locations. Here, we introduce a dominance graph, which builds up on the dominance relation and can be used to calculate the upper bound more efficiently. We first look at another property of the dominance relation.
(Transitivity of Dominance) Given a fixed point $p^1$, and three points $p^2, p^3, p^4$ that are different from $p^1$, if $p^2 \succ p^3$ and $p^3 \succ p^4$, then $p^2 \succ p^4$. \[prop:transitivity\]
Refer to the Appendix.
Under Assumption \[assumption\], the dominance relation is a partial order since it is
- Reflexive because $\forall p \in \mathds{P}$, $p \succ p$;
- Antisymmetric because $p^i \succ p^j$ and $p^j \succ p^i$ imply that $p^i = p^j$ as shown in Proposition \[prop:antisymmetry\];
- Transitive because $p^i \succ p^j$ and $p^j \succ p^k$ imply that $p^i \succ p^k$ as shown in Proposition \[prop:transitivity\].
Based on this dominance partial order, the set of points $\mathds{P}$ induces a directed graph, which we call a dominance graph.
Given a fixed point $p^1$ and a set of points $\mathds{P} = \{p^2, p^3, ..., p^n\}$ satisfying Assumption \[assumption\], we define the dominance graph induced by $\mathds{P}$ as $\mathds{G}(p^1, \mathds{P}) = (V~E)$, where i) $V = \mathds{P}$ is the set of vertices, and ii) $E$ is the set of directed edges and there is a directed edge $e \in E$ from $p^i \in V$ to $p^j \in V$ if $p^i \succ p^j$. In addition, $p^i$ is called a parent of $p^j$, and $p^j$ is called a child of $p^i$.
Since a point can dominate (or be dominated by) multiple points in $\mathds{P}$, there could be multiple output (or input) edges for this point in the dominance graph. However, there is no cycle in dominance graphs as shown in the following proposition, which can be proved via contradiction.
Given a fixed point $p^1$ and a set of points $\mathds{P} = \{p^2, p^3, ..., p^n\}$ satisfying Assumption \[assumption\], the dominance graph $\mathds{G}(p^1, \mathds{P})$ is acyclic. \[prop:acyclic\]
Refer to the Appendix.
Therefore, dominance graphs are directed acyclic graphs. Given a dominance graph, we are interested in finding points that are not dominated by any other point.
Given a fixed point $p^1$ and a set of points $\mathds{P} = \{p^2, p^3, ..., p^n\}$ satisfying Assumption \[assumption\], a point $p \in \mathds{P}$ is a neighbor of $p^1$ in the dominance graph $\mathds{G}(p^1, \mathds{P})$ if there does not exist another point $p' \in \mathds{P}$ that is different from $p$ and dominates $p$. \[def:neighbor\_d\_graph\]
Based on Definition \[def:NGp1\], $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ is exactly the set of neighbors of $p^1$ in the dominance graph $\mathds{G}(p^1, \mathds{P})$. The importance of neighbors in the dominance graph is that only neighbors of $p^1$ matter when $p^1$ calculates its own Voronoi cell given the set of points $\mathds{P}$, as shown in Theorem \[prop:Voronoi\_neighbor\]. It can be verified that the following result holds.
Given a fixed point $p^1$ and a set of points $\mathds{P} = \{p^2, p^3, ..., p^n\}$ satisfying Assumption \[assumption\], $p$ is a neighbor of $p^1$ in the dominance graph iff the in-degree of $p$ in the dominance graph $\mathds{G}(p^1, \mathds{P})$ is $0$. \[prop:neighbor\]
We still consider the setting in Example \[example:upper\_bound\]: $p^1 = (0~0)^T$, and the set of $11$ points $\mathds{P}$ is shown in Fig. \[fig10\](a). The corresponding dominance graph is shown in Fig. \[fig12\](a). Based on Proposition \[prop:neighbor\], points $6, 7, 9, 11$ are the neighbors of $p^1$ in the dominance graph. Note that there is no cycle in the dominance graph, which is consistent with Proposition \[prop:acyclic\]. $\diamondsuit$ \[example:dominance\_graph\]
Now we study how to dynamically maintain the dominance graph when inserting or deleting points. We assume that there is an upper bound $K$ on the number of points (naturally, the number of mobile vehicles serves as this upper bound $K$). For each point $p^i \in \mathds{P}$, we have the vertex $V_{p^i}$ in the dominance graph, and use the following fields to keep track of the vertex: i) $\textrm{ID}$: $i$ with $2 \leq i \leq K$; ii) $x$: the $x$ coordinate of $p^i$; iii) $y$: the $y$ coordinate of $p^i$; iv) *Parent*: a data array of dimension $K$. *Parent*$(k) = 1$ if there is an edge from $V_{p^k}$ to $V_{p^i}$, $0$ otherwise; v) *Child*: a data array of dimension $K$. *Child*$(k) = 1$ if there is an edge from $V_{p^i}$ to $V_{p^k}$, $0$ otherwise; vi) *No\_of\_parent*: the number of parents of vertex $V_{p^i}$. In addition, there is a data array *List\_of\_neighbor* of dimension $K$ for $p^1$ to keep track of its neighbors, i.e., *List\_of\_neighbor*$(k) = 1$ if $p^k$ is a neighbor of $p^1$ and $0$ otherwise.
When inserting a point, the point can affect the child and parent fields of the existing vertices, can make a neighbor invalid, and itself can become a new neighbor. The details are given in Algorithm \[algorithm\_insertion\]. The input is a dominance graph $\mathds{G}(p^1, \mathds{P})$ with vertices $V_{p^2}, ..., V_{p^n}$, a list of neighbors, and a new point $p^{n+1}$, and the output is the dominance graph $\mathds{G}(p^1, \mathds{P} \cup \{p^{n+1}\})$ and the updated list of neighbors. Step 1 initializes the vertex $V_{p^{n+1}}$. Steps 2-11 update the fields of vertices $V_{p^2}, V_{p^3}, ..., V_{p^{n+1}}$. At Step 3, $p^{n+1}$ is checked against $p^i$, and there are three cases:
- $p^i$ dominates $p^{n+1}$. Then $p^i$ is a parent of $p^{n+1}$, and the number of parents of $p^{n+1}$ is increased by $1$. This corresponds to Step 4;
- $p^{n+1}$ dominates $p^i$. Then $p^i$ is a child of $p^{n+1}$, the number of parents of $p^i$ is increased by $1$, and $p^i$ cannot be a neighbor of $p^1$. This corresponds to Step 5.
- Neither $p^i$ nor $p^{n+1}$ dominates. In this case, no change is necessary.
Steps 7-11 examine whether $p^{n+1}$ itself is a neighbor of $p^1$. It can be verified that the insertion algorithm has complexity $\mathcal{O}(n)$. Algorithm \[algorithm\_insertion\] can start with $n = 1$ (or $n \geq 2$), i.e., when the dominance graph is empty.
Dominance graph $\mathds{G}(p^1, \mathds{P})$ with each vertex $V_p$ for $p \in P$ being represented using the fields *ID*, $x$, $y$, *Parent*, *Child*, and *No\_of\_parent*, a global data structure *List\_of\_neighbor*, and a new point $p^{n+1}$ such that Assumption \[assumption\] holds for the set of points $\mathds{P} \cup \{p^{n+1}\}$
Dominance graph $\mathds{G}(p^1, \mathds{P} \cup \{p^{n+1}\})$ and updated *List\_of\_neighbor*
Initialize $V_{p^{n+1}}$ with *ID* being $n+1$, $x$ being $x_{p^{n+1}}$, $y$ being $y_{p^{n+1}}$, *Parent* and *Child* being vectors of all zeros, and *No\_of\_parent* being $0$;
Check if $p^i$ dominates $p^{n+1}$ or $p^{n+1}$ dominates $p^i$ using the results in Theorem \[case\_1\], Corollary \[case\_2\], and Proposition \[prop:special\_case\];
If $p^i$ dominates $p^{n+1}$, increase $V_{p^{n+1}}.$*No\_of\_parent* by $1$, and set $V_{p^i}.$*Child*$(n+1) = 1$ and $V_{p^{n+1}}.$*Parent*$(i) = 1$;
If $p^{n+1}$ dominates $p^{i}$, increase $V_{p^i}.$*No\_of\_parent* by $1$, and set $V_{p^i}.$*Parent*$(n+1) = 1$, *List\_of\_neighbor*$(i) = 0$, and $V_{p^{n+1}}.$*Child*$(i) = 1$;
*List\_of\_neighbor*$(n+1) = 1$;
*List\_of\_neighbor*$(n+1) = 0$.
When deleting a point, the point can affect the child and parent fields of other vertices, and can create new neighbors. The details are given in Algorithm \[algorithm\_deletion\]. The input is a dominance graph $\mathds{G}(p^1, \mathds{P})$ with vertices $V_{p^2}, ..., V_{p^n}$, a list of neighbors, and a point $p^{j}$ to delete, and the output is the dominance graph $\mathds{G}(p^1, \mathds{P} \setminus \{p^{j}\})$ and the updated list of neighbors. Steps 1-5 update the fields of vertices $V_{p^2}, V_{p^3}, ..., V_{p^{j-1}}, V_{p^{j+1}}, ..., V_{p^n}$. If $p^i$ is a parent of $p^j$, then remove $p^j$ from $p^i$’s child list; this is done in Step 2. If $p^i$ is a child of $p^j$, then remove $p^j$ from $p^i$’s parent list, decrease the number of parents of $p^i$ by $1$: if the number of parents of $p^i$ is $0$, set $p^i$ to be a neighbor of $p^1$; this is done in Step 4. If $p^j$ is a neighbor of $p^1$, Step 6 removes $p^j$ from the list of neighbors of $p^1$. It can be verified that the deletion algorithm has complexity $\mathcal{O}(n)$. Algorithm \[algorithm\_deletion\] can start with $n=2$ (or $n \geq 3$), i.e., when there is only one vertex in the dominance graph.
Dominance graph $\mathds{G}(p^1, \mathds{P})$ with each vertex $V_p$ for $p \in P$ being represented using the fields *ID*, $x$, $y$, *Parent*, *Child*, and *No\_of\_parent*, a global data structure *List\_of\_neighbor*, and a point $p^{j} \in \mathds{P}$ to delete, where $j \in \{2, 3, \dots, n\}$
Dominance graph $\mathds{G}(p^1, \mathds{P} \setminus \{p^{j}\})$ and updated *List\_of\_neighbor*
If $V_{p^j}.$*Parent*$(i) = 1$, set $V_{p^i}.$*Child*$(j) = 0$;
If $V_{p^j}.$*Child*$(i) = 1$, set $V_{p^i}.$*Parent*$(j) = 0$ and decrease $V_{p^i}.$*No\_of\_parent* by $1$;
If $V_{p^i}.$*No\_of\_parent*$=0$, set *List\_of\_neighbor*$(i) = 1$;
Set *List\_of\_neighbor*$(j) = 0$, and delete the vertex $V_{p^j}$.
To obtain the set of neighbors of $p^1$ in the dominance graph at any time, we just need to check the nonzero entries in *List\_of\_neighbor*.
We still use the point $p^1$ and the set of points $\mathds{P}$ in Example \[example:upper\_bound\]. Now we consider inserting points. We first insert point $12$ (the relative position of which is shown in Fig. \[fig12\](b)). The dominance graph in Fig. \[fig12\](a) becomes the graph in Fig. \[fig12\](c); here, point $12$ is not a neighbor of $p^1$ in its dominance graph (since it is dominated by points $2$, $7$ and $8$), which implies that the Voronoi cell of $p^1$ remains the same following Theorem \[prop:Voronoi\_neighbor\]. Next we insert point $13$ (the relative position of which is shown in Fig. \[fig12\](b)). The dominance graph in Fig. \[fig12\](c) becomes the graph in Fig. \[fig12\](d); here, point $13$ becomes a neighbor of $p^1$ in its dominance graph. In this case, points $6, 7, 13$ are neighbors of $p^1$ in its dominance graph, and can also be verified to be Voronoi neighbors. Now we consider deleting points. We first delete point $5$ (the relative position of which is shown in Fig. \[fig12\](b)). The dominance graph in Fig. \[fig12\](d) becomes the graph in Fig. \[fig12\](e). Since the set of neighbors in dominance graph does not change after deleting point $5$, the Voronoi cell of $p^1$ remains the same as the one after inserting point $13$ following Theorem \[prop:Voronoi\_neighbor\]. Next we delete point $7$ (the relative position of which is shown in Fig. \[fig12\](b)). The dominance graph in Fig. \[fig12\](e) becomes the graph in Fig. \[fig12\](f). Since point $7$ is a neighbor of $p^1$ in its dominance graph, point $8$ becomes a neighbor of $p^1$ in its dominance graph after deleting point $7$, as shown in Fig. \[fig12\](f). In this case, points $6, 8, 13$ are neighbors of $p^1$ in its dominance graph, and can also be verified to be Voronoi neighbors. Therefore, when a point is inserted or deleted, the Voronoi cell could stay the same provided that the set of neighbors in the dominance graph remains the same. In contrast, we have to consider all points again after insertion or deletion if without the dynamically maintained dominance graph. This becomes particularly useful when the points are the positions of mobile vehicles. $\diamondsuit$ \[example:dynamic\_maintain\]
Simulations {#section7}
===========
In this section, we first run simulations to study the number of neighbors in dominance graphs (namely, the cardinality of $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$), and then propose methods to solve Problem \[problem:distributed\_calculation\].
Simulations for the Upper Bound
-------------------------------
Since $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ is an upper bound on the set of Voronoi neighbors as shown in Theorem \[prop:Voronoi\_neighbor\], it is natural to ask the question of how many points there could be in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$. While the exact number depends on the specific relative positions of the set of points $\mathds{P}$, we can study the average number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ if the points are generated randomly.
Let us first fix $p^1$ to be $(0~0)^T$, select the number of points $n$ to generate, and then generate each point with uniform distribution in the square $[-1, 1] \times [-1, 1]$ independently from all other points while satisfying Assumption \[assumption\]. In other words, the positions of these $n$ points are i.i.d (independent and identically distributed). Given the set of generated $n$ points $\{p^2, ..., p^n, p^{n+1}\}$, we can run either Algorithm \[algorithm\_simple\] or Algorithm \[algorithm\_efficient\] to calculate $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$. Then the quantity that we are interested in is the expected number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$.
Note that if $n = 1$, we know that any randomly generated point must be in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$. Therefore, the expected number is $1$. For $n \geq 2$, we examine it via simulations. We randomly generate $n$ points, run $5000$ trials, and calculate the average number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$. The plot of the average number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ as a function of the number of points is given in Fig. \[fig17\]. As can be seen from the figure, the average number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ (which is an approximation of the expected number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$) always stays below $4.5$. This is also confirmed via simulations for more points (though less trials are run for the sake of time). More specifically, we choose $60, 80, 100, 120, 140, 160$ points, and fix the number of trials to be $1000$. For example, if $|\mathds{P}| = 60$ and we run $1000$ trials, there are $4.34$ points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ on average, and the histogram of the number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ is plotted in the left upper corner of Fig. \[fig9\]. Similarly, if $|\mathds{P}| = 80, 100, 120, 140, 160$ and we still run $1000$ trials, the average number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ is below $4.5$, which is independent of the number of points that we generate. The histograms also have similar shapes for all scenarios. The intuition is that, when an additional point is added, the probability (that the number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ increases) decreases as the number of points increases because it is more likely that the point is dominated by other points or other points dominate this point; therefore, the expected number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ will not blow up and is very likely to stay around a certain value when the number of points is large enough.
![Average number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ for randomly generated points over $5000$ trials as a function of the number of points.[]{data-label="fig17"}](Average_No_Neighbor.eps)
Methods for Solving Problem \[problem:distributed\_calculation\]
----------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in the previous subsection, the number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ is comparatively much smaller than the number of points in $\mathds{P}$ especially when the total number of points is large. Therefore, it is much more efficient to calculate the Voronoi cell of the point $p^1$ based on the points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$. In this subsection, we briefly discuss methods for solving Problem \[problem:distributed\_calculation\].
Given a fixed point $p^1$ and a set of points $\mathds{P}$, one straightforward way to calculate the Voronoi cell of $p^1$ is to consider one point $p \in \mathds{P}$ at a time and calculate the boundary based on the points that have considered so far; we denote this approach as the naive approach. The upper bound based approach is that we first calculate $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$, and then calculate the boundary of the Voronoi cell only based on the points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$. The difference between these two approaches lies in the fact that the naive approach uses all points to directly calculate the Voronoi cell, and the upper bound based approach only uses points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ to do the calculation. Since the calculation of the upper bound is much simpler compared with calculating the Voronoi cell of $p^1$ (which involves determining the intersection points of hyperbolas), the additional effort to preselect the set of points that are necessary to compute the Voronoi cell is well worthy.
Intuitively, the ratio of the naive approach’s running time to that of the dominance graph based approach will roughly be the ratio of the total number of points to the number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$, which is denoted as $\mathcal{R}$, i.e., $\mathcal{R} = \frac{|\mathds{P}|}{|\mathds{N}_G(p^1)|}$. To calculate the Voronoi cell, we can use any method that is capable of calculating Voronoi cells for additively weighted metrics. For example, the most efficient method is the sweepline algorithm proposed in [@yru_journal:Fortune_1987]; however, the algorithm computes the Voronoi cell for every point instead of just one single point, and the implementation is complicated since queuing mechanism is necessary. In our simulations, we implement a simple (and less efficient) algorithm for calculating the (bounded) Voronoi cell of the point $p^1$. The basic idea is that we consider one point $p$ at a time, and determine which part of the boundary between $p$ and $p^1$ contributes to the (bounded) Voronoi cell of $p^1$.
We generate $32$ points as shown in Fig. \[fig15\](a), and calculate the Voronoi cell. For the naive approach, $\mathds{P'} = \{1, 2, 3, ..., 32\}$; for the upper bound based approach, $\mathds{P'} = \{9, 31, 32\}$ which is the set of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$. The Voronoi cells are plotted in Fig. \[fig15\](b). Note that the upper bound based approach runs[^1] $1.55$ seconds while the naive approach runs $18.75$ seconds. The running time ratio is $\frac{18.75}{1.55} \approx 12.1$, while the ratio $\mathcal{R}$ is $\frac{32}{3} \approx 10.7$. Note that the two ratios are close as expected. By examining the Voronoi cells, they are exactly the same. In Fig. \[fig18\], the ratio $\mathcal{R}$ of the number of all points to the average number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ is plotted by combing the data in Fig. \[fig17\] and Fig. \[fig9\] (note that for the number of points larger than $60$, the plot is based on interpolation using the data in Fig. \[fig9\]). This plot shows that on average the ratio $\mathcal{R}$ increases linearly as a function of the number of points. In other words, the upper bound based approach becomes more and more efficient (on average) as the number of points increases. Note that even in the worst case, i.e., the largest number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$ given a fixed number of points, the ratio $\mathcal{R}$ is also increasing as can be verified from Fig. \[fig9\].
![Plot of the ratio of the number of points to the average number of points in $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$.[]{data-label="fig18"}](Ratio.eps)
Conclusions {#section8}
===========
In this paper, we study the Voronoi partition by introducing an energy-based metric in constant flow environments. We provide an explicit expression for this energy metric, and use it to derive the equation for the Voronoi boundary between two generators. To facilitate the distributed calculation of Voronoi cells, we propose a disk-based approximation which leads to a lower bound on the set of Voronoi neighbors, and asymptote-based approximations which lead to an upper bound on the set of Voronoi neighbors. When deriving the upper bound, we introduce the dominance relation and provide a complete characterization. Simulations are run to evaluate the upper bound and its effect on calculating Voronoi cells. The results have potential applications to any other setting based on additively weighted metrics.
There are several future directions. First, we would like to study the Voronoi partition when an upper bound on the traveling time of vehicles is imposed. This is motivated by applications such as search/rescue in which the time taken to reach a point is also very important besides saving energy. Second, we would like to generalize the flow field to more general scenarios, such as piecewise constant flows [@yru_journal:Kwok_2010], time varying flows [@yru_journal:Bakolas_2010_Voronoi_j], or even quadratic flows [@yru_journal:Ru_2011_b]. Third, we would also like to incorporate the energy necessary for communication [@yru_journal:Rodoplu_1999] (such as transmitting the location information) and sensing into our energy metric. Last, we would like to study approximation techniques for Voronoi cells based on metrics other than the energy metric. For example, we would like to extend such results to the power metric as studied in [@yru_journal:Pavone_2011].
**Proof of Proposition \[prop:metric\]** The minimum energy control problem can be formulated as below: $$\begin{aligned}
\min ~&\int_{0}^{t_f} U^T U d t \nonumber\\
s.t. ~~& \frac{dx}{dt} = U_x + B~, ~~\frac{dy}{dt} = U_y~,\nonumber\\
& x(0) = x_{p^1}, ~y(0) = y_{p^1}~, x(t_f) = x_{p^2}, ~y(t_f) = y_{p^2}~.\end{aligned}$$ The objective of the optimization problem is to find a control $U$ which minimizes the total energy. Then the Hamiltonian is $H = U^TU + P^T (U + N)$, where $P= (P_1~P_2)^T$ and $N = (B~0)^T$. Using the minimum principle [@yru_journal:Bryson_1975], we obtain the following coupled ordinary differential equations (ODEs) besides Eqs. and : $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{dP_1}{dt} &= 0~, \label{eq:dP_1}\\
\frac{dP_2}{dt} &= 0~. \label{eq:dP_2}\end{aligned}$$ Since $U$ is chosen to minimize the Hamiltonian, we have $U =
-\frac{1}{2} P$. Plugging $U$ into Eqs. (\[eq:dynamicsx\]) and (\[eq:dynamicsy\]), we get the following ODEs: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{dx}{dt} &= -\frac{1}{2}P_1 + B~,\label{eq:dxnew}\\
\frac{dy}{dt} &= -\frac{1}{2} P_2~. \label{eq:dynew}\end{aligned}$$
From Eq. (\[eq:dP\_1\]), we know $P_1$ is a constant, and let $P_1(t) = C_1$ for $t \in [0, t_f]$. Similarly, from Eq. (\[eq:dP\_2\]), we know $P_2$ is also a constant and let $P_2(t) = C_2$ for $t \in [0, t_f]$. Then using Eqs. (\[eq:dxnew\]) and (\[eq:dynew\]), we have $$x(t) = x_{p^1} + (B -
\frac{C_1}{2})t,~\mathrm{and}~y(t) = y_{p^1} -
\frac{C_2 t}{2}~.$$ Since $x(t_f)$ and $y(t_f)$ are given, we obtain the following equations $$\begin{aligned}
x_{p^2} &= x_{p^1} + (B - \frac{C_1}{2})t_f~, \label{eq:setofeq_1}\\
y_{p^2} &= y_{p^1} - \frac{C_2 t_f}{2}~. \label{eq:setofeq_2}\end{aligned}$$
Since $t_f$ is free and there is no cost imposed on the final state in the optimization problem, $H|_{tf} = 0$. Therefore, we have $$-\frac{C_1^2 + C_2^2}{4} + C_1 B = 0~. \label{eq:setofeq_3}$$
By solving Eqs. (\[eq:setofeq\_1\]), (\[eq:setofeq\_2\]) and (\[eq:setofeq\_3\]), we obtain the unique solution in Eq. . Then the optimal control is $U(t) = -\frac{1}{2}
\begin{bmatrix} C_1\\C_2\end{bmatrix}$ for $t \in [0, t_f]$, and the minimum energy is given in Eq. .\
**Proof of Theorem \[theorem:Voronoi\_neighbor\_lower\]** We prove it by contradiction. Suppose $p^k \in \mathcal{N}_D(p^1)$, but $p^k \notin \mathcal{N}_V(p^1)$. Then the point $p^*(p^1, p^k)$ must lie outside of $V(p^1)$. In other words, there must exist an edge of the Voronoi cell $V(p^1)$ that intersects with the line segment $p^1 p^*(p^1, p^k)$ at a point $p^l$ (which is different from $p^*(p^1, p^k)$) satisfying $d_{p^1 p^l} < d_{p^1 p^*(p^1, p^k)}$. Suppose the edge is due to another point $p^m$. Since $p^*(p^1, p^m)$ is the unique point on the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^m$ that is closest to $p^1$, we have $d_{p^1, p^*(p^1, p^m)} \leq d_{p^1 p^l}$. Thus, $d_{p^1, p^*(p^1, p^m)} \leq d_{p^1 p^l} < d_{p^1 p^*(p^1, p^k)}$. That is to say, following the disk-based approximation, $d_{p^1, p^*(p^1, p^m)}$ (i.e., the radius due to the point $p^m$) is strictly smaller than $d_{p^1, p^*(p^1, p^k)}$ (i.e., the radius due to the point $p^k$). It contradicts with the assumption that $p^k \in \mathcal{N}_D(p^1)$. Therefore, $p^k$ must be a Voronoi neighbor.\
**Proof of Proposition \[prop:neighbor\_lower\]** Since $p^*(p^1, p^k)$ lies on the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^k$, we have $J(p^1, p^*(p^1, p^k)) = J(p^k, p^*(p^1, p^k))$. Because for any $l \in \{2, 3, ..., n\} \setminus \{k\}$ we have $J(p^k, p^*(p^1, p^k)) < J(p^l, p^*(p^1, p^k))$, we obtain $J(p^1, p^*(p^1, p^k)) \leq J(p^m, p^*(p^1, p^k))$ for $m \in \{2, 3, ..., n\}$. Based on Definition \[def:Voronoi\], we know that $p^*(p^1, p^k)$ lies in $V(p^1)$. Because for any $l \in \{2, 3, ..., n\} \setminus \{k\}$ we have $J(p^1, p^*(p^1, p^k)) < J(p^l, p^*(p^1, p^k))$, $p^*(p^1, p^k)$ must only belong to the edge of $V(p^1)$ between $p^1$ and $p^k$, and the edge of $V(p^1)$ between $p^1$ and $p^k$ is not a single point due to the strict inequality. Therefore, $p^k$ must be a Voronoi neighbor of $p^1$.\
**Proof of Proposition \[prop:asymptotes\]** For $l_1$, we are interested in $y' = \frac{b}{a}x'$ for $y' \geq 0$. Plugging in the expressions for $x'$ and $y'$ in Eqs. and , we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
&-(x - \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}) \sin \alpha + (y -
\frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}) \cos \alpha =\\
&((x - \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}) \cos \alpha + (y - \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}) \sin \alpha) \tan \alpha~,\end{aligned}$$ which simplifies to be $y - \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2} = (x - \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}) \tan2 \alpha$. $y' \geq 0$ is equivalent to $-(x - \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}) \sin \alpha + (y -
\frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}) \cos \alpha \geq 0$. Using $x - \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2} = \frac{y - \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}}{\tan2 \alpha}$, we obtain $(y - \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}) \frac{\sin \alpha}{\sin 2 \alpha} > 0$. Since $\alpha \in (0, \frac{\pi}{2})$, $y' \geq 0$ reduces to $y \geq \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}$.
For $l_2$, we are interested in $y' = -\frac{b}{a}x'$ for $y' \leq 0$. Plugging in the expressions for $x'$ and $y'$ in Eqs. and , we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
&-(x - \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}) \sin \alpha + (y -
\frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}) \cos \alpha =\\
&((x - \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}) \cos \alpha + (y - \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}) \sin \alpha) (-\tan \alpha)~,\end{aligned}$$ which can be rewritten as $(y - \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2})\frac{1}{\cos \alpha} = 0$. Since $\alpha \in (0, \frac{\pi}{2})$, we have $y = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}$. $y' \leq 0$ is equivalent to $-(x - \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}) \sin \alpha \leq 0$. Therefore, $x \geq \frac{x_{p^1} + x_{p^2}}{2}$.\
**Proof of Theorem \[case\_1\]**
If $p^3$ is the same as $p^2$, $p^2 \succ p^3$ and the conditions hold trivially. Therefore, in the following proof, we assume that $p^2$ and $p^3$ are different.
**(If part)** Depending on the $x$ coordinates of $p^1$ and $p^2$, there are three cases.
**Case I**: $x_{p^2} > x_{p^1}$. Since $y_{p^3} \geq y_{p^2} > y_{p^1}$, we have $(x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}) \times (y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}) \geq (y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}) \times (x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}) > 0$, which implies that $x_{p^3} > x_{p^1}$. Therefore, Eq. can be rewritten as $$\frac{y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}} \leq \frac{y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}}~. \label{eq:angle_relation}$$ Now there are two cases depending on the $y$ coordinate of $p^2$ and $p^3$:
- If $y_{p^3} = y_{p^2}$, Eq. implies that $x_{p^3} > x_{p^2}$ since $p^2, p^3$ are different. For any point $p$ in $V(p^1~|~p^2)$, we have $J(p^1, p) \leq J(p^2, p)$, i.e., $2B(d_{p^1p} + x_{p^1} - x_p) \leq 2B(d_{p^2p} + x_{p^2} - x_p)$. Since $d_{p^2p} \leq d_{p^3p} + d_{p^2p^3} = d_{p^3p} + x_{p^3} - x_{p^2}$ (due to the triangular inequality), i.e., $d_{p^2p} + x_{p^2} \leq d_{p^3p} + x_{p^3}$, we have $2B(d_{p^2p} + x_{p^2} - x_p) \leq 2B(d_{p^3p} + x_{p^3} - x_p)$. Therefore, $2B(d_{p^1p} + x_{p^1} - x_p) \leq 2B(d_{p^3p} + x_{p^3} - x_p)$, i.e., $J(p^1, p) \leq J(p^3 p)$. Therefore, we have $V(p^1~|~p^2) \subseteq V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3)$. As $V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3) \subseteq V(p^1~|~p^2)$, we have $V(p^1~|~p^2) = V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3)$;
- If $y_{p^3} > y_{p^2}$, Eq. implies that $x_{p^3} > x_{p^2}$. For any point $p$ in $V(p^1~|~p^2)$, we have $p \in {D_{\textup{upper}}}''(p^1~|~p^2)$, where ${D_{\textup{upper}}}''(p^1~|~p^2)$ is obtained via shifting the vertex of ${D_{\textup{upper}}}(p^1~|~p^2)$ to the point $p^2$. In other words, the two lines that consist of the boundary of ${D_{\textup{upper}}}''(p^1~|~p^2)$ are $y = y_{p^2}$ with $x \geq x_{p^2}$ (namely, the half line $p^2 q_3$ in Fig. \[fig5\]), and $y - y_{p^2} = (x - x_{p^2}) \tan 2 \alpha$ with $y \geq y_{p^2}$ and $\alpha$ being the angle of $\angle q_1p^1p^2$ (namely, the half line $p^2 q_2$ in Fig. \[fig5\]). Now we look at ${D_{\textup{lower}}}(p^2~|~p^3)$, the lower approximation for $p^2$ given $p^3$. Recall that the two lines that consist of the boundary of ${D_{\textup{lower}}}(p^2~|~p^3)$ are $y = \frac{y_{p^2} + y_{p^3}}{2}$ with $x \geq \frac{x_{p^2} + x_{p^3}}{2}$ (namely, the half line $q_6 q_5$ in Fig. \[fig5\], where $q_6$ is the middle point of $p^2, p^3$), and $y - \frac{y_{p^2} + y_{p^3}}{2} = (x - \frac{x_{p^2} + x_{p^3}}{2}) \tan 2 \beta$ with $y \geq \frac{y_{p^2} + y_{p^3}}{2}$ and $\beta$ being the angle of $\angle q_3p^2p^3$ (namely, the half line $q_6 q_4$ in Fig. \[fig5\]). Since $\frac{y_{p^2} + y_{p^3}}{2} > y_{p^2}$, $\frac{x_{p^2} + x_{p^3}}{2} > x_{p^2}$ and $\beta \leq \alpha$ (due to Eq. ), we have $2 \beta \leq 2 \alpha$, and ${D_{\textup{upper}}}''(p^1~|~p^2) \subseteq {D_{\textup{lower}}}(p^2~|~p^3)$. In other words, for any $p \in V(p^1~|~p^2)$, $p \in {D_{\textup{lower}}}(p^2~|~p^3)$. Therefore, $2B(d_{p^1p} + x_{p^1} - x_p) \leq 2B(d_{p^2p} + x_{p^2} - x_p) \leq 2B(d_{p^3p} + x_{p^3} - x_p)$. Thus, $V(p^1~|~p^2) \subseteq V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3)$. Since $V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3) \subseteq V(p^1~|~p^2)$, we have $V(p^1~|~p^2) = V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3)$.
**Case II**: $x_{p^2} = x_{p^1}$. Since $y_{p^2} > y_{p^1}$, Eq. implies that $x_{p^3} \geq x_{p^1} = x_{p^2}$. There are two cases depending on the $x$ coordinates of $p^2, p^3$:
- If $x_{p^3} = x_{p^2}$, then we have $x_{p^3} = x_{p^1}$ and $y_{p^3} > y_{p^2}$ since $p^2, p^3$ are different. In this case, the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^2$ is $y_{12} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}$ as shown in Case II of Section \[section3\_special\], and the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^3$ is $y_{13} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^3}}{2} > y_{12}$. Therefore, we have $V(p^1~|~p^2) = V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3)$;
- If $x_{p^3} > x_{p^2}$, then we have $x_{p^3} > x_{p^1}$ and $y_{p^3} \geq y_{p^2}$. In this case, the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^2$ is $y_{12} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}$, and the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^3$ is a hyperbola which is above the lower asymptote $y_{13} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^3}}{2} \geq y_{12}$. However, the hyperbola will not touch the line $y_{12}$. Therefore, we have $V(p^1~|~p^2) = V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3)$.
**Case III**: $x_{p^2} < x_{p^1}$. There are three cases depending on the $x$ coordinates of $p^2, p^3$:
- If $x_{p^3} > x_{p^1}$, then Eq. holds because $y_{p^3} \geq y_{p^2} > y_{p^1}$. The boundary between $p^1$ and $p^2$ is a hyperbola which is below the upper asymptote $y_{12} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}$, while the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^3$ is a hyperbola which is above the lower asymptote $y_{13} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^3}}{2} \geq y_{12}$. Since the hyperbolas will not touch the asymptotes, we have $V(p^1~|~p^2) = V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3)$;
- If $x_{p^3} = x_{p^1}$, the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^2$ is a hyperbola which is below the upper asymptote $y_{12} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}$, while the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^3$ is the line $y_{13} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^3}}{2} \geq y_{12}$. Since the hyperbola will not touch the asymptote $y_{12}$ due to $y_{p^1} < y_{p^2}$, we have $V(p^1~|~p^2) = V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3)$;
- If $x_{p^3} < x_{p^1}$, it can be shown that $V(p^1~|~p^2) = V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3)$ by an argument similar to the one used in Case I.
**(Only if part)** We prove it via contradiction. Suppose the conditions that $y_{p^3} \geq y_{p^2}$ and $(y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}) \times (x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}) \leq (x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}) \times (y_{p^2} - y_{p^1})$ do not hold. Then there are three possibilities: 1) $y_{p^3} < y_{p^1}$, 2) $y_{p^1} \leq y_{p^3} < y_{p^2}$, and 3) $y_{p^3} \geq y_{p^2}$ but $(y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}) \times (x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}) > (x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}) \times (y_{p^2} - y_{p^1})$.
**Case 1)**: $y_{p^3} < y_{p^1}$. In this case, $y_{p^3} < y_{p^1} < y_{p^2}$. The boundary between $p^1$ and $p^3$ is a hyperbola which is below the upper asymptote $y_{13} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^3}}{2} < y_{p^1}$. Since $y_{p^2} > y_{p^1}$, the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^2$ is a hyperbola which is above the lower asymptote $y_{12} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2} > y_{p^1}$, and lies strictly above the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^3$. Therefore, we must have $V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3) \subset V(p^1~|~p^2)$. A contradiction to $p^2 \succ p^3$.
**Case 2)**: $y_{p^1} \leq y_{p^3} < y_{p^2}$. Then there are two cases depending on the $x$ coordinates of $p^1, p^2$:
- $x_{p^2} \geq x_{p^1}$. In this case, the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^2$ lies on/above the asymptote $y_{12} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}$. If $x_{p^3} \geq x_{p^1}$ (or $x_{p^3} < x_{p^1}$), the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^3$ lies on/above (or below) the asymptote $y_{13} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^3}}{2} < y_{12}$ and can be arbitrarily close to the asymptote. Therefore, we must have $V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3) \subset V(p^1~|~p^2)$. A contradiction.
- $x_{p^2} < x_{p^1}$. In this case, the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^2$ lies below the asymptote $y_{12} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}$ and can be arbitrarily close to the asymptote. If $x_{p^3} \geq x_{p^1}$ (or $x_{p^3} < x_{p^1}$), the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^3$ lies on/above (or below) the asymptote $y_{13} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^3}}{2} < y_{12}$ and can be arbitrarily close to the asymptote. Therefore, we must have $V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3) \subset V(p^1~|~p^2)$. A contradiction.
**Case 3)**: $y_{p^3} \geq y_{p^2}$ but $(y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}) \times (x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}) > (x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}) \times (y_{p^2} - y_{p^1})$. There are also two cases depending on the $x$ coordinates of $p^1, p^2$:
- $x_{p^2} \geq x_{p^1}$. The boundary between $p^1$ and $p^2$ lies on/above the asymptote $y_{12} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^2}}{2}$, and can be arbitrarily close to the asymptote. If $x_{p^3} < x_{p^1}$, the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^3$ lies below the asymptote $y_{13} = \frac{y_{p^1} + y_{p^3}}{2} \geq y_{12}$ and can be arbitrarily close to the asymptote. Therefore, we must have $V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3) \subset V(p^1~|~p^2)$. A contradiction. If $x_{p^3} \geq x_{p^1}$, the upper asymptote of the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^3$ has the slope $\tan 2 \beta$ with $\beta = \arctan \frac{y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}} \geq 0$. The upper asymptote of the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^2$ has the slope $\tan 2 \alpha$ with $\alpha = \arctan \frac{y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}} \geq 0$. If $(y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}) \times (x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}) > (x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}) \times (y_{p^2} - y_{p^1})$, we have $\beta > \alpha$, which implies that $2 \beta > 2 \alpha$. Therefore, part of the boundary (corresponding to the upper asymptote) between $p^1$ and $p^3$ must strictly refine $V(p^1|p^2)$, i.e., $V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3) \subset V(p^1~|~p^2)$. A contradiction.
- $x_{p^2} < x_{p^1}$. Since $y_{p^3} \geq y_{p^2} > y_{p^1}$, $(y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}) \times (x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}) > (x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}) \times (y_{p^2} - y_{p^1})$ implies that $x_{p^3} < x_{p^1}$. The lower asymptote of the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^3$ has the slope $\tan 2 \beta$ with $\beta = \arctan \frac{y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}} \leq 0$. The lower asymptote of the boundary between $p^1$ and $p^2$ has the slope $\tan 2 \alpha$ with $\alpha = \arctan \frac{y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}} \leq 0$. If $(y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}) \times (x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}) > (x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}) \times (y_{p^2} - y_{p^1})$, we have $\beta > \alpha$, i.e., $0 \leq -\beta < -\alpha$, which implies that $0 \leq -2 \beta <- 2 \alpha$. Therefore, part of the boundary (corresponding to the lower asymptote) between $p^1$ and $p^3$ must strictly refine $V(p^1|p^2)$, i.e., $V(p^1~|~p^2, p^3) \subset V(p^1~|~p^2)$. A contradiction.
![Points $\{p^1, p^2\}$ satisfying $x_{p^1} < x_{p^2}$ and $y_{p^1} < y_{p^2}$. The red dashed lines are the boundaries.[]{data-label="fig5"}](proof.eps)
**Proof of Proposition \[prop:antisymmetry\]** If $p^2$ is the same as $p^3$, the result holds trivially. In the following proof, we consider the case in which $p^2$ and $p^3$ are different.
If $y_{p^1} < y_{p^2}$ (namely, Scenario A in Section \[section5\_scenario\]), $p^2 \succ p^3$ implies that $y_{p^3} \geq y_{p^2}$, and $(y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}) \times (x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}) \leq (x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}) \times (y_{p^2} - y_{p^1})$. Since $y_{p^3} \geq y_{p^2} > y_{p^1}$, $p^3 \succ p^2$ implies that $y_{p^2} \geq y_{p^3}$, and $(y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}) \times (x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}) \leq (x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}) \times (y_{p^3} - y_{p^1})$. From $y_{p^3} \geq y_{p^2}$ and $y_{p^2} \geq y_{p^3}$, we have $y_{p^2} = y_{p^3} > y_{p^1}$. Therefore, $(y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}) \times (x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}) \leq (x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}) \times (y_{p^2} - y_{p^1})$ implies $x_{p^2} \leq x_{p^3}$, and $(y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}) \times (x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}) \leq (x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}) \times (y_{p^3} - y_{p^1})$ implies $x_{p^3} \leq x_{p^2}$. Thus, $x_{p^2} = x_{p^3}$. In summary, $p^2 = p^3$. Similarly, we can show that $p^2 = p^3$ for the case $y_{p^1} > y_{p^2}$ (namely, Scenario B in Section \[section5\_scenario\]).
If $y_{p^1} = y_{p^2}$ and $x_{p^1} < x_{p^2}$ (namely, Scenario D in Section \[section5\_scenario\]), $p^2 \succ p^3$ implies that $y_{p^3} = y_{p^2}$ and $x_{p^3} \geq x_{p^2}$. Since $y_{p^3} = y_{p^1}$ and $x_{p^3} \geq x_{p^2} > x_{p^1}$, $p^3 \succ p^2$ implies that $y_{p^2} = y_{p^3}$ and $x_{p^2} \geq x_{p^3}$. Therefore, $p^2 = p^3$.\
**Proof of Theorem \[prop:Voronoi\_neighbor\]** Assumption \[assumption\] guarantees that $V(p^1)$ is nonempty. Let $p^i \in \mathcal{N}_V(p^1)$ for $i \in \{2, 3, ..., n\}$, i.e., $p^i$ is a Voronoi neighbor of $p^1$. Then the intersection of the Voronoi cells of $p^1$ and $p^i$ is a curve with the set of points being $V(p^1) \cap V(p^i)$. For any $p$ which lies on the curve but is not an end point, we have $J(p^1, p) = J(p^i, p)$, and $J(p^1, p) < J(p^j, p)$ for any $j \in \{2, 3, ..., n\} \setminus \{i\}$.
Suppose $p^i \notin \mathcal{N}_G(p^1)$. Then there exists some $p^k$ for $k \in \{2, 3, ..., n\} \setminus \{i\}$ such that $p^i$ is dominated by $p^k$. Since $p^k \succ p^i$, $V(p^1|p^k) = V(p^1|p^k, p^i)$. Since for the $p$ chosen previously $p \in V(p^1) \subseteq V(p^1 | p^k)$, we have $J(p^1, p) \leq J(p^k, p)$. Since $V(p^1|p^k) = V(p^1|p^k, p^i)$, $J(p^1, p) \leq J(p^k, p)$ implies that $J(p^1, p) \leq J(p^i, p)$. Therefore, we must have $J(p^1, p) \leq J(p^k, p) \leq J(p^i, p)$ (this can be proved via contradiction). Because $J(p^1, p) = J(p^i, p)$, we have $J(p^1, p) = J(p^k, p)$. This contradicts with $J(p^1, p) < J(p^k, p)$ due to $J(p^1, p) < J(p^j, p)$ for any $j \in \{2, 3, ..., n\} \setminus \{i\}$. Therefore, $\mathcal{N}_V(p^1) \subseteq \mathcal{N}_G(p^1)$.\
**Proof of Proposition \[prop:transitivity\]** If any pair of points in $p^2, p^3, p^4$ is the same, or all three points are the same, the result holds trivially. In the following proof, we consider the case in which all three points are distinct.
Depending on the relative position of $p^1$ and $p^2$, there are four scenarios as discussed in Section \[section5\_scenario\]:
**Scenario A** In this case, $y_{p^1} < y_{p^2}$. Since $p^2 \succ p^3$ and $p^3 \succ p^4$, we have $y_{p^1} < y_{p^2} \leq y_{p^3} \leq y_{p^4}$. To show $p^2 \succ p^4$, we only need to prove that $$(y_{p^4} - y_{p^1}) \times (x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}) \leq (x_{p^4} - x_{p^1}) \times (y_{p^2} - y_{p^1})~. \label{eq:p4p2}$$
If $x_{p^1} < x_{p^2}$, $p^2 \succ p^3$ implies that $x_{p^1} < x_{p^3}$ as argued in the proof of Theorem \[case\_1\], and $\frac{y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}} \leq \frac{y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}}$; $p^3 \succ p^4$ implies that $x_{p^1} < x_{p^4}$, and $\frac{y_{p^4} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^4} - x_{p^1}} \leq \frac{y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}}$. Therefore, we have $\frac{y_{p^4} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^4} - x_{p^1}} \leq \frac{y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}}$, which implies Eq. .
If $x_{p^1} = x_{p^2}$, $x_{p^3} \geq x_{p^2} = x_{p^1}$. If $x_{p^3} = x_{p^1}$, we must have $x_{p^4} \geq x_{p^1}$ since $p^3 \succ p^4$. Then the left hand side of Eq. is $0$ while the right hand side of Eq. is nonnegative because $x_{p^4} \geq x_{p^1}$ and $y_{p^2} > y_{p^1}$. Therefore, Eq. holds. If $x_{p^3} > x_{p^1}$, then we have $x_{p^4} > x_{p^1}$. Then Eq. holds too.
If $x_{p^1} > x_{p^2}$, there are three cases depending on the $x$ coordinates of $p^1, p^3$. i) If $x_{p^3} > x_{p^1}$, then we have $x_{p^4} > x_{p^1}$. Then the left hand side of Eq. is negative while the right hand side of Eq. is positive because $x_{p^4} > x_{p^1}$ and $y_{p^2} > y_{p^1}$. Therefore, Eq. holds. ii) If $x_{p^3} = x_{p^1}$, we must have $x_{p^4} \geq x_{p^1}$. Then Eq. holds. iii) If $x_{p^3} < x_{p^1}$ and $x_{p^4} \geq x_{p^1}$, then Eq. holds. If $x_{p^3} < x_{p^1}$ and $x_{p^4} < x_{p^1}$, we have $\frac{y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}} \leq \frac{y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}}$ and $\frac{y_{p^4} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^4} - x_{p^1}} \leq \frac{y_{p^3} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^3} - x_{p^1}}$. Therefore, we have $\frac{y_{p^4} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^4} - x_{p^1}} \leq \frac{y_{p^2} - y_{p^1}}{x_{p^2} - x_{p^1}}$, which implies Eq. holds.
**Scenario B** In this case, $y_{p^1} > y_{p^2}$. It can be proved in a way similar to the one used for Scenario A.
**Scenario C** In this case, $y_{p^1} = y_{p^2}$ and $x_{p^1} > x_{p^2}$. If $y_{p^2} \neq y_{p^3}$, then $y_{p^3} \neq y_{p^1}$ and the relative position of $p^1$ and $p^3$ belongs to either Scenario A or B. However, in both cases, $p^3 \succ p^4$ implies that $y_{p^4} \neq y_{p^1}$, i.e., $y_{p^4} \neq y_{p^2}$. Then $p^2 \succ p^4$. If $y_{p^2} = y_{p^3}$ and $x_{p^3} < x_{p^1}$, there are two cases:
- $y_{p^3} \neq y_{p^4}$. Then $y_{p^4} \neq y_{p^2}$. Therefore, $p^2 \succ p^4$.
- $y_{p^3} = y_{p^4}$ and $x_{p^4} < x_{p^1}$. Then we have $y_{p^2} = y_{p^4}$. Therefore, $p^2 \succ p^4$.
**Scenario D** In this case, $y_{p^1} = y_{p^2}$ and $x_{p^1} < x_{p^2}$. We have $y_{p^3} = y_{p^2}$ and $x_{p^3} \geq x_{p^2}$ due to $p^2 \succ p^3$, and $y_{p^4} = y_{p^3}$ and $x_{p^4} \geq x_{p^3}$ due to $p^3 \succ p^4$. Therefore, $p^2 \succ p^4$.\
**Proof of Proposition \[prop:acyclic\]** We show the result via contradiction. Suppose there is a cycle $p^i \succ p^{i+1} \succ p^{i+2} ...\succ p^{i+j} \succ p^i$ in the dominance graph where all points are in $\mathds{P}$. Then we have $p^i \succ p^{i+j}$ by repeatedly applying the transitivity property (i.e., Proposition \[prop:transitivity\]). Since we also have $p^{i+j} \succ p^i$, $p^i = p^{i+j}$ due to the antisymmetry property (i.e., Proposition \[prop:antisymmetry\]). Now the cycle becomes $p^i \succ p^{i+1} \succ p^{i+2} ...\succ p^{i+j-1} \succ p^i$. By repeatedly applying the above analysis, we can show that $p^{i+j-1} = p^{i+j-2} = ... = p^{i+1} = p^i$. Since the points are assumed to be different from each other, a contradiction.
[^1]: Note that the running time for the upper bound based approach does not include the time necessary to compute $\mathcal{N}_{G}(p^1)$, which is ignorable when the total number of points is large.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: '[In this paper we introduce the notion of *deformation cohomology* for singular foliations and related objects (namely integrable differential forms and Nambu structures), and study it in the local case, i.e., in the neighborhood of a point. ]{}'
address: |
Institut de Mathématiques de Toulouse, UMR 5219 CNRS, Université Toulouse III\
E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]
author:
- Philippe Monnier and Nguyen Tien Zung
title: 'Deformation of singular foliations, 1: Local deformation cohomology'
---
Introduction
============
This is the first in our series of papers on the problem of deformations of singular foliations in the sense of Stefan-Sussmann [@Stefan-Foliation1974; @Sussmann-Foliation1973]. In this paper we will concentrate on the local case, i.e., germs of singular foliations (analytic, smooth or formal), and study the deformation cohomology which governs their infinitesimal deformations. In the subsequent papers, we will discuss the global deformation cohomology, the rigidity problem of singular foliations, and so on.
In most deformation theories of objects of some given category (e.g., Lie algebras, complex structures, group actions, etc.), one can define a *cohomology group* which controls *infinitesimal deformations*, and other higher cohomology groups which may play the role of obstructions to integrating these infinitesimal deformations into true deformations. One wants to do the same thing for singular foliations. In order to do that, one first needs to “algebraize” or “tensorize” them, turn them into objects which can be manipulated with algebraic operations. Our approach to algebraization of singular foliations is via *integrable differentiel forms* and their dual multi-vector fields, called *Nambu structures* (see, e.g., [@DuZu-PoissonBook2005 Chapter 6] and [@MiZu-Commuting2014]).
We note that some authors, including Androulidalik, Skandalis and Zambon, consider locally finitely-generated involutive modules of vector fields and Lie algebroids as proxies for singular foliations, and obtain many interesting results with this approach, see, e.g., [@AndrouZambon-Foliations2016; @AndrouSkandalis-Holonomy2009]. Our approach is different from theirs. We believe that our approach is more directly related to the problem of deformations of singular foliations of a given dimension, and that the two approaches are complementary to each other and can be combined for the study of various problems concerning singular foliations.
We refer to [@DuZu-PoissonBook2005 Section 1.5 and Chapter 6] for a brief introduction to singular foliations and some basic results, including the *Stefan-Sussmann theorem* [@Stefan-Foliation1974; @Sussmann-Foliation1973], which says that a *distribution* ${\mathcal{D}}$ on a manifold $M$ generated by a family ${\mathcal{C}}$ of (smooth, analytic or formal) vector fields on $M$ (i.e., at every point $x \in M$ the corresponding tangent subspace ${\mathcal{D}}_x$ of ${\mathcal{D}}$ is spanned by the vectors $\{ X(x), X\in {\mathcal{C}}\}$) is *integrable*, i.e., is the *tangent distribution* of a singular foliation à la Stefan-Sussmann, if and only if ${\mathcal{D}}$ is invariant with respect to ${\mathcal{C}}$, i.e. the local flow of every element of ${\mathcal{C}}$ preserves ${\mathcal{D}}$.
In the case when $\dim {\mathcal{D}}_x$ does not depend on $x$ then ${\mathcal{D}}$ is called a *regular distribution*, and in this case its integrability condition (i.e., ${\mathcal{D}}$ is the tangent distribution of a *regular foliation*) is equivalent to the Frobenius *involutivity condition*: the Lie bracket of any two vector fields tangent to ${\mathcal{D}}$ is again tangent to ${\mathcal{D}}$. In the singular case (when $\dim {\mathcal{D}}_x$ is not constant but drops on a subset called the *singular set*), the involutivity condition is still necessary but not sufficient. A simple counter example is the distribution ${\mathcal{D}}$ on ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ given by [${\mathcal{D}}_{(x,y)} = Span(\partial/\partial x)$ if $x \leq 0$ and ${\mathcal{D}}_{(x,y)} =
Span(\partial/\partial x, \partial/ \partial y)$ if $x > 0$]{}, which is involutive but not integrable. However, according to a theorem of Hermann [@Hermann-Foliation1963], for locally *finitely generated* disributions (i.e., the family ${\mathcal{C}}$ of vector fields which generates ${\mathcal{D}}$ can be chosen to be finite, at least locally) the involutivity condition is sufficient for integrability. To avoid pathologies, we will be mainly interested in singular foliations whose tangent distributions are locally finitely generated.
For regular foliations, the problem of stability (rigidity) was studied by Reeb [@Reeb-Foliation1952] and Thurston [@Thurston-Foliation1974], among other authors, and a deformation cohomology (which governs infinitesimal deformations) was defined by Heitsch [@Heitsch-Cohomology1975]. We want to extend these theories of stability and infinitesimal deformations of foliations to the case of singular foliations. The motivation is clear: similarly to the fact that most functions in practice admit singular points, most foliations that we encounter (e.g., in geometric control theory, sub-Riemannian geometry, dynamical systems, symplectic and Poisson geometry, algebraic geometry, etc.) are in fact *singular*, and many interesting things (including global invariants) are localized at singularities, so one should include singularities in the study.
Tensorization of singular foliations
====================================
Integrable differential forms and Nambu structures
--------------------------------------------------
Let us recall that a differential $p$-form $\omega$ on a manifold $M^n$ ($0 \leq q \leq n$) is called ***integrable*** if it satisfies the following two conditions for any $(p-1)$-vector field $A$: $$\label{eqn:integrable}
1)\ \omega \wedge i_A \omega = 0 \quad \text{and} \quad
2)\
d\omega \wedge i_A \omega = 0.$$ In particular, when $p=1$ then the first condition is trivial ($\omega \wedge \omega = 0$ for any 1-form $\omega$), and the second condition is the usual integrability condition for a differential 1-form $\omega \wedge d\omega = 0$. If $\omega$ is an integrable $p$-form and $z$ is a regular point of $\omega$, i.e. $\omega (z) \neq 0$, then in a neighborhood of $z$ there is a local coordinate system $(x_1,\hdots,x_n)$ in which $$\omega = f dx_1 \wedge \hdots \wedge dx_{p},$$ where $f$ is some function such that $f(z) \neq 0$ . The kernel of an integrable $p$-form $\omega$ near a point $z$ where $\omega(z) \neq 0$ is an involutive distribution of corank $p$ which gives a codimension $p$ foliation outside singular points.
A *Nambu structure* of order $q$ on a manifold $M$ is a $p$-vector field $\Lambda$ on $M$ such that its contraction $$\omega = i_\Lambda \Omega$$ with a (local) volume form $\Omega$ is a (local) differential $p$-form (where $p+q = n$ is the dimension of the manifold). An equivalent condition (for smooth or analytic) Nambu structures is as follows: A (smooth or analytic) $q$-vector field $\Lambda$ is a Nambu structure if and only if near every point $x$ such that $\Lambda(x) \neq 0$ there is a local coordinate system $(x_1,\dots,x_n)$ such that $$\label{eqn:Nambu}
\Lambda = f \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{p+1}}\wedge\ldots\wedge\frac{\partial}{\partial x_n}\,.$$
In fact, by a change of coordinates, one can put $f=1$ in Formula . This formula cannot be used in the singular formal case, so in order to define a formal singular Nambu structure one has to use Condition (applied to the dual differential form) instead (see, e.g.,[@DuZu-PoissonBook2005]).
From singular foliations to Nambu structures and back
-----------------------------------------------------
Given a singular foliation ${\mathcal F}$, we will say that a Nambu structure $\Lambda$ is a ***tangent Nambu structure*** to a ${\mathcal F}$ if $$\mathrm{codim}(S({\mathcal{F}})\setminus S(\Lambda)) \geq 2$$ and near each point $x \notin S(\Lambda)\cup S({\mathcal{F}})$ there is a local coordinate system in which $\Lambda = \partial/\partial x_1 \wedge \hdots \wedge \partial/\partial x_p$ and ${\mathcal F}$ is generated by $\partial/\partial x_1,\dots, \partial/\partial x_p$. Here $S(\Lambda)$ denotes the singular set of $\Lambda$, i.e. the set of points where $\Lambda$ vanishes, and $S({\mathcal{F}})$ denotes the set of singular points of ${\mathcal F}$, i.e., the set of points where the dimension of the tangent distribution drops. If, moreover, $\mathrm{codim}\big(S(\Lambda)\setminus S({\mathcal{F}})\big)\geq 2$, and $\Lambda$ is without multiplicity in the sense that $\Lambda$ can’t be written as $\Lambda=f^2\Lambda',$ where $f$ is a function which vanishes at the origin, then we say that $\Lambda$ is an ***associated Nambu structure*** to ${\mathcal F}.$
The above definition works well in the analytic and formal categories, and also in the smooth category under some finiteness conditions: the local associated Nambu structure exists and is unique up to multiplication by a non-vanishing function. (See [@MiZu-Commuting2014] for the details). It can be constructed as follows. Take $p$ local vector fields $X_1,\hdots, X_p$ which are tangent to $\mathcal{F}$ and which are linearly independent almost everywhere, where $p$ is the dimension of $\mathcal{F}$. Put $$\Pi=X_1\wedge\hdots\wedge X_q,$$ then factorize $\Pi$ as $\Pi=h\Lambda$, where $\mathrm{codim}S(\Lambda)\geq 2.$ If $\mathrm{codim}S({\mathcal{F}})\geq 2$ then $\Lambda$ is an associated Nambu structure of ${\mathcal{F}}$. If $\mathrm{codim}S({\mathcal{F}})=1$, then we find a reduced function $s$ such that $S({\mathcal{F}})=\{s=0\}$, and $s\Lambda$ is an associated Nambu structure of ${\mathcal{F}}$.
For example, let ${\mathcal{F}}$ be the codimension-1 quadric foliation on $\mathbb{R}^3$ or $\mathbb{C}^3$ with leaves $\{x^2+y^2+z^2=const\}$. Take two tangent vector fields $X=y\frac{\partial}{\partial z}-z\frac{\partial}{\partial y}$, $Y=z\frac{\partial}{\partial x}-x\frac{\partial}{\partial z}$, and put $\Pi=X\wedge Y=z\left(x\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\wedge\frac{\partial}{\partial z}+ y\frac{\partial}{\partial z}\wedge\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+z\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\wedge\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\right).$ Then $\Lambda=\dfrac{\Pi}{z}$ is an associated Nambu structure of ${\mathcal{F}}$.
Conversely, given a Nambu structure $\Lambda$, consider the set (or the sheaf), denoted by $CIT(\Lambda)$, of all (local) ***conformally invariant tangent*** (CIT) vector fields of $\Lambda$, i.e. vector fields $X$ satisfying $$X\wedge\Lambda=0 \quad \text{and} \quad
{\mathcal{L}}_X\Lambda=g\Lambda \;\text{ for some function } g.$$ Then one checks easily that $CIT(\Lambda)$ generates an integrable distribution. The corresponding foliation is denoted by ${\mathcal F}_\Lambda$ and called the ***associated foliation*** of $\Lambda$. If $f$ is a non-vanishing function then ${\mathcal F}_{f\Lambda} ={\mathcal F}_\Lambda$.
The above forward and backward functors give an “almost one to one” correspondence between local singular foliations and local Nambu structures (up to multiplication by non-vanishing functions) under some mild conditions on the singularities. (See [@MiZu-Commuting2014] for precise statements in the holomorphic case). This justifies our use of Nambu structures as a proxy for singular foliations.
Nambu structures will allow us to study deformations of singular foliations. They also allow us to talk about (quasi)homogeneous singular foliations (i.e., foliations associated to linear and/or (quasi)homogeneous Nambu structures in some coordinate system), and study the local normalization problem near a singular point. See [@Zung-Nambu2013] and references therein for recent results on the problem of local linearization of singular foliations and of Nambu structures. Many operations with singular foliations, e.g., pull-back and reduction, can also be done naturally via associated Nambu structures and integrable differential forms.
Globally, on a manifold, we have a sheaf of local tangent Nambu structures, which is a locally free module of rank one over the ring of functions. In other words, this sheaf is a line bundle, which is nothing but the *anti-canonical line bundle* of the foliation. Since this line bundle may be twisted and does not necessarily admit a global section, we do not necessarily have a global Nambu structure associated to a singular foliation, only local ones. This will be discussed in more detail in our subsequent paper.
Infinitesimal deformations and deformation cohomologies
=======================================================
Let $\omega$ be an integrable differential $q$-form on a $n$ dimensional manifold $M$. By an ***infinitesimal deformation*** of $\omega$ we mean a $q$-form $\eta$ such that $\omega+{\varepsilon}\eta$ is *integrable modulo ${\varepsilon}^2$*, where ${\varepsilon}$ is a formal infinitesimal parameter. In other words, $$(\omega+ {\varepsilon}\eta) \wedge i_A (\omega+{\varepsilon}\eta) \equiv 0 \pmod {{\varepsilon}^2}\quad \text{and} \quad
d(\omega+ {\varepsilon}\eta) \wedge i_A (\omega+{\varepsilon}\eta) \equiv 0 \pmod {{\varepsilon}^2}$$ for any $(q-1)$-vector field $A$. Since $\omega$ is integrable, the above conditions are equivalent to the following family of linear equations on $\eta$ and $d\eta$: $$i_A\omega\wedge\eta+i_A\eta\wedge\omega=0 \quad
\text{and} \quad i_A\omega\wedge d\eta+i_A\eta\wedge d\omega=0, \;\forall (q-1)\text{-vector fields }A.$$
If $\eta={\mathcal{L}}_X\omega = i_X d \omega + di_X\omega$, where $X$ is a vector field, then $\eta$ is called a ***trivial deformation*** of $\omega$ (because it is obtained by the pull-back of $\omega$ with respect to the infinitesimal flow of $X$, i.e. $\omega$ is sent to $\omega + \varepsilon \eta$ modulo ${\varepsilon}^2$ by such a flow). Denote by ${\mathcal Z}(\omega)$ the set of infinitesimal deformations of $\omega$, and by ${\mathcal{B}}(\omega)$ the set of trivial deformations of $\omega$. It is clear that ${\mathcal{B}}(\omega)$ is a vector subspace of ${\mathcal Z}(\omega)$, and we can define the following quotient vector space, which we denote by $DH (\omega)$ and call the ***deformation cohomology*** of $\omega$: $$DH (\omega)=\frac{{\mathcal Z}(\omega)}{{\mathcal{B}}(\omega)}.$$
Suppose that $\Omega$ is a volume form and $\Lambda$ is a Nambu structure of degree $q$ on $M$. The set of ***infinitesimal deformations*** ${\mathcal Z}(\Lambda)$ of $\Lambda$ consists of all $q$-vector fields $\Pi$ such that $i_{\Pi}\Omega$ is a infinitesimal deformation of $i_{\Lambda}\Omega$. In other words, $\Pi\in{\mathcal Z}(\Lambda)$ means that $\Lambda+{\varepsilon}\Pi$ is a Nambu structure modulo ${\varepsilon}^2$. If $\Pi={\mathcal{L}}_{X}\Lambda$ for some vector field $X$, then $\Pi$ is called a trivial deformation of $\Lambda$. We denote by ${\mathcal{B}}(\Lambda)$ the set of trivial deformations of $\Lambda$. The ***deformation cohomology*** $DH(\Lambda)$ of $\Lambda$ is defined as follows: $$DH(\Lambda)=\frac{{\mathcal Z}(\Lambda)}{{\mathcal{B}}(\Lambda)}.$$
The definition of ${\mathcal Z}(\Lambda)$ does not depend on the volume form $\Omega$. Usually, $DH(\omega)$ is an infinite dimensional vector space even when $\omega$ is regular. For example, if $\omega=dx_1\wedge\ldots\wedge dx_p$, with $1\leq p\leq n-1$, then $\dim DH(\omega)=+\infty$ because when a multiform is disturbed it can lose some properties (e.g. the closeness). Here, for any function $f$, the $p$-form $f\omega$ is integrable but not necessarily closed so, does not belong to ${\mathcal{B}}(\omega)$. Nevertheless, we have the following proposition.
If $\displaystyle \Lambda=\partial/\partial x_1 \wedge \hdots \wedge \partial/\partial x_q$ in ${\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n$, then $DH(\Lambda)=\{0\}$.
Consider an infinitesimal deformation $\Lambda + \varepsilon\Pi$ of $\Lambda$. Let us first remark that if $\Pi = f \partial/\partial x_1 \wedge \hdots \wedge \partial/\partial x_q$ for some function $f$ then, we have $\Pi = {\mathcal{L}}_{X}\Lambda$ where $X=\big(\int f dx_1\big)\partial/\partial x_1$.
Therefore, we can assume that in the deformation $\Lambda + \varepsilon\Pi$, the tensor $\Pi$ does not contain a term of type $f\Lambda$. Consider for $i=1,\hdots, q$ the Hamiltonian vector fields $$X_i =(-1)^{p-i} i_{ dx_1\wedge\hdots
\widehat{dx_i} \hdots\wedge dx_q } \big( \Lambda + \varepsilon\Pi \big)\,.$$
We have $$X_i = \partial/\partial x_i + \varepsilon \sum_{k=q+1}^n f_k^{(i)} \partial/\partial x_k\,.$$ Since $\Lambda + \varepsilon\Pi$ is a Nambu tensor modulo $\varepsilon^2$ we have $X_1\wedge\hdots\wedge X_q= \Lambda + \varepsilon\Pi \, (\mathrm{mod}\, \varepsilon^2)$ and $\displaystyle [X_i , X_j]=0 \, (\mathrm{mod}\, \varepsilon^2)$.
This last relation then gives $\displaystyle \frac{\partial f_k^{(i)}}{\partial x_j} = \frac{\partial f_k^{(j)}}{\partial x_i}$ for any $i\neq j$ and $k>q$. Therefore, by Poincaré’s Lemma, there exist functions $F_k$ (for any $k>q$) such that $\displaystyle f_k^{(i)}= \frac{\partial F_k}{\partial x_i}$ for every $i=1,\hdots, q$ and $k>q$.
Now, we put $\displaystyle X=-\sum_{k=q+1}^n F_k \partial/\partial x_k$. We then have $$X_1\wedge\hdots\wedge X_q = \Lambda + \varepsilon \mathcal{L}_X\Lambda \, (\mathrm{mod}\, \varepsilon^2)$$ and the flow $\phi_X^\varepsilon$ sends $\Lambda$ to $\Lambda + \varepsilon \Pi \, (\mathrm{mod}\, \varepsilon^2)$.
Deformation cohomology of singular foliations
---------------------------------------------
Let $\Lambda$ be a (germ of a) local (smooth, analytic, or formal) Nambu structure of degree $q$ near the origin in ${\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n$ , and ${\mathcal F}_\Lambda$ be the foliation generated by $\Lambda$. The set ${\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal F}_\Lambda)$ of trivial deformations of ${\mathcal F}_\Lambda$ consists of all (smooth, analyti, or formal) germs of $q$-vector fields $\Pi$ which can be written as $$\Pi={\mathcal{L}}_X\Lambda+f\Lambda$$ where $X$ is local a vector field and $f$ is a local function neqr the origin in ${\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n$. The ***deformation cohomology*** $DH({\mathcal F}_\Lambda)$ of the foliation ${\mathcal F}_\Lambda$ is defined as follows: $$DH({\mathcal F}_\Lambda)=\frac{{\mathcal Z}(\Lambda)}{{\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal F}_\Lambda)}.$$ Similarly, if ${\mathcal F}_\omega$ is generated by a local integrable $p$-form $\omega$, then the set of trivial deformations ${\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal F}_\omega)$ consists of all $p$-forms of the type ${\mathcal{L}}_X\omega+f\omega$, where $X$ denotes a local vector field and $f$ denotes a local function. The ***deformation cohomology*** of ${\mathcal F}_\omega$ can then be defined as follows: $$DH({\mathcal F}_\omega)=\frac{{\mathcal Z}(\omega)}{{\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal F}_\omega)}.$$ The following lemma, whose proof is straightforward, says that the cohomology of singular foliations doesn’t depend on the choice of its associated Nambu structures or integrable forms:
Let $\Lambda$ be a (local or global) Nambu structure on a manifold. Suppose that $\Omega$ is a (local or global) volume form and $u$ is an invertible function on the manifold. If $\omega=i_\Lambda\Omega$ then $$DH({\mathcal F}_\Lambda) \cong DH({\mathcal F}_\omega)\quad \text{and} \quad DH({\mathcal F}_\Lambda) \cong DH({\mathcal F}_{u\Lambda}).$$ \[lem:isomfonctionpres\]
Global case
-----------
If $\Lambda$ is a Nambu structure defined on a manifold $M$, then the cohomology deformation of $\Lambda$ is defined similarly to the local case with $\Lambda$. In the case of foliations, we define the cohomology deformation as follows: suppose that $(U_i)_{i\in I}$ is a atlas of $M$ and $\Lambda_i$ is a Nambu structure defined on $U_i$ such that $\Lambda_i=u_{ij}\Lambda_j$ on $U_i\cap U_j$, where $u_{ij}$ is invertible. Then, the family $(\Lambda_i)$ define a foliation ${\mathcal F}_\Lambda$ on $M$. An *infinitesimal deformation* of ${\mathcal F}$ is a family $(\Pi_i)$ such that $\Pi_i\in{\mathcal Z}(\Lambda_i)$ and on $U_i\cap U_j$ we have $$\Pi_i=u_{ij}\Pi_j+g_{ij}\Lambda_j,$$ for some function $g_{ij}$. $(\Pi_i)$ is *trivial* if and only if there is a global vector field $X$ and a family of function $(h_i)$ such that $$\label{eq3.2}
\Pi_i={\mathcal{L}}_X\Lambda_i+h_i\Lambda_i.$$ The set of infinitesimal deformations and trivial deformations is denoted by ${\mathcal Z}({\mathcal F}_\Lambda)$ and ${\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal F}_\Lambda)$ respectively. The deformation cohomology of ${\mathcal F}$ is defined similarly:
$$DH({\mathcal F}_\Lambda)=\frac{{\mathcal Z}({\mathcal F}_\Lambda)}{{\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal F}_\Lambda)}.$$
Top order with nondegenerate singularity
----------------------------------------
Now if we allow a top order Nambu structure $\Lambda$ to have nondegenerate singularities, i.e. $S(\Lambda)$ consists of a finite disjoint compact $(n-1)$-submanifolds. Locally near singular points, $\Lambda$ is written as $$\Lambda=x_1\frac{\partial}{\partial x_1}\wedge\ldots\wedge\frac{\partial}{\partial x_n}.$$ The classification of these structure is done by Martinez Torres [@Marinez-TopOrder2004]. Beside topological and orientation invariants, such Nambu structures are classified by the following numerical invariants
- Regularized Liouville volume of the manifold and
- $(n-1)$-dimensional volume of each singular leaf which is induced by $\Lambda$.
We have the following result about deformation cohomology which is consistent to the classification of and D. Martinez Torrez [@Marinez-TopOrder2004]
Let $\Lambda$ be a Nambu structure of top order with nondegenerate singularities on an orientable compact manifold $M$. Then $\dim H_{def}({\mathcal F}_\Lambda)=0$ and $\dim H_{def}(\Lambda)=k+1$, where $k$ is the number of $(n-1)$-dimensional leaves.
Let $\Lambda_0$ be a contravariant volume form on $M$. Then $\Lambda=f\Lambda_0$ for some function $f$. It is easy to see that any $n$-multi-vector $\Pi$ is an infinitesimal deformation. Denote by $g=\frac{\Pi}{\Lambda_0}$. Then $\Pi$ is trivial if there is a global vector field $X$ such that $X(f)-g$ vanishes on the singularities $\{f=0\}$ of $\Lambda$. Locally, near any point $x\in M$, there is a such local vector field. Using partition of unity, we can easily sum up to a global vector field. This implies the trivialization of $H_{def}({\mathcal F}_\Lambda)$. Now we will determine the deformation cohomology of $\Lambda$. Let $\Pi$ be an $n$-multi-vector, then the trivialization of $H_{def}({\mathcal F}_\Lambda)$ implies that there is a vector field $X$ a function $g\in C^{\infty}(M)$ such that $${\mathcal{L}}_{X}\Lambda=\Pi+g\Lambda$$
Nambu structures of order 0 (functions)
---------------------------------------
Suppose that $\Lambda=f$ is a (smooth or analytic) function (i.e. a $0$-vector field) in a neighborhood of 0 in ${\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n$ (${\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}$ is ${\mathbb R}$ or ${\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}$).
We denote by $\mathcal{O}_n$ the vector space of germs at 0 of (smooth or analytic) functions on ${\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n$ and $\mathfrak{X}({\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n)$ the vector space of germs at 0 of (smooth, analytic) vector fields.
With the notations above, we have $$\begin{aligned}
DH(f)&=\frac{\mathcal{O}_n}{\{X(f)\, | \, X\in\mathfrak{X}({\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n)\}}=\frac{\mathcal{O}_n}{\left\langle\frac{\partial f}{\partial_{x_1}},\ldots,\frac{\partial f}{\partial_{x_n}}\right\rangle},\\
DH({\mathcal F}_f)&=\frac{\mathcal{O}_n}{\{X(f)+ cf\, | \, X\in\mathfrak{X}({\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n),c\in\mathcal{O}_n\}}=\frac{\mathcal{O}_n}{\left\langle f,\frac{\partial f}{\partial_{x_1}},\ldots,\frac{\partial f}{\partial_{x_n}}\right\rangle}.\end{aligned}$$ In particular, $\mathrm{dim} DH(f)=\mu(f)$ (*the so-called Milnor number*) and $\mathrm{dim} DH({\mathcal F}_f)=\tau(f)$ (*the so-called Tjurina number*).\
It is obvious. The set of infinitesimal deformations of $f$ is just $\mathcal{O}_n$.
Note that in this case, if $\omega=fdx_1\wedge\hdots\wedge dx_n$ then $DH(\omega)$ is the quotient of $\Omega^n({\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n)$ by $\{ d(f\theta)\,|\, \theta\in \Omega^{n-1}({\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n) \}$ (denoting by $\Omega^{k}({\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n)$ the vector space of $k$-differential forms) which is isomorphic to the quotient of $\mathcal{O}_n$ by $\{X(f) + (div X)f\, | \, X\in\mathfrak{X}({\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n) \}$. This deformation space has been computed in [@Monnier-Nambucohomology2001] (Theorem 3.14) when $f$ is a quasihomogeneous polynomial with an isolated singularity at 0 (its dimension is the Milnor number of $f$).
Top order multi-vector fields
-----------------------------
Assume that $$\Lambda=f\frac{\partial}{\partial x_1}\wedge\ldots\wedge\frac{\partial}{\partial x_n}$$ where $f$ is either a smooth real function or a real or complex analytic function such that $f(0) = 0$ and moreover $0$ is a singular point of $f$, i.e. $df(0) = 0$.
With the same notations as above, we have $$DH({\mathcal{F}}_\Lambda) \cong \frac{\mathcal{O}_n}
{\left\langle f,\frac{\partial f}{\partial_{x_1}},\ldots,
\frac{\partial f}{\partial_{x_n}}\right\rangle}$$ and $\displaystyle \dim H_{def}({\mathcal{F}}_\Lambda)=\tau(f)$ is the Tjurina number of $f$ at 0. Moreover, $$DH(\Lambda) \cong \frac{\mathcal{O}_n} {\{X(f)-(div X)f\, | \, X\in\mathfrak{X}({\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n) \}}\,.$$
The vector space of infinitesimal deformations of $\Lambda$ is the space of (germs of) $n$-vector fields of type $f\frac{\partial}{\partial x_1}\wedge\ldots\wedge\frac{\partial}{\partial x_n}$ with $g\in \mathcal{O}_n$ which is isomorphic to $\mathcal{O}_n$. If $X$ is a vector field, we have $\displaystyle \mathcal{L}_X\Lambda = \big( X(f)-(div X)f \big) \frac{\partial}{\partial x_1}\wedge\ldots\wedge\frac{\partial}{\partial x_n}$ which gives the expression of $\mathcal{B}(\Lambda)$ and ${\mathcal{B}}({\mathcal F}_\Lambda)$. Finally, one easily checks that $\displaystyle \big\{ X(f)-(div X)f + gf \, | \, X\in\mathfrak{X}({\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n),\, g\in \mathcal{O}_n \big\}$ is $\left\langle f,\frac{\partial f}{\partial_{x_1}},\ldots,
\frac{\partial f}{\partial_{x_n}}\right\rangle$.
One can find some computations of this cohomology space in the case where $f$ is a quasihomogeneous polynomial with an isolated singularity at 0 in [@Monnier-Nambucohomology2001] and [@Monnier-Poissoncohomology2002]. More precisely, if $n=2$, it is the (germified) Poisson cohomology of the Poisson structure $\Lambda$ (see Theorems 4.9 and 4.11 in [@Monnier-Poissoncohomology2002]). If $n\geq 3$, it is related to a Nambu cohomology space associated to $\Lambda$, denoted by $H_{f,n-2}^n({\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n)$ or $H_\Lambda^2({\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n)$ in [@Monnier-Nambucohomology2001] (Corollary 3.19). In these two cases, the dimension of the deformation cohomology space is finite and depends on the Milnor number of $f$.
Decomposable integrable forms with small singularities
------------------------------------------------------
In this section, we work on ${\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^n$, in the complex analytic category. Suppose that $\Lambda$ is an analytic Nambu structure in a neighborhood of 0 in ${\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^n$ and $\omega=i_{\Lambda}\Omega$, $\Omega$ is a volume form. If $\omega$ is decomposable (i.e. $\omega=\omega_1\wedge\ldots\wedge\omega_p$) and $\mathrm{codim}(\omega)\geq 3$ then by Malgrange (see [@Mal]): $$\omega=ud{f_1}\wedge\ldots\wedge d{f_p},$$ where $u$ is a function with $u(0)\neq 0$. According to Lemma \[lem:isomfonctionpres\] we can assume that $u=1$.
Let $\omega=d{f_1}\wedge\ldots\wedge d{f_p}$ be a complex analytic integrable $p$-form and $\eta$ is an infinitesimal deformation $\omega$. If $\mathrm{codim}S(\omega)\geq p+2$ then $$\eta=a_0df_1\wedge\ldots\wedge df_p+\sum_{i=1}^p df_1\wedge\ldots\wedge df_{i-1}\wedge da_i\wedge df_{i+1}\wedge\ldots\wedge df_p.$$ \[prop:decompositiondefinfinitesimal\]
It means that $\omega + \epsilon \eta$ is also decomposable and admits first integrals modulo $\epsilon^{2}$.
By definition, $\eta$ satisfies for all $(p-1)$-vector field $A$ : $$\begin{aligned}
i_A\eta \wedge df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p + i_A(df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p)\wedge \eta & = & 0 \label{eqn:infdefdecomp1}\\
i_A(df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p) \wedge d\eta & = & 0 \label{eqn:infdefdecomp2}\end{aligned}$$ We first claim that (\[eqn:infdefdecomp2\]) is equivalent to $$df_i\wedge d\eta=0 \quad (\forall i=1,\hdots,p)\,.
\label{eqn:infdefdecomp3}$$ Indeed, if $x\notin S(\omega)$ then $df_1(x),\hdots, df_p(x)$ are independent and if $E_x$ is the subspace of $({\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^n)^\ast$ generated by the linear forms $df_1(x),\hdots, df_p(x)$, we consider constant vector fields $X_1,\hdots,X_p$ such that $\langle df_i(x),X_j(x) \rangle = \delta_{ij}$ (Kronecker symbol) for all $i$ and $j$. We put $A_i=X_1\wedge\hdots\widehat{X_i}\hdots\wedge X_{p}$ and if (\[eqn:infdefdecomp2\]) is satisfied, it gives $df_i(x)\wedge d\eta(x)=0$ for all $i=1,\hdots,p$. The converse is obvious.
Now, using successively the vanishing of the relative de Rham cohomology spaces $H^p(\Omega^\ast_{f_1,\hdots,f_k})$ for $k=1,\hdots,p$ (see [@Mal]) we get $$\eta = d\theta + c df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p\,,
\label{eqn:infdefdecomp4}$$ for some $(p-1)$-form $\theta$ and function $c$.
In the same way as above, we can show that (\[eqn:infdefdecomp1\]) implies $$df_i\wedge df_j\wedge \eta = 0\quad \forall i,j=1\hdots,p\,.$$ Consequently, in the decomposition (\[eqn:infdefdecomp4\]), $d\theta$ satisfies this condition too. For every $i$, using successively the division theorem (see for instance Proposition 1.1 in [@Mal]), one can show easily that $$df_i\wedge d\theta = df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p\wedge\beta_i$$ where $\beta_i$ is a 1-form. Now, we get $\displaystyle df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p\wedge d\beta_i = 0$ so $\beta_i$ is a 1-cocyle in the relative de Rham cohomology $H^1(\Omega^\ast_{f_1,\hdots,f_p})$, which gives $\beta_i = da_i + \sum_{j=1}^pb_{ij}df_j$ for some functions $a_i$ and $b_{ij}$. Therefore, $$df_i\wedge d\theta = df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p\wedge da_i \,.$$ It gives $$df_i\wedge \Big( d\theta + \sum_{j=1}^p(-1)^j df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge\widehat{df_j}\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p\wedge da_j\Big) = 0$$ for every $i=1,\hdots,p$, which implies, by the division theorem, $$d\theta + \sum_{j=1}^p(-1)^j df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge\widehat{df_j}\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p\wedge da_j = b df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p$$ for some function $b$. The proposition follows.
If, $\omega=df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p$, we consider $F$ the analytic map from ${\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^n$ to ${\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^p$ defined by $F=(f_1,\hdots, f_p)$. If $X\in\mathfrak{X}({\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^n)$ and $H=(H_1,\hdots,H_p)$ is an analytic map from ${\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^p$ to ${\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^p$, we denote $X.F=(X.f_1,\hdots,X.f_p)$ and $H(F)=(H_1(f_1,\hdots,f_p),\hdots,H_p(f_1,\hdots,f_p))$. Now, we put $$\mathcal{I}_{RL}(F) = \big\{X.F + H(F)\,|\, X\in\mathfrak{X}({\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^n)\,,\, H\in (\mathcal{O}_p)^p\big\}
\quad \mathrm{and}\quad \mathcal{Q}_{RL}(F) = \frac{(\mathcal{O}_n)^p}{\mathcal{I}_{RL}(F)}\,.$$ Recall that $\mathcal{Q}_{RL}(F)$ measures the stability of the germ $F$ and the versal deformations of $F$ with respect to the Right-Left-equivalence (see for instance [@Arnold]). More precisely, another germ of analytic map $G$ is RL-equivalent to $F$ if there exists a germ of analytic diffeomorphism $\phi$ of $({\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^n,0)$ and a germ of analytic diffeomorphism $\psi$ of $({\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^p,0)$ such that $G=\psi\circ F\circ\phi$.
If $\omega=df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p$ with $\mathrm{codim}S(\omega)\geq p+2$, then, with the notations above, we have $$DH({\mathcal F}_{\omega}) \simeq \mathcal{Q}_{RL}(F)\,.$$
We denote $$\begin{aligned}
A & = & \big\{ \sum_{i=1}^p df_1\wedge\ldots\wedge df_{i-1}\wedge da_i\wedge df_{i+1}\wedge\ldots\wedge df_p\,|\, a_i\in\mathcal{O}_n \big\} \\
B & = & \big\{ bdf_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p \,|\, b\in\mathcal{O}_n \big\} \\
C & = & \big\{ \sum_{i=1}^p df_1\wedge\ldots\wedge df_{i-1}\wedge dX(f_i)\wedge df_{i+1}\wedge\ldots\wedge df_p \,|\, X\in\mathfrak{X}({\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^n) \big\}\end{aligned}$$
By Proposition \[prop:decompositiondefinfinitesimal\], we have $$DH({\mathcal F}_{\omega}) = \frac{A+B}{B+C} \simeq \frac{A}{A\cap(B+C)}\,.$$
Clearly, $C$ is included in $A$. If $bdf_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p\in B$ is in $A$, i.e. of the form $\sum_{i=1}^p df_1\wedge\ldots\wedge df_{i-1}\wedge da_i\wedge df_{i+1}\wedge\ldots\wedge df_p$ then, we have $db\wedge df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p=0$ which gives $b=H(f_1,\hdots,f_p)$ where $H\in\mathcal{O}_p$ (see [@Mal], Theorem 2.1.1). Conversely, if $b=H(f_1,\hdots,f_p)$ with $H\in\mathcal{O}_p$ then $bdf_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p$ is in $A\cap B$.
Therefore, we have $$DH({\mathcal F}_{\omega}) \simeq \frac{A}{D+C}\,,$$ where $D=\big\{ H(f_1,\hdots,f_p)df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p \,|\, H\in\mathcal{O}_p \big\}$. Now, we define $\Phi : (\mathcal{O}_n)^p \longrightarrow DH({\mathcal F}_{\omega})$ such that if $G=(g_1,\hdots,g_p)$ we have $$\Phi(G)= \big[ \sum_{i=1}^p df_1\wedge\ldots\wedge df_{i-1}\wedge dg_i\wedge df_{i+1}\wedge\ldots\wedge df_p \big]\,.$$ It is a surjective linear map. It is clear that $\mathcal{I}_{RL}(F)$ is included in the kernel of $\Phi$. Moreover, if $\Phi(G)=0$ then there exist a vector field $X$ on ${\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^n$ and an analytic map $K$ from ${\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^p$ to ${\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^p$ such that $$\sum_{i=1}^p df_1\wedge\ldots\wedge df_{i-1}\wedge (dg_i - X.f_i)\wedge df_{i+1}\wedge\ldots\wedge df_p =
K(f_1,\hdots,f_p)df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p\,.$$ It implies that for every $i=1,\hdots,p$, we have $df_1\wedge\hdots\wedge df_p\wedge(dg_i - X.f_i)=0$ which gives (see [@Mal]) that $g_i=X.f_i + H_i(f_1,\hdots,f_p)$ for some $H_i\in\mathcal{O}_p$. Therefore, $G\in \mathcal{I}_{RL}(F)$.
If $\omega=df$ (Nambu structure of order $n-1$) and $\mathrm{codim}S(df)\geq 3$ then $$DH({\mathcal F}_{df}) \simeq \frac{\mathcal{O}_n}{\left\{ a_i\frac{\partial f}{\partial_{x_1}}+\ldots+a_n\frac{\partial f}{\partial_{x_n}}+h\circ f\, | \, a_i\in\mathcal{O}_n, h\in\mathcal{O}_1\right\}}$$ In particular, $\mu(f)\geq \mathrm{dim} DH({\mathcal F}_{df})\geq\tau(f)-1$.
We consider the two ideals of $\mathcal{O}_n$, $I_f=\left\langle\frac{\partial f}{\partial_{x_1}},\ldots,\frac{\partial f}{\partial_{x_n}}\right\rangle$ and $J_f=\left\langle f,\frac{\partial f}{\partial_{x_1}},\ldots,\frac{\partial f}{\partial_{x_n}}\right\rangle$, If we assume that $df(0)=0$ then $X.f$ is not a constant for any vector field $X$ so, we have $I_f\oplus{\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}\subset \mathcal{I}_{RL}(f)\subset J_f\oplus{\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}$ which gives $\mu(f)-1\geq \mathrm{dim} DH({\mathcal F}_{df})\geq\tau(f)-1$. Consequently, if 0 is an isolated singularity of $f$, i.e. $\mu(f) < \infty$, then $\mathrm{dim} DH({\mathcal F}_{df})<\infty$. If moreover, $f$ is a quasihomogeneous polynomial, then $I_f=J_f$ which gives $\mathrm{dim} DH({\mathcal F}_{df})= \mu(f)-1 = \tau(f)-1$.
If $0$ is an isolated singularity of $\omega=udf_1\wedge\ldots\wedge df_p$ then $\mathrm{dim} DH({\mathcal F}_{\omega})<\infty$
We prove that, denoting $F=(f_1,\hdots, f_p)$, the quotient $\displaystyle \frac{(\mathcal{O}_n)^p}{\big\{X.F\,|\, X\in\mathfrak{X}({\ensuremath{\mathbb C}}^n)\big\}}$ has a finite dimension. If we denote by $\mathfrak{M}$ the ideal of $\mathcal{O}_n$ formed by the functions vanishing at 0, we prove that there is a positive integer $N$ such that if $g_i\in \mathfrak{M}^N$, $i=1,\hdots ,p$, then there exists a vector field $X$ such that $X.f_i=g_i$, $i=1,\hdots ,p$. The corollary will follow naturally.
We prove it by induction on $p$. The case $p=1$ is a direct consequence of Hilbert’s Nullstellensatz Theorem. If the statement is true for $p-1$, we prove the existence of an integer $N$ such that for all $g\in \mathfrak{M}$, there is a vector field $X$ which satisfies $X.f_p=g$ and $X.f_i=0$, $i=1,\hdots ,p-1$.
We consider the ideal $\mathcal{I}$ of $\mathcal{O}_n$ formed by functions $g\in \mathfrak{M}$ such that there exists a vector field $X$ satisfying $X.f_p=g$ and $X.f_i=0$, $i=1,\hdots ,p-1$.
For $1\leq i_1 < \hdots < i_p \leq n$, denoting $$X= \sum_{j=1}^p (-1)^{p+j} det\Big( \frac{\partial(f_1,\hdots,f_{p-1})}{\partial(x_{i_1},\hdots,\widehat{x_{i_j}},\hdots, x_{i_p})} \Big) \frac{\partial}{\partial x_{i_j}}$$ we have $X.f_i=0$, $i=1,\hdots ,p-1$ and $X.f_p= det\Big( \frac{\partial(f_1,\hdots,f_{p})}{\partial(x_{i_1},\hdots, x_{i_p})} \Big)$. Therefore, the function $\displaystyle det\Big( \frac{\partial(f_1,\hdots,f_{p})}{\partial(x_{i_1},\hdots, x_{i_p})} \Big)$ is in $\mathcal{I}$.
By the hypothesis, the zero locus of $\mathcal{I}$ is $\{0\}$ and it finishes the proof, using Hilbert’s Nullstellensatz Theorem.
Vector fields and linear Nambu structures
-----------------------------------------
If $\Lambda = X$ is a vector field, the leaves of the associated foliation are integral curves of $X$. The normalization of this foliation is the same as the orbital normalization of $X$.
In the case $\Lambda=X$ is a formal vector field in $({\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}^n,O)$ whose linear part $X^{(1)}$ is non-trivial, we denote by $DH_{lin}(X^{(1)})$ the quotient of the vector space of [*linear*]{} infinitesimal deformations of $X^{(1)}$ by the vector space of [*linear*]{} trivial deformations of $X^{(1)}$.
Then by the classical Poncaré-Dulac formal normalization theory we have the following proposition.
Suppose that $X^{(1)}$ is non-resonant, then we have :
- $DH(X) = DH_{lin}(X^{(1)})$ and $\dim DH({\mathcal F}_X) = \dim DH_{lin}(X^{(1)}) -1$.
- $\dim DH_{lin}(X^{(1)}) = n^2 -d \geq n$ where $d$ is the dimension of the adjoint orbit of $X^{(1)}$ in $\mathfrak{gl}_n({\ensuremath{\mathbb K}})$.
- In the generic case (i.e. the eigenvalues of $X^{(1)}$ are distincts) we have $\dim DH_{lin}(X^{(1)}) =~n$.
By hypothesis, the vector field $X$ is formally linearizable, we then can assume that it coincides with its linear part $X^{(1)}$. Moreover, if $X^{(1)} + \varepsilon Y$ is an infinitesimal deformation of $X^{(1)}$ then $Y$ may be written as $Y=Y^{(1)} + \widetilde{Y}$ where $\widetilde{Y}$ contains only terms of degree larger or equal to 2. Since $X^{(1)}$ is non-resonant, we have $\widetilde{Y} = [X^{(1)} , \widetilde{Z}]$ for some formal vector field $\widetilde{Z}$ which contains only terms of degree larger or equal to 2. Finally, $DH(X)$ is the quotient of the vector space of linear vector fields by the vector space of vector fields of type $[X^{(1)} , Z]$ where $Z$ is a linear vector field (whose dimension is the dimension of the adjoint orbit of $X^{(1)}$). In the same way, $DH({\mathcal F}_X)$ is the quotient of the vector space of linear vector fields by the vector space of vector fields of type $[X^{(1)} , Z] + \lambda X^{(1)}$ where $Z$ is a linear vector field and $\lambda\in{\ensuremath{\mathbb K}}$.
Finally, recall that the dimension of the adjoint orbit of $X^{(1)}$ is less than $n(n-1)$ and if the eigenvalues of $X^{(1)}$ are distincts, it is exactly $n(n-1)$.
Note that the point [*(iii)*]{} of this proposition can be true even if $X^{(1)}$ has eigenvalues of multiplicity strictly larger than 1. It is the case if in the Jordan decomposition of $X^{(1)}$, there is only one Jordan block corresponding to each eigenvalue.
In the resonant case, the formal deformation cohomology can be infinite-dimensional.\
Let us now recall that there are two types of linear Nambu structures:
: $\Lambda$ is dual to a decomposable linear integrable differential form $\omega = dx_1 \wedge \dots
\wedge dx_{p-1} \wedge dQ,$ where $Q$ is a quadratic function.
: $ \Lambda$ is decomposable: $ \Lambda = \partial / \partial x_{1} \wedge ... \wedge \partial / \partial x_{q-1} \wedge (\sum_{i,j=q}^{n} b^i_j x_i \partial / \partial x_j).
$
It has been shown in [@DuZu-Nambu1999; @Zung-Nambu2013] that linear Nambu structures of Type 1 with a nondegenerate quadratic function $Q$ in its formula are formally and analytically rigid (and they are also smoothly rigid if $Q$ satisfies a natural condition on its signature). In fact, the proofs in these papers also dealt with deformation cohomology, so we can conclude that the formal and analytic deformation cohomology of a linear Nambu structure of Type 1 is trivial if the quadratic function $Q$ in its formula is nondegenerate. If, moreover, the signature of $Q$ is different from $(1,*)$ then the local smooth deformation cohomology is also trivial.
As regards linear Nambu structure of Type 2, the situation is similar to that of linear vector fields $X = \sum_{i,j=q}^{n} b^i_j x_i \partial / \partial x_j$ in the formula. In particular, if $X$ is non-resonant then $ \Lambda = \partial / \partial x_{1} \wedge ... \wedge \partial / \partial x_{q-1} \wedge X$ has trivial formal deformation cohomology. (See [@DuZu-Nambu1999; @Zung-Nambu2013] for the details.)
[99]{}
I. Androulidakis and M. Zambon, *Stefan-Sussmann singular foliations, singular subalgebroids and their associated sheaves.* Int. J. Geom. Methods Mod. Phys. 13 (2016), suppl., 1641001, 17 pp.
I. Androulidakis and G. Skandalis, *The holonomy groupoid of a singular foliation.* J. Reine Angew. Math. 626 (2009), 1–37.
V.I. Arnold, S.M. Gusein-Zade and A.N. Varchenko, [*Singularities of differentiable maps (volume 1)*]{}, Monographs in Mathematics (82), Birkhäuser, Basel, 1985.
J.-P. Dufour and N. T. Zung, [*Linearization of Nambu structures*]{}, Compositio Math. 117 (1999), no. 1, 77–98.
J.-P. Dufour and N. T. Zung, [*Poisson structures and their normal forms*]{}, Progr. Math., 242, Birkhäuser, Basel, 2005.
J.L. Heitsch, *A cohomology for foliated manifolds.* Comment. Math. Helv. 50 (1975), 197–218.
R. Hermann, *On the accessibility problemin control theory*, International Symposium on Nonlinear Differential Equations and Nonlinear Dynamics, Academic Press, 1963, 327-332.
B. Malgrange, *Frobenius avec singularités. II. Le cas général.*, Invent. Math. 39 (1977), no. 1, 67–89.
T.H. Minh, N.T. Zung, *Commuting Foliations.* Regular and Chaotic Dynamics, 2014
P. Monnier, *Computations of Nambu-Poisson cohomologies.* Int. J. Math. Math. Sci., 26 (2) (2001), 65-81.
P. Monnier, *Poisson cohomology in dimension two.* Israel J. Math., 129 (2002), 189-207.
G. Reeb, *Sur certaines propriétés topologiques des variétés feuilletées.* Publ. Inst. Math. Univ. Strasbourg, 11 (1952), pp. 5–89, 155–156.
P. Stefan, *Accessible sets, orbits, and foliations with singularities.* Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 29 (1974), 699–713.
H. J. Sussmann, *Orbits of families of vector fields and integrability of distributions.* Trans. AMS 180 (1973), 171–188.
W. Thurston, *A generalization of the Reeb stability theorem.* Topology [**13**]{} (1974), 347–352.
Nguyen Tien Zung - *New results on the linearization of Nambu structures.* J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) 99 (2013), no. 2, 211–218.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We use the POWHEG formalism in the event generator to match QCD real-emission matrix elements with the parton shower for a range of decays relevant to Beyond the Standard Model physics searches. Applying this correction affects the shapes of experimental observables and so changes the number of events passing selection criteria. To validate this approach, we study the impact of the correction on Standard Model top quark decays. We then illustrate the effect of the correction on Beyond the Standard Model scenarios by considering the invariant-mass distribution of dijets produced in the decay of the lightest Randall-Sundrum graviton and transverse momentum distributions for decays in Supersymmetry. We consider only the effect of the POWHEG correction on the simulation of the hardest emission in the shower and ignore the normalisation factor required to correct the total widths and branching ratios to next-to-leading order accuracy.'
bibliography:
- 'Herwig.bib'
---
IPPP/13/17\
DCPT/13/34\
MCNET-13-03\
\
\
[**]{}\
[**]{}\
[ ** ]{}
——————————————————————————————————— ———————————————————————————————————
Introduction {#sec:Intro}
============
For Beyond the Standard Model (BSM) scenarios with additional new particles, the decays of these particles determine the experimental signals we would observe at collider experiments. If the new particles have a well separated mass spectrum, long decay chains will occur when a heavy new particle is produced. For decays involving coloured particles, hard quantum chromodynamic (QCD) radiation at each step in the decay chain will alter the structure of the event and therefore the number of events passing experimental selection criteria. The effects of radiation are also important in models with degenerate new particle mass spectra, where decay chains are typically limited to one step. Searches for these compressed spectra scenarios look for events in which hard radiation in the initial-state shower recoils against missing transverse energy in the final state to give an observable signal[^1]. The emission of hard QCD radiation in the decay of new particles could either enhance or reduce this effect and so must be taken into account. Therefore, accurate simulation of hard radiation in the decays of BSM particles is necessary in order to optimise searches for new physics.
Monte Carlo event generators use fixed-order matrix elements combined with parton showers and hadronization models to simulate particle collisions. In the event generator [@Bahr:2008pv; @Arnold:2012fq], the decays of unstable fundamental particles are treated separately from the hard process which produced them, prior to the parton shower phase, using the narrow width approximation. Decays are generated using the algorithm described in [@Richardson:2001df], which ensures spin correlations are correctly treated. The parton shower utilises an approximation that resums the leading collinear and leading-colour soft logarithms [@Buckley:2011ms] and so does not accurately describe QCD radiation in the regions of phase space where the transverse momenta of the emitted partons are high. The Positive Weight Hardest Emission Generator (POWHEG) formalism [@Nason:2004rx] is one method that allows the simulation of high transverse momentum (hard) radiation to be improved upon by using the real-emission matrix element to produce the hardest emission in the shower. This approach affects both the overall cross sections for inclusive processes and results in local changes to the shapes of distributions sensitive to the hardest emission. In particular, local changes to observables such as jet transverse momenta are important since they can impact on the proportion of events passing selection criteria in new physics searches. Since BSM signals often consist of only a few events, this can in turn result in significant changes to the exclusion bounds that can be set.
The POWHEG formalism has been successfully applied to a wide range of hard production processes, for example [@Frixione:2007nw; @Alioli:2008gx; @Hamilton:2008pd; @Alioli:2008tz; @Nason:2009ai; @Alioli:2009je; @Hamilton:2009za; @Re:2010bp; @Hamilton:2010mb; @Alioli:2010qp; @Alioli:2010xa; @Platzer:2011bc; @Oleari:2011ey; @Melia:2011gk; @Jager:2011ms; @Melia:2011tj; @D'Errico:2011sd; @D'Errico:2011um; @Jager:2012xk; @Re:2012zi; @Jager:2013mu], and particle decays [@LatundeDada:2008bv; @Richardson:2012bn] in the Standard Model (SM) as well as selected BSM processes [@Papaefstathiou:2009sr; @Bagnaschi:2011tu; @Klasen:2012wq; @FridmanRojas:2012yh; @Jager:2012hd]. Next-to-leading order (NLO) corrections to BSM particle decays have also previously been studied, for example in [@Horsky:2008yi] where the Supersymmetric-QCD correction to the decay $\tilde{q} \rightarrow q \tilde{\chi} $ was calculated. In this work, we present results from the implementation of the POWHEG method in for a range of decays relevant for new physics searches. A similar approach based on generic spin structures is used to apply a matrix-element correction to hard radiation in particle decays in [@Norrbin:2000uu].
The POWHEG formalism will be reviewed in Sect. \[sec:POWHEG\] and in Sect. \[sec:TopQuark\] our implementation of the POWHEG correction will be described in full for the example of top quark decay. In Sect. \[sec:BSMDecays\], details of the decay modes implemented will be given. The impact of the correction on the decay of the lightest graviton in the Randall-Sundrum (RS) model [@Randall:1999ee] will be studied in Sect. \[sec:RSResults\]. Finally, results from a selection of decays in the Constrained Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (CMSSM) will be presented in Sect. \[sec:MSSMResults\].
POWHEG Method {#sec:POWHEG}
=============
In this section, a brief outline of the POWHEG method is given. Further details can be found in [@Frixione:2007vw].
In the conventional parton shower approach, the inclusive differential cross section for the highest transverse momentum emission from an $N$-body process is given by d \^[[PS]{}]{}=B(\_N) d\_N . \[eq:PS\] Here we are considering a parton shower ordered in terms of the transverse momentum of the emitted parton, $p_T$. $ \Phi_N$ are the phase space variables of the $N$-body leading-order (LO) process and $B$ is the Born-level matrix element squared, including the relevant flux factor, such that the total LO cross section is $ \sigma^{\rm{LO}} = \int B(\Phi_N) d\Phi_N$. $ \mathcal{P}$ is the unregularized Altarelli-Parisi splitting kernel and $ \Phi_R$ is a set of variables parameterizing the phase space of the additional radiated parton. The radiative phase space is limited to the region $p_T \left(\Phi_R \right)>p_{T \rm{min}}$, where $p_{T \rm{min}} $ is a transverse momentum cut-off introduced to regularize the infra-red (IR) divergences in the splitting kernel. The Sudakov form factor for the parton shower is (p\_T) = ( - d\_R (p\_T (\_R) -p\_T ) ). \[eq:PSSudakov\] The square bracket in Eq. \[eq:PS\] integrates to unity which ensures that the total cross section is given by the LO result.
In the POWHEG approach, the inclusive differential cross section for the hardest emission is given by the QCD NLO differential cross section, that is d \^[[PO]{}]{}=|[B]{}(\_N) d\_N , \[eq:PO\] where $\bar{B}(\Phi_N) $ is defined by $$\begin{aligned}
\bar{B}(\Phi_N) = B(\Phi_N) &+ \left[V(\Phi_N) + \int C(\Phi_N, \Phi_R) d\Phi_R\right] \nonumber \\
&+ \int\left[R(\Phi_N, \Phi_R) d\Phi_R- C(\Phi_N, \Phi_R) d\Phi_R\right]. \label{eq:Bbar}\end{aligned}$$ The real-emission contribution, $R(\Phi_N, \Phi_R)$, corresponds to the radiation of an additional parton from the LO interaction and the virtual contribution, $V(\Phi_N)$, comes from the 1-loop correction to the LO process. $C(\Phi_N, \Phi_R)$ is a counter term with the same singular behaviour as the real and virtual contributions and is introduced to ensure the two square brackets in Eq. \[eq:Bbar\] are separately finite. The Sudakov form factor appearing in Eq. \[eq:PO\] is \^[PO]{}(p\_T) = ( - d\_R (p\_T (\_R ) -p\_T ) ). \[eq:POSudakov\] As with the conventional parton shower approach, the square bracket in Eq. \[eq:PO\] will integrate to unity and hence the total inclusive cross section will be given by the NLO result.
Typically, the counter term, $C(\Phi_N, \Phi_R)$, can be rewritten as a sum of dipole functions, $\mathcal{D}_i $, each of which describes the behaviour of the real-emission matrix element in a singular region of phase space, i.e. when the emitted parton becomes soft or collinear to one of the legs in the Born process. By doing so, the different singular regions can be separated such that Eq. \[eq:POSudakov\] becomes a product of Sudakov form factors \^[PO]{}(p\_T) = \_i ( - d\_R (p\_T (\_R ) -p\_T ) ), \[eq:POSudakov2\] each of which describes the non-emission probability in a particular region of phase space specified by the dipole function $\mathcal{D}_i$.
When applying the POWHEG method to a parton shower ordered in transverse momentum, the hardest emission is generated first using the POWHEG Sudakov form factor in Eq. \[eq:POSudakov2\]. Subsequent emissions are generated with the normal parton shower Sudakov given in Eq. \[eq:PSSudakov\], with the requirement that no parton shower emission has higher transverse momentum than the emission described by $R(\Phi_N, \Phi_R)$. However, to allow QCD coherence effects to be included, an angularly ordered parton shower is used in . Ordering the parton shower in terms of an angular variable means the first emission in the shower may not be the hardest. The POWHEG approach can be reconciled with angularly ordered parton showers by dividing the shower into several steps [@Nason:2004rx]. The hardest emission in the shower is generated first using the POWHEG Sudakov form factor and the value of the angular evolution variable corresponding to this emission is determined. An angularly ordered shower, running from the shower starting scale down to the scale of the hardest emission, is then generated. This *truncated* parton shower simulates coherent soft wide-angle radiation. The hardest emission is then inserted and the shower continues until the IR cut-off of the evolution variable is reached. Finally, in both stages of the parton shower, emissions generated by the shower are discarded if they have higher transverse momentum than the emission generated using the POWHEG Sudakov form factor.
Top Quark Decays {#sec:TopQuark}
================
In this section, we describe our implementation of the POWHEG formalism for the example of a top quark decaying to a $W$ boson and a bottom quark. To implement the full POWHEG correction to this decay, the Born configuration must be generated according to Eq. \[eq:Bbar\] and the hardest emission in the parton shower simulated using Eq. \[eq:POSudakov2\]. However, in this work we consider only the effect of the POWHEG correction on the simulation of the hardest emission in the shower and hence generate the Born configuration using only $B \left(\Phi_N \right)$, the leading order contribution in Eq. \[eq:Bbar\]. As such, we use the existing LO implementation of top quark decay and modify the shower such that the hardest emission is generated according to Eq. \[eq:POSudakov2\]. Justification for excluding the normalisation factor of the POWHEG correction will be given in Sect. \[sec:BSMDecays\].
Application of the POWHEG correction to top quark decays, along with top quark pair production in $e^+ e^-$ collisions, has been previously studied in [@LatundeDada:2008bv] for massless bottom quarks. In this work, we retain the mass of the bottom quark throughout.
Implementation in {#sec:TopQuarkImp}
-------------------
In , the decays of fundamental particles are performed in the rest frame of the decaying particle. In this frame, we are free to choose the orientation of the $W$ boson to be along the negative $z$-direction and so, at LO, the bottom quark is orientated along positive $z$-direction. The squared, spin and colour averaged matrix element for the LO process is given by |\_B|\^2 = (m\_t\^4+m\_b\^4-2m\_w\^4+m\_t\^2m\_w\^2+m\_b\^2m\_w\^2-2m\_t\^2m\_b\^2 ), where $m_t$, $m_b$ and $m_W$ are the masses of the top quark, bottom quark and $W$ boson respectively and $g$ is the weak interaction coupling constant. The relevant CKM factor has been set equal to 1.
The squared, spin and colour averaged matrix element for the $\mathcal{O} \left(\alpha _s \right)$ real-emission correction to the decay $t \rightarrow W b$ is $$\begin{gathered}
|\mathcal{M}_R|^2 = g^2 g_s^2 C_F \left\{ - \frac{|\mathcal{M}_B|^2} {g^2} \left(\frac{p_b}{p_b.p_g} - \frac{p_t} {p_t.p_g} \right)^2 + \right. \\ \left. \left(\frac{p_g.p_t}{p_b.p_g} + \frac{p_b.p_g}{p_t.p_g} \right) \left(1 + \frac{m_t^2}{2m_w^2} + \frac{m_b^2}{2m_w^2} \right) - \frac{1}{m_w^2} \left(m_t^2+m_b^2 \right)\right\},\end{gathered}$$ where $g_s$ is the strong coupling constant, $C_F= \frac{4}{3}$ and $p_t$, $p_b$, $p_W$ and $p_g$ are the four-momenta of the top quark, bottom quark, $W$ boson and gluon. In general, the orientation of the decay products in the three-body final state is such that the emitting parton absorbs the transverse recoil coming from the emission of the gluon and the spectator particle continues to lie along the negative $z$-direction. When the radiation originates from the top quark, the bottom quark effectively acts as the emitting particle so that we remain in the rest frame of the top quark. Therefore, for emission from both the top and the bottom quarks, the momenta of the decay products are p\_W = (E\_W,0,0,- ), p\_b = (E\_b, -p\_T ( ), -p\_T ( ), ), p\_g = (E\_g, p\_T ( ), p\_T ( ), ), where $E_x$ is the energy of particle $x$, and $p_T$ and $\phi$ are the transverse momentum and azimuthal angle of the gluon.
The Lorentz invariant phase space element, ${\mathrm{d}}\Phi_R$, describing the emission of the additional gluon is obtained from the relation \_3 = \_2 \_R , where \_N = (2 )\^4 \^4 (p\_t - \_[i=1]{}\^N p\_i ) \_[i=1]{}\^[N]{} and $\mathbf{p_i}$ is the three-momentum of particle $i$. We choose to parameterize the radiative phase space in terms of the transverse momentum, $p_T$, rapidity, $y$, and azimuthal angle, $\phi$, of the gluon and so find \_R = J p\_T dy , where the Jacobian factor, $J$, is [^2] J = . This parametrization has the advantage of simplifying the Heaviside function in the POWHEG Sudakov form factor to a lower limit in the integration over $p_T$.
The final components required for the implementation of the POWHEG Sudakov form factor in Eq. \[eq:POSudakov2\] are the dipole functions, $\mathcal{D}_i$, which describe the singular behaviour of the real-emission matrix element. We use the dipole functions defined in the Catani-Seymour subtraction scheme, details of which can be found in [@Catani:1996vz; @Catani:2002hc], to describe the singular behaviour resulting from emissions from the decay products. The dipole used to describe radiation from the top quark is as follows \_i = |\_B|\^2. \[eq:initialDipole\] It contains only soft enhancements since, in the top quark rest frame, collinear enhancements are suppressed.
Using the above information, the hardest emission in the shower can then be generated according to Eq. \[eq:POSudakov2\] using the veto algorithm[^3], which proceeds as follows:
1. Trial values of the radiative phase space variables are generated. The transverse momentum of the emission is generated by solving \^[[over]{}]{}(p\_T ) = (- \^[p\^[[max]{}]{}\_T]{}\_[p\_T]{} p\_T( \_R) ) = , \[eq:SudakovOver\] where $p^{\rm{max}}_T = \frac{\left(m_t -m_W \right)^2 -m_b^2} {2 \left(m_t - m_W \right)}$ is the maximum possible $p_T$ of the gluon. $y_{\rm{max}}$ and $y_{\rm{min}}$ are the upper and lower bounds on the gluon rapidity, chosen to overestimate the true rapidity range. $C$ is a constant chosen such that the integrand in Eq. \[eq:SudakovOver\] always exceeds the integrand in Eq. \[eq:POSudakov2\] and $\mathcal{R}$ is a random number distributed uniformly in the range $[0,1]$. Values of $y$ and $\phi$ are generated uniformly in the ranges $[y_{\rm{min}}, y_{\rm{max}}]$ and $[0, 2 \pi]$ respectively;
2. If $p_T < p^{\rm{min}}_T$, no radiation is generated and the event is hadronized directly. We set $p^{\rm{min}}_T=1{\,\mathrm{GeV}}$ throughout this work;
3. If $p_T \geq p^{\rm{min}}_T$, the momenta of the $W$ boson, bottom quark and gluon are calculated using the generated values of the radiative variables. Doing so, yields two possible values of $E_W$ that must both be retained and used in the remainder of the calculation. If the resulting momenta do not lie within the physically allowed region of phase space, we veto this configuration, set $p^{\rm{max}}_T = p_T$ and return to step 1;
4. Events within the physical phase space are accepted with a probability given by the ratio of the true to overestimated integrands in Eqs. \[eq:POSudakov2\] and \[eq:SudakovOver\] respectively. If the event is rejected, we set $p^{\rm{max}}_T = p_T$ and return to step 1;
Using this procedure, a trial emission is generated for each dipole, $\mathcal{D}_i$, in Eq. \[eq:POSudakov2\]. The configuration which gives the highest $p_T$ emission is selected. The existing framework, detailed in [@Hamilton:2008pd], is then used to generate the remainder of the parton shower.
Parton Level Results {#sec:TopQuarkRes}
--------------------
To validate our implementation of the algorithm described in Sec. \[sec:TopQuarkImp\], Dalitz style plots were generated for the decay $t \rightarrow W b$ and are shown in Fig. \[fig:top\_Dalitz\]. The Dalitz variables, $x_W$ and $x_g$, were defined by the relation, $x_i = \frac{2E_i}{m_t}$, where $E_i$ is the energy of particle $i$ in the rest frame of the top quark. The left-hand plot in Fig. \[fig:top\_Dalitz\] shows the distribution obtained using the POWHEG style correction. In this case, $x_g$ is the energy fraction of the gluon generated using the full real-emission matrix element. The distribution on the right-hand side of Fig. \[fig:top\_Dalitz\] was generated using the conventional parton shower, limited to one emission in the final state, and so here $x_g$ is the energy fraction of a gluon produced using the parton shower splitting kernels. On both distributions, the black outline indicates the physical phase space boundaries. The enclosed area is divided into a section populated by radiation from the bottom quark (above the green dashed line), sections populated by radiation from the top quark (below the blue dotted lines) and a *dead region* (between the blue dotted and green dashed lines) that corresponds to hard gluon radiation and is not populated by the conventional parton shower. These boundaries correspond to the theoretical limits of the parton shower with symmetric phase space partitioning, described in [@Gieseke:2003rz], in which the starting values of the shower evolution variables for the top and bottom quarks are chosen such that the volumes of phase space accessible to emissions from each quark are approximately equal.
As expected, in both plots we see a high density of points in the limit $x_g \rightarrow 0$, corresponding to soft gluon emission. The POWHEG corrected distribution also has a concentration of points along the upper physical phase space boundary where $x_W$ is maximal and emissions are collinear to the bottom quark. The density of points along the upper boundary is reduced in the parton shower distribution and points are instead concentrated along the lower boundary of the bottom quark emission region. As discussed in [@Gieseke:2003rz], the parton shower approximation agrees with the exact matrix element in the case of collinear radiation from the bottom quark but overestimates it elsewhere in the bottom quark emission region. The factor by which the parton shower approximation exceeds the exact matrix element, increases towards the lower boundary of the region and therefore we see an excess of points near the boundary. The parton shower distribution also has a high density of points in the top quark emission region for $x_g \lesssim 0.53$. This enhancement is again the result of the parton shower approximation overestimating the exact matrix element in this area [@Gieseke:2003rz]. In general, we see that the parton shower in produces areas of high emission density which do not correspond to physically enhanced areas of phase space and therefore has a tendency to overpopulate hard regions of phase space. On the other hand, the POWHEG emission is distributed according to the exact real-emission matrix element and so correctly populates the physically enhanced regions of phase space with no additional spurious high density regions. Finally, we also see that the POWHEG corrected distribution fills the dead region of phase space that is not populated by the standalone parton shower.
![Dalitz distributions for the decay $t \rightarrow W b$ with (left) and without (right) the POWHEG style correction. The black outline indicates the physically allowed region of phase space. In the conventional parton shower approach, the region above the green dashed line is populated with radiation from the bottom quark and the regions below the blue dotted lines with radiation from the top quark. These boundaries correspond to the limits of the parton shower with symmetric phase space partitioning.[]{data-label="fig:top_Dalitz"}](figure_1a)
![Dalitz distributions for the decay $t \rightarrow W b$ with (left) and without (right) the POWHEG style correction. The black outline indicates the physically allowed region of phase space. In the conventional parton shower approach, the region above the green dashed line is populated with radiation from the bottom quark and the regions below the blue dotted lines with radiation from the top quark. These boundaries correspond to the limits of the parton shower with symmetric phase space partitioning.[]{data-label="fig:top_Dalitz"}](figure_1b)
![Comparison of distributions generated using the standalone parton shower with those generated using a matrix element or POWHEG style correction to the decay $t \rightarrow W b$. Parton level $e^+e^- \rightarrow t \bar{t}$ events were generated at $\sqrt{s}=360 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}$. The left-hand plot shows the distribution of the minimum jet separation, $\Delta R$, and the right-hand plot the logarithm of the jet measure, $y_{32}$. []{data-label="fig:top_parton"}](figure_2a)
![Comparison of distributions generated using the standalone parton shower with those generated using a matrix element or POWHEG style correction to the decay $t \rightarrow W b$. Parton level $e^+e^- \rightarrow t \bar{t}$ events were generated at $\sqrt{s}=360 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}$. The left-hand plot shows the distribution of the minimum jet separation, $\Delta R$, and the right-hand plot the logarithm of the jet measure, $y_{32}$. []{data-label="fig:top_parton"}](figure_2b)
To study the impact of the POWHEG style correction on top quark decays, parton level $e^+ e^- \rightarrow t \bar{t}$ events were simulated and analysed as in [@Hamilton:2006ms]. Events were generated at a centre-of-mass energy close to the $t \bar{t}$ threshold, $\sqrt{s} =360 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}$, to minimize the effects of radiation from the initial-state shower. Unless otherwise stated, in this study we use the default set of tuned perturbative and non-perturbative parameters, or *event tune*, in version 2.6 [@Arnold:2012fq]. Final-state partons were clustered into three jets using the [@Cacciari:2011ma] implementation of the $k_T$ algorithm. The $W$ bosons were decayed leptonically and their decay products excluded from the jet clustering. Events were discarded if they contained a jet with $p_{T}<10 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}$ or the minimum jet separation[^4], $\Delta R$ , did not satisfy $ \Delta R \geq 0.7$. Using events that passed these selection criteria, differential distributions were plotted of $ \Delta R $ and $\log \left(y_{32}\right)$, where $y_{32}$ is the value of the jet resolution parameter[^5] at which a three jet event is classified as a two jet event. The resulting distributions are shown in the left and right-hand plots in Fig. \[fig:top\_parton\]. Distributions generated using the normal parton shower and the parton shower including the POWHEG style correction, are shown by the blue dashed and black solid lines respectively. The red dotted lines in Fig. \[fig:top\_parton\] show the distributions obtained when the existing implementation of hard and soft matrix element corrections (MEC) [@Hamilton:2006ms] are applied to the normal parton shower. Hard matrix element corrections use the full $t \rightarrow W b g$ matrix element to distribute emissions in the dead regions of phase space that are not populated by the parton shower. Soft matrix element corrections use the full real-emission matrix element to correct emissions generated by the parton shower that lie outside the areas of phase space where the parton shower approximation is valid, i.e. away from the soft and collinear limits. Applying these corrections ensures that the hardest emission in the shower is generated according to the exact matrix element, therefore, we expect a high level of agreement between the POWHEG and matrix element corrected distributions. The bottom panel in each plot shows the ratio of the parton shower and matrix element corrected distributions to the POWHEG corrected distribution. In both plots, we include error bars indicating the statistical uncertainty.
As discussed in [@Hamilton:2006ms], applying the matrix element corrections has the effect of softening both the $\Delta R $ and $\log \left(y_{32} \right) $ distributions. This is due to the soft matrix element correction rejecting a portion of the high $p_T$ emissions generated by the parton shower. The magnitude of the observed effect illustrates the importance of matching the parton shower to the exact matrix element in high $p_T$ regions. As expected, the distributions generated using the POWHEG style and matrix element corrections are very similar although, for both variables, the POWHEG style correction yields slightly harder distributions. The discrepancies between the distributions are the result of a number of subtle differences between the POWHEG and matrix element correction schemes. Firstly in the matrix element correction approach, events in the dead region are generated using the fixed-order real-emission matrix element only, without any Sudakov suppression, and subsequent showering of the resulting configuration is simulated starting from the $1 \rightarrow 3 $ process. However, in the POWHEG approach the hardest emission in the shower is reinterpreted such that the conventional parton shower instead begins from the Born hard configuration. The scale of the hardest emission is generated, and then the shower proceeds as normal except that the hardest emission is fixed at the generated scale. In addition to this, the soft matrix element correction is applied to all emissions in the parton shower which are the hardest so far. Normally this leads to the correction of both the hardest emission and a number of other emissions with large values of the evolution parameter, but smaller transverse momentum. These differences all contribute to the discrepancies between the POWHEG style and matrix element corrected distributions although it is unclear which would have the largest effect. However, the difference between the POWHEG style and matrix element corrected results is comparatively small. The agreement between the two approaches serves to further validate our implementation of the POWHEG formalism. Finally, we note that the POWHEG style approach is preferable to the original matrix element correction scheme since it is significantly simpler to implement in .
Decays of BSM Particles {#sec:BSMDecays}
=======================
As discussed in Sect. \[sec:Intro\], it is important that the simulation of QCD radiation in the decays of BSM particles is done in the most accurate way possible. In this work, we present results illustrating the effect of consistently matching the QCD real-emission matrix element with the parton shower in through the POWHEG formalism. This technique has been applied to a range of decays that occur in most of the well studied BSM scenarios. Tab. \[tab:spins\] shows the combinations of incoming and outgoing spins for which this method is used and each spin structure is implemented for the colour flows given in Tab. \[tab:colour\]. However, models with coloured tensor particles are beyond the scope of this work and therefore decays involving incoming tensor particles were limited to colour flows in which the tensor is a colour singlet.
The LO and real-emission matrix elements appearing in the POWHEG Sudakov form factor in Eq. \[eq:POSudakov\] are calculated using helicity amplitude methods to correctly incorporate spin correlations [@Richardson:2001df]. The dipole functions, $\mathcal{D}_i $, are defined as in the Catani-Seymour dipole subtraction method[@Catani:1996vz; @Catani:2002hc] when describing radiation from the decay products. In this approach, dipoles describing quasi-collinear radiation from massive vector bosons are not well defined. Therefore, the Fermion-Fermion-Vector, Scalar-Scalar-Vector and Tensor-Vector-Vector decays are limited to the situation where any final-state coloured vector particles are massless. The Vector-Fermion-Fermion and Vector-Scalar-Scalar decays do, however, include radiation from massive incoming vector particles. Decays are performed in the rest frame of the decaying particle [@Bahr:2008pv] and therefore the dipole describing the singular behaviour of this particle will only contain a universal soft contribution. This is a well defined, spin-independent function given, for the example colour flow $3 \rightarrow 3\,0$, by Eq. \[eq:initialDipole\].
Finally, in this work we focus solely on the effect of the POWHEG correction on the simulation of the hardest emission in the shower and have not implemented the normalisation factor coming from the presence of $\bar{B}$ rather than $B$ in Eq. \[eq:PO\]. In many cases, the partial widths and branching ratios used in the simulation are calculated by an external program, for example SDECAY [@Muhlleitner:2003vg], and so already include NLO corrections. These values are then passed to by means of a spectrum file in SUSY Les Houches Accord format [@Allanach:2004ub; @Allanach:2008qq]. In cases where the calculation of the widths and branching ratios is performed in , generated distributions can be rescaled by a global normalisation factor to achieve NLO accuracy for suitably inclusive observables when the necessary calculations exist.
Results
=======
Randall-Sundrum Graviton {#sec:RSResults}
------------------------
The effect of applying the POWHEG correction to the decay of the lightest RS graviton was investigated using the implementation of the RS model. LHC proton-proton collisions with a centre-of-mass (CM) energy of $\sqrt{s}=8 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}$ were simulated. The lightest graviton, $G$, was produced as a resonance and allowed to decay via $G \rightarrow gg $ and $G \rightarrow q \bar{q}$ for $q = u,d,s,c,b $. The mass of the graviton was chosen to be $m_G = 2.23 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}$ which corresponds to the lower bound on the allowed graviton mass for the coupling $k/ \bar{M}_{pl} = 0.1 $ in [@Aad:2012cy]. An analysis based on the ATLAS experiment’s search for new phenomena in dijet distributions [@ATLAS:2012pu] was then carried out. Jets were constructed using the [@Cacciari:2011ma] implementation of the anti-$k_t$ algorithm [@Cacciari:2008gp] with the energy recombination scheme and a distance parameter $R=0.6$. Jets with $|y| \geq 4.4 $ were discarded, where $y$ is the rapidity of the jet in the $pp$ CM frame. Events with less than two jets passing this constraint were vetoed. The rapidities of the two highest $p_T$ jets in the $pp$ CM frame are given by $y_{1}$ and $y_{2}$. In the dijet CM frame formed by the two hardest jets, their corresponding rapidities are $y_{*}$ and $-y_{*}$ where $y_{*}= \frac{1}{2} (y_1 - y_2)$. Events not satisfying $|y_{*}| < 0.6$ and $|y_{1,2}| < 2.8$ were discarded. The dijet invariant mass, $m_{jj}$, was formed from the vector sum of the two hardest jet momenta and events were vetoed if $m_{jj} \leq 1.0 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}$.
![Dijet invariant mass distribution for the lightest RS graviton decaying to jets. The left-hand plot shows the distribution in the full range while the right-hand plot emphasises the effect on the peak region $2.1 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}\leq m_{jj} \leq 2.3 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}$. The mass of the graviton was $m_G = 2.23 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}$ and the coupling $k/ \bar{M}_{pl} = 0.1 $. LHC events were simulated with $\sqrt{s}=8 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}$. The yellow and orange bands were generated by varying the event tune parameters in the POWHEG corrected and conventional parton shower distributions respectively.[]{data-label="fig:mass distribution"}](figure_3a)
![Dijet invariant mass distribution for the lightest RS graviton decaying to jets. The left-hand plot shows the distribution in the full range while the right-hand plot emphasises the effect on the peak region $2.1 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}\leq m_{jj} \leq 2.3 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}$. The mass of the graviton was $m_G = 2.23 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}$ and the coupling $k/ \bar{M}_{pl} = 0.1 $. LHC events were simulated with $\sqrt{s}=8 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}$. The yellow and orange bands were generated by varying the event tune parameters in the POWHEG corrected and conventional parton shower distributions respectively.[]{data-label="fig:mass distribution"}](figure_3b)
The dijet mass distribution after the above selection criteria were applied, is shown in the left-hand plot in Fig. \[fig:mass distribution\]. The blue dashed line shows the invariant mass distribution for the LO matrix element combined with the parton shower while the black solid line shows the result including the POWHEG correction to the graviton decay. Both distributions were generated using the optimum set of tuned perturbative and non-perturbative parameters found in[@Richardson:2012bn]. From Fig. \[fig:mass distribution\], we see that including the POWHEG correction causes a decrease of $\mathcal{O} \left( 40 \% \right) $ in the number of events in the region $2.1 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}\leq m_{jj} \leq 2.3 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}$. This effect is highlighted in the right-hand plot in Fig. \[fig:mass distribution\], which shows the dijet mass distribution in this range. In the conventional parton shower approach, the majority of the graviton’s momentum will be carried by the two partonic decay products. When the POWHEG correction is applied, the highest $p_T$ emission in the shower will typically be quite hard and so a significant fraction of the the graviton’s momentum will be missed by considering the invariant mass of only the hardest two jets, therefore shifting the distribution to lower values of $m_{jj}$.
To give an estimate of the uncertainty arising from our choice of event tune, the dijet mass distributions were generated at ten points in the event tune parameter space and error bands were created showing the maximum and minimum values from the resulting set of distributions. A description of the varied parameters can be found in[@Richardson:2012bn] and their values at each of the ten points are given in Tab.$\,$2 of[@Richardson:2012bn]. The error bands are shown in yellow and orange for the distributions with and without the POWHEG correction respectively. The impact of the POWHEG correction is still clearly evident once this uncertainty has been taken into account.
Constrained Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model {#sec:MSSMResults}
-------------------------------------------------
In addition to the results presented in Sect. \[sec:RSResults\], the effect of the POWHEG correction was also studied in the context of the CMSSM model. The high scale parameters of the model were chosen to be $m_0 = 1220 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}$, $m_{1/2} = 630 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}$, $\tan{\beta} = 10$, $A_0 = 0$ and $\mu >0$. This point lies just outside the exclusion limits set by the ATLAS experiment in [@ATLAS:2012ona]. The corresponding weak scale parameters and decay modes were calculated using ISAJET 7.80 [@Paige:2003mg] and the resulting masses of the Supersymmetric (SUSY) particles relevant to this study are given in Tab. \[tab:mass\]. The implementation of the MSSM model was used to generate LHC $pp$ collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}=8 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}$. Here we focus on the effect of the correction to the parton shower and so hadronization and the underlying event are not simulated. In the following sections, the impact of the POWHEG correction on two archetypal decays is presented. In both cases, the decaying SUSY particle is pair produced in the hard process and the two subsequent decays are then analysed separately in the rest frame of the decaying particle. Dalitz style distributions were produced, as described in Sec. \[sec:TopQuarkRes\], for both the POWHEG corrected emission and the normal parton shower limited to one final-state emission. In addition, transverse momentum distributions of the hardest jet not coming from a visible decay product were also studied. To do so, the full parton shower was generated, with and without the POWHEG style correction, and events were analysed by clustering all visible final-state particles into jets using the implementation of the anti-$k_T$ algorithm with the energy recombination scheme and $R=0.4$. Jets with $p_T \leq 20 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}$ or $|\eta|>4.0 $ were discarded. Events were required to have at least $n+1$ jets passing the selection criteria, where $n$ is the number of visible decay products.
$m_{\tilde{u}_L}$ $m_{\tilde{g}}$ $m_{\tilde{t}_1}$ $m_{\tilde{\chi}_1^0}$
------------------------------ ------------------------------ ------------------------------ -----------------------------
$1812.91 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}\ $ $1546.56 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}\ $ $1278.14 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}\ $ $279.22 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}\ $
: Masses of the SUSY particles relevant to the decays studied in Secs. \[sec:chiResults\] and \[sec:gluinoResults\]. Values were obtained using ISAJET 7.80 with the high scale parameters $m_0 = 1220 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}$, $m_{1/2} = 630 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}$, $\tan{\beta} = 10$, $A_0 = 0$ and $\mu >0$. []{data-label="tab:mass"}
### $\tilde{u}_L \rightarrow u \, \tilde{\chi}_1^0$ {#sec:chiResults}
Events were generated in which $\tilde{u}_L$ and its associated anti-particle were produced and then decayed via the mode $\tilde{u}_L \rightarrow u \, \tilde{\chi}_1^0$. Dalitz style distributions with and without the POWHEG correction were produced and are shown in the left and right-hand plots in Fig. \[fig:squark\_Dalitz\]. The black outline indicates the kinematic limits of phase space and the green dashed and blue dotted lines are the boundaries of the emission regions of the conventional parton shower with the most symmetric choice of shower phase space partitioning. Emissions from the up quark populate the area above the green dashed line, while the regions below the blue dotted lines are filled by emissions from the $\tilde{u}_L$. The area between the green and blue lines is the dead zone, unpopulated by the normal parton shower. In the POWHEG corrected distribution, points are concentrated in the soft region as $x_g \rightarrow 0$ and along the upper boundary of physical phase space where the gluon in collinear to the up quark. However, in the normal parton shower distribution fewer points lie along the upper physical phase space boundary and instead there is an concentration of points in the $\tilde{u}_L$ emission region with $ x_g \lesssim 0.85$ and along the lower boundary of the up quark emission region. In analogy to the case of top quark decay, it is likely that these unphysical high density regions are due to the parton shower kernels overestimating the exact real-emission matrix element. Finally, we see that including the POWHEG correction ensures that the region of phase space inaccessible to the normal parton shower is populated.
![Dalitz distributions for the decay $\tilde{u}_L \rightarrow u \, \tilde{\chi}_1^0$ with (left) and without (right) the POWHEG style correction. The black outline indicates the physically allowed region phase space. In the conventional parton shower approach, the region above the green dashed line is populated with radiation from the up quark and the regions below the blue dotted lines with radiation from the $\tilde{u}_L$. These boundaries correspond to the limits of the parton shower with symmetric phase space partitioning.[]{data-label="fig:squark_Dalitz"}](figure_4a)
![Dalitz distributions for the decay $\tilde{u}_L \rightarrow u \, \tilde{\chi}_1^0$ with (left) and without (right) the POWHEG style correction. The black outline indicates the physically allowed region phase space. In the conventional parton shower approach, the region above the green dashed line is populated with radiation from the up quark and the regions below the blue dotted lines with radiation from the $\tilde{u}_L$. These boundaries correspond to the limits of the parton shower with symmetric phase space partitioning.[]{data-label="fig:squark_Dalitz"}](figure_4b)
![Transverse momentum distributions of the the second hardest jet in the decay $\tilde{u}_L \rightarrow u \, \tilde{\chi}_1^0$ in the rest frame of the $\tilde{u}_L$. Events were generated with and without the POWHEG correction using the CMSSM model with , $m_{1/2} = 660 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}$, $\tan{\beta} = 10$, $A_0 = 0$ and $\mu >0$ at the LHC with $\sqrt{s}=8 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}$. []{data-label="fig:squark distribution"}](figure_5)
Differential distributions of the transverse momentum of the subleading jet[^6], $p_{T,2}$, in each decay were also generated and are shown in Fig. \[fig:squark distribution\]. The blue dashed line corresponds to the distribution generated using the LO matrix element combined with the parton shower while the black solid line shows the result with the POWHEG correction to the decay applied. The bottom panel in Fig. \[fig:squark distribution\] shows the ratio of the parton shower and POWHEG corrected results and in both distributions error bars are included to indicate statistical uncertainty. As demonstrated in Fig. \[fig:squark\_Dalitz\], the parton shower has a tendency to over-populate the hard regions of phase space. Hence, including the POWHEG correction reduces the $p_T$ of the hardest emission in the decay. This phenomenon is reflected in the $p_{T,2}$ distributions. When the POWHEG correction is applied, the $p_{T,2}$ distribution is softened such that there is a reduction in the number of events passing the jet $p_T$ selection criteria of $\mathcal{O} \left(20 \% \right)$. The softening is less pronounced at low values of $p_{T,2}$ where the parton shower splitting kernels give a good approximation to the exact matrix element. Here the standalone parton shower and POWHEG corrected distributions are similar. At larger values of $p_{T,2}$, the impact of the POWHEG correction is again reduced as, in this region, the subleading jet in the POWHEG corrected distribution typically has a significant contribution from partons generated by the normal parton shower in addition to the hardest emission coming from the POWHEG correction.
### $\tilde{g} \rightarrow \tilde{t}_1 \, \bar{t}$ {#sec:gluinoResults}
Finally, we investigate the impact of the POWHEG style correction on the decay mode $\tilde{g} \rightarrow \tilde{t}_1 \, \bar{t}$. The left and right-hand plots in Fig. \[fig:gluino\_Dalitz\] show Dalitz distributions for this decay with and without the POWHEG correction respectively. In both plots, the black outline indicates the kinematically allowed region phase space. The solid coloured lines show the boundaries of the parton shower emission regions in the scenario where the $\bar{t}$ absorbs the $p_T$ of the gluon and the $\tilde{t}_1$ is orientated along the negative $z$-axis in the $\tilde{g}$ rest frame. The region above the pale green line is populated by emissions from the $\bar{t}$ and the areas below the dark blue lines are filled by emissions from the $\tilde{g}$. In this scenario, the two emission regions overlap and there is no region of phase space left unpopulated by the parton shower. The dashed coloured lines indicate the emission boundaries of the parton shower when the $\tilde{t}_1$ absorbs the transverse recoil of the emission and the $\bar{t}$ is aligned with the negative $z$-axis. The pale green dashed line is the upper limit for emissions coming from the $\tilde{t}_1$ and the dark blue dashed lines are the lower boundaries from emissions from the $\tilde{g}$. From the left-hand plot of Fig. \[fig:gluino\_Dalitz\], we see that the majority of points in the POWHEG corrected distribution are concentrated in the soft region of phase space. High density regions corresponding to emissions collinear to the $\bar{t}$ or $\tilde{t}_1$ are suppressed due to the large masses of the decay products. In the parton shower distribution, points are concentrated in the soft region and along the lower boundary of the $\bar{t}$ and dashed $\tilde{g}$ emission regions. The latter two unphysical regions of over-population again highlight the importance of correcting hard emissions in the parton shower using the exact real-emission matrix element.
The transverse momentum distribution of the third hardest jet in the rest frame of the $\tilde{g}$ were also plotted and are shown in Fig. \[fig:gluino stable\]. To focus on the effect of the POWHEG correction, the decay products, $\bar{t}$ and $\tilde{t}_1 $, were not allowed to decay further. The blue dashed and black solid lines in Fig. \[fig:gluino stable\] correspond to the parton shower and POWHEG correction distributions respectively. The bottom panel of the plot shows the ratio of the parton shower and POWHEG corrected results and in both distributions error bars are included to indicate statistical uncertainty. As in Sect. \[sec:chiResults\], we find that the POWHEG correction decreases the total number of events passing the jet $p_T$ selection criterion. The effect is more pronounced in this case, with an $\mathcal{O} \left(40 \% \right )$ reduction. The parton shower distribution significantly exceeds the POWHEG corrected distribution at small $p_{T,3}$, however, at higher values of $p_{T,3}$ the two distributions are similar. At lower values of $p_{T,3}$, the main contribution to the third hardest jet in the POWHEG corrected distribution is from the hardest emission in the decay, generated using the real-emission matrix element. Therefore, we expect the uncorrected distribution to exceed the corrected one in this region. However, the maximum possible $p_T$ of the gluon generated
![Dalitz distributions for the decay $\tilde{g} \rightarrow \tilde{t}_1 \, \bar{t}$ with (left) and without (right) the POWHEG style correction applied. The solid (dashed) coloured lines indicate the parton shower emission regions when the $\bar{t}$ $\left(\tilde{t}_1\right)$ absorbs the transverse recoil of the emission. The solid (dashed) pale green line shows the lower (upper) boundary for radiation from the $\bar{t}$ $\left(\tilde{t}_1 \right) $. The dark blue solid (dashed) lines are the equivalent upper (lower) boundaries for radiation from the $\tilde{g}$. All boundaries correspond to the case of symmetric phase space partitioning and the black outline shows the kinematically allowed region of phase space.[]{data-label="fig:gluino_Dalitz"}](figure_6a)
![Dalitz distributions for the decay $\tilde{g} \rightarrow \tilde{t}_1 \, \bar{t}$ with (left) and without (right) the POWHEG style correction applied. The solid (dashed) coloured lines indicate the parton shower emission regions when the $\bar{t}$ $\left(\tilde{t}_1\right)$ absorbs the transverse recoil of the emission. The solid (dashed) pale green line shows the lower (upper) boundary for radiation from the $\bar{t}$ $\left(\tilde{t}_1 \right) $. The dark blue solid (dashed) lines are the equivalent upper (lower) boundaries for radiation from the $\tilde{g}$. All boundaries correspond to the case of symmetric phase space partitioning and the black outline shows the kinematically allowed region of phase space.[]{data-label="fig:gluino_Dalitz"}](figure_6b)
![Comparison of parton level distributions generated with and without the POWHEG correction for the decay $\tilde{g} \rightarrow \tilde{t}_1 \, \bar{t}$ with stable decay products. Results are for the CMSSM model with $m_0 = 1220 {\,\mathrm{GeV}}$, , $\tan{\beta} = 10$, $A_0 = 0$ and $\mu >0$ and LHC events with $\sqrt{s}=8 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}$. Shown are the $p_T$ distributions of the the third hardest jet in the rest frame of the $\tilde{g}$. []{data-label="fig:gluino stable"}](figure_7)
by the POWHEG correction is[^7] $p^{\rm{max}}_T \approx 75{\,\mathrm{GeV}}$. Jets contributing to the POWHEG corrected distribution above this limit include a number of other partons generated by the normal parton shower in addition to the hardest emission. This reduces the effect of the correction at higher values of $p_{T,3}$. Therefore, we find that applying the POWHEG correction has a more significant impact on the number of events passing selection criteria when the value of the $p_{T,3}$ selection criterion lies below $p^{\rm{max}}_T$ of the gluon produced in the POWHEG correction.
Conclusions
===========
In this work, we used the real-emission matrix element to generate hard QCD radiation in a range of particle decays in the event generator. This method is particularly relevant to new physics searches based on the decays of heavy new particles. The POWHEG corrections to these decays can change the shapes of certain experimental observables, thus altering the number of signal events passing selection criteria and modifying the exclusion bounds that can be set on the masses of the new particles. This correction will be available in version 2.7.
The algorithm used to implement the POWHEG style correction in was described in detail for the decay $t \rightarrow W b$. Dalitz style distributions of the first emission in the conventional parton shower and POWHEG corrected approach were produced and showed that, while the POWHEG style correction ensures the majority of emissions lie in the soft and collinear limits, the parton shower has erroneous, unphysical regions of high emission density. This causes the parton shower to overpopulate the high $p_T$ regions of phase space. Differential distributions of the minimum jet separation and logarithm of the jet measure were also generated with the POWHEG style correction and compared to those generated with the existing implementation of hard and soft matrix element corrections. The two techniques exhibit a high level of agreement therefore demonstrating the validity of our approach. In addition to this, distributions were generated using the normal parton shower. In agreement with the results from the Dalitz plots, these distributions were found to be considerably harder than those generated with the matrix element or POWHEG style corrections.
The impact of applying the POWHEG style correction to a BSM decay was studied by plotting the invariant mass distribution of dijets produced in the decay of the lightest RS graviton, $G \rightarrow gg$ and $G \rightarrow q \bar{q}$. Applying the POWHEG correction was found to have a considerable impact on the height of the distribution in the dijet mass peak. The number of events passing selection criteria in the mass range $2.1 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}\leq m_{jj} \leq 2.3 {\,\mathrm{TeV}}$ dropped by $\mathcal{O} \left(40 \% \right) $ when the correction was applied. This is a consequence of the dijet invariant mass not including the hardest emission in the shower that carries a significant fraction of the graviton’s momentum when it is simulated using the real-emission matrix element. The sizable impact of the correction in this scenario illustrates the importance of including higher order corrections when optimising experimental searches.
The impact of the POWHEG correction was also investigate for two decays in the CMSSM model by studying the transverse momentum distributions of the hardest jet generated by the shower. At values of the transverse momentum less than the upper limit of the POWHEG correction, it was found that the POWHEG corrected distributions were significantly reduced with respect to those generated with the conventional parton shower. Above this cutoff, the normal parton shower and POWHEG corrected distributions were found to be similar.
In this work, we have used the POWHEG formalism to improve the simulation of hard radiation in particle decays and studied the resulting effect on a number of distributions. However, hard radiation in the initial-state parton shower can also have a significant impact on these distributions. Hence, in order to achieve accurate simulation of hard radiation in BSM processes we must also include effects from the initial-state shower. Using the POWHEG formalism to improve the simulation of the hardest initial-state emission in the shower will be the subject of future work.
Acknowledgements
================
We are grateful for help from the other members of the collaboration. This work was supported by the Science and Technology Facilities Council. We also acknowledge the support of the European Union via MCNet.
[^1]: See [@LeCompte:2011cn] for a recent study.
[^2]: $\lambda(x,y,z) = \sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2-2xy-2xy-2yz} $.
[^3]: A good description of the veto algorithm can be found in [@Sjostrand:2006za].
[^4]: $\Delta R = \min_{ij}\sqrt{\Delta \eta_{ij} ^2 + \Delta \phi_{ij} ^2}$ where the indices $i,j$ run over the three hardest jets and . $\Delta \eta_{ij}$ and $\Delta \phi_{ij}$ are the differences in pseudorapidity and azimuthal angle of jets $i$ and $j$ respectively.
[^5]: $y_{32} = \frac{2} {s} \min_{ij} \left(\min \left(E_i^2, E_j^2 \right) \left(1-\cos \theta_{ij} \right)\right)$ where again the indices $i,j$ run over the three hardest jets with $i \neq j$. $E_i$ is the energy of jet $i$ and $\theta_{ij}$ the polar angle between jets $i$ and $j$.
[^6]: Jets are ordered in terms of their transverse momentum such that $p_{T,1} > p_{T,2} > p_{T,3} $ etc.
[^7]: The value of $p^{\rm{max}}_T$ was calculated using the formula for $p^{\rm{max}}_T$ in top quark decay, given on page , with the replacements $m_t \rightarrow m_{\tilde{g}}$, $m_W \rightarrow m_{\tilde{t}_1}$ and $m_b \rightarrow m_t$
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In 1991, Michael Gelfond introduced the language of epistemic specifications. The goal was to develop tools for modeling problems that require some form of meta-reasoning, that is, reasoning over multiple possible worlds. Despite their relevance to knowledge representation, epistemic specifications have received relatively little attention so far. In this paper, we revisit the formalism of epistemic specification. We offer a new definition of the formalism, propose several semantics (one of which, under syntactic restrictions we assume, turns out to be equivalent to the original semantics by Gelfond), derive some complexity results and, finally, show the effectiveness of the formalism for modeling problems requiring meta-reasoning considered recently by Faber and Woltran. All these results show that epistemic specifications deserve much more attention that has been afforded to them so far.'
author:
- 'Miros[ł]{}aw Truszczy[ń]{}ski'
title: Revisiting Epistemic Specifications
---
[ ]{}
Introduction
============
Early 1990s were marked by several major developments in knowledge representation and nonmonotonic reasoning. One of the most important among them was the introduction of *disjunctive logic programs with classical negation* by Michael Gelfond and Vladimir Lifschitz [@gl90b]. The language of the formalism allowed for rules $$H_1 \vee \ldots \vee H_k {\leftarrow}B_1,\ldots, B_m,{\mathit{not\;}}B_{m+1},\ldots,{\mathit{not\;}}B_n,$$ where $H_i$ and $B_i$ are classical literals, that is, atoms and classical or *strong* negations ($\neg$) of atoms. In the paper, we will write “strong” rather than “classical” negation, as it reflects more accurately the role and the behavior of the operator. The *answer-set* semantics for programs consisting of such rules, introduced in the same paper, generalized the stable-model semantics of normal logic programs proposed a couple of years earlier also by Gelfond and Lifschitz [@gl88]. The proposed extensions of the language of normal logic programs were motivated by knowledge representation considerations. With two negation operators it was straightforward to distinguish between $P$ being *false by default* (there is no justification for adopting $P$), and $P$ being *strongly false* (there is evidence for $\neg P$). The former would be written as ${\mathit{not\;}}P$ while the latter as $\neg P$. And with the disjunction in the head of rules one could model “indefinite” rules which, when applied, provide partial information only (one of the alternatives in the head holds, but no preference to any of them is given).
Soon after disjunctive logic programs with strong negation were introduced, Michael Gelfond proposed an additional important extension, this time with a modal operator [@Gelfond91]. He called the resulting formalism the language of *epistemic specifications*. The motivation came again from knowledge representation. The goal was to provide means for the “correct representation of incomplete information in the presence of multiple extensions” [@Gelfond91].
Surprisingly, despite their evident relevance to the theory of nonmonotonic reasoning as well as to the practice of knowledge representation, epistemic specifications have received relatively little attention so far. This state of affairs may soon change. Recent work by Faber and Woltran on *meta-reasoning* with answer-set programming [@FaberW09] shows the need for languages, in which one could express properties holding across all answer sets of a program, something Michael Gelfond foresaw already two decades ago.
Our goal in this paper is to revisit the formalism of epistemic specifications and show that they deserve a second look, in fact, a place in the forefront of knowledge representation research. We will establish a general semantic framework for the formalism, and identify in it the precise location of Gelfond’s epistemic specifications. We will derive several complexity results. We will also show that the original idea of Gelfond to use a modal operator to model “what is known to a reasoner” has a broader scope of applicability. In particular, we will show that it can also be used in combination with the classical logic.
Complexity results presented in this paper provide an additional motivation to study epistemic specifications. Even though programs with strong negation often look “more natural” as they more directly align with the natural language description of knowledge specifications, the extension of the language of normal logic programs with the strong negation operator does not actually increase the expressive power of the formalism. This point was made already by Gelfond and Lifschitz, who observed that there is a simple and concise way to compile the strong negation away. On the other hand, the extension allowing the disjunction operator in the heads of rules is an essential one. As the complexity results show [@mt88; @eg95], the class of problems that can be represented by means of disjunctive logic programs is strictly larger (assuming no collapse of the polynomial hierarchy) than the class of problems that can be modeled by normal logic programs. In the same vein, extension by the modal operator along the lines proposed by Gelfond is essential, too. It does lead to an additional jump in the complexity.
Epistemic Specifications
========================
To motivate epistemic specifications, Gelfond discussed the following example. A certain college has these rules to determine the eligibility of a student for a scholarship:
1. Students with high GPA are eligible
2. Students from underrepresented groups and with fair GPA are eligible
3. Students with low GPA are not eligible
4. When these rules are insufficient to determine eligibility, the student should be interviewed by the scholarship committee.
Gelfond argued that there is no simple way to represent these rules as a disjunctive logic program with strong negation. There is no problem with the first three rules. They are modeled correctly by the following three logic program rules (in the language with both the default and strong negation operators):
1. $eligible(X) {\leftarrow}\mathit{highGPA}(X)$
2. $eligible(X) {\leftarrow}underrep(X), \mathit{fairGPA}(X)$
3. $\neg eligible(X) {\leftarrow}\mathit{lowGPA}(X)$.
The problem is with the fourth rule, as it has a clear meta-reasoning flavor. It should apply when the possible worlds (answer sets) determined by the first three rules do not fully specify the status of eligibility of a student $a$: neither *all* of them contain $eligible(a)$ nor *all* of them contain $\neg eligible(a)$. An obvious attempt at a formalization:
1. $interview(X) {\leftarrow}{\mathit{not\;}}eligible(X), {\mathit{not\;}}\neg eligible(X)$
fails. It is just another rule to be added to the program. Thus, when the answer-set semantics is used, the rule is interpreted with respect to individual answer sets and not with respect to collections of answer-sets, as required for this application. For a concrete example, let us assume that all we know about a certain student named Mike is that Mike’s GPA is fair or high. Clearly, we do not have enough information to determine Mike’s eligibility and so we must interview Mike. But the program consisting of rules (1)-(4) and the statement
1. $fairGPA(mike) \vee highGPA(mike)$
about Mike’s GPA, has two answer sets:
> $\{highGPA(mike), eligible(mike)\}$\
> $\{fairGPA(mike), interview(mike)\}$.
Thus, the query $?interview(mike)$ has the answer “unknown.” To address the problem, Gelfond proposed to extend the language with a modal operator $K$ and, speaking informally, interpret premises $K{\varphi}$ as “${\varphi}$ is known to the program” (the original phrase used by Gelfond was “known to the reasoner”), that is, true in all answer-sets. With this language extension, the fourth rule can be encoded as
1. $interview(X) {\leftarrow}{\mathit{not\;}}K\, eligible(X), {\mathit{not\;}}K \neg eligible(X)$
which, intuitively, stands for “*interview* if neither the eligibility nor the non-eligibility is known.”
The way in which Gelfond [@Gelfond91] proposed to formalize this intuition is strikingly elegant. We will now discuss it. We start with the syntax of *epistemic specifications*. As elsewhere in the paper, we restrict attention to the propositional case. We assume a fixed infinite countable set ${\mathit{At}}$ of *atoms* and the corresponding language ${\mathcal{L}}$ of propositional logic. A *literal* is an atom, say $A$, or its *strong* negation $\neg A$. A *simple modal atom* is an expression $K{\varphi}$, where ${\varphi}\in {\mathcal{L}}$, and a *simple modal literal* is defined accordingly. An *epistemic premise* is an expression (conjunction) $$E_1,\ldots, E_s,{\mathit{not\;}}E_{s+1},\ldots, {\mathit{not\;}}E_t,$$ where every $E_i$, $1\leq i\leq t$, is a simple modal literal. An *epistemic rule* is an expression of the form $$L_1 \vee \ldots\vee L_k {\leftarrow}L_{k+1},\ldots, L_m,{\mathit{not\;}}L_{m+1},\ldots, {\mathit{not\;}}L_n, E,$$ where every $L_i$, $1\leq i\leq k$, is a literal, and $E$ is an epistemic premise. Collections of epistemic rules are *epistemic programs*. It is clear that (ground versions of) rules (1)-(5) and (4$'$) are examples of epistemic rules, with rule (4$'$) being an example of an epistemic rule that actually takes advantage of the extended syntax. Rules such as
> $a\vee \neg d {\leftarrow}b, {\mathit{not\;}}\neg c, \neg K(d\lor \neg c)$\
> $\neg a {\leftarrow}\neg c, {\mathit{not\;}}\neg K(\neg (a\land c){\rightarrow}b)$
are also examples of epistemic rules. We note that the language of epistemic programs is only a fragment of the language of epistemic specifications by Gelfond. However, it is still expressive enough to cover all examples discussed by Gelfond and, more generally, a broad range of practical applications, as natural-language formulations of domain knowledge typically assume a rule-based pattern.
We move on to the semantics, which is in terms of *world views*. The definition of a world view consists of several steps. First, let $W$ be a consistent set of literals from ${\mathcal{L}}$. We regard $W$ as a three-valued interpretation of ${\mathcal{L}}$ (we will also use the term *three-valued possible world*), assigning to each atom one of the three logical values ${\mathbf{t}}$, ${\mathbf{f}}$ and ${\mathbf{u}}$. The interpretation extends by recursion to all formulas in ${\mathcal{L}}$, according to the following truth tables
$\neg$
---------------- ----------------
${\mathbf{f}}$ ${\mathbf{t}}$
${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{f}}$
${\mathbf{u}}$ ${\mathbf{u}}$
$\lor$ ${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{u}}$ ${\mathbf{f}}$
---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ----------------
${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{t}}$
${\mathbf{u}}$ ${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{u}}$ ${\mathbf{u}}$
${\mathbf{f}}$ ${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{u}}$ ${\mathbf{f}}$
$\land$ ${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{u}}$ ${\mathbf{f}}$
---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ----------------
${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{u}}$ ${\mathbf{f}}$
${\mathbf{u}}$ ${\mathbf{u}}$ ${\mathbf{u}}$ ${\mathbf{f}}$
${\mathbf{f}}$ ${\mathbf{f}}$ ${\mathbf{f}}$ ${\mathbf{f}}$
${\rightarrow}$ ${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{u}}$ ${\mathbf{f}}$
----------------- ---------------- ---------------- ----------------
${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{u}}$ ${\mathbf{f}}$
${\mathbf{u}}$ ${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{u}}$ ${\mathbf{u}}$
${\mathbf{f}}$ ${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{t}}$ ${\mathbf{t}}$
\
\
By a *three-valued possible-world structure* we mean a non-empty family of consistent sets of literals (three-valued possible worlds). Let ${\mathcal{A}}$ be a three-valued possible-world structure and let $W$ be a consistent set of literals. For every formula ${\varphi}\in{\mathcal{L}}$, we define
1. ${\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}\models{\varphi}$, if $v_W({\varphi})={\mathbf{t}}$
2. ${\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}\models K{\varphi}$, if for every $V\in{\mathcal{A}}$, $v_V({\varphi})={\mathbf{t}}$
3. ${\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}\models \neg K{\varphi}$, if there is $V\in{\mathcal{A}}$ such that $v_V({\varphi})={\mathbf{f}}$.
Next, for every literal or simple modal literal $L$, we define
1. ${\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}\models{\mathit{not\;}}L$ if ${\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}\not\models L$.
We note that neither ${\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}\models K{\varphi}$ nor ${\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}\models
\neg K{\varphi}$ depend on $W$. Thus, we will often write ${\mathcal{A}}\models F$, when $F$ is a simple modal literal or its default negation.
In the next step, we introduce the notion of the *G-reduct* of an epistemic program.
\[def1\] Let $P$ be an epistemic program, ${\mathcal{A}}$ a three-valued possible-world structure and $W$ a consistent set of literals. The *G-reduct* of $P$ with respect to ${\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}$, in symbols $P^{{\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}}$, consists of the heads of all rules $r\in P$ such that ${\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}\models \alpha$, for every conjunct $\alpha$ occurring in the body of $r$.
Let $H$ be a set of disjunctions of literals from ${\mathcal{L}}$. A set $W$ of literals is *closed* with respect to $H$ if $W$ is consistent and contains at least one literal in common with every disjunction in $H$. We denote by ${\mathit{Min}}(H)$ the family of all minimal sets of literals that are closed with respect to $H$. With the notation ${\mathit{Min}}(H)$ in hand, we are finally ready to define the concept of a world view of an epistemic program $P$.
\[def2\] A three-valued possible-world structure ${\mathcal{A}}$ is a *world view* of an epistemic program $P$ if ${\mathcal{A}}= \{W{\,|\;}W\in {\mathit{Min}}(P^{{\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}})\}$.
The $G$-reduct of an epistemic program consists of disjunctions of literals. Thus, the concept of a world view is well defined.
We note that Gelfond considered also inconsistent sets of literals as minimal sets closed under disjunctions. However, the only such set he allowed consisted of *all* literals. Consequently, the difference between the Gelfond’s semantics and the one we described above is that some programs have a world view in the Gelfond’s approach that consists of a single set of all literals, while in our approach these programs do not have a world view. But in all other cases, the two semantics behave in the same way.
Let us consider the ground program, say $P$, corresponding to the scholarship eligibility example (rule (5), and rules (1)-(3) and (4$'$), grounded with respect to the Herbrand universe $\{mike\}$). The only rule involving simple modal literals is
> $interview(mike) {\leftarrow}{\mathit{not\;}}K\, eligible(mike), {\mathit{not\;}}K \neg eligible(mike)$.
Let ${\mathcal{A}}$ be a world view of $P$. Being a three-valued possible-world structure, ${\mathcal{A}}\not=\emptyset$. No matter what $W$ we consider, no minimal set closed with respect to $P^{{\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}}$ contains $\mathit{lowGPA}(mike)$ and, consequently, no minimal set closed with respect to $P^{{\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}}$ contains $\neg eligible(mike)$. It follows that ${\mathcal{A}}\not\models K \neg
eligible(mike)$.
Let us assume that ${\mathcal{A}}\models K\, eligible(mike)$. Then, no reduct $P^{{\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}}$ contains $interview(mike)$. Let $W=\{\mathit{fairGP}(mike)\}$. It follows that $P^{{\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}}$ consists only of $\mathit{fairGPA}(mike) \vee \mathit{highGPA}(mike)$. Clearly, $W\in{\mathit{Min}}(P^{{\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}})$ and, consequently, $W\in {\mathcal{A}}$. Thus, ${\mathcal{A}}\not\models K\, eligible(mike)$, a contradiction.
It must be then that ${\mathcal{A}}\models{\mathit{not\;}}K\, eligible(mike)$ and ${\mathcal{A}}\models {\mathit{not\;}}K \neg eligible(mike)$. Let $W$ be an arbitrary consistent set of literals. Clearly, the reduct $P^{{\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}}$ contains $interview(mike)$ and $\mathit{fairGPA}(mike) \vee \mathit{highGPA}(mike)$. If $\mathit{highGPA}(mike)\in W$, the reduct also contains $eligible(mike)$. Thus, $W\in{\mathit{Min}}(P^{{\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}})$ if and only if
> $W=\{\mathit{fairGPA}(mike),interview(mike)\}$, or\
> $W=\{\mathit{highGPA}(mike),eligible(mike),interview(mike)\}$.
It follows that if ${\mathcal{A}}$ is a world view for $P$ then it consists of these two possible worlds. Conversely, it is easy to check that a possible-world structure consisting of these two possible worlds is a world view for $P$. Thus, $interview(mike)$ holds in ${\mathcal{A}}$, and so our representation of the example as an epistemic program has the desired behavior.
Epistemic Specifications — a Broader Perspective
================================================
The discussion in the previous section demonstrates the usefulness of formalisms such as that of epistemic specifications for knowledge representation and reasoning. We will now present a simpler yet, in many respects, more general framework for epistemic specifications. The key to our approach is that we consider the semantics given by *two-valued* interpretations (sets of atoms), and standard *two-valued* possible-world structures (nonempty collections of two-valued interpretations). We also work within a rather standard version of the language of modal propositional logic and so, in particular, we allow only for one negation operator. Later in the paper we show that epistemic specifications by Gelfond can be encoded in a rather direct way in our formalism. Thus, the restrictions we impose are not essential even though, admittedly, not having two kinds of negation in the language in some cases may make the modeling task harder.
We start by making precise the syntax of the language we will be using. As we stated earlier, we assume a fixed infinite countable set of atoms ${\mathit{At}}$. The language we consider is determined by the set ${\mathit{At}}$, the modal operator $K$, and by the *boolean connectives* $\bot$ (0-place), and $\land$, $\lor$, and ${\rightarrow}$ (binary). The BNF expression
> ${\varphi}::= \bot\,|\,A\,|\,({\varphi}\land {\varphi})\,|\,({\varphi}\lor {\varphi})\,|\,
> ({\varphi}{\rightarrow}{\varphi})\,|\ K{\varphi}$,
where $A\in {\mathit{At}}$, provides a concise definition of a formula. The parentheses are used only to disambiguate the order of binary connectives. Whenever possible, we omit them. We define the unary *negation* connective $\neg$ and the 0-place connective $\top$ as abbreviations:
> $\neg{\varphi}::= {\varphi}{\rightarrow}\bot$\
> $\top::=\neg\bot$.
We call formulas $K{\varphi}$, where ${\varphi}\in{\mathcal{L}}_K$, *modal atoms* (simple modal atoms that we considered earlier and will consider below are special modal atoms with $K$-depth equal to 1). We denote this language by ${\mathcal{L}}_K$ and refer to subsets of ${\mathcal{L}}_K$ as *epistemic theories*. We denote the modal-free fragment of ${\mathcal{L}}_K$ by ${\mathcal{L}}$.
While we will eventually describe the semantics (in fact, several of them) for arbitrary epistemic theories, we start with an important special case. Due to close analogies between the concepts we define below and the corresponding ones defined earlier in the context of the formalism of Gelfond, we “reuse” the terms used there. Specifically, by an *epistemic premise* we mean a conjunction of simple modal literals. Similarly, by an *epistemic rule* we understand an expression of the form $$\label{eq10}
E\land L_1\land\ldots\land L_m {\rightarrow}A_1\lor\ldots\lor A_n,$$ where $E$ is an epistemic premise, $L_i$’s are literals (in ${\mathcal{L}}$) and $A_i$’s are atoms. Finally, we call a collection of epistemic rules an *epistemic program*. It will always be clear from the context, in which sense these terms are to be understood.
We stress that $\neg$ is not a primary connective in the language but a derived one (it is a shorthand for some particular formulas involving the rule symbol). Even though under some semantics we propose below this negation operator has features of default negation, under some others it does not. Thus, we selected for it the standard negation symbol $\neg$ rather than the “loaded” ${\mathit{not\;}}$.
A (two-valued) *possible-world structure* is any nonempty family ${\mathcal{A}}$ of subsets of ${\mathit{At}}$ (two-valued interpretations). In the remainder of the paper, when we use terms “interpretation” and “possible-world structure” without any additional modifiers, we always mean a two-valued interpretation and a two-valued possible-world structure.
Let ${\mathcal{A}}$ be a possible-world structure and ${\varphi}\in {\mathcal{L}}$. We recall that ${\mathcal{A}}\models K{\varphi}$ precisely when $W\models {\varphi}$, for every $W\in{\mathcal{A}}$, and ${\mathcal{A}}\models \neg K{\varphi}$, otherwise. We will now define the *epistemic reduct* of an epistemic program with respect to a possible-world structure.
Let $P\subseteq{\mathcal{L}}_K$ be an epistemic program and let ${\mathcal{A}}$ be a possible-world structure. The *epistemic reduct* of $P$ with respect to ${\mathcal{A}}$, ${{P}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ in symbols, is the theory obtained from $P$ as follows: eliminate every rule with an epistemic premise $E$ such that ${\mathcal{A}}\not\models E$; drop the epistemic premise from every remaining rule.
It is clear that ${{P}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}\subseteq{\mathcal{L}}$, and that it consists of rules of the form $$\label{eq11}
L_1\land\ldots\land L_m {\rightarrow}A_1\lor\ldots\lor A_n,$$ where $L_i$’s are literals (in ${\mathcal{L}}$) and $A_i$’s are atoms.
Let $P$ be a collection of rules (\[eq11\]). Then, $P$ is a propositional theory. Thus, it can be interpreted by the standard propositional logic semantics. However, $P$ can also be regarded as a disjunctive logic program (if we write rules from right to left rather than from left to right). Consequently, $P$ can also be interpreted by the stable-model semantics [@gl88; @gl90b] and the supported-model semantics [@abw87; @bg93; @bradix96jlp1; @Inoue98-JLP]. (For normal logic programs, the supported-model semantics was introduced by Apt et al. [@abw87]. The notion was extended to disjunctive logic programs by Baral and Gelfond [@bg93]. We refer to papers by Brass and Dix [@bradix96jlp1], Definition 2.4, and Inoue and Sakama [@Inoue98-JLP], Section 5, for more details). We write ${\mathcal{M}}(P)$, ${\mathcal{ST}}(P)$ and ${\mathcal{SP}}(P)$ for the sets of models, stable models and supported models of $P$, respectively. An important observation is that *each* of these semantics gives rise to the corresponding notion of an epistemic extension.
\[def11\] Let $P\subseteq {\mathcal{L}}_K$ be an epistemic program. A possible-world structure ${\mathcal{A}}$ is an *epistemic model* (respectively, an *epistemic stable model*, or an *epistemic supported model*) of $P$, if ${\mathcal{A}}= {\mathcal{M}}({{P}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}})$ (respectively, ${\mathcal{A}}=
{\mathcal{ST}}({{P}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}})$ or ${\mathcal{A}}= {\mathcal{SP}}({{P}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}})$).
It is clear that Definition \[def11\] can easily be adjusted also to other semantics of propositional theories and programs. We briefly mention two such semantics in the last section of the paper.
We will now show that epistemic programs with the semantics of epistemic stable models can provide an adequate representation to the scholarship eligibility example for Mike. The available information can be represented by the following program $P(mike) \subseteq{\mathcal{L}}_K$:
1. $eligible(mike)\land neligible(mike) {\rightarrow}\bot$
2. $fairGPA(mike) \vee highGPA(mike)$
3. $\mathit{highGPA}(mike) {\rightarrow}eligible(mike)$
4. $underrep(mike) \land \mathit{fairGPA}(mike){\rightarrow}eligible(mike)$
5. $\mathit{lowGPA}(mike) {\rightarrow}neligible(mike)$
6. $\neg K\, eligible(mike), \neg K\, neligible(mike){\rightarrow}interview(mike)$.
We use the predicate *neligible* to model the strong negation of the predicate $eligible$ that appears in the representation in terms of epistemic programs by Gelfond (thus, in particular, the presence of the first clause, which precludes the facts $eligible(mike)$ and $neligible(mike)$ to be true together). This extension of the language and an extra rule in the representation is the price we pay for eliminating one negation operator.
Let ${\mathcal{A}}$ consist of the interpretations
> $W_1=\{\mathit{fairGPA}(mike),interview(mike)\}$\
> $W_2=\{\mathit{highGPA}(mike),eligible(mike),interview(mike)\}$.
Then the reduct ${{[P(mike)]}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ consists of rules (1)-(5), which are unaffected by the reduct operation, and of the fact $interview(mike)$, resulting from rule (6) when the reduct operation is performed (as in logic programming, when a rule has the empty antecedent, we drop the implication symbol from the notation). One can check that ${\mathcal{A}}=\{W_1,W_2\}={\mathcal{ST}}({{[P(mike)]}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}})$. Thus, ${\mathcal{A}}$ is an epistemic stable model of $P$ (in fact, the only one). Clearly, $interview(mike)$ holds in the model (as we would expect it to), as it holds in each of its possible-worlds. We note that in this particular case, the semantics of epistemic supported models yields exactly the same solution.
Complexity
==========
We will now study the complexity of reasoning with epistemic (stable, supported) models. We provide details for the case of epistemic stable models, and only present the results for the other two semantics, as the techniques to prove them are very similar to those we develop for the case of epistemic stable models.
First, we note that epistemic stable models of an epistemic program $P$ can be represented by partitions of the set of all modal atoms of $P$. This is important as *a priori* the size of possible-world structures one needs to consider as candidates for epistemic stable models may be exponential in the size of a program. Thus, to obtain good complexity bounds alternative polynomial-size representations of epistemic stable models are needed.
Let $P\subseteq{\mathcal{L}}_K$ be an epistemic program and $(\Phi,\Psi)$ be the set of modal atoms of $P$ (all these modal atoms are, in fact, simple). We write $P_{|\Phi,\Psi}$ for the program obtained from $P$ by eliminating every rule whose epistemic premise contains a conjunct $K\psi$, where $K\psi\in\Psi$, or a conjunct $\neg K{\varphi}$, where $K{\varphi}\in\Phi$ (these rules are “‘blocked’’ by $(\Phi,\Psi)$), and by eliminating the epistemic premise from every other rule of $P$.
\[prop:char\] Let $P\subseteq{\mathcal{L}}_K$ be an epistemic program. If a possible-world structure ${\mathcal{A}}$ is an epistemic stable model of $P$, then there is a partition $(\Phi,\Psi)$ of the set of modal atoms of $P$ such that
1. ${\mathcal{ST}}(P_{|\Phi,\Psi})\not=\emptyset$
2. For every $K{\varphi}\in\Phi$, ${\varphi}$ holds in every stable model of $P_{|\Phi,\Psi}$
3. For every $K\psi\in\Psi$, $\psi$ does not hold in at least one stable model of $P_{|\Phi,\Psi}$.
Conversely, if there are such partitions, $P$ has epistemic stable models.
It follows that epistemic stable models can be represented by partitions $(\Phi,\Psi)$ satisfying conditions (1)-(3) from the proposition above.
We observe that deciding whether a partition $(\Phi,\Psi)$ satisfies conditions (1)-(3) from Proposition \[prop:char\], can be accomplished by polynomially many calls to an $\Sigma_2^P$-oracle and, if we restrict attention to non-disjunctive epistemic programs, by polynomially many calls to an ${\mathit{NP}}$-oracle.
\[rem1\] If we adjust Proposition \[prop:char\] by replacing the term “stable” with the term “supported,” and replacing ${\mathcal{ST}}()$ with ${\mathcal{SP}}()$, we obtain a characterization of epistemic supported models. Similarly, omitting the term “stable,” and replacing ${\mathcal{ST}}()$ with ${\mathcal{M}}()$ yields a characterization of epistemic models. In each case, one can decide whether a partition $(\Phi,\Psi)$ satisfies conditions (1)-(3) by polynomially many calls to an ${\mathit{NP}}$-oracle (this claim is evident for the case of epistemic models; for the case of epistemic supported models, it follows from the fact that supported models semantics does not get harder when we allow disjunctions in the heads or rules).
The problem to decide whether a non-disjunctive epistemic program has an epistemic stable model is $\Sigma_2^P$-complete.
Proof: Our comments above imply that the problem is in the class $\Sigma_2^P$. Let $F=\exists Y \forall Z \Theta$, where $\Theta$ is a DNF formula. The problem to decide whether $F$ is true is $\Sigma_2^P$-complete. We will reduce it to the problem in question and, consequently, demonstrate its $\Sigma_2^P$-hardness. To this end, we construct an epistemic program $Q\subseteq{\mathcal{L}}_K$ by including into $Q$ the following clauses (atoms $w$, $y'$, $y\in Y$, and $z'$, $z\in Z$ are fresh):
1. $Ky{\rightarrow}y\;$; and $Ky' {\rightarrow}y'$, for every $y\in Y$
2. $y\land y'{\rightarrow}\;$; and $\neg y\land \neg y'{\rightarrow}\;$, for every $y\in Y$
3. $\neg z'{\rightarrow}z\;$; and $\neg z{\rightarrow}z'$, for $z\in Z$
4. $\sigma(u_1)\land \ldots\land \sigma(u_k){\rightarrow}w\;$, where $u_1\wedge\ldots\wedge u_k$ is a disjunct of $\Theta$, and $\sigma(\neg a)=a'$ and $\sigma(a)=a$, for every $a\in Y\cup Z$
5. $\neg Kw{\rightarrow}\;$.
Let us assume that ${\mathcal{A}}$ is an epistemic stable model of $Q$. In particular, ${\mathcal{A}}\not=\emptyset$. It must be that ${\mathcal{A}}\models Kw$ (otherwise, ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ has no stable models, that is, ${\mathcal{A}}=\emptyset$). Let us define $A= \{y\in Y{\,|\;}{\mathcal{A}}\models
Ky\}$, and $B=\{y\in Y{\,|\;}{\mathcal{A}}\models Ky'\}$. It follows that ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ consists of the following rules:
1. $y$, for $y\in A$, and $y'$, for $y\in B$
2. $y\land y'{\rightarrow}\;$; and $\neg y\land \neg y'{\rightarrow}\;$, for every $y\in Y$
3. $\neg z'{\rightarrow}z\;$; and $\neg z{\rightarrow}z'$, for $z\in Z$
4. $\sigma(u_1)\land \ldots\land \sigma(u_k){\rightarrow}w\;$, where $u_1\wedge\ldots\wedge u_k$ is a disjunct of $\Theta$, and $\sigma(\neg a)=a'$ and $\sigma(a)=a$, for every $a\in Y\cup Z$.
Since ${\mathcal{A}}={\mathcal{ST}}({{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}})$ and ${\mathcal{A}}\not=\emptyset$, $B=Y\setminus A$ (due to clauses of type (2)). It is clear that the program ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ has stable models and that they are of the form $A\cup \{y'{\,|\;}y\in Y\setminus A\} \cup
D \cup \{z'{\,|\;}z\in Z\setminus D\}$, if that set does not imply $w$ through a rule of type (4), or $A\cup \{y'{\,|\;}y\in Y\setminus A\} \cup
D \cup \{z'{\,|\;}z\in Z\setminus D\}\cup \{w\}$, otherwise, where $D$ is any subset of $Z$. As ${\mathcal{A}}\models Kw$, there are no stable models of the first type. Thus, the family of stable models of ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ consists of all sets $A\cup \{y'{\,|\;}y\in Y\setminus
A\} \cup
D \cup \{z'{\,|\;}z\in Z\setminus D\}\cup \{w\}$, where $D$ is an arbitrary subset of $Z$. It follows that for every $D\subseteq Z$, the set $A\cup
\{y'{\,|\;}y\in Y\setminus A\} \cup D \cup \{z'{\,|\;}z\in Z\setminus D\}$ satisfies the body of at least one rule of type (4). By the construction, for every $D\subseteq Z$, the valuation of $Y\cup Z$ determined by $A$ and $D$ satisfies the corresponding disjunct in $\Theta$ and so, also $\Theta$. In other words, $\exists Y\forall Z \Theta$ is true.
Conversely, let $\exists Y\forall Z\Theta$ be true. Let $A$ be a subset of $Y$ such that $\Theta_{|Y/A}$ holds for every truth assignment of $Z$ (by $\Theta_{|Y/A}$, we mean the formula obtained by simplifying the formula $Q$ with respect to the truth assignment of $Y$ determined by $A$). Let ${\mathcal{A}}$ consist of all sets of the form $A\cup \{y'{\,|\;}y\in Y\setminus
A\} \cup D \cup \{z'{\,|\;}z\in Z\setminus D\}\cup \{w\}$, where $D\subseteq
Z$. It follows that ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ consists of clauses (1)-(4) above, with $B=Y\setminus A$. Since $\forall Z \Theta_{|A/Y}$ holds, it follows that ${\mathcal{A}}$ is precisely the set of stable models of ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$. Thus, ${\mathcal{A}}$ is an epistemic stable model of $Q$. $\Box$
In the general case, the complexity goes one level up.
\[thm:2\] The problem to decide whether an epistemic program $P\subseteq{\mathcal{L}}_K$ has an epistemic stable model is $\Sigma_3^P$-complete.
Proof: The membership follows from the earlier remarks. To prove the hardness part, we consider a QBF formula $F=
\exists X \forall Y \exists Z \Theta$, where $\Theta$ is a 3-CNF formula. For each atom $x\in X$ ($y\in Y$ and $z\in Z$, respectively), we introduce a fresh atom $x'$ ($y'$ and $z'$, respectively). Finally, we introduce three additional fresh atoms, $w$, $f$ and $g$.
We now construct a disjunctive epistemic program $Q$ by including into it the following clauses:
1. $Kx{\rightarrow}x$; and $Kx' {\rightarrow}x'$, for every $x\in X$
2. $x\land x'{\rightarrow}$; and $\neg x\land \neg x'{\rightarrow}$, for every $x\in X$
3. $\neg g{\rightarrow}f$; and $\neg f{\rightarrow}g$
4. $f{\rightarrow}y \vee y'$; and $f{\rightarrow}z \vee z'$, for every $y\in Y$ and $z\in Z$
5. $f\land w{\rightarrow}z$; and $f\land w{\rightarrow}z'$, for every $z\in Z$
6. $f\land \sigma(u_1)\land \sigma(u_2)\land \sigma(u_3){\rightarrow}w$, for every clause $C= u_1\vee u_2 \vee u_3$ of $\Theta$, where $\sigma(a)=a'$ and $\sigma(\neg a)= a$, for every $a\in X\cup Y \cup Z$
7. $f\land \neg w {\rightarrow}w$
8. $\neg K\neg w {\rightarrow}$
Let us assume that $\exists X \forall Y\exists Z \Theta$ is true. Let $A\subseteq
X$ describe the truth assignment on $X$ so that $\forall Y
\exists Z \Phi_{X/A}$ holds (we define $\Phi_{X/A}$ in the proof of the previous result). We will show that $Q$ has an epistemic stable model ${\mathcal{A}}=\{A\cup \{a'{\,|\;}a\in X\setminus A\}\cup\{g\}\}$. Clearly, $Kx$, $x\in A$, and $Kx'$, $x\in X\setminus A$, are true in ${\mathcal{A}}$. Also, $K\neg w$ is true in ${\mathcal{A}}$. All other modal atoms in $Q$ are false in ${\mathcal{A}}$. Thus, ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ consists of rules $x$, for $x\in A$, $x'$, for $x\in
X\setminus A$ and of rules (2)-(7) above. Let $M$ be a stable model of ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ containing $f$. It follows that $w\in M$ and so, $Z\cup Z'
\subseteq M$. Moreover, the Gelfond-Lifschitz reduct of ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ with respect to $M$ consists of rules $x$, for $x\in A$, $x'$, for $x\in
X\setminus A$, all $\neg$-free constraints of type (2), rule $f$, and rules (4)-(6) above, and $M$ is a minimal model of this program.
Let $B=Y\cap M$. By the minimality of $M$, $M=A\cup \{x'{\,|\;}x\in X
\setminus A\}\cup B\cup\{y'{\,|\;}y\in Y\setminus B\} \cup Z\cup Z'\cup
\{f,w\}$. Since $\forall Y \exists Z \Phi_{X/A}$ holds, $\exists Z
\Phi_{X/A,Y/B}$ holds, too. Thus, let $D\subseteq Z$ be a subset of $Z$ such that $\Phi_{X/A,Y/B,Z/D}$ is true. It follows that $M'=A\cup \{x'
{\,|\;}x\in X \setminus A\}\cup B\cup\{y'{\,|\;}y\in Y\setminus B\} \cup
D\cup\{z'{\,|\;}z\in Z\setminus D\} \cup \{f\}$ is also a model of the Gelfond-Lifschitz reduct of ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ with respect to $M$, contradicting the minimality of $M$.
Thus, if $M$ is an answer set of ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$, it must contain $g$. Consequently, it does not contain $f$ and so no rules of type (4)-(7) contribute to it. It follows that $M=A\cup \{a'{\,|\;}a\in
X\setminus A\} \cup\{g\}$ and, as it indeed is an answer set of ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$, ${\mathcal{A}}={\mathcal{ST}}({{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}})$. Thus, ${\mathcal{A}}$ is a epistemic stable model, as claimed.
Conversely, let as assume that $Q$ has an epistemic stable model, say, ${\mathcal{A}}$. It must be that ${\mathcal{A}}\models K\neg w$ (otherwise, ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ contains a contradiction and has no stable models). Let us define $A=\{x\in X{\,|\;}{\mathcal{A}}\models Kx\}$ and $B=\{x\in X{\,|\;}{\mathcal{A}}\models Kx'\}$. It follows that ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ consists of the clauses:
1. $x$, for $x\in A$ and $x'$, for $x\in B$
2. $x\land x'{\rightarrow}$; and $\neg x\land \neg x'{\rightarrow}$, for every $x\in X$
3. $\neg g{\rightarrow}f$; and $\neg f{\rightarrow}g$
4. $f {\rightarrow}y \vee y'$; and $f{\rightarrow}z \vee z'$, for every $y\in Y$ and $z\in Z$
5. $f\land w {\rightarrow}z$; and $f\land w {\rightarrow}z'$, for every $z\in Z$
6. $f\land \sigma(u_1)\land\sigma(u_2)\land\sigma(u_3){\rightarrow}w$, for every clause $C= u_1\vee u_2 \vee u_3$ of $\Phi$, where $\sigma(a)=a'$ and $\sigma(\neg a)= a$, for every $a\in X\cup Y \cup Z$.
7. $f, \neg w {\rightarrow}w$
We have that ${\mathcal{A}}$ is precisely the set of stable models of this program. Since ${\mathcal{A}}\not=\emptyset$, $B=X\setminus A$. If $M$ is a stable model of ${{Q}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ and contains $f$, then it contains $w$. But then, as $M\in{\mathcal{A}}$, ${\mathcal{A}}\not\models K\neg w$, a contradiction. It follows that there is no stable model containing $f$. That is, the program consisting of the following rules has no stable model:
1. $x$, for $x\in A$ and $x'$, for $x\in X\setminus A$
2. $y \vee y'$; and $z \vee z'$, for every $y\in Y$ and $z\in Z$
3. $w {\rightarrow}z$; and $w {\rightarrow}z'$, for every $z\in Z$
4. $\sigma(u_1)\land\sigma(u_2)\land\sigma(u_3){\rightarrow}w$, for every clause $C= u_1\vee u_2 \vee u_3$ of $\Theta$, where $\sigma(a)=a'$ and $\sigma(\neg a)= a$, for every $a\in X\cup Y \cup Z$.
5. $\neg w {\rightarrow}w$
But then, the formula $\forall Y\exists Z \Theta_{|X/A}$ is true and, consequently, the formula $\exists X \forall Y\exists Z \Theta$ is true, too. $\Box$
For the other two epistemic semantics, Remark 1 implies that the problem of the existence of an epistemic model (epistemic supported model) is in the class $\Sigma_2^P$. The $\Sigma_2^P$-hardness of the problem can be proved by similar techniques as those we used for the case of epistemic stable models. Thus, we have the following result.
\[thm:3\] The problem to decide whether an epistemic program $P\subseteq{\mathcal{L}}_K$ has an epistemic model (epistemic supported model, respectively) is $\Sigma_2^P$-complete.
Modeling with Epistemic Programs
================================
We will now present several problems which illustrate the advantages offered by the language of epistemic programs we developed in the previous two sections. Whenever we use predicate programs, we understand that their semantics is that of the corresponding ground programs.
First, we consider two graph problems related to the existence of Hamiltonian cycles. Let $G$ be a directed graph. An edge in $G$ is *critical* if it belongs to every hamiltonian cycle in $G$. The following problems are of interest:
1. Given a directed graph $G$, find the set of all critical edges of $G$
2. Given a directed graph $G$, and integers $p$ and $k$, find a set $R$ of no more than $p$ new edges such that $G\cup R$ has no more than $k$ critical edges.
Let $HC(vtx,edge)$ be any standard ASP encoding of the Hamiltonian cycle problem, in which predicates $vtx$ and $edge$ represent $G$, and a predicate $hc$ represents edges of a candidate hamiltonian cycle. We assume the rules of $HC(vtx,edge)$ are written from left to right so that they can be regarded as elements of ${\mathcal{L}}$. Then, simply adding to $HC(vtx,edge)$ the rule:
> $K hc(X,Y) {\rightarrow}critical(X,Y)$
yields a correct representation of the first problem. We write $HC_{cr}(vtx,edge)$ to denote this program. Also, for a directed graph $G=(V,E)$, we define
> $D=\{vtx(v){\,|\;}v\in V\} \cup \{edge(v,w){\,|\;}(v,w)\in E\}$.
We have the following result.
Let $G=(V,E)$ be a directed graph. If $HC_{cr}(vtx,edge) \cup D$ has no epistemic stable models, then every edge in $G$ is critical (trivially). Otherwise, the epistemic program $HC_{cr}(vtx,edge)\cup D$ has a unique epistemic stable model ${\mathcal{A}}$ and the set $\{(v,w){\,|\;}{\mathcal{A}}\models
critical(u,v) \}$ is the set of critical edges in $G$.
Proof (Sketch): Let $H$ be the grounding of $HC_{cr}(vtx,edge) \cup D$. If $H$ has no epistemic stable models, it follows that the “non-epistemic” part $H'$ of $H$ has no stable models (as no atom of the form $critical(x,y)$ appears in it). As $H'$ encodes the existence of a hamiltonian cycle in $G$, it follows that $G$ has no Hamiltonian cycles. Thus, trivially, every edge of $G$ belongs to every Hamiltonian cycle of $G$ and so, every edge of $G$ is critical.
Thus, let us assume that ${\mathcal{A}}$ is an epistemic stable model of $H$. Also, let $S$ be the set of all stable models of $H'$ (they correspond to Hamiltonian cycles of $G$; each model contains, in particular, atoms of the form $hc(x,y)$, where $(x,y)$ ranges over the edges of the corresponding Hamiltonian cycle). The reduct ${{H}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ consists of $H'$ (non-epistemic part of $H$ is unaffected by the reduct operation) and of $C'$, a set of some facts of the form $critical(x,y)$. Thus, the stable models of the reduct are of the form $M\cup C'$, where $M\in S$. That is, ${\mathcal{A}}=\{M\cup C'{\,|\;}M\in S\}$. Let us denote by $C$ the set of the atoms $critical(x,y)$, where $(x,y)$ belongs to every hamiltonian cycle of $G$ (is critical). One can compute now that ${{H}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}} =
H'\cup C$. Since ${\mathcal{A}}={\mathcal{ST}}({{H}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}})$, ${\mathcal{A}}= \{M\cup C{\,|\;}M\in S\}$. Thus, $HC_{cr}(vtx,edge)\cup D$ has a unique epistemic stable model, as claimed. It also follows that the set $\{(v,w){\,|\;}{\mathcal{A}}\models
critical(u,v) \}$ is the set of critical edges in $G$. $\Box$
To represent the second problem, we proceed as follows. First, we “select” new edges to be added to the graph and impose constraints that guarantee that all new edges are indeed new, and that no more than $p$ new edges are selected (we use here *lparse* syntax for brevity; the constraint can be encoded strictly in the language ${\mathcal{L}}_K$).
> $vtx(X)\land vtx(Y) {\rightarrow}newEdge(X,Y)$\
> $newEdge(X,Y)\land edge(X,Y){\rightarrow}\bot$\
> $(p+1) \{newEdge(X,Y): vtx(X), vtx(Y)\} {\rightarrow}\bot$.
Next, we define the set of edges of the extended graph, using a predicate $edgeEG$:
> $edge(X,Y){\rightarrow}edgeEG(X,Y)$\
> $newEdge(X,Y){\rightarrow}edgeEG(X,Y)$
Finally, we define critical edges and impose a constraint on their number (again, exploiting the *lparse* syntax for brevity sake):
> $edgeEG(X,Y)\land K hc(X,Y) {\rightarrow}critical(X,Y)$\
> $(k+1)\{critical(X,Y): edgeEG(X,Y)\}{\rightarrow}\bot$.
We define $Q$ to consist of all these rules together with all the rules of the program $HC(vtx,edgeEG)$. We now have the following theorem. The proof is similar to that above and so we omit it.
Let $G$ be a directed graph. There is an extension of $G$ with no more than $p$ new edges so that the resulting graph has no more than $k$ critical edges if and only if the program $Q\cup D$ has an epistemic stable model.
For another example we consider the unique model problem: given a CNF formula $F$, the goal is to decide whether $F$ has a unique minimal model. The unique model problem was also considered by Faber and Woltran [@FaberW09]. We will show two encodings of the problem by means of epistemic programs. The first one uses the semantics of epistemic models and is especially direct. The other one uses the semantics of epistemic stable models.
Let $F$ be a propositional theory consisting of constraints $L_1\land
\ldots\land L_k{\rightarrow}\bot$, where $L_i$’s are literals. Any propositional theory can be rewritten into an equivalent theory of such form. We denote by $F^K$ the formula obtained from $F$ by replacing every atom $x$ with the modal atom $Kx$.
For every theory $F\subseteq{\mathcal{L}}$ consisting of constraints, $F$ has a least model if and only if the epistemic program $F\cup F^K$ has an epistemic model.
Proof: Let us assume that $F$ has a least model. We define ${\mathcal{A}}$ to consist of all models of $F$, and we denote the least model of $F$ by $M$. We will show that ${\mathcal{A}}$ is an epistemic model of $F\cup F^K$. Clearly, for every $x\in M$, ${\mathcal{A}}\models Kx$. Similarly, for every $x\not\in M$, ${\mathcal{A}}\models \neg Kx$. Thus, ${{[F^K]}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}=\emptyset$. Consequently, ${{[F\cup F^K]}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}} = F$ and so, ${\mathcal{A}}$ is precisely the set of all models of ${{[F\cup F^K]}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$. Thus, ${\mathcal{A}}$ is an epistemic model.
Conversely, let ${\mathcal{A}}$ be an epistemic model of $F\cup F^K$. It follows that ${{[F^K]}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}=\emptyset$ (otherwise, ${{[F\cup F^K]}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ contains $\bot$ and ${\mathcal{A}}$ would have to be empty, contradicting the definition of an epistemic model). Thus, ${{[F\cup F^K]}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}=F$ and consequently, ${\mathcal{A}}$ is the set of all models of $F$. Let $M=\{x\in{\mathit{At}}{\,|\;}{\mathcal{A}}\models Kx\}$ and let $$\label{eq17}
a_1\land\ldots\land a_m \land\neg b_1\land\ldots\land\neg b_n {\rightarrow}\bot$$ be a rule in $F$. Then, $$K a_1\land\ldots\land K a_m \land\neg K b_1\land\ldots\land\neg K b_n
{\rightarrow}\bot$$ is a rule in $F^K$. As ${{[F^K]}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}=\emptyset$, $${\mathcal{A}}\not\models K a_1\land\ldots\land K a_m \land\neg K b_1\land\ldots\land
\neg K b_n.$$ Thus, for some $i$, $1\leq i\leq m$, ${\mathcal{A}}\not\models K a_i$, or for some $j$, $1\leq j\leq n$, ${\mathcal{A}}\models K b_j$. In the first case, $a_i
\notin M$, in the latter, $b_j\in M$. In either case, $M$ is a model of rule (\[eq17\]). It follows that $M$ is a model of $F$. Let $M'$ be a model of $F$. Then $M'\in{\mathcal{A}}$ and, by the definition of $M$, $M
\subseteq M'$. Thus, $M$ is a least model of $F$. $\Box$
Next, we will encode the same problem as an epistemic program under the epistemic stable model semantics. The idea is quite similar. We only need to add rules to generate all candidate models.
For every theory $F\subseteq{\mathcal{L}}$ consisting of constraints, $F$ has a least model if and only if the epistemic program $$F\cup F^K \cup \{\neg x{\rightarrow}x'{\,|\;}x\in {\mathit{At}}\}\cup \{\neg x'{\rightarrow}x{\,|\;}x\in {\mathit{At}}\}$$ has an epistemic stable model.
We note that an even simpler encoding can be obtained if we use *lparse* choice rules. In this case, we can replace $\{\neg x{\rightarrow}x'{\,|\;}x\in {\mathit{At}}\}\cup \{\neg x'{\rightarrow}x{\,|\;}x\in {\mathit{At}}\}$ with $\{\{x\}{\,|\;}x\in{\mathit{At}}\}$.
Connection to Gelfond’s Epistemic Programs
==========================================
We will now return to the original formalism of epistemic specifications proposed by Gelfond [@Gelfond91] (under the restriction to epistemic programs we discussed here). We will show that it can be expressed in a rather direct way in terms of our epistemic programs in the two-valued setting and under the epistemic supported-model semantics.
The reduction we are about to describe is similar to the well-known one used to eliminate the “strong” negation from disjunctive logic programs with strong negation. In particular, it requires an extension to the language ${\mathcal{L}}$. Specifically, for every atom $x\in {\mathit{At}}$ we introduce a fresh atom $x'$ and we denote the extended language by ${\mathcal{L}}'$. The intended role of $x'$ is to represent in ${\mathcal{L}}'$ the literal $\neg x$ from ${\mathcal{L}}$. Building on this idea, we assign to each set $W$ of literals in ${\mathcal{L}}$ the set $$W'=(W\cap {\mathit{At}}) \cup \{x'{\,|\;}\neg x\in W\}.$$ In this way, sets of literals from ${\mathcal{L}}$ (in particular, three-valued interpretations of ${\mathcal{L}}$) are represented as sets of atoms from ${\mathcal{L}}'$ (two-valued interpretations of ${\mathcal{L}}'$).
We now note that the truth and falsity of a formula form ${\mathcal{L}}$ under a three-valued interpretation can be expressed as the truth and falsity of certain formulas from ${\mathcal{L}}'$ in the two-valued setting. The following result is well known.
\[prop:2\] For every formula ${\varphi}\in{\mathcal{L}}$ there are formulas ${\varphi}^-, {\varphi}^+\in{\mathcal{L}}'$ such that for every set of literals $W$ (in ${\mathcal{L}}$)
1. $v_W({\varphi})={\mathbf{t}}$ if and only if $u_{W'}({\varphi}^+)={\mathbf{t}}$
2. $v_W({\varphi})={\mathbf{f}}$ if and only if $u_{W'}({\varphi}^-)={\mathbf{f}}$
Moreover, the formulas ${\varphi}^-$ and ${\varphi}^+$ can be constructed in polynomial time with respect to the size of ${\varphi}$.
Proof: This a folklore result. We provide a sketch of a proof for the completeness sake. We define ${\varphi}^+$ and ${\varphi}^-$ by recursively as follows:
1. $x^+ = x$ and $x^- = \neg x'$, if $x\in{\mathit{At}}$
2. $(\neg {\varphi})^+ = \neg{\varphi}^-$ and $(\neg {\varphi})^- = \neg{\varphi}^+$
3. $({\varphi}\lor \psi)^+={\varphi}^+\lor \psi^+$ and $({\varphi}\lor \psi)^-={\varphi}^-\lor \psi^-$; the case of the conjunction is dealt with analogously
4. $({\varphi}{\rightarrow}\psi)^+ = {\varphi}^-{\rightarrow}\psi^+$ and $({\varphi}{\rightarrow}\psi)^- = {\varphi}^+{\rightarrow}\psi^-$.
One can check that formulas ${\varphi}^+$ and ${\varphi}^-$ defined in this way satisfy the assertion. $\Box$
We will now define the transformation $\sigma$ that allows us to eliminate strong negation. First, for a literal $L\in {\mathcal{L}}$, we now define $$\sigma(L) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
x & \mbox{if $L=x$}\\
x' & \mbox{if $L=\neg x$}
\end{array}
\right.$$ Furthermore, if $E$ is a simple modal literal or its default negation, we define $$\sigma(E) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
K{\varphi}^+ & \mbox{if $E=K{\varphi}$}\\
\neg K{\varphi}^{-} & \mbox{if $E=\neg K{\varphi}$}\\
\neg K{\varphi}^{+} & \mbox{if $E={\mathit{not\;}}K{\varphi}$}\\
K{\varphi}^{-} & \mbox{if $E={\mathit{not\;}}\neg K{\varphi}$}
\end{array}
\right.$$ and for an epistemic premise $E = E_1,\ldots, E_t$ (where each $E_i$ is a simple modal literal or its default negation) we set $$\sigma(E) = \sigma(E_1)\land\ldots\land \sigma(E_t).$$ Next, if $r$ is an epistemic rule $$L_1 \vee \ldots\vee L_k {\leftarrow}F_1,\ldots, F_m,{\mathit{not\;}}F_{m+1},\ldots, {\mathit{not\;}}F_n, E$$ we define $$\sigma(r) = \sigma(E)\land \sigma(F_1)\land\ldots\land \sigma(F_m)\land \neg
\sigma(F_{m+1})\land\ldots\land \neg \sigma(F_n) {\rightarrow}\sigma(L_1) \vee \ldots\vee \sigma(L_k).$$ Finally, for an epistemic program $P$, we set $$\sigma(P)=\{\sigma(r){\,|\;}r\in P\}) \cup\{x\land x' {\rightarrow}\bot\}.$$ We note that $\sigma(P)$ is indeed an epistemic program in the language ${\mathcal{L}}_K$ (according to our definition of epistemic programs). The role of the rules $x\land x' {\rightarrow}\bot$ is to ensure that sets forming epistemic (stable, supported) models of $\sigma(P)$ correspond to consistent sets of literals (the only type of set of literals allowed in world views).
Given a three-valued possible structure ${\mathcal{A}}$, we define ${\mathcal{A}}'=\{W'{\,|\;}W\in {\mathcal{A}}\}$, and we regard ${\mathcal{A}}'$ as a two-valued possible-world structure. We now have the following theorem.
Let $P$ be an epistemic program according to Gelfond. Then a three-valued possible-world structure ${\mathcal{A}}$ is a world view of $P$ if and only if a two-valued possible-world structure ${\mathcal{A}}'$ is an epistemic supported model of $\sigma(P)$.
Proof (Sketch): Let $P$ be an epistemic program according to Gelfond, ${\mathcal{A}}$ a possible-world structure and $W$ a set of literals. We first observe that the G-reduct $P^{{\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}}$ can be described as the result of a certain two-step process. Namely, we define the *epistemic reduct* of $P$ with respect to ${\mathcal{A}}$ to be the disjunctive logic program $P^{\mathcal{A}}$ obtained from $P$ by removing every rule whose epistemic premise $E$ satisfies ${\mathcal{A}}\not\models E$, and by removing the epistemic premise from every other rule in $P$. This construction is the three-valued counterpart to the one we employ in our approach. It is clear that the epistemic reduct of $P$ with respect to ${\mathcal{A}}$, with some abuse of notation we will denote it by ${{P}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$, is a disjunctive logic program with strong negation.
Let $Q$ be a disjunctive program with strong negation and $W$ a set of literals. By the *supp-reduct* of $Q$ with respect to $W$, $R^{sp}(Q,W)$, we mean the set of the heads of all rules whose bodies are satisfied by $W$ (which in the three-valued setting means that every literal in the body not in the scope of ${\mathit{not\;}}$ is in $W$, and every literal in the body in the scope of ${\mathit{not\;}}$ is not in $W$). A consistent set $W$ of literals is a supported answer set of $Q$ if $W\in{\mathit{Min}}(R^{sp}(Q,W))$ (this is a natural extension of the definition of a supported model [@abw87; @bg93] to the case of disjunctive logic programs with strong negation; again, we do not regard inconsistent sets of literals as supported answer sets).
Clearly, $P^{{\langle}{\mathcal{A}},W{\rangle}} = R^{sp}({{P}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}},W)$. Thus, ${\mathcal{A}}$ is a world view of $P$ according to the definition by Gelfond if and only if ${\mathcal{A}}$ is a collection of all supported answer sets of ${{P}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$.
We also note that by Proposition \[prop:2\], if $E$ is an epistemic premise, then ${\mathcal{A}}\models E$ if and only if ${\mathcal{A}}'\models \sigma(E)$. It follows that $\sigma({{P}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}) = {{\sigma(P)}^{{{\mathcal{A}}'}}}$. In other words, constructing the epistemic reduct of $P$ with respect to ${\mathcal{A}}$ and then translating the resulting disjunctive logic program with strong negation into the corresponding disjunctive logic program without strong negation yields the same result as first translating the epistemic program (in the Gelfond’s system) into our language of epistemic programs and then computing the reduct with respect to ${\mathcal{A}}'$. We note that there is a one-to-one correspondence between supported answer sets of ${{P}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ and supported models of $\sigma({{P}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}})$ ($\sigma$, when restricted to programs consisting of rules without epistemic premises, is the standard transformation eliminating strong negation and preserving the stable and supported semantics). Consequently, there is a one-to-one correspondence between supported answer sets of ${{P}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ and supported models of $ {{\sigma(P)}^{{{\mathcal{A}}'}}}$ (cf. our observation above). Thus, ${\mathcal{A}}$ consists of supported answer sets of ${{P}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ if and only if ${\mathcal{A}}'$ consists of supported models of ${{\sigma(P)}^{{{\mathcal{A}}'}}}$. Consequently, ${\mathcal{A}}$ is a world view of $P$ if and only if ${\mathcal{A}}'$ is an epistemic supported model of $\sigma(P)$. $\Box$
Epistemic Models of Arbitrary Theories
======================================
So far, we defined the notions of epistemic models, epistemic stable models and epistemic supported models only for the case of epistemic programs. However, this restriction is not essential. We recall that the definition of these three epistemic semantics consists of two steps. The first step produces the reduct of an epistemic program $P$ with respect to a possible-world structure, say ${\mathcal{A}}$. This reduct happens to be (modulo a trivial syntactic transformation) a standard disjunctive logic program in the language ${\mathcal{L}}$ (no modal atoms anymore). If the set of models (respectively, stable models, supported models) of the reduct program coincides with ${\mathcal{A}}$, ${\mathcal{A}}$ is an epistemic model (respectively, epistemic stable or supported model) of $P$. However, the concepts of a model, stable model and supported model are defined for *arbitrary* theories in ${\mathcal{L}}$. This is obviously well known for the semantics of models. The stable-model semantics was extended to the full language ${\mathcal{L}}$ by Ferraris [@fer05] and the supported-model semantics by Truszczynski [@tr10]. Thus, there is no reason precluding the extension of the definition of the corresponding epistemic types of models to the general case. We start be generalizing the concept of the reduct.
Let $T$ be an arbitrary theory in ${\mathcal{L}}_K$ and let ${\mathcal{A}}$ be a possible-world structure. The *epistemic reduct* of $T$ with respect to ${\mathcal{A}}$, ${{T}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}}$ in symbols, is the theory obtained from $T$ by replacing each maximal modal atom $K{\varphi}$ with $\top$, if ${\mathcal{A}}\models K{\varphi}$, and with $\bot$, otherwise.
We note that if $T$ is an epistemic program, this notion of the reduct does not coincide with the one we discussed before. Indeed, now no rule is dropped and no modal literals are dropped; rather modal atoms are replaced with $\top$ and $\bot$. However, the replacements are executed in such a way as to ensure the same behavior. Specifically, one can show that models, stable models and supported models of the two reducts coincide.
Next, we generalize the concepts of the three types of epistemic models.
\[def14\] Let $T$ be an arbitrary theory in ${\mathcal{L}}_K$. A possible-world structure ${\mathcal{A}}$ is an *epistemic model* (respectively, an *epistemic stable model*, or an *epistemic supported model*) of $P$, if ${\mathcal{A}}$ is the set of models (respectively, stable models or supported models) of ${\mathcal{M}}({{P}^{{{\mathcal{A}}}}})$.
From the comments we made above, it follows that if $T$ is an epistemic program, this more general definition yields the came notions of epistemic models of the three types as the earlier one.
We note that even in the more general setting the complexity of reasoning with epistemic (stable, supported) models remains unchanged. Specifically, we have the following result.
\[thm:4\] The problem to decide whether an epistemic theory $T\subseteq{\mathcal{L}}_K$ has an epistemic stable model is $\Sigma_3^P$-complete. The problem to decide whether an epistemic theory $T\subseteq{\mathcal{L}}_K$ has an epistemic model (epistemic supported model, respectively) is $\Sigma_2^P$-complete.
Proof(Sketch): The hardness part follows from our earlier results concerning epistemic programs. To prove membership, we modify Proposition \[prop:char\], and show a polynomial time algorithm with a $\Sigma_2^P$ oracle (NP oracle for the last two problems) that decides, given a propositional theory $S$ and a modal formula $K{\varphi}$ (with ${\varphi}\in{\mathcal{L}}_K$ and not necessarily in ${\mathcal{L}}$) whether ${\mathcal{ST}}(S)
\models K{\varphi}$ (respectively, ${\mathcal{M}}(S)\models K{\varphi}$, or ${\mathcal{SP}}(S)
\models K{\varphi}$). $\Box$
Discussion
==========
In this paper, we proposed a two-valued formalism of epistemic theories — subsets of the language of modal propositional logic. We proposed a uniform way, in which semantics of propositional theories (the classical one as well as nonmonotonic ones: stable and supported) can be extended to the case of epistemic theories. We showed that the semantics of epistemic supported models is closely related to the original semantics of epistemic specifications proposed by Gelfond. Specifically we showed that the original formalism of Gelfond can be expressed in a straightforward way by means of epistemic programs in our sense under the semantics of epistemic supported models. Essentially all that is needed is to use fresh symbols $x'$ to represent strong negation $\neg x$, and use the negation operator of our formalism, ${\varphi}{\rightarrow}\bot$ or, in the shorthand, $\neg {\varphi}$, to model the default negation ${\mathit{not\;}}{\varphi}$.
We considered in more detail the three semantics mentioned above. However, other semantics may also yield interesting epistemic counterparts. In particular, it is clear that Definition \[def14\] can be used also with the minimal model semantics or with the Faber-Leone-Pfeifer semantics [@flp04]. Each semantics gives rise to an interesting epistemic formalism that warrants further studies.
In logic programming, eliminating strong negation does not result in any loss of the expressive power but, at least for the semantics of stable models, disjunctions cannot be compiled away in any concise way (unless the polynomial hierarchy collapses). In the setting of epistemic programs, the situation is similar. The strong negation can be compiled away. But the availability of disjunctions in the heads and the availability of epistemic premises in the bodies of rules are essential. Each of these factors separately brings the complexity one level up. Moreover, when used together under the semantics of epistemic stable models they bring the complexity two levels up. This points to the intrinsic importance of having in a knowledge representation language means to represent indefiniteness in terms of disjunctions, and what is known to a program (theory) — in terms of a modal operator $K$.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
This work was partially supported by the NSF grant IIS-0913459.
[10]{}
Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Generation Computing **9** (1991) 365–385
Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: The stable semantics for logic programs. In: Proceedings of the 5th [I]{}nternational [C]{}onference on [L]{}ogic [P]{}rogramming (ICLP 1988), MIT Press (1988) 1070–1080
Gelfond, M.: Strong introspection. In: Proceedings of AAAI 1991. (1991) 386–391
Faber, W., Woltran, S.: Manifold answer-set programs for meta-reasoning. In Erdem, E., Lin, F., Schaub, T., eds.: Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning, 10th International Conference, LPNMR 2009. Volume 5753 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science., Springer (2009) 115–128
Marek, W., Truszczyński, M.: Autoepistemic logic. Journal of the [ACM]{} **38** (1991) 588–619
Eiter, T., Gottlob, G.: On the computational cost of disjunctive logic programming: propositional case. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence **15** (1995) 289–323
Apt, K., Blair, H., Walker, A.: Towards a theory of declarative knowledge. In Minker, J., ed.: Foundations of deductive databases and logic programming, Morgan Kaufmann (1988) 89–142
Baral, C., Gelfond, M.: Logic programming and knowledge representation. Journal of Logic Programming **19/20** (1994) 73–148
Brass, S., Dix, J.: haracterizations of the [D]{}isjunctive [S]{}table [S]{}emantics by [P]{}artial [E]{}valuation. Journal of Logic Programming **32(3)** (1997) 207–228
Inoue, K., Sakama, C.: Negation as failure in the head. Journal of Logic Programming **35** (1998) 39–78
Ferraris, P.: Answer sets for propositional theories. In: Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning, 8th International Conference, LPNMR 2005. Volume 3662 of LNAI., Springer (2005) 119–131
Truszczynski, M.: Reducts of propositional theories, satisfiability relations, and generalizations of semantics of logic programs. Artificial Intelligence (2010) In press, available through Science Direct at [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2010.08.004]{}.
Faber, W., Leone, N., Pfeifer, G.: Recursive aggregates in disjunctive logic programs: semantics and complexity. In: [Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2004)]{}. Volume 3229 of LNAI., Springer (2004) 200 – 212
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
FTUV-011031\
1.5cm
**T and CPT in B-Factories [^1]**
2.em
[J. Bernabéu$^{1}$, M.C. Bañuls$^2$ and F. Martínez-Vidal$^{3}$ ]{}\
[*$^1$ Depto. Física Teórica, Universitat de València (Spain)*]{}\
[*$^2$ IFIC, Centro Mixto Universitat de València - CSIC (Spain)*]{}\
[*$^3$ INFN-Sezione di Pisa, Scuola Normale Superiore (Italy)*]{}\
0.5em
[**Abstract**]{}
[For the $B_d$ meson system, CP, T and CPT indirect violation can be described using two physical parameters, $\ve$ and $\delta$. The traditional observables based on flavour tag and used in the kaon system, are not helpful in the $B_d$ case, and new asymmetries have to be introduced. Here such alternative observables, based on CP tag, are presented, together with the first estimation on the sensitivity that current asymmetric B-factories can achieve on their measurement.]{}
Introduction
============
Violation of CP, T and CPT symmetries in the time evolution of $K^0$-$\bar{K}^0$ was studied by the CP-LEAR experiment [@cplear] from the preparation of definite flavour states. The study of this *flavour-to-flavour* evolution allows the construction of observables which violate CP and T, or CP and CPT. In order to be non-vanishing, nevertheless, these observables need the presence of an absorptive part in the effective Hamiltonian that governs neutral meson system. The different lifetimes of physical states $K_L$ and $K_S$ provides this ingredient. In the case of $B_d$ mesons, on the contrary, the width difference $\dg$ between the physical states is expected to be negligible[@kh87], so that the T- and CPT-odd observables proposed for kaons, and based on flavour tag, will practically vanish for a $B_d$ system.
Here alternative observables are discussed, which allow the study of CP, T and CPT indirect violation in the $B_d$ system[@bb99.2]. Based on CP-tag[@bb99], these observables do not need the presence of $\dg \neq 0$, and can be constructed from the entangled states of $B_d$ mesons.
In the following section, the invariant parameters $\ve$ and $\delta$ are introduced to describe indirect violation of symmetries in the neutral meson system. In section \[sec:CPtag\] we describe the CP tag of $B_d$ from the entangled states in a $B$-factory. Next, section \[sec:asymmetries\] reviews three different kinds of asymmetries that can be constructed from these states, namely, *flavour-to-flavour* and both genuine and non-genuine *CP-to-flavour* asymmetries. Finally, in section \[sec:experiment\] the first estimates on the reach and sensitivity of the experimental analysis are given.
Invariant description of CP, T and CPT violation in the $B$ system {#sec:parameters}
==================================================================
The physical states in the neutral $B$-meson system are a linear combination of the definite flavour $B^0$ and $\bar{B}^0$. Physical states can also be written in terms of CP eigenstates, $|B_{\pm}\rangle \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(I \pm CP)|B^0\rangle$, which are physical iff the CP operator is well defined. To do so, one has to introduce two complex parameters, $\ve_{1,2}$, to describe the CP mixing, so that $|B_{1(2)} \rangle =
\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+|\varepsilon_{1(2)}|^2}} \left [|B_{+(-)}
\rangle +\varepsilon_{1(2)}|B_{-(+)} \rangle \right ]$. The complex parameters $\ve_{1, 2}$, invariant under rephasing of the meson states, are better interpreted in terms of $\ve \equiv (\ve_1+\ve_2)/2$ and $\delta \equiv \ve_1-\ve_2$, whose observable character is explicit when they are written in terms of the effective hamiltonian matrix elements [@bb98].
Discrete symmetries impose different restrictions on the effective mass matrix, $H=M-\frac{i}{2}\Gamma$, and thus on the invariant parameters $\ve$ and $\delta$:
- CPT invariance requires[^2] $H_{11}=H_{22}$, so that $\delta=0$, with no restriction on $\ve$;
- T invariance imposes ${\rm Im}(M_{12} {\rm CP}_{12}^*)={\rm Im}(\Gamma_{12}{\rm CP}_{12}^*)=0$, and so $\ve=0$;
- and CP conservation requires both $\ve=\delta=0$.
In the exact limit $\Delta \Gamma=0$, an approximation that is expected to be excellent for the $B_d$ system, both ${\rm Re}(\ve)$ and ${\rm Im}(\delta)$ vanish. Then $\ie \neq 0$ is a proof of both CP and T violation, and $\rd \neq 0$ is a proof of CP and CPT violation, but neither $\rep=0$ nor $\id =0$ are proof of a fundamental invariance. Information on the symmetry parameters can be extracted from the study of time evolution of $B$ meson entangled states.
CP-Tag from entangled states {#sec:CPtag}
============================
In a $B$ factory operating at the $\Upsilon(4S)$ peak, correlated pairs of neutral $B$-mesons are produced through $e^+ e^- \rightarrow \Upsilon(4S) \rightarrow B \bar{B}$. Charge conjugation together with Bose statistics require the initial state to be i>= (B\^0(), \^0(-)> - \^0(), B\^0(-)> ). \[eq:ent\] This permits the performance of a flavour tag: if at $t_0$ one of the mesons decays through a channel $X$, which is only allowed for one flavour, the other meson in the pair must have the opposite flavour at $t_0$, and will later evolve during $\dt=t-t_0$ until its final decay to some state $Y$.
The entangled $B-\bar{B}$ state can also be expressed in terms of the CP eigenstates as $\vert i>=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left (\vert B_-, B_+>
- \vert B_+, B_-> \right )$. Thus it is also possible to carry out a CP tag, if we have a CP-conserving decay into a definite CP final state $X$, so that its detection allows us to identify the decaying meson as a $B_+$ or a $B_-$, which decays into $Y$ after a time $\dt$. In Ref. [@bb99] we described how this determination is possible and unambiguous to [${\cal O}(\lambda^3)$]{}, the flavour-mixing parameter of the CKM matrix. If we consider only decay channels $X$, $Y$ which are either flavour or CP conserving, then the final configuration $(X,\,Y)$ corresponds to a single particle mesonic transition. The intensity for the final configuration, $I(X,\,Y,\dt)\equiv
\fr{1}{2}\int_{\dt}^{\infty} dt' |(X,\,Y)|^2$ is proportional to the time dependent probability for the meson transition.
Asymmetries {#sec:asymmetries}
===========
By comparing the probabilities corresponding to different processes we build time-dependent asymmetries that can be classified into three types.
Flavour-to-flavour genuine asymmetries
--------------------------------------
The final configuration denoted by $(\ell,\ell)$, with flavour definite (for example, semileptonic) decays detected on both sides of the detector, corresponds to *flavour-to-flavour* transition at the meson level. The equivalence is shown in Table \[tab:f2f\].
$(X,\, Y)$ Meson Transition
----------------------- -------------------------------------------------------
$(\ell^+, \, \ell^+)$ $\bar{B}^0 \stackrel{\phantom{c}}{\rightarrow} {B^0}$
$(\ell^-, \, \ell^-)$ $B^0 \rightarrow \bar{B}^0$
$(\ell^+, \, \ell^-)$ $\bar{B}^0 \rightarrow \bar{B}^0$
$(\ell^-, \, \ell^+)$ $B^0 \rightarrow B^0$
: *Flavour-to-flavour* transitions.[]{data-label="tab:f2f"}
The first two processes in the Table are conjugated under CP and also under T. The corresponding Kabir asymmetry[@ka68] is, to linear order in the CPT violating $\delta$, A (\^+, \^+) , \[eq:l+l+\] which does not depend on time. However, in the exact limit $\dg=0$, $\rep$ vanishes, and this quantity will be zero. For the $B_d$ system, experimental limits on $\rep$ are of few parts in a thousand[@ac97] [@bbar01].
A second asymmetry arises from the last two processes in Table \[tab:f2f\], related by a CP or a CPT transformation, A(\^+ , \^-) - 2 [ + ([m ]{})]{},\[eq:l+l-\] which is an odd function of time. This asymmetry also vanishes unless $\dg \neq 0$. Present limits [@ac97] on $\id$ are at the level of few percent.
CP-to-flavour genuine asymmetries
---------------------------------
Alternative asymmetries can be constructed making use of the CP eigenstates, which can be identified in this system by means of a CP tag. If the first decay product, $X$, is a CP eigenstate produced along the CP-conserving direction, i.e. the decay is free of CP violation, and $Y$ is a flavour definite channel, then the mesonic transition corresponding to the configuration $(X, \, Y)$ is of the type *CP-to-flavour*.
In Table \[tab:CP2f\] we show the mesonic transitions, with their related final configurations, connected by genuine symmetry transformations to $B_+ \rightarrow B^0$.
$(X,\, Y)$ Transition Transformation
--------------------------- ----------------------------- ----------------
$(J/\Psi K_S, \, \ell^-)$ $B_+ \rightarrow \bar{B}^0$ CP
$(\ell^-, \, J/\Psi K_L)$ $B^0 \rightarrow B_+$ T
$(\ell^+, \, J/\Psi K_L)$ $\bar{B}^0 \rightarrow B_+$ CPT
: Transitions connected to $(J/\Psi K_S, \, \ell^+)$.[]{data-label="tab:CP2f"}
Comparing the intensities of the four processes, we may construct three genuine asymmetries, namely $A({\rm CP})$, $A({\rm T})$ and $A({\rm CPT})$ [@bb99.2]. A([CP]{}) =-2 () + \^2 (), \[eq:aCP\] the CP odd asymmetry, contains both T-violating and CPT-violating contributions, which are, respectively, odd and even functions of $\dt$. This asymmetry corresponds to the “gold plate” decay [@bigi] and has been measured recently [@abe00]. T and CPT violating terms can be separated by constructing other asymmetries. A([T]{}) =-2 () , \[eq:aT\] the T asymmetry, needs $\ve \neq 0$, and turns out to be purely odd in $\dt$ in the limit we are considering. A([CPT]{})= , \[eq:aCPT\] is the CPT asymmetry. It needs $\delta \neq 0$, and includes both even and odd time dependences.
The above expressions correspond to the limit $\dg=0$, but, being genuine observables, a possible absorptive part could not induce by itself a non-vanishing asymmetry.
CP-to-flavour non-genuine asymmetries
-------------------------------------
The construction of the quantities described in the previous paragraphs requires to tag both $B_+$ and $B_-$ states, and thus the reconstruction of the experimentally challenging decay $B \rightarrow J/\Psi K_L$. Conversely, non-genuine asymmetries offer a possibility to measure the symmetry parameters from the reconstruction of $J/\Psi K_S$ only. But they involve the discrete transformation that we denote $\dt$, consisting of the exchange in the order of appearance of decay products $X$ and $Y$, which cannot be associated with any fundamental symmetry.
Table \[tab:CP2fng\] shows the different transitions we may study from such final states.
$(X,\, Y)$ Transition Transformation
--------------------------- ----------------------------- ----------------
$(J/\Psi K_S, \, \ell^-)$ $B_+ \rightarrow B^0$ CP
$(\ell^+, \, J/\Psi K_S)$ $\bar{B}^0 \rightarrow B_-$ $\dt$
$(\ell^-, \, J/\Psi K_S)$ $\bar{B}^0 \rightarrow B_-$ $\dt$+CP
: Final configurations with only $J/\Psi K_S$.[]{data-label="tab:CP2fng"}
Besides the genuine CP asymmetry, there are two new quantities that can be constructed from the comparison between $(J/\Psi K_S, \, \ell^+)$ and the processes in the table. In the exact limit $\dg =0$, $\dt$ and T operations are found to become equivalent, so that the temporal asymmetry satisfies $A(\dt)\equiv A(\ell^+, \, J/\Psi K_S) = A({\rm T})$ and moreover $A({\rm CP}\dt) \equiv A(\ell^-, \, J/\Psi K_S) = A({\rm CPT})$. Since this result holds for $\dg\approx0$, it is expected to be valid for the $B_d$ system, but not for $B_s$ and even less for $K$. The asymmetries $A(\dt)$ and $A({\rm CP}\dt)$ are non-genuine, and the presence of $\dg \neq 0$ may induce non-vanishing values for them, even if there is no true T or CPT violation. These fake effects, nevertheless, can be calculated and are thus controllable.
CP, T, CPT indirect violation reach at asymmetric B-Factories {#sec:experiment}
=============================================================
The asymmetries described in the previous section can be already constructed from the current data taken at Asymmetric B-Factories [@abe00]. The experimental analysis is based on a simultaneous unbinned likelihood fit of the flavour and CP intensities $I(X,\,Y;\dt)$, together with the $B^0$/$\bar{B}^0$ mistag rates and the $\dt$ resolution function. The coefficients of terms with different temporal dependencies contain the information on the symmetry parameters.
Parameter (Generated) Statistical error
------------------------ ------------------- -------------------
$\fr{\rd}{1+|\ve|^2}$ (0) 0.09
$\fr{\rep}{1+|\ve|^2}$ (0) 0.007
$\fr{\dg}{\Gamma}$ (0) 0.07
$\fr{\ie}{1+|\ve|^2}$ (0.35) 0.04
$\dm$ (0.472 ps$^{-1}$) 0.009
: Projections for 60 fb$^{-1}$.[]{data-label="tab:exp"}
From a simulation study, estimations on the reachable statistical precision for the relevant parameters have been calculated for $\approx$60 fb$^{-1}$ (assuming yields from Ref. [@abe00]) and are shown in Table \[tab:exp\].
Conclusions
===========
We have shown how the two complex rephasing invariant parameters $\ve$ and $\delta$ describe CP, T and CPT indirect violation in $B^0-\bar{B}^0$. In the exact limit $\dg=0$ the number of parameters is reduced to $\ie$ and $\rd$. Observables based on [*flavour-to-flavour*]{} transitions are sensitive to $\rep$, but need $\dg \! \neq \! 0$, and thus are not promising in B-factories. Conversely, these experimental facilities allow the construction of new asymmetries based on combination of flavour and CP tags.
First estimations on the sensitivity reachable on B-factories have been presented. This data will be crucial to achieve the separation of the two ingredients: on one hand CP and T violation, described by $\ve$, and on the other CP and CPT violation, given by $\delta$.
This work has been supported by CICYT, Spain, under Grant AEN99-0692.
[99]{}
[^1]: Talk given at the International Europhysics conference on HEP, HEP2001, July 2001, Budapest (Hungary)
[^2]: Here $H_{ij}$, $M_{ij}$, and so on, represent the matrix elements in the flavour basis $B^0-\bar{B}^0$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
**The Finiteness Result for Khovanov Homology and Localization in Monoidal Categories.**
**Nadya Shirokova.**
**Abstract.**
.5cm
In \[S1\] we constructed the local system of Khovanov complexes on the Vassiliev’s space of knots and extended it to the singular locus. In this paper we introduce the definition of the homology theory (local system or sheaf) of finite type and prove the first finiteness result: the Khovanov local system restricted to the subcategory of knots of the crossing number at most $n$ is the theory of type $\leq n$. This result can be further generalized to the categorification of Birman-Lin theorem \[S2\].
**Contents.**
1\. Introduction. .3cm 2. The Geometric Interpretation of the Cone of the Wall-Crossing Morphism. .3cm
3\. Jones Polynomial and Invariants of Finite Type. .3cm 4. The Grothendieck Group and the Reduced Khovanov Homology . .3cm
5\. $\bigsqcup S^1$- stable Homotopy. Category of Khovanov Spectra. .3cm 6. The Poincare Polynomial. .3cm 7. On the Algebraic Definition of Finiteness. .3cm 8. The Filtration. .3cm 9. The Finiteness Result. .3cm
10\. Further Directions. .3cm 11. Bibliography.
**1. Introduction.**
In \[S2\] we outlined a program of classification of homological knot theories, such as Khovanov’s categorification of the Jones polynomial \[Kh\], Ozsvath-Szabo categorification of Alexander polynomial \[OS\] and Khovanov-Rozansky homology \[KR\]. This program can be further generalized to 3 and 4-manifolds.
.2cm
Namely, we want to classify the following functors (embedded TQFT’s):
$$\xymatrix{
\mathrm \mathcal Spaces \ar[rrr] ^-{functor}_{\mbox{\footnotesize(e.g. Khovanov)}} &&& \mathrm \mathcal Triang.Cat}\\$$
which behave in a prescribed way (via the wall-crossing morphisms) under cobordisms. By Spaces we understand the moduli spaces of manifolds, including the singular ones (e.g. Vassiliev’s space of knots).
.2cm We consider a knot homology theory as a local system, or a constructible sheaf on the space of all objects (knots, including singular ones), extend this local system to the singular locus and introduce the analogue of the “Vassiliev derivative” for categorifications.
.3cm
We get the correspondence between knots (possibly singular) and objects of the triangulated category (spectra), satisfying the exact triangle relations. .2cm
Our classification is given by the “type” of the theory, the homological condition on its extension to the strata of the discriminant, similar to the Vassiliev’s classification of knot invariants.
Recall that by Vassiliev, the knot invariant is of finite type $n$, if for any selfintersection of the discriminant of the space of knots of codimension $n+1$, the alternated sum of the invariants of knots from $2^{n+1}$ adjacent chambers is zero.
.3cm The main example of this paper is the Khovanov homology, however our results can be generalized to Khovanov-Rozansky theory. Recall that M.Khovanov \[Kh\] categorified the Jones polynomial, i.e. he found a homology theory, the Euler characteristics of which equals the Jones polynomial. From the diagram of the knot he constructs a bigraded complex, associated with this diagram, using 0 and 1- resolutions of the knot crossings.
The complex becomes the sum of the tensor products of the vector space V, where the homological degree is given by the number of 1’s in the complete resolution of the knot diagram. In \[S1\] we constructed the local system of Khovanov complexes on the space of knots, the wall-crossing morphisms for the local system and introduced the definition of the Khovanov homology of a singular knot.
The discriminant of the space of knots corresponds to knots with transversal self-intersection, it is an algebraic hypersurface which is cooriented, so that all cobordisms between knots are directed, i.e. moving between chambers we change overcrossing to undercrossing by passing through a knot with a single double point. We extended the Khovanov local system to the discriminant by the cone of a wall-crossing morphism \[S1\]:
.5cm
[**Definition 1 \[S1\].**]{} The Khovanov homology of the singular knot (with a single double point) is a bigraded complex $$\renewcommand\arraystretch{1}
X^{\bullet}\oplus Y^{\bullet}[1] \quad\mathrm{with \ the \ matrix \ differential}\quad
d_{C_\omega}=\left(\!\!\!\begin{array}{cc}
d_X & \omega \\ 0 & d_Y[1] \end{array}\!\!\right),$$ where $X^{\bullet}$ is Khovanov complex of the knot with overcrossing, $Y^{\bullet}$ is the Khovanov complex of the knot with undercrossing and $\omega$ is the wall-crossing morphism. .2cm
In this paper we give the geometric interpretation of the homology of the cone of the wall-crossing morphism:
.2cm [**Definition 2.**]{} The Khovanov homology of the singular knot $K$ of n crossings(with kth single double point ) is a bigraded complex $$\renewcommand\arraystretch{1}
C^{\bullet}\oplus C^{\bullet}[2] \quad\mathrm{with \ the \ matrix \ differential}\quad
d_{C_\omega}=\left(\!\!\!\begin{array}{cc}
d_C & 0 \\ 0 & d_C[2] \end{array}\!\!\right),$$ where $C^{\bullet}$ is the Khovanov complex of the knot of (n-1) crossings where kth double point of $K$ is given 1-resolution.
.3cm This implies the geometric definition of the local system being of finite type n: .5cm [**Definition (G)**]{}. The local system of Khovanov complexes, extended to the discriminant of the space of manifolds via the cone of morphism, is a [**local system of order n**]{} if for any selfintersection of the discriminant of codimension $n$, its $n$’s cone is quasiisomorphic to
$$C_m^0 X^{\bullet}\oplus C^{1}_{n}X^{\bullet}[2] ...\oplus C_n^n X^{\bullet}[2n]$$
where $X^{\bullet}$ is the Khovanov complex of the disconnected sum of unknots.
.2cm
In the triangulated category to every morphism between complexes there corresponds an object (up to isomorphism), the mapping cone, which fits into an exact sequence. By assigning cones of wall-crossing morphisms to singular knots we get the structure of the triangulated category for the Khovanov’s sheaf. We observe, that the constructed category has the monoidal symmetric structure: the Khovanov complex of the disconnected sum of knots is the tensor product of the corresponding complexes.
To give the definition of the local system of finite type and to prove the main result we construct the category of the Khovanov spectra. We stabilize this triandulated monoidal category by taking disconnected sums of a knot with the collection of circles, i.e. by taking tensor products of the sheaf with the complexes, corresponding to the disconnected sums of circles. (Tensoring with the Khovanov complex of a circle can be viewed as the suspension.) We use the reduced version of Khovanov homology \[Kh1\]. As the result of the localization we get the category of Khovanov spectra $\tilde {\mathcal D}$ which is again the symmetric monoidal category \[Vo\]. .4cm
Next we construct the sequence of derived categories, a filtration, obtained by factorization over the ideals, generated by the Khovanov complexes of the the special form, supported on the strata of the discriminant:
$$\tilde{\mathcal D}=\tilde{\mathcal D_{\infty}} \supset ...\tilde{\mathcal D_n} \supset \tilde{\mathcal D_{n-1}} \supset ... \supset \tilde{\mathcal D_1}$$
.3cm
This filtration is an analogue of the filtration in the theory of invariants of finite type. We show that in these subcategories the Khovanov theory satisfies the finiteness condition introduced in \[S1\]. .5cm The algebraic, Vassiliev-type definition of finiteness now becomes as follows. Consider a new invariant, an additive functor from complexes to the 2-torsion in their cohomology:
$$\mathcal T_2: C \in Ob(\mathcal D) \rightarrow {Tor}_2( H^*(C))$$
If the local system of Khovanov’s complexes $CKh$ has $\mathcal T^n_2=0$, i.e. $\mathcal T_2(H^*(CKh))|_{D_n}=0$ everywhere on $D_n$ - the codimension $n$ of the discriminant, but is not quasiisomorphic to $(Z^2,0,Z^2)$ (to eliminate the case of the Hopf link), form a factor-category in a sense of Verdier $\mathcal D_n = \mathcal D/ \mathcal I_n$, where the category $\mathcal I_n$ is [**supported on the codimension n of the discriminant**]{}.
.5cm
Now can give an algebraic (torsion) definition, similar to the original one of Vassiliev (triviality or acyclicity of complexes in codimension $n$) \[S1\]. .3cm
[**Definition (T)**]{}. The local system is of finite type n if for any codimension $n$ selfintersection of the discriminant its nth cone is not quasiisomorphic to $(Z^2,0,Z^2)$, and has torsion-free homology (i.e. the image of $\mathcal T_2$ is zero). .3cm
The Vassiliev-type definition becomes:
.3cm
[**Definition (V)**]{}. The local system of Khovanov complexes is of finite type $n$ if for any codimension $n$ selfintersection of the discriminant the nth cone is zero in $\tilde{\mathcal D_n}$ but not in $\tilde{\mathcal D_{n+1}}$.
.3cm
The main results of this paper is as follows: .3cm
[**Theorem 1**]{}. Restricted to the subcategory of knots with the crossing number at most $n$, $n\geq 3$, Khovanov local system is of finite type $\leq n$.
.3cm
We will further generalize this result \[S2\] and get the “categorification of Birman-Lin theorem” \[S2\].
.5cm [**Acknowledgements**]{}. I want to thank P. Deligne, G. Carlsson, O. Viro and A. Voronov for useful discussions and Stanford University for their hospitality.
**2. The geometric interpretation of the cone of the wall-crossing morphism.**
In this paragraph we give the geometric interpretation of the cone of the wall-crossing morphism for Khovanov homology, by raising the skein relation for the Jones polynomial to the level of complexes.
First we recall the definition of the wall-crossing morphism $\omega_k$, correponding to the crossing change for the kth point in the knot projection.
$$\xymatrix@C+0.5cm{\omega_k: A_0^\bullet (k)
\ar[r]^-{ Id} & B_0^\bullet[1] (k) \\
\omega_k:A_1^\bullet(k)[1] \ar[r]^{ \emptyset} & B_1^\bullet[1](k) }$$
Where $A^\bullet$ is the Khovanov complex, corresponding to the knot with the kth overcrossing and $B^\bullet[1]$ to the knot with kth undercrossing.
When we change kth overcrossing to undercrossing, 0 and 1-resolutions are exchanged , so $A^\bullet = A^\bullet_0(k) \oplus A^\bullet_1(k)$, $B^\bullet[1]=B^\bullet_0(k)\oplus B^\bullet_1[1](k)$, and for every k we get morphism $\omega_k$.
.5cm According to the Definition 2 to show that the local system is of finite type (n-1), we have to prove that for any point of selfintersection of the discriminant of codimension n the corresponding n-cones are acyclic complexes, or that the convolution of n dimensional hypercube is acyclic.
.3cm
We first observe the following simple properties of the Khovanov complex: .2cm
[**Proposition 1**]{}. For any commutative n-dimensional cube , with $2^n$ complexes of length $(n+1)$ at its vertices, the last complex (via coorientation) is the the dual of the first one. .2cm [**Proof**]{}. Notice, that by changing all overcrossings to undercrossings on the diagram projection we exchange 0-resolutions of the diagram to 1-resolutions and move from the knot to its mirror. One can easily see that the Khovanov complex will be dualized. .4cm Now we want to study the restrictions of our local system. Recall that a $\bf subcategory$ of a category C is a category S whose objects are objects in C and whose arrows $ f:A\rightarrow B$ are arrows in C (with the same source and target).
For the category of knots $\mathcal K$ we can define a sequence of subcategories $\mathcal K_n$ . Objects of $\mathcal K_n$ are knots with a crossing number at most n. .2cm
We refer to \[GM\] for the definition and properties of Postnikov towers and convolutions. Here we show that for the restriction of the Khovanov local system to the subcategory $\mathcal K_n$ of knots with at most n crossings, complexes forming equators of the hypercubes will fit into a sequence. .5cm
[**Proposition 2**]{}. If n complexes $X^\bullet,....,Z^\bullet$ form the equator of the n-hypercube in the restriction of the Khovanov local system to $\mathcal K_n$, the subcategory of knots with at most n crossings, then $X^\bullet,....,Z^\bullet$ and the wall-crossing morphisms $\omega$ fit into a sequence: .5cm
$$\rightarrow Z^\bullet [-n+1] \rightarrow^u X^\bullet \rightarrow ^{\omega}...\rightarrow ^
{\omega}Z^\bullet \rightarrow^u X^\bullet[n-1]$$
.5cm where $u$ is an isomorphism between $X^n$ and $Z^0$. .3cm
[**Proof**]{}. If $(n+1)$ complexes $X^{\bullet},....,Z^{\bullet}$ form the equator in the n-dimensional commutative hypercube, there is a connecting map $u$ from the last complex into the first one, shifted by \[n-1\], \[GM\]. Given Proposition 1 , the connecting map u is the isomorphism between $Z_0$ and $X_n$.
[**Proposition 3**]{}. The cone of the wall-crossing morphism between Khovanov complexes corresponding to $K$ and $K'$, where the ith double point of the projection of $K$ is overcrossing and the ith double point of $K'$ is undercrossing, is quasiisomorphic to $$X^{\bullet}\oplus X^{\bullet}[2]$$
where $X^{\bullet}$ is the Khovanov complex of the knot of (n-1) crossings where ith double point of the projection of $K$ is given 1-resolution. .5cm [**Proof**]{}. It is clear from the definition of $\omega_k$ and the way we defined the local system, that the wall-crossing morphism corresponding to the ith crossing will map isomorphically the parts of the complex, which have 0-resolution of the crossing (and will be quasiisomorphic to zero in the cone of the wall-crossing morphism). The parts, that are mapped by zero, are the 1-resolutions of the k th crossing. In particular, we see that the last component of the complex contributes nontrivially to the homology of the cone.
.3cm
So the homology of the cone of the wall crossing morphism is isomorphic to the homology of the knot with the ith intersection point given 1-resolution.
This allows us to give the geometric version of the Definition 1:
Let $D$ be the projection of the knot of n crossings with k th crossing being a doublepoint. We call $D$ the projection of the singular knot. .5cm [**Definition 2.**]{} The Khovanov homology of the singular knot $K$ of n crossings(with kth single double point ) is a bigraded complex $$\renewcommand\arraystretch{1}
C^{\bullet}\oplus C^{\bullet}[2] \quad\mathrm{with \ the \ matrix \ differential}\quad
d_{C_\omega}=\left(\!\!\!\begin{array}{cc}
d_C & 0 \\ 0 & d_C[2] \end{array}\!\!\right),$$ where $C^{\bullet}$ is the Khovanov complex of the knot of (n-1) crossings where kth double point of $K$ is given 1-resolution.
1.5cm
On the level of the Euler characteristics one has:
$$\chi (A^\bullet[1])= - \chi (A^\bullet[1])$$
$$\chi (C_f) = \chi (A^\bullet) - \chi (B^\bullet)$$
Since the Euler characteristics of Khovanov complex is the Jones polynomial, recall its skein ralation:
$$q^{-1} J_{L_+} - qJ_{L_-} = (q^{1/2} - q^{-1/2}) J_{L_0}$$
where $L_+$ is the knot with overcrossing , $L_-$ knot with undercrossing and $L_0$ is the knot, where the crossing point is given 1-resolution. .5cm
[**Proposition 4**]{}. Let $K$ be the knot with n crossings, denote it’s projection $D_{i_1,...,i_n}$, where each index $i_n$ can have values $+$ for overcrossing, $-$ for undercrossing and $0$ for 1-resolution of the crossing point. Then the m’th cone of the local system, for which $K$ is the “first” knot is given by formula (for simplicity we assume that the wall-crossings happen for the first m indices):
$$C_m^0 CKh(D_{0...0,i_{m+1},..i_n}) \oplus C^{1}_{m} CKh(D_{0...0,i_{m+1},..i_n})[2] \oplus...$$ $$...\oplus C^{l}_{m} CKh(D_{0...0,i_{m+1},..i_n})[2l]\oplus ... \oplus CKh(D_{0...0,i_{m+1},..i_n})[2m]$$ .5cm [**Proof**]{}. We will prove this formula by induction. The first cone was described in Proposition 3. In our notation it is given by formula $CKh(D_{0,i_2,..i_n}) \oplus CKh(D_{0,i_2,..i_n})[2]$. If we take the second cone, we get $$CKh(D_{0,0,i_3,..i_n}) \oplus CKh(D_{0,0,i_3,..i_n})[2] \oplus CKh(D_{0,0,i_3,..i_n})[2] \oplus CKh(D_{0,0,i_3,..i_n})[4]$$
Suppose we proved the formula for m-1, let’s show it is true for m.
.3cm
The $m-1$st cone is found to be
$$C_{m-1}^0 CKh(D_{0...0,i_{m},..i_n}) \oplus C^{1}_{m-1} CKh(D_{0...0,i_{m},..i_n})[2] \oplus...$$ $$...\oplus C^{l}_{m-1} CKh(D_{0...0,i_{m},..i_n})[2l]\oplus ... \oplus CKh(D_{0...0,i_{m},..i_n})[2m-2]$$ .2cm When taking the last mth cone, we will take pairwise cones of corresponding summands and can use Proposition 3 to show that we will be getting the components of the complex, described in Proposition 4.
We just have to show that the coeffitients of the formula will be given by binomial coeffitients of proposition 4. This can be proved by using the identities for the binomial coeffitients. For any n, m we use the formula: .5cm
$$\xymatrix@C+0.5cm{C^m_n = C^{m-1}_{n-1} \oplus C^m_{n-1}}$$
.5cm
The geometric version of the definition of finiteness follows from the Definition 2:
.5cm [**Definition (G)**]{}. The local system of Khovanov complexes, extended to the discriminant of the space of manifolds via the cone of morphism, is a [**local system of order n**]{} if for any selfintersection of the discriminant of codimension $n$, its $n$’s cone is quasiisomorphic to
$$C_m^0 X^{\bullet}\oplus C^{1}_{n}X^{\bullet}[2] ...\oplus C_n^n X^{\bullet}[2n]$$
where $X^{\bullet}$ is the Khovanov complex of the disconnected sum of circles.
In paragraphs 5,7 we will construct the sequence of derived categories, in which Definitions 2 and 4 will become equivalent.
1.5cm
**3. Jones polynomial and invariants of finite type.**
The notion of the invariant of finite type was introduced by V.Vassiliev in 1989 as a filtration in the spectral sequence. Later it was interpreted by Birman and Lin as a “Vassiliev derivative” and led to the following skein relation.
If $\lambda$ be an arbitrary invariant of oriented knots in oriented space with values in some abelian group $A$. Extend $\lambda$ to be an invariant of $1$-singular knots $L_1$ (knots that may have a single singularity that locally looks like a double point), using the formula
$$\lambda(L_1)=\lambda(L_+)-\lambda(L_-)$$
where as before $L_+$ is the knot with overcrossing , $L_-$ knot with undercrossing.
Further extend $\lambda$ to the set of $n$-singular knots $L_n$ (knots with $n$ double points) by repeatedly using the skein relation. .2cm [**Definition**]{} We say that $\lambda$ is of type $n$ if its extension to $(n+1)$-singular knots vanishes identically. We say that $\lambda$ is of finite type if it is of type $n$ for some $n$. .2cm
Let $\mathcal L_n$ be invariants of knots (with values in Q) of order $\leq n$, then $\mathcal L_n / \mathcal L_{n-1}$ invariants of knots of order exactly n.
Let $\mathcal L$ - formal linear combinations of knots , then the singular knot is a linear combination of $2^n$ terms.
Let $\mathcal L^n$ - subspace of $\mathcal L$, generated by knots with n double points. .3cm [**Fact 1**]{}. $\mathcal L^{n+1} \subset \mathcal L^n$ . .3cm
[**Fact 2.**]{} Spaces $\mathcal L_n / \mathcal L_{n-1}$ and $\mathcal L^n / \mathcal L^{n+1}$ are dual to each other. .3cm Birman and Lin (1993) showed that substituting the power series for $e^x$ as the variable in the Jones polynomial yields a power series coefficients of which are Vassiliev invariants: .3cm [**Theorem \[BL\]**]{} Let $K$ be a knot and $J_t(K)$ be its Jones polynomial. let $U_k(x)$ be obtained from $J_t(K)$ by replacing the variable $t$ with $e^x$. Express $U_k(x)$ as power series in$x$:
$$U_k(x) = \sum u_i(K)x^j$$
then $u_0(K) = 1$ and each $(K)\geq 1$ is a Vassiliev invariant of order i. .3cm
Their result implies in particular that the values of the Jones polynomial are not of finite type, but the values of the truncations are. .2cm
Note, that there is another normalization of the Jones polynomial, when it is considered not as a polynomial in $(q + q^{-1})$, but in $(q-1)$. This renormalization implies the Jones polynomial, determined by the skein relation
$$q^2 J_{L_+} - q^{-2} J_{L_-} = (q - q^{-1}) J_{L_0}$$ .3cm and normalized by $J(\bigcirc)=1$. .3cm The Birman-Lin theorem holds for this renormalized polynomial in $q$ without substituting $e^x$.
The Khovanov theory, categorifying this polynomial, is called the reduced Khovanov homology.
Since the Euler characteristics of the cone of the morphism is just the difference of the values of the Jones polynomials of knots from adjacent chambers,, our local system is not expected to be of finite type, however, as we will see later, it’s restrictions can be of finite type.
1.5cm
**4. The Grothendieck group and the reduced Khovanov homology .**
In this paragraph we start to establish the correspondence between Vassiliev-type definition of finiteness given in \[S1\] and the geometric one of section 2. . We introduce the Grothendieck group of Khovanov homology to be able to factorize over subgroups , generated by the Khovanov homology of the collection of circles and their shifts.
To construct the Grothendieck group of a commutative monoid M, one forms the Cartesian product
$$M \times M$$
The two coordinates represent first and second part:
$$(a, b)$$
which corresponds to
$$a - b$$
Addition is defined as follows:
$$(a, b) + (c, d) = (a + c, b + d)$$ .5cm Next we define an equivalence relation on $M\times M$: (a, b) is equivalent to (c, d) if, for some element k of M if $ a + d + k = b + c + k$. It is easy to check that the addition operation is compatible with the equivalence relation. The identity element is now any element of the form (a, a), and the inverse of (a, b) is (b, a).
The Grothendieck group can also be constructed using generators and relations: denoting by (Z(M),+) the free abelian group generated by the set M, the Grothendieck group is the quotient of Z(M) by the subgroup generated by $ \{a+ b - (a+b)\mid a,b\in M\}$.
The Grothendieck group of an abelian category $\mathcal M$ is an abelian group with generators $[M],$ for all objects and relations $[M_2]=[M_1]+[M_3]$ for all exact sequences:
$$0 \rightarrow M_1 \rightarrow M_2 \rightarrow M_3 \rightarrow 0$$
The Grothendieck group of the category $\mathcal K(\mathcal M)$ of bounded complexes up to chain homotopies is an abelian group with generators $[M],$ and relations $[M[1]]= - [M]$ and $[M_2]= [M_1]+[M_3]$ for all exact sequences of complexes as above for all components of the complexes.
The Grothendieck group of a triangulated category $\mathcal T$ is an abelian group with generators $[M],$ for all objects $M$ of $\mathcal T$ and relations $[M[1]]=-[M]$ and $[M_2]=[M_1]+[M_3]$ for all distinguished triangles
$$...\rightarrow M_1 \rightarrow M_2 \rightarrow M_3 \rightarrow M_1[1] \rightarrow ...$$
It is easy to see that the Grothendieck group of the bounded derived category $D^b(\mathcal M)$ is isomorphic to the Grothendieck groups of $\mathcal K(\mathcal M)$ and $\mathcal M$.
The Grothendieck group was originally introduced for the study of Euler characteristics.
Now we want to apply the above constructions to the derived category of Khovanov complexes.
As it was shown in the original Khovanov paper, if $D_1,D_2$ are diagrams of oriented links $L_1,L_2$ then for a diagram $D_1\sqcup D_2$ of the disjoint union $L_1\sqcup L_2.$ there is an isomorphism of cochain complexes $$C(D_1\sqcup D_2) = C(D_1) \otimes C(D_2)$$ of free graded abelian groups.
From the Künneth formula Khovanov derives the following formulas for the cohomology of the disjoint union: .5cm
[**Proposition.**]{} There is a short split exact sequence of cohomology groups
.3cm $$0 \to \oplus_{i,j\in Z}( H^{i,j}(D_1)\otimes H^{k-i,m-j}(D_2))
\to H^{k,m} (D_1\sqcup D_2) \to
\oplus_{i,j\in {\mathbb{Z}}}
Tor_1^{{\mathbb{Z}}}( H^{i,j}(D_1), H^{k-i+1,m-j}(D_2))\to 0$$ .5cm
[**Corollary.**]{} For each $k,m \in Z$ there is an equality of isomorphism classes of abelian groups
.3cm $$H^{k,m} (L_1\sqcup L_2) =
\oplus_{i,j\in {\mathbb{Z}}}( H^{i,j}(L_1)\otimes H^{k-i,m-j}(L_2))
\oplus_{i,j\in Z}
Tor_1^{{\mathbb{Z}}}(H^{i,j}(L_1), H^{k-i+1,m-j}(L_2))$$ .5cm
Over $Q$ these formulas will imply that the derived category of Khovanov complexes form a tensor category which has a monoidal structure.
Given the disconnected sum of two knots $K_1, K_2$ one gets a tensor product of Khovanov groups:
$$H^{a,b} (K_1) \otimes H^{c,d} (K_2)$$
We form the Grothendieck group as follows:
Khovanov homology are the bigraded groups, so we will be taking sums over all products with fixed bigradings $a+c, b+d$:
$$H^{a,b} \otimes H^{c,d} \rightarrow H^{a+c,b+d}$$
In the original Khovanov’s paper \[Kh\] the homology of a loop is $$H( \bigcirc) = Z\{-1\} \oplus Z\{1\}$$ which corresponds to the normalization of the Jones polynomial, s.t. $$J( \bigcirc)= q+q^{-1}$$
Then the Khovanov homology of the disconnected sum of m circles is $$H (\bigcirc ^ m) = ({Z\{-1\} \oplus Z\{1\}})^{\otimes m}$$ Thus in the Grothendieck group the identity will be formed by the elements of the form $H^{0,j}$ and after factorizing by the disconnected sum of circles and their shifts we get the new version of Khovanov homology $'Kh$ we will get the identity:
$$'H^{i,j}(D) = H ^{i+j,j}(D)$$
The version of the Khovanov homology which was introduced in \[Kh1\] takes care of the above problem. It categorifies the Jones polynomial, determined by the skein relation
$$q^2 J_{L_+} - q^{-2} J_{L_-} = (q - q^{-1}) J_{L_0}$$ .3cm and normalized by $J(\bigcirc)=1$. .5cm
It is called the reduced homology and is defined as follows: .5cm
Let $ \mathcal A = Q[X]/(X^2)$ is the base ring and $H^{i,j}(D)$ is the complex of finite-dimensional $Q$-vector spaces. Khovanov constructs a map of complexes $ \mathcal A \otimes C(D) \rightarrow C(D)$ via a geometric construction: choose a segment of the knot diagram $D$ that doesn’t contain crossing, place an unknotted circle next to it and consider cobordism, which merges circle into $D$. Ridemeister move, which happens away from this cobordism, induces a chain homotopy equivalence between complexes of $ \mathcal A$-modules. It also establishes a bijection between $(1,1)$-tangles and oriented links with marked component. .5cm
If $\mathcal Q = \mathcal A/X \mathcal A $ is onedimensional representation of $ \mathcal A$, then the reduced complex is defined as
$$\tilde {C(D)} = C(D) \otimes_{ \mathcal A } \mathcal Q$$
and its homology is the reduced homology of $D$. The analogous construction can be carried out over integers.
.5cm
In our case we mark any arc of the “first” knot, which will become a circle after making 1-resolutions of all crossing point. By the cobordism construction all other circles of the resolved link can be merged to this component.
.3cm
After we made a derived category of Khovanov complexes into a “group”, the first guess of how to match the geometric and the Vassiliev-type definitions would be: factorize the category by the complexes corresponding to the disconnected sums of circles. However, disconnected sums with unknots will give acyclic complexes and the category will become trivial.
[**Note**]{}. Quotients in the DG categories were studied by V. Drinfeld \[D\]. However, these are not the quotients that we would like to consider, since we don’t want homology of the unknot to be zero. .3cm We will do the factorization in two steps: first we construct a stable category, in which the disconnected sum with a circle is viewed as a suspension, so that the homology of the disconnected sum of a knot and a circle would be quasiisomorphic to the homology of the knot. (In that case we won’t have to remmember how many circles our theory decomposed into).
Next we form the filtration, on the factors of which the geometric definition will become equivalent to the Vassiliev’s one.
We will be using the reduced version of Khovanov homology.
**5. $\bigsqcup S^1$- stable Homotopy. Category of Khovanov Spectra.**
We introduce a new derived category $\tilde {\mathcal D}$ in which the reduced Khovanov homology of the disconnected sums of circles, discussed in the previous paragraph, is quasiisomorphic to the Khovanov homology of a circle.
This can be understood by considering a linear equivalence relation , generated by an object - unknot $u$: $$X \sim Y \Leftrightarrow X \otimes u_1 = Y \otimes u_2$$ where $u_1$ and $u_1$ are disconnected sums of unknots. .3cm What we will construct in this section can be viewed as a version of [**Spanier-Whitehead category**]{}, objects of which are called ${\bf spectra}$.
This construction can be carried out in any [**symmetric monoidal**]{} category and it was proved that the result of this localization is again a symmetric monoidal category, e.g. \[Vo\].
Recall the definition of the monoidal category:
.5cm
[**Definition**]{}. A [**monoidal category**]{} (or tensor category) is a category $\mathcal M$ equipped with .2cm 1) a binary functor $\otimes \colon \mathcal M\times\mathcal M\to\mathcal M$ called the tensor product,
2\) an object I called the unit object,
3\) three natural isomorphisms subject to certain coherence conditions expressing the fact that the tensor operation $\otimes$ is associative, i.e. there is a natural isomorphism , called associativity, with components $ \alpha_{A,B,C} \colon (A\otimes B)\otimes C \to A\otimes(B\otimes C)$, $\otimes$ has I as left and right identity: there are two natural isomorphisms , with components $\lambda_A \colon I\otimes A\to A $ and $\rho_A \colon A\otimes I\to A.$
The coherence conditions for these natural transformations, given by penthagon diagrams which commute for all objects $A,B,C,D \in \mathcal M$ (see Fig. 1 on the next page). The tensor category, which we are considering is also [**braided**]{}, i.e. it is equipped with the braiding isomorphism $$\gamma_{A,B} : A \otimes B \rightarrow B \otimes A$$
A [**symmetric**]{} monoidal category is a braided monoidal category whose braiding satisfies $\gamma_{B,A} \gamma_{A,B} = 1_{A \otimes B}$.
.3cm
It is obvious that the derived category of Khovanov complexes satisfies all these conditions and is a symmetric monoidal category \[Kh2\].
.2cm [**Definition.**]{} Suppose $\tilde {\mathcal D}$ satisfies the Definition 1 for [**countable**]{} coproducts. Let
$$\xymatrix@C+0.5cm
{X_0\ar[r]^-{ j_1} & X_1 \ar[r]^-{ j_2} & X_2 ...}$$
be a sequence of objects and morphisms in $\tilde{ \mathcal D}$. The homotopy colimit of the sequence denoted ${\mathcal Hocolim}_{i \to +\infty} (X_i)$ is by definition given, up to non-canonical isomorphism by the triangle:
.5cm
$$\xymatrix@C+0.5cm
{\coprod X_i\ar[r]^-{ [1]-shift} &{ \coprod X_i}\ar[r] & {\mathcal Hocolim (X_i)} \ar[r] &\Sigma \{ \coprod X_i \} }$$
.5cm
here the shift map $[1]-shift$ is the infinite matrix:
$$\left(
\begin{array}{ccccc}
1_{X_0}&j_1&0&1&...\\
0&1_{X_1}&j_2&0&...\\
0&0&1_{X_2}&j_3&...\\
0&0&0&1_{X_3}&...\\
...&...&...&...&...\\
\end{array}
\right)$$
The coherence conditions:
$$\begin{aligned}
\xymatrix
{
& (A\otimes B) \otimes (C\otimes D)
\ar[ddr]^{\alpha_{A, B,C\otimes D}} & \\ \\
((A\otimes B)\otimes C)\otimes D
\ar[uur]^{\alpha_{A\otimes B,C, D}}
\ar[dd]^{\alpha_{A, B,C} \otimes 1_D}
& &
A\otimes(B\otimes(C\otimes D))\\ \\
(A\otimes (B\otimes C)) \otimes D
\ar[rr]^{\alpha_{A, B \otimes C, D}}
& &
A\otimes ((B\otimes C)\otimes D)
\ar[uu]^{ 1_A \otimes \alpha_{ B , C, D}}
}\end{aligned}$$
One can think of taking a disconnected sum with the circle as a suspension on Khovanov complex. Indeed, connect the circle to the knot by two strands, forming the overcrossing point in projection:
then the resolutions are
The resulting complex will be of length $(n+1)$ if the original was of length $n$ and will have shifted grading, like in the case of usual suspensions. Desuspending will correspond to eliminating fake loops as above.
.2cm
Then the Freudenthal theorem implies that
$$[X,Y] \rightarrow [\Sigma X, \Sigma Y] \rightarrow [\Sigma^2 X, \Sigma^2 Y] \rightarrow...$$
eventually stabilizes. The stable homotopy classes of maps from $X$ to $Y$ is above colimit.
The resulting category is the Spanier-Whitehead category, or the category of Khovanov spectra.
From the category viewpoint the above construction implies, that we added another axiom to the the standard axioms of triangulated category: .2cm [**Definition.**]{} Let $\alpha$ be an infinite cardinal. The triangulated category $\tilde {\mathcal D}$ is said to satisfy [**homotopy colimits**]{} axiom if the following holds:
For any set $\mathcal N$ of cardinality less than $\alpha$ and any collection $\{ X_n, n\in \mathcal N \}$ of objects, the coproduct $\coprod X_n$ exists in $\tilde{ \mathcal D}$.
Now we define the new category $\tilde {\mathcal D}$, by modifying morphisms:
.5cm
[**Definition.**]{} The category $\tilde {\mathcal D}$ of Khovanov [**spectra**]{} is as follows
1\) Objects of $\tilde {\mathcal D}$ = Objects of $ \mathcal D$
2\) Morphisms of $\tilde {\mathcal D}$:
$$\tilde Hom (X \rightarrow Y) = colim (Hom (X \rightarrow (Y + n (Unknots))))$$
.5cm One can define composition of morphisms. If $\mathcal H_n = Hom (X \rightarrow (Y + n (Unknots)))$, then one has to take the limit
$$\mathcal H_1 \rightarrow \mathcal H_2 \rightarrow... \mathcal H_i \rightarrow...$$
where $i$ denotes the number of unknots .
.2cm The fact, that the resulting category is triangulated and has nice properties was proved by several authors \[A\], \[Vo\], in algebraic setting for example: .2cm
[**Theorem \[Vo\]** ]{}. Let $ (\mathcal D, \otimes , 1)$ be a symmetric monoidal category and $U$ be an object, s.t. the cyclic permutation on $U \otimes U \otimes U$ equals identity in $\mathcal D[U^{-1}]$. Then there exists a symmetric monoidal structure $\otimes$ on $\mathcal D[U^{-1}]$. .5cm The above theorem implies that in the category $\tilde {\mathcal D} = \mathcal D[U^{-1}]$ the disconnected sums of unknots are considered an identity and the resulting category is again symmetric monoidal. 1.5cm
**6. The Poincare Polynomial.**
As we observed in paragraph 2, Proposition 4, the nth cone of the Khovanov local system, restricted to the subcategory of knots of crossing number n is a complex of length $2n+1$, with generators (unknots) in the odd homological dimensions. .3cm [**Definition**]{}. The [**Poincare polynomial**]{} of the complex $X^{\bullet} =(X^0,X^1,....X^n)$ is the polynomial $P(X,t)=\Sigma{ \beta}_k t^k$, where ${\beta}_k = dim(X^k)$ is the kth Betti number. .3cm We consider the ideals $ I_n$ generated by the complexes of the form:
$$C^\bullet (n) = \left ( \begin{array}{c}
{C_n^n} Z \\ 0 \\ \\ 0 \\ {C^{i}_{n}} Z \\ 0 \\ \\ 0 \\{C_n^0} Z \end{array} \right)$$
.5cm
In the next paragraph we will factorize the category of complexes by these complexes. Notice that $C^\bullet (n)=(C^\bullet (1))^{\otimes n}$. .2cm [**Lemma**]{}. The Poincare polynomial of the complex $C^\bullet (n)$ equals ${(1 + t^2)}^n$ and its Euler characteristics is $2^n$. .2cm [**Proof**]{}. Obvious: $${(1 + t^2)}^n = \Sigma C^{i}_{n} t^{2i}$$
$$\Sigma {C^{i}_{n}} = 2^n.$$
.2cm [**Note**]{}. After grading change, we can assume that the Poincare polynomial is equal to ${(t^{-1} + t)}^n$.
For each n by the polynomial ${(t + t^{-1})}^n$ we generate an ideal $ I_n$ in the ring of Laurent polynomials $Z[t, t^{-1}]$:
$$I_n = Z[t, t^{-1}]/ {(t^{-1} + t)}^n$$ .3cm In the next chapter we are taking this factorization to the level of the derived category. 1.5cm
**7. On the Algebraic Definition of Finiteness.**
The geometric definition of finiteness, which we gave in section 2 is sufficient to prove the main result of this paper, however, we would like to give an algebraic definition, similar to the original one of Vassiliev (that complexes become zero or acyclic after the extension to the codimension $n$ of the discriminant).
However, we would like to understand if there are computational ways to determine that the local system decomposed into a collection of circles on the strata of the discriminant, i.e. how the TQFT “knows” about it?
The idea is to factor out the free part of the homology. .3cm
Recall the Theorem of A.Shumakovich \[Su\] and Asaeda-Przytycki \[AP\] regarding the torsion in Khovanov homology: .3cm [**Theorem \[Su\]**]{} The only alternating links that do not have torsion are the trivial knot, the Hopf link, their connected sums and disjoint unions. The nontrivial torsion always contains the $Z_2$ subgroup. .3cm
They further conjecture (and prove in many cases) that the above theorem will also hold for any, not necessarily alternating links.
The above statements allow us to reformulate the geometric definition in terms of torsion. But first we have to eliminate the case of the Hopf link. .3cm
[**Calculation**]{}. The Khovanov homology of the Hopf link is quasiisomorphic to $(Z_2, 0, Z_2)$.
.3cm
Assigning 0 and 1-resolutions to 2 crossing points of the Hopf link one gets 4 complete resolutions and the Khovanov complex becomes:
$$0 \rightarrow V \otimes V \rightarrow V \oplus V \rightarrow V \otimes V \rightarrow 0$$
recall that that the space $V$ is generated by $v_+$ and $v_-$. One can see that the 1-cycles are $(v_- \otimes v_-)$, $(v_+ \otimes v_- - v_- \otimes v_+)$ and 1-boundaries are 0. The 2-cycles are $(v_+^1 \oplus v_+^2)$ and $(v_-^1 \oplus v_-^2)$, 2-boundaries are $(v_+^1 \oplus v_+^2)$ and $(v_-^1 \oplus v_-^2)$, 3-cycles are $(v_+ \otimes v_+)$, $(v_+ \otimes v_- )$ , $ (v_- \otimes v_+)$, 3-boundaries are $(v_- \otimes v_-)$, $(v_+ \otimes v_- + v_- \otimes v_+)$. Thus the Khovanov homology of the Hopf link is $(Z_2, 0, Z_2)$. .3cm
Consider a new invariant, an additive functor:
$$\mathcal T_2: C \in Ob(\mathcal D) \rightarrow {Tor}_2( H^*(C))$$ .3cm [**Definition (T)**]{}. The local system is of finite type n if for any codimension $n$ selfintersection of the discriminant the corresponding nth cone is not quasiisomorphic to $(Z_2, 0, Z_2)$ and has torsion-free homology, i.e. the image of $\mathcal T_2$ is zero. .3cm The disadvantage of this definition is that after taking torsion the theory becomes trivial on the level of the Euler characteristics. To fix this problem, we consider the ideals $ I_n$ generated by the complexes $C(n)^{\bullet}$ introduced in section 6.
1.5cm
**8. The Filtration.**
In this paragraph we take the factorization, which we discussed in section 5, to the level of the derived category.
According to \[D\], it is possible to divide in the tensor monoidal categories if the tensor product preserves quasiisomorphisms, i.e. an exact functor. If we consider the class of flat objects (those, on which the tensor product is exact), then one can divide by a subcategory.
Recall our geometric definition of finiteness: .3cm [**Definition (G)**]{}. The local system is of finite type n, if there exists such minimal $n$, s.t. for any selfintersection of the discriminant of codimension $n$ the corresponding complex is quasiisomorphic to $C^{\bullet}(n)(\mathcal U) $, where $\mathcal U$ is the Khovanov complex of the disjoint union of unknots. .3cm
We will follow the Verdier approach, who constructed the quotient $\mathcal T/ \mathcal S$, where $ \mathcal S$ is a subcategory of $\mathcal T$. He showed that the factorization is well-defined if $ \mathcal S$ is thick. Recall the definition of a [**thick**]{} subcategory: .3cm
[**Definition**]{}. The subcategory of a triangulated category is called [**thick**]{} if it is triangulated and contains all direct summands of it’s objects. .3cm
The subcategories, over which we will be factorizing are generated by $ I_n$ and [**supported on $D_n$**]{} - the union of strata of codimension $n$ of the discriminant: .3cm
First we define the notion of generated subcategory:
.3cm [**Definition**]{}. Let $\mathcal T$ be a triangulated category satisfying the [**homotopy colimits**]{} axiom. Let $\alpha$ be an infinite cardinal. Let $S$ be a class of objects of $\mathcal T$. Then ${<S>}^{\alpha}$ will denote the smallest $ \mathcal S$, $ \mathcal S$ a triangulated subcategory of $ \mathcal T$, the [**generated subcategory**]{} satisfying:
1). The objects of S lie in $ \mathcal S$.
2). Any coproduct of fewer that $\alpha$ objects of $ \mathcal S$ lies in $ \mathcal S$.
3). The subcategory $ \mathcal S \subset \mathcal T$ is thick. .3cm
We refer to \[N\] for the proofs that $ \mathcal S$ is well-defined and that it is localizing \[Bo\]. By Verdier theorem \[V\] one can factorize by such subcategories. .3cm
[**Proposition 5**]{}. Let ${\mathcal I_n}$ be the triangulated category generated by $C^{\bullet}(n)$. Then for any complex $X^{\bullet} \in {\mathcal I_n}$ we have $\chi (X^{\bullet})=2^n \cdot k$. .2cm [**Proof**]{}. This is a check for all operations in the triangulated category:
1\) quasiisomorphic complexes have the same Euler characteristics
2\) By taking the direct sum of i copies of $C^{\bullet}(n)$ we get a complex with Euler characteristics $2^n \cdot i$ :
$$\chi (\underbrace{X^{\bullet} \oplus X^{\bullet} \oplus... X^{\bullet}}_{i times}) = i \chi(X^{\bullet})$$
3\) By taking the cone of the map between complexes $C^{\bullet}(n)$ we can arrange any combination of morphisms between the components, but it is an easy check that what we get will have a trivial Euler characteristics.
In all cases the Euler characteristics of the resulting complex will be a multiple of $2^n$. Thus the divisability of the Euler characteristics by $2^n$ becomes an invariant of $\mathcal I_n$
.2cm [**Proposition 6.**]{} One gets a sequence of categories: $$...{\mathcal I_n} \subset {\mathcal I_{n-1}} \subset ... \subset {\mathcal I_1}$$
.2cm [**Proof**]{}. This statement follows from the previous one: if one takes k equal 2, and recall that ${\mathcal I_n}$ is supported on $D_n$, then $${\mathcal I_n} \subset {\mathcal I_{n-1}}$$
[**Definition** ]{}. We define the derived category $\tilde{\mathcal D_n}$ as a factor category (in a sense of Verdier \[V\], \[D\]) :
$$\tilde{\mathcal D_n} = \tilde{\mathcal D}/ \mathcal I_n$$
.3cm Where $I_n$ is a thick subcategory.
It follows from the above definition that the subcategory is thick when it is closed under cofibrations, retractions, direct sums and suspensions. When we form a thick subcategory, generated by $\mathcal I_n$, we may loose the property of the Euler characteristics being divisible by $2^n$, but since $\mathcal I_n$ is [**supported**]{} on $D_n$, this is the thick subcategory of $\tilde{\mathcal D}$. The resulting category $\tilde{\mathcal D_n}$ will lack the exactness property only on codimension $n$ strata.
.3cm
[**Example.**]{} In the triangulated category of complexes over $Z$ consider those, which have $k$-torsion in the homology. This subcategory is thick. .3cm [**Proposition 7**]{}. The Verdier quotients of the category $\tilde{\mathcal D}$ over thick subcategories $\tilde{\mathcal{I}_n}$ defined above, form an increasing filtration of the category $\tilde{\mathcal D}$:
$$\tilde{\mathcal D}=\tilde{\mathcal D_{\infty}} \supset ...\tilde{\mathcal D_n} \supset \tilde{\mathcal D_{n-1}} \supset ... \supset \tilde{\mathcal D_1}$$
.2cm [**Proof**]{}. The statement follows from the previous propositions.
.5cm
[**Remark 1.**]{} Notice that in $ \tilde{\mathcal D}$ the Euler characteristics of complexes is well-defined modulo $2^n$.
.5cm
[**Remark 2**]{}. Notice that this final definition is very similar to the one of invariants of finite type given in paragraph 3. .5cm
[**Remark 3**]{}. Yet another approach... Complexes with torsion-free homology don’t form a thick subcategory, but they are factor- functors of Tor. We show that one still can form a factor-category $\tilde{\mathcal D_{tor}}$ with the same objects, morphisms (arrows) of which can factor through complexes, homology of which don’t have torsion \[Ho\].
.3cm
[**Theorem**]{}. In the factor-category $\tilde{\mathcal D_{tor}}$ objects, corresponding to complexes, homology of which have no torsion are isomorphic to zero, while complexes, homology of which have torsion are never isomorphic to zero in $\tilde{\mathcal D_{tor}}$.
.2cm [**Definition (V’)**]{}. The local system of Khovanov complexes is of finite type $n$ if for any codimension $n$ selfintersection of the discriminant the nth cone is zero in $\tilde{\mathcal D_{tor}}$.
1.5cm
**9. The Finiteness result.**
In this paragraph we prove the first simple finiteness property of the Khovanov local system.
First let’s define our categories.
The category of knots $\mathcal K$ is the topolocical category, objects of which are knots and morphism are knot cobordisms. ( If knots $K_1$ and $K_2$ have the same isotopy type, i.e. lie within the same chamber of the Vassiliev space, then morphisms are just the product cobordisms, if we pass between adjacent chambers, changing one crossing, then these are genus one cobordisms).
The construction of the local system of Khovanov complexes on the Vassiliev space of knots \[S1\] provided us with a functor from the category of knots into the derived category of complexes, denote it by $\mathcal Kh$.
Recall that the [**crossing number**]{} of the knot is the minimum of the crossing numbers over all its projections.
In the category of knots $\mathcal K$ we define a sequence of subcategories $K_n$ . Objects of $\mathcal K_n$ are knots with at most n crossings, morphisms in $\mathcal K_n$ are cobordisms between knots with the crossing number at most n, etc. The corresponding derived category is denoted $\mathcal Kh_n$.
.3cm [**Theorem 1**]{}. Restricted to the subcategory of knots with at most $n$ crossings , $n\geq 3$, Khovanov local system is of finite type $\leq n$.
.5cm
[**Proof**]{}. We give the proof according to the geometric definitions.
.3cm
If we restrict Khovanov theory to the subcategory $\mathcal K_n$ of knots with at most $n$ crossing, the complexes we get from knot projections are all quasiisomorphic to the ones of length at most $(n+1)$.
Consider an n-dimensional commutative hypercube, corresponding to the selfintersection of the discriminant of codimension n.
As we have seen in the previous paragraph, complexes, corresponding to the codimension one walls of the discriminant are
$$\renewcommand\arraystretch{1}
X^{\bullet}\oplus X^{\bullet}[2] \quad\mathrm{with \ the \ matrix \ differential}\quad
d_{C_\omega}=\left(\!\!\!\begin{array}{cc}
d_X & 0 \\ 0 & d_X[2] \end{array}\!\!\right),$$ where $X^{\bullet}$ is the Khovanov complex of the knot of (n-1) crossings where kth double point of $K$ is given 1-resolution.
When we pass to codimension 2 selfintersections of the discriminant, we get 4-graded complexes associated to it:
$$Y^{\bullet} \oplus Y^{\bullet}[2] \oplus Y^{\bullet}[2] \oplus Y^{\bullet}[4]$$ .3cm where $Y^{\bullet}$ is the Khovanov complex of the knot of (n-2) crossings where kth and lth double points of $K$ are given 1-resolution.
After establishing these identities for all indices up to $n$, it is easy to see from our geometrical interpretation of the finite type condition what is the nth generalized cone of the restricted Khovanov local system.
The geometric definition implies that we calculate the nth cone by taking the “first” knot in the hypercube (via the coorientation) and giving all the crossings of it’s projection 1-resolutions. We end up with a collection of circles in $R^2$, corresponding to the last component of the complex, associated with the projection of the knot.
The $n$th cone, assigned to the selfintersection of the discriminant of codimension $n$ will be quasiisomorphic to the complex of the disconnected sum of $2^n$ copies of the collection of circles, described above, shifted in homological grading according to the coorientation. In the stable category this complex is isomorphic to the one of the circle.
Passing to the stable category means the eliminating of the “inessential” crossings of the knot projection. The discriminant of the space of knots, consists to singular knots with “essential” crossings (i.e. this singular knot can be realized without extra under/over crossings). Let $\mathcal K_n$ be the subcategory of knots with the crossings number (minimum over all projections) at most $n$ , then we can reformulate the main theorem as follows:
.3cm [**Theorem 1’**]{}. If the singular knot $K$ with n double points can be realized without extra under/over crossings, then the extension of the Khovanov local system to $K$ is zero in $\tilde{\mathcal D_n}$ (even if in the diagram of $K$ there are other under/over crossings). .3cm Next we consider the localized local system: since the nth cone is given by the formula $C^\bullet (n) \otimes K_{1,1,....1}$, where $K_{1,1,....1}$ Khovanov complex of the knot projection, where n crossing points are given 1-resolutions and
$$C^\bullet (n) =
\left (
\begin{array}{c}
{C_n^n} Z \\
0 \\
\vdots\\
0 \\
{C^{i}_{n}} Z \\
0 \\
\vdots\\
0 \\
{C_n^0} Z
\end{array}
\right)$$
in $\tilde{\mathcal D_n}$ it will satisfy the finiteness condition, since all crossing points will be given 1- resolution and this is a local system of finite type n. And since we are not considering walls with knots of crossing number $n+1$, this is the only cone we can form. .5cm
[**Remark**]{}. One may not need to take the nth cone to get the finiteness condition, i.e. the knot projection may decompose into a disconnected sum of unknots earlier. (It would be interesting to get an estimate). But since $\tilde{\mathcal D_n} \supset \tilde{\mathcal D_k}$ for $k \leq n$, we get that the local system will be of type at most $n$. .5cm
[**Example**]{}. Consider the right-handed trefoil with three double points:
There are 8 resolutions of this singular knot, corresponding to 8 chambers (say, complexes X,Y,A,B,C,D,W,Z), adjacent to the selfintersection of the discriminant of codimansion 3. Two of them correspond to the righthanded trefoil and it’s mirror image and six - to the twisted unknots, which are obtained after changing any overcrossing in the projection of the trefiol to the undercrossing.
$$\xymatrix
{& & & & 0 \ar[d] & \\
& & 0 \ar[d]^{d_Y} & \ar[r]^{\omega} & { Z_0 = X_3} \ar[d]^ {d_Z} & \\
& 0 \ar[d]^{d_X} & {Y_0} \ar[d]^{d_Y} \ar[r]^{\omega} & {...} \ar[r]^ {\omega} & {...} \ar[d]^{d_Z} & \\
& {X_0} \ar[d]^{d_X} \ar[r]^{\omega} & {Y_1} \ar[d] ^{d_Y} & {...} & {Z_3 = X_0} \ar[d] & \\
& {X_1} \ar[d]^{d_X} \ar[r]^{\omega} & {Y_2} \ar[d] ^{d_Y} \ar[r]^ {\omega} & {...} & 0 & \\
& {X_2} \ar[d]^{d_X} \ar[r]^{\omega} & {Y_3} \ar[d] ^{d_Y} \ar[r]^{\omega} & & & \\
&{X_3} \ar[d] \ar[r]^{\omega} & 0 & & & \\
& 0 & & & & \\ }$$
The third cone $C^\bullet (3) $ will be of the form:
$$C^\bullet (3) \otimes K_{1,1,1} = \left ( \begin{array}{c}
Z \\
0 \\
3 Z \\
0 \\
3 Z \\
0 \\
Z \end{array} \right ) \otimes K_{1,1,1}$$
.5cm
Thus the third cone is acyclic in $\tilde{\mathcal D_3}$ and this is a condition for the local system to be of type 3.
In the upcoming paper \[S2\] we prove the generalization of Theorem 1, or the categorification of Birman-Lin theorem.
1.5cm
**10. Further directions.**
1\. We would like to generalize the result of this paper to the Khovanov-Rozhansky homology \[KR\], for which we defined the wall-crossing morphisms \[SW\].
.3cm 2. It would be very interesting to see, if the recent extensions to the singular locus of Ozsvath-Szabo knot invariants, done by Benjamin Audoux \[A\] , cf. \[OSS\], satisfy finiteness conditions.
.3cm
3\. The geometric definition implies that the knot homology theory is of finite type, if after taking sufficiently high cones all objects decompose into a collection of disconnected circles. It would be very interesting to understand what are the “building blocks” for the homology theories of higher dimensions. .3cm 4. Our theorem can be proved using the properties of the homological width of the knot. Such proof could provide another point of view on finiteness result (via the ranks of homologies). .3cm 5. We believe that our constructions will provide a better estimates on the crossing number of the knot.
[email protected]
**11. Bibliography.**
\[A\] Adams J. F., Stable homotopy and generalized homology, Chicago Lectures in Mathematics, Univ. of Chicago Press, 1974. .2cm \[AP\] Asaeda M., Przytycki J., Khovanov homology: torsion and thickness., arXiv:0402402. .2cm \[Au\] Audoux B., Heegaard-Floer homology for singular knots, arcXiv:0705.2377. .2cm
\[B\] Bar-Natan D.,Khovanov’s homology for tangles and cobordisms, arXiv:math/0410495. .2cm \[Bo\] Bousfield A. The localization of spaces with respect to homology, Topology 14, 1975, 133-150. .2cm \[BL\] Birman J., Lin X.S., Knot polynomials and Vassiliev invariants, Invent. Math., 111 (1993), pp.225-270. .2cm \[D\] Drinfeld D., DG quotients of DG categories, arXiv:0210114v6 .2cm \[GM\] Gelfand S., Manin Yu., Methods of homological algebra, Springer 1996. .2cm \[H\] Hovey M., Model categories, Math.Surveys, vol.63. .2cm \[Kh\] Khovanov M., A Categorification of the Jones Polynomial, Duke Math. J. 101 (2000), no. 3, 359–426.
.2cm \[Kh1\] Khovanov M., Patterns in knot cohomology, I, Experiment. Math. 12 (2003), no. 3, 365-374 math.QA/0201306. .2cm \[Kh2\] Khovanov M., A functor-valued invariant of tangles., arXiv:math/0103190. .2cm
\[Kh3\] Crossingless matchings and the cohomology of $(n,n)$ Springer varieties, arXiv:QA/0202110. .2cm \[KR\] Khovanov M., Rozansky L., Matrix factorizations and link homology .2cm \[N\] Neeman A., Triangulated categories, Princeton university press, 2001. .2cm \[OSS\] Ozsvath P., Stipsicz A., Szabo Z., Floer homology and singular knots, arXiv:0705.2661. .2cm
.2cm \[P\] Przytycki J., When the theories meet: Khovanov homology as Hochschild homology of links, arXiv GT/0509334. .2cm \[Q\] Quillen D., Homotopical Algebra. Lecture Notes in Math., no. 43, Springer-Verlag, 1967 .2cm \[S1\] Shirokova N., On the classification of Floer-type theories, arXiv:0704.1330. .2cm \[S2\] Shirokova N., The Categorification of Birman-Lin Theorem, preprint 2007.
.2cm \[SW\] Shirokova N., Webster B., Wall-crossing morphism for Khovanov-Rozhansky homology, arXiv:0706.1388. .2cm
\[Su\] Shumakovich A., Torsion of the Khovanov homology, arXiv:GT/0405474v1. .2cm \[V\] Verdier J. L., Des categories derivees des categories abeliennes. Asterisque, vol.239. Societe mathematique de France, 1996. .2cm
\[Vo\] Voevodsky V., The $A^1$-homotopy theory, Documenta Math. J.DMV, 1998, I,579-604. .2cm
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
bibliography:
- 'the.bib'
nocite: '[@*]'
---
Glossary {#glossary .unnumbered}
========
The data volume contained within a bin. The bin occupancy of the $i$th bin is written as $n_i$. For discrete point set data this is the number of points occupying the $i$th bin.
The normalized bin occupancy. The bin probability of the $i$th bin is written as $p_i$. For discrete point set data this is the probability of a randomly chosen data point occupying the $i$th bin.
An important theorem from statistics that states that sampling from a parent distribution with mean $\mu$ and variance $\sigma^2$ results in a distribution approaching normal with mean $\mu$ and variance $\frac{\sigma^2}{N}$.
The scale derivative of the information. It can also be written as the difference between the scale-local object and reference dimension distributions. The integral of the dimension transport is fixed by the relative data volume of the object and reference distributions. Changing the correlations in the data only serves to transport dimension on scale, this is a measure of that transport.
A binning procedure in which the partition is applied to the data many times, changing the relative position each time. By averaging over these applications of the partition any bias from a single application is removed.
The rank-$q$ width of a 1d distribution as seen by a correlation analysis.
A simulated event that is defined by the average of the entropy of all of the events within an ensemble. The difference between the entropy of a single event in an ensemble and its ensemble average is a measure of the uniqueness of the event.
A space in which event characteristics are used to define the axes. In an event space each event appears as a single point and the distance between two points is a measurement of the similarity of the events represented by those points.
An event characteristic that is represented by a single number.
An ordinal pair made from the measured properties of two particles taken from different events.
Containing model assumptions explicitly. Scaled correlation analysis, for example, is model-explicit since one must explicitly choose a model to generate a reference for comparison to the object of the analysis. The $\Phi_{p_t}$ measure is not model-explicit. Its definition ($\sqrt{\frac{\overline{Z^2}}{\overline{N}}}-\sigma_{p_t}$) contains the reference ($\sigma_{p_t}$) and its model assumptions implicitly.
The events closest to a given event within an event space. These are the events that are most similar in terms of the event-space measures.
The distribution that is the object of an analysis. To test a hypothesis the object distribution must be compared to a reference distribution consistent with the hypothesis.
A bin in a partition that contains some fraction of the data.
An event that contains multiple beam-target or beam-gas interactions. These events are a source of error since they contain multiple beam interaction vertices.
Any data that takes the form of a list of bin occupancies. All real data is pre-binned since we cannot in reality know the position of individual data points with perfect accuracy.
A track that originates from the primary vertex.
The point of contact between colliding nuclei.
The apparent information contained in a randomly generated uniform distribution when compared to an ideal uniform distribution with a cutoff. This is an effect of an approximation to the correlation integral used to simplify the topological measure calculations.
A grouping of $q$ points. A collection of N points contains $C^N_q=\frac{N!}{q!(N-q)!}$ unique $q$-tuples.
A theoretical state of quark matter in which quarks and gluons are asymptotically free.
The distribution that serves as a baseline for comparison to the object of an analysis. The reference is determined by the hypothesis that the analysis is testing.
As a function of scale.
An ordinal pair made from the measured properties of two distinct particles taken from the same event.
A track that has been improperly reconstructed so that it appears as two or more disconnected segments instead of a single continuous track.
The collection of occupied bins for a distribution.
A reconstruction of the path taken by a particle through a detector.
A crossing of two or more tracks.
A bin in a partition that does not contain any part of the data.
Motivation
==========
Introduction and Overview
-------------------------
The constituents of nuclear matter behave according to the rules of quantum chromodynamics (QCD). These rules guide our expectations for the interaction of quarks via the exchange of gluons. The most striking feature of QCD is the energy dependence of the strong coupling constant, $\alpha_s(q^2)$. At short distances (large momentum transfer, high temperature) the coupling is small; at large distances (small momentum transfer, low temperature) the coupling increases to its eponymous strength [@PDG]. The major consequence of the strong coupling at low energy is the hadronic confinement of quarks and gluons which is responsible for nucleonic structure. At very high energies the coupling constant nearly vanishes and the quarks and gluons are asymptotically free. This deconfined state of quark matter is known as the [**quark-gluon plasma**]{} (QGP) [@HM]. By creating a QGP and observing its behavior we hope to obtain a better understanding of strong interaction physics in the high temperature regime. The work in this dissertation presents one approach to finding and understanding this new form of matter. This is a small piece of a larger effort within the nuclear physics community to map out the nuclear matter phase diagram (see figure \[PhaseDiagram\]).
![A cartoon of the QCD phase diagram showing temperature vs. baryon chemical potential. (taken from [@FluctReview])[]{data-label="PhaseDiagram"}](PhaseDiag.eps){width="4in"}
QGP physics is difficult because we cannot access the deconfined quark matter directly. We can prepare high energy-density nuclear matter with the accelerators (CERN’s Super Proton Synchrotron) and colliders (BNL’s Relativistic Heavy-ion Collider) at our disposal, but the collision products dissipate very quickly. Thus, our detectors only see the decay products of the excited matter after dissipation has occured. However, this achievement is itself no small feat. The fact that we are able to record a collision event with the necessary precision is a testament to modern experimental techniques. We have gone from analyzing photographic bubble chamber data by eye to the modern time projection chamber, which provides an accurate digital snapshot of the charged collision products. The tools of our trade have been revolutionized along with the rest of the world by the availability of fast, affordable, networked computing power. As a consequence of this revolution of detectors and experimental methods we are now experiencing a painful period of rapid change in the development of analysis methods used to extract physics results from the data. With precise, digital event reconstruction and high-energy collider-accelerators we can create and reconstruct individual events with thousands of produced charged particles. This has given us, for the first time, the ability to do statistically meaningful event-by-event analysis of our data. This type of analysis is essential if we are to achieve the goal of creating deconfined quark matter and understanding the nuclear matter phase diagram.
Consider the data that comes from a single collision event. After the high energy-density matter created in the collision has dissipated, we are left with only a detector image of the produced particles. Along with the trajectory information we record as much as we can about the properties of the particles we detect (charge, momentum, energy-loss, etc). Because this matter cannot be kept in the interesting region of the phase diagram, a wide variety of possible decay-product signals of the formation of a QGP have been proposed [@Harris]. Ultimately the data available to us are so far removed from the physics of interest (the state of the collision participants at the instant of the collision) that the final state particle distributions are nearly correlation free. From this barely-correlated distribution of particles we are trying to piece together the convoluted journey that they take during the evolution of the collision. This requires an approach to data analysis that is sensitive to very small non-statistical effects so that we can fully exploit the correlations present in the data. Until recently the application of such methods was in its infancy because the small number of particles detected per event at lower energies made it difficult to reach statistically meaningful conclusions. With the recent increases in collider energy and the resulting increases in event multiplicity a new frontier of event-by-event data analysis has opened. Event-by-event approaches are gaining popularity where inclusive measures once dominated, and the physics possibilities are very exciting. There are a variety of ways in which the QGP phase transition may present itself on an event-by-event level, two distinct approaches to QGP detection adopted here utilize measures of fluctuations and correlations.
Event-by-event fluctuation analysis relies on measurements of fluctuations present in event variables [@GeneralizedPhi] like multiplicity [@SPH] and particle species ratios [@QGPFluct]. All of the event-by-event fluctuation measures have some degree of utility [@Compress] [@FluctReview] [@APPFluct], but for this analysis effort we have chosen to focus on fluctuations in mean transverse momentum. $<p_t>$ fluctuations have the most theoretical support of all event-by-event approaches and there are models that both contradict [@LUCIAE] and agree with [@QGSM] [@FirstOrder] the experimental fluctuation results. There are a variety of proposed momentum fluctuation analysis measures [@PhiPt] [@SubEvent] [@CLT]. All are closely related and come out of comparisons of measured fluctuations to statistical expectations. Of these the $\Delta\sigma_{p_t}$ measure is minimally biased [@TATMeasureBias] and thus the most useful for our purposes.
From a theoretical perspective fluctuation analysis is an exploitation of canonical thermodynamics which tells us that the non-statistical fluctuations of collective observables are related to physically interesting measures. For example, fluctuations in the slope of the transverse momentum distribution can provide information about the temperature of the collision at freeze-out [@TFluct]. We need event-by-event approaches because they have access to information unavailable to inclusive measure analysis [@TptFluct]. Event-by-event signatures can be used to map the phase diagram with information like the order of the transition [@FirstOrder] and the presence of a critical point [@CriticalPoint].
Event-by-event correlation analysis has been used in various forms since the inception of experimental QCD physics. Parton jet finding [@jets], event-plane determination for flow analysis [@flow] [@STARFlow], and Hanbury-Brown Twiss interferometery for source size and lifetime calculations [@HBT] all depend on correlation analysis. All of these methods have been (and continue to be) applied on an event-by-event basis. We have chosen to take a different and completely general approach to correlation analysis. Using tools derived from the entropy [@EbyEEntropy], factorial moments [@FacMo], and autocorrelation [@AutoCorr], we study QCD through the arbitrary correlation content of the final state measured with model-independent correlation analysis systems.
Here we present novel methods that are suitable for analyzing data from single relativistic heavy-ion collision events and map out the analysis tasks that lie before us. We will always have an eye on the greater goal of discovering and understanding deconfined quark matter, but the initial task is to construct a robust analysis system for event-by-event analysis, which has become increasingly important in experimental QCD physics.
Approaches to Event-by-event Analysis
-------------------------------------
At relatively low energies ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}\sim$1-5 GeV) the low multiplicity of a single event makes analyzing single heavy-ion events of limited utility. With the larger energies seen at the CERN SPS ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}=17$ GeV) and recently at BNL with the RHIC ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$130-200 GeV) have come larger event multiplicities, and thus the possibility of making statistically meaningful physics measurements with event-by-event analyses. Of course, accelerator/collider experiments have often focused on a kind of event-by-event physics. When searching for a new particle one often hopes to find an elusive single event that contains clear evidence that the particle exists and has been created successfully in the lab. Parton searches were finally successful because single events with dramatic jet structures were observed [@jets]; event-by-event searches for specific decay toplogies in bubble chamber images are responsible for the discovery of a plethora of particles ([*e.g.,*]{} the discovery of the $\Omega^-$ [@omegadiscovery]). In this sense event-by-event physics has had a long history in nuclear and particle physics.
However, now that our experiments have matured we can do more. We can now move beyond specific, model-dependent event-by-event physics searches and make statistically significant measurements of the general properties of individual events. This experimental evolution has been accompanied by five years of rapid growth in the number of publications aimed at the quantification of event-wise physical quantities [@FluctReview]. The work reported here has been aimed at developing a set of tools for the analysis and characterization of event-by-event RHI data. The interpretation of results from these new tools is often difficult, and a large portion of this work will be aimed at addressing the issue of making our results meaningful.
By maintaining a connection to the existing canon of analysis tools the job of interpreting our results is made much easier. This is an important consideration. The more care that is taken in the crafting of the analysis system, the easier it will be to interpret the results and generate meaningful conclusions. One could easily become lost in a sea of questionable results when dealing with poorly designed, misunderstood measures. Avoiding this is a large part of the motivation for this work. In addition to using the connection to established measures as a touchstone for interpretation of our results, we wish to provide a new context for understanding existing techniques. We hope to address and resolve the shortcomings of existing measures by developing a holistic approach to event-by-event analysis.
Towards this end, we consider three distinct but interconnected types of correlation analysis, each based (in part) on a different piece of the existing analysis canon. First, we will take on the task of creating a generalized correlation analysis system appropriate for event-by-event analysis. The available QCD theory of RHI collisions is not very predictive. We need an analysis system that is able to find something interesting even though we may not know how to define what “interesting" is. By carefully examining this problem we can identify the characteristics of an appropriate analysis system to help with the actual implementation (see chapters 2, 3, and 4 for details).
Secondly, we will formulate an event-by-event analysis system that uses fluctuation analysis to learn about the collision. The most straightforward method used for characterizing events is by the calculation and analysis of event-wise properties. We will refer to these as [**global variables**]{}. By analogy to thermodynamics there are two types of global variables, extensive (multiplicity $N$, total momentum $P$, etc.) and intensive (temperature T, event-wise mean momentum $<p>$, etc.). We will concentrate on intensive variables since we want to compare events with different centrality, and the increase in multiplicity with centrality makes extensive quantities more difficult to deal with. By looking at the fluctuations present in global variables we can already understand a great deal about the evolution of the collision. The $\Phi_{p_t}$ variable of Gaździcki and Mrówczyński [@PhiPt] provides a starting point for the development and refinement of fluctuation analysis in RHI collision data. The details of our global variable analysis approach and its relationship to $\Phi_{p_t}$ are discussed in chapter 5.
Finally, we will show that two-particle correlations are uniquely important in understanding the early state of the collision. We want to understand the hadronization process that created the detected particles. Thus, we are naturally drawn to the correlations between particles, which can contain significant amounts of information about the early collision. While higher-order correlations are also interesting, two-particle correlations are the easiest to calculate and interpret. The exponential growth of the combinatorial background with correlation order makes higher-order correlation calculations too computationally expensive to be useful for this analysis. Not only do the two-particle correlation measures provide valuable insight into the correlation structure of the data, but there is also a deep algebraic connection between these measures and the fluctuations present in certain global variables [@CLT]. This is explored in detail in chapter 6 where we examine the relationship between the $\Phi_{p_t}$ variable and two-particle correlation measures.
Generalized Model-independent Correlation Analysis
--------------------------------------------------
While it is important to understand and incorporate existing event-by-event analysis methods into this work, the main purpose is to develop new techniques applicable to (but not constrained by) event-by-event physics. The most significant part of this work is in the development of a system for quantifying the information contained in an arbitrary data set and interpreting its results to better understand possible correlation mechanisms. Statistics, probability, topology, information theory, statistical mechanics, and thermodynamics have all been applied, with varying degrees of effectiveness, as probes of correlation structure. Using these canonical tools as a starting point, we will formulate a robust analysis system appropriate to the problems of event-by-event physics.
We want to study a collision after it has heated up to the point that quark deconfinement is possible, but before it has cooled again and made the detectable hadrons we observe. Because the detected particles are the only connection we have to the collision we need an analysis system that will allow us to see through the veil of hadronization back to the early collision. This alone is a daunting task, but the real difficulty comes when we consider the state of QCD theory. Since the QCD Lagrangian has no closed-form solution we are dependent upon a wide variety models and assumptions to help us know what to expect from our data [@Intro]. These expectations are often contradictory and rife with theoretical oversimplification and experimentally unsupportable assumptions. Because of this cacophony of available models we have chosen an explicit approach when incorporating any model into the analysis system. One simple way to do this is to design a system that is model-independent. This decouples our results from any current theory, but still allows us to make comparisons with theory expectations when appropriate. While all of our techniques are not model-independent, it is important to stress that when a model is incorporated implicitly into an analysis we will address the model choice directly.
An example of [**model-explicit**]{} analysis can be found in detector triggering. When colliding nuclei as we do, it is impossible to precisely control the time at which the collision occurs ($t_0$). This necessitates a triggering system to determine $t_0$ and set in motion the chain of events that record the data present in the detector at that instant. A simple trigger might look for significant energy deposition in the detector and/or a lack of significant energy deposition along the beam path. This selects events where a significant amount of momentum transfer has occured. Modern triggers have become more sophisticated. We can now choose to record data from a collision based on how interesting that collision appears to be according to a variety of criteria. The trigger system in the STAR experiment can operate several triggers in parallel to generate a variety of data streams from a single set of collisions. This trigger system is analogous to a model-explicit analysis because it incorporates a variety of different triggers based on explicit criteria. When analyzing a data set one must explicitly define the trigger that was used in creating it. Similarly, when analyzing data with a model-explicit analysis system one must explicity specify the reference model used, otherwise the results are meaningless.
The motivation for the development of a general model-independent analysis was to develop a smart trigger for STAR similar to the one described above. We approached the problem by trying to answer the universal question: “How can we quantify the amount and type of information contained in some general distribution?" This problem arises in many different contexts, from data compression to image analysis. Our approach was to characterize the information contained in the data using a model-independent analysis, then incorporate a model explicitly by performing an identical analysis on the model. A comparison between these two results gives a measure of their similarity, and allows us to quantify how interesting the data might be. Building such an analysis system was more subtle than we first imagined, so we chose to abandon the smart trigger and move to offline analysis.
Quantifying Information
-----------------------
We want to measure the low-level structure present in a [*nearly*]{} statistical distribution of particles produced from a RHI collision. While there are many analyses designed to address similar problems, there is no existing analysis system that can fulfill all of our needs. The problem calls for an abstraction of various techniques so we can create a generalized, universal language for model-independent correlation analysis, applicable and useful in a variety of contexts.
Since we approach the problem from a physicist’s perspective we start by considering statistical mechanics and thermodynamics. The simplest mathematical measure of information content or correlation is entropy. The Boltzmann entropy, $S=k_b\:log(g)$ is a measure of the number of states that are accessible to a given system [@KandK]. Clearly, the more states accessible to a system, the more information the system can contain. The computing problems that arose at the turn of the millennium are a good example of this. Most computers had been programmed to represent the date using two digits in base 10. This allowed for only 100 unique states in the system. At the turn of the millennium suddenly we needed to avoid the redundancy of 1900 and 2000 being represented by the same state (00). This was solved by adopting a system that could contain more information. Many systems went to a four digit year, insuring no redundancy for 10,000 years because of the extra information content possible in a system with a factor of 100 more states. The [*relative*]{} entropy between two systems tells us how much information one system can contain as compared to another. This is why information is defined as the relative entropy [@Info].
This example suggests a straightforward [*information-based*]{} solution to the triggering problem. By comparing the entropy of a known reference distribution ([*e.g.,*]{} an “uninteresting" event from an appropriately chosen statistical model) to the entropy of the data in a particular event, we can measure the mutual information. This will tell us if the data contain any information beyond what we expect to see in the reference distribution. As long as the reference we have chosen is appropriate, this will tell us which events are “interesting" and worth further study, and which events look so similar to the “uninteresting" model prediction that they can be ignored.
Reference Comparisons
---------------------
Reference comparison is an important aspect of any information or correlation analysis. The scientific method itself is based on the idea of comparisons between data and reference. We compare data to a model to see if the information in the data matches the information predicted by the model. The model’s information content serves as the reference, with the comparison to data telling us if the data and model are in agreement.
Describing a set of data with a fitting function is an illustrative example of a model-explicit reference-based analysis. Consider a goodness-of-fit measure such as $\chi^2$. By minimizing $\chi^2$ we are minimizing the difference between the data and a reference defined by the function we are fitting to the data. In effect, we are changing the fitting parameters using the assumption that the fitting function being considered is a good reference to compare to the data. If it is a good reference, then we can determine the parameters of the fitting function so the data deviate minimally from this reference. The final minimized $\chi^2$ calculated gives us an idea of the quality of fit, if the fit is bad we must reexamine the assumption that the reference chosen for the fitting function is appropriate for the data [@Bevvy].
In this example the operating assumption is that the reference (fitting function) is robust and its parameters can be tuned to match the data so that meaningful conclusions can be drawn from the parameters. However, if there is no good reference available, this approach is not useful. The goodness-of-fit procedure cannot make suggestions as to what reference is appropriate; it can only make a comparison using an explicitly specified reference.
An example that illustrates a model-dependent reference-based analysis is the linear correlation coefficient. The linear correlation coefficient is obtained by performing a least-squares fit on a two-dimensional data set with straight lines of the form $y=a+bx$ and $x=a'+b'y$ [@Bevvy]. The coefficient is a measure of the correlation covariance of the data, $r=\sqrt{bb'}$. Because of the integrated reference, the data can contain significant correlation to which this measure is totally insensitive. Namely, if the assumption about the linear relationship between $x$ and $y$ is incorrect the LCC may be useless. Any circularly-symmetric data distributions will have a linear correlation coefficient of zero. This makes it impossible to distinguish between a totally uncorrelated distribution and a tightly correlated, circularly-symmetric distribution when using the LCC as the correlation measure. The LCC is a useful measure, but one must be aware of the correlations to which it is sensitive and use it only in situations where it is well matched to the problem being addressed.
These examples make it clear that the choice of reference should be made explicit in our correlation analysis system. Since we aren’t sure exactly what correlations will present themselves it is especially important that we use the most flexible approach possible. This is also consistent with our desire to create a system that is inherently model-independent. Using this model-explicit approach the analysis can be done without any model. This would yield an absolute measure of the information contained in the data. If a model comparison is appropriate the absolute results from the data and a reference (from an explicitly chosen model) can be used to calculate the mutual information between the two distributions.
Scale Generalization
--------------------
As we know from thermodynamics, the choice of partition is an essential part of calculating thermodynamic quantities [@Huang]. Thus, one of the first problems that we encounter in designing an entropy-based correlation analysis system is choosing the proper partition.
As the number of degrees of freedom available to a system undergoing a phase transition changes self-similar scaling behavior often arises in the ordering of the system’s constituents ([*e.g.,*]{} crystal formation, cluster agglomeration) [@Fractal]. This is particularly true in first order phase transitions. Because some theorists suggest that the QGP transition should be first order [@FirstOrder], we have chosen to insure that our analysis be sensitive to correlations at a variety of scales. Thus, we can easily identify events with self-similar scaling behavior if the phase transition presents itself in such a direct way.
Unfortunately, standard thermodynamic entropy calculations are relevant only in the zero-scale limit. This restricts us to analyzing distributions in the region where the partition size $e$ is taken to be very near zero. Since we want to be sensitive to correlations present at any scale, we cannot depend on the standard methods for calculating thermodynamic quantities. We need a generalization of entropy calculation methods that can be extended to instances where the number of bins is small.
The solution to our problems with the standard entropy lie in a generalization of the partition scale. By abandoning the restrictive zero-scale limit we gain sensitivity to information content at all scales. A scale-generalized (or [**scale-local**]{}) entropy also allows direct comparison of results at different scales, making self-similar (fractal) behavior easily detectable. Furthermore, this generalization incorporates the thermodynamic limit (a zero-scale partition) seamlessly with the continuum of other binning scales. This creates a larger context that is conceptually satisfying; the zero-scale limit of the scale-local entropy is the standard entropy.
With such a seemingly simple generalization as a solution to our analysis problem one might wonder why this approach has not been applied to entropy calculations before. As we will see in the coming sections the computational task of calculating the entropy of a data distribution as a function of scale is substantial. It requires significant numerical computation to characterize even the simplest distribution. With cutting-edge computing technology these calculations are quite time consuming, and it is clear that they would not have been technically feasible even 10 years ago. It is possible to calculate the scaled entropy of the simplest distributions analytically, but the practical application of such a calculation requires the large and reliable computing power afforded by modern computers. The development of this analysis method has been intimately tied to recent developments in computing power.
Conclusions
-----------
The physics of high temperature quantum chromodynamics is itself undergoing an exciting phase transition. The advent of fast and affordable computing coupled with new experimental techniques has given us high-energy accelerators and exquisitely sensitive detectors that are revolutionizing experimental QCD. No subfield feels this more acutely than event-by-event physics. For the first time statistically meaningful event-scale analysis has become possible. These developments have motivated us to tackle the problem of developing new analysis techniques to exploit the exciting new possibilities of meaningful event-by-event physics.
This work presents three distinct, but interconnected, approaches to event-by-event analysis. First is the most general, scale-local model-independent correlation analysis. This approach eschews any connection to the specifics of QCD and event-by-event physics. By designing a completely general analysis system we hope to be sensitive to any possible QGP signal. Second is an analysis of fluctuations in the event-wise transverse momentum distribution. This analysis is based on the work of Gaździcki and Mrówczyński [@PhiPt] and addresses the expected effect of a QGP transition on temperature fluctuations. Our goal with this analysis has been to clarify the meaning of existing fluctuation measures and design a framework for fluctuation analysis that is applicable in a broader context. Finally, is the analysis of two-particle correlations. This effort grew out of the fluctuation measure work and has since taken on its own life. Here we to look at the full two-particle correlation map instead of a specific region or measure of correlation strength. This gives us a broad view of the correlation content of the data and gives us access to nearly all of the physics of the collision.
While these approaches are diverse in scope and method, they are bound together by the common thread of event-scale analysis. The results born of these techniques represent the realization of the promise of event-by-event physics in heavy-ion collisions.
Scaled Correlation Analysis
===========================
Introduction
------------
Our goal is to detect anomalous QGP events. However, the scientific method works best when there are clear, testable hypotheses and direct measurement methods for testing them. As we discussed in the previous chapter, that is not the case for QCD theory and experiment. This is not the fault of the theory community. It simply indicates the depth and complexity of the issues that we must address. To accommodate this situation we have built an analysis system independent of theory expectations. In this system we characterize the information contained in the data without interpretation. As much as we value this theoretical independence, we will eventually want to make a variety of model comparisons. Thus, we have built a general analysis that 1) does not rely on any specific model or theory and 2) can nevertheless be used to make model comparisons. We will start by focusing on model-independence, then move to developing tools for making explicit comparisons with theory predictions.
Simplifying the Analysis Task
-----------------------------
Using thermodynamics and information theory as a starting point we have found that each collision event can be specified uniquely and independently. The entropy of a single event can be calculated by treating the data as a set of points in a $d$-dimensional space (where $d$ is the number of unique variables needed to completely specify the particle data), then partitioning that space and applying the methods of statistical mechanics to calculate properties of the single-event data. For example, we can calculate an entropy $S_0=log[M_0]$, where $M_0$ is the total number of bins in the partition that contain [*at least one data point*]{}. We refer to these as [**occupied bins**]{}. The set of occupied bins is the [**support**]{} of the distribution. Of course, it is not necessary to use all of the data variables from an event in our analysis. Calculating the entropy of an arbitrary point set in a $d$-dimensional space could be prohibitively difficult and time-consuming. Thus, we will ignore most of the event variables and focus initially on a one-dimensional analysis.
We select our initial analysis variable to be the transverse momentum ($p_t$) of the detected collision products. The slope of the $p_t$ distribution is a measure of the temperature of the collision [@TFluct], and so $p_t$ is a logical place to look first for signs of interesting physics. By focusing on $p_t$ we keep the problem tractable computationally, and also make the physics interpretation of our results simpler. This does not rule out later, more complex analyses including other variables. Rather, it serves as a starting point for our analysis development.
To calculate the entropy of a point set we must select a scale for the binning that will be applied to the data. This decision may bias our results. For example, we might choose a binning scale at which we expect to find interesting features in the data. This provides sensitivity in that scale region at the cost of sensitivity elsewhere in scale. If we instead consider the entropy of each event as a function of the scale of the partition we remove any scale bias present in the standard entropy formulation. This allows us to apply the results of information theory in a general way, independent of assumptions about the scale of anticipated correlation features. Thus, we write the entropy $S_0$ as a function of scale, $S_0(e)=log[M_0(e)]$ where $e$ is the scale of the binning system. This novel approach to the entropy is outlined in great detail in [@SLTM].
Partitioning the Embedding Space
--------------------------------
Before we discuss the details involved in calculating the scaled entropy we must first decide what type of partition to use. There are a couple of requirements that the chosen partition must obey. First, we need a partition that minimizes scale-mixing; at each point in scale we would like the partition to be sensitive to correlations at that specific scale and no others. A careful choice of partition can maximize our resolution by minimizing the sensitivity window. Secondly, it is important that the partition completely cover the embedding space with no holes or overlapping bins. If there were holes then we would miss some correlations in the data dependent upon where the correlated points presented themselves in the embedding space. If the bins overlapped then we would weight the correlations in the region of space where the overlap occured more heavily then the correlations in other regions of the embedding space.
With a one-dimensional embedding space the choice of bins for a scale $e$ is obvious, each bin is a line segment of length $e$. Points that fall on the $i$th line segment are considered to be in the $i$th bin. Partitioning the space with a lattice of line segments insures minimal scale mixing.
It is worth noting that a variety of other binning methods could be used. For example, one could choose the binning system to be data-dependent. In this system we might define the partition such that each bin contains the same number of data points (this method has useful applications in astrophysics [@AstroBin]). In this way the features of the data are reflected in the binning itself. In this system areas with a high density of points would be covered with many small bins and low-density areas with a few large bins. Such data-dependent approaches are difficult to apply in a scale-local way, so we avoid them in favor of simpler partitions.
Moving to higher dimensional embedding spaces adds further complexity to the binning problem. Consider data in a two-dimensional embedding space. A logical choice for a partition of scale $e$ would be a grid of squares with side length $e$. However, because the diagonal of the each square bin is naturally $\sqrt{2}e$ this will cause some undesirable mixing of correlations from different scales. This could be avoided by using circular bins of diameter $e$, but making a compact tiling of circles to cover a 2d embedding space isn’t possible. The best we could do would be to use a tiling of hexagons with side length $\frac{e}{2}$. This would give us a compact covering of the embedding space while minimizing the sensitivity of the binning to correlations at scales other than $e$. This would be the ideal solution if computational time and effort was irrelevant. Unfortunately, it is not.
With a square binning, determining if a data point is in a particular bin is trivial: if the position of the data point is greater than that of the lower bin edge and less than that of the upper bin edge (on every axis) the data point can be said to be contained by the bin in question. Using a hexagonal binning, or even a rotated rectangular binning, the problem can no longer be trivially factored so that each axis is considered separately. This would make analysis of data in two dimensions difficult, and higher-dimensional analysis effectively impossible given the restrictions of currently available computing technology. Thus, we are restricted to a square binning system by the limitations of the computers available to us. It is not significantly more difficult to extend a square binning system to a rectangular binning system, but for the sake of clarity at this point we consider only square bins. An example of the application of a rectangular binning can be found in section 2.11.
Relative Binning Placement
--------------------------
Now that we have selected a square binning to partition the space and calculate the entropy we address the issue of the spatial relationship between the binning and the embedding space in which the data resides. For a generic distribution there is no way of determining a preferred relationship between the binning and the embedding space. One might argue that the edges of the bins ought to coincide with the edges of the embedding space. However, this would place restrictions on the scale points used to calculate the entropy. We would be forced to use only bin scales that are an integer fraction of the side length $L$ of the embedding space.
In general there are an infinite number of different ways to lay down the binning relative to the embedding space. If none of these bin orientations is preferable to the others then we must show that the relative position of the binning to the embedding space is irrelevant, or find a way of incorporating all possible bin positions to avoid biasing our results by making an arbitrary choice.
Consider the example of a data distribution that is much smaller than the embedding space. If the data distribution contains a bin edge then it will be split among multiple bins. However, if the binning is placed in precisely the right place then the data will fit entirely in a single bin. This can make a large difference in the resulting entropy calculation (see figure \[DitheringCartoon\]). Clearly, the relative position of the binning and the embedding space is important to the entropy calculation.
![An illustration of the importance of bin placement. The solid dark line marks the border of the embedding space in which the data resides. This space is partitioned using a square binning of scale $e$. Two different relative placements of this same partition system are shown. The first is placed in such a way that all of the data points are contained in a single bin (dashed lines), this bin placement would yield an entropy $S_0=log [1]=0$. The second is placed so that four different bins are occupied (dotted lines), this bin placement calculates the entropy of the data set to be $S_0=log [4]=0.60206$.[]{data-label="DitheringCartoon"}](DitherCartoon.eps){width="4in"}
This example also illustrates the utility of averaging to incorporate all possible relative binning positions. The contribution from the rare bin positioning that contains all of the data points is made insignificant by the inclusion of many other binning positions in which the data points are contained in multiple bins. This gives us a better picture of the correlation content of the data than the calculation of the entropy from a single, arbitrary bin position.
This averaging over different binnings is a very powerful tool. Consider the example of data in two dimensions being partitioned with circular bins. We cannot cover the entire embedding space with a single lattice of circles. If we instead chose to partition the space by placing a very large number of circles randomly we will cover the space many times over. We can then average over the redundant binnings (divide our results by the ratio of the total area of circles to the area of the embedding space) and we have effectively applied a compact binning using circular bins. One could envision using a similar approach averaging over fractal bins to try and minimize any bin-edge effects. With exotic binning approaches such as these we could try to solve many of our analysis problems, but it isn’t that simple. The science of partitioning spaces is non-trivial and a seemingly well-designed partition can have unintended consequences. Thus, we will avoid exotic solutions in favor of simplicity and focus on the details of applying a simple square partition.
Bin Dithering
-------------
In the previous section we showed that to maintain the generality of the binning we must average over all possible translations of the bin edges with respect to the embedding space. We do this with a process we call [**dithering**]{}. First, we define a dithering phase $\alpha$ to be $\frac{x}{e}$ where $x$ is the distance from the lower edge of the embedding space to the nearest bin edge. $e$ is the size of a bin (distance between bin edges) and $L$ is the size of the embedding space (see figure \[DitherVariables1d\]).
![A cartoon of a data set (black dots) in a one-dimensional embedding space (thick solid line) that illustrates the relationships among the relevant binning, event, and dithering variables.[]{data-label="DitherVariables1d"}](DitherVariables1d.eps){width="4.5in"}
All of the unique relationships between the partition and embedding space (along this axis) are represented by taking $\alpha$ from $0$ to $1$. In general, we will need $d$ such dithering phases for data existing in a $d$-dimensional embedding space. It is important to note that $\alpha \in [0,1)$ and behaves like a phase. This is a consequence of the definition $x \equiv 0$ when the bin edge coincides with the edge of the embedding space. With the goal of simplifying the dithering algebra we define $\phi=1-\alpha$ ($\phi \in (0,1]$) and use $\phi$ as the relevant dithering phase variable. The utility of this substitution can be seen in section 2.11 where we derive an analytical form for the entropy of an ideal uniform distribution.
To properly incorporate bin dithering into entropy calculations we must take the dithering phase average over the number of occupied bins. According to this prescription we calculate $M_{\phi}(e)$ of an event $J$ times at each scale, where each time we increment $\phi$ by $\frac{1}{J}$, and average over these results to get the entropy for this event at scale $e$. Thus, we must now write the entropy $S_0$ as the log of the $\phi$-averaged number of occupied bins: $S_0(e)=log[\frac{1}{J}\sum_{\phi}M_{\phi}(e)]=log[<M(e)>_{\phi}]$.
This treatment only applies to translations of the binning lattice. Even though we want to carefully consider and include all possible binning positions and orientations, we will not consider rotations of the binning system relative to the embedding space. Because of the rotational asymmetry of the square bins this would lead to a more complicated scale mixing than we already have, and would prohibitively increase the computational task.
Measuring Multiparticle Correlations
------------------------------------
Near a phase boundary in a classical bulk-matter system we expect to see clusters and droplets form as the number of degrees of freedom available to the system changes. These clusters and droplets can vary significantly in size and density, depending on the physics of the relevant phase transition. Thus, we must insure that our analysis is sensitive to arbitrary multiparticle correlations. To incorporate sensitivity to correlated clusters involving $q$ particles (known as [**$q$-tuples**]{}) we look to existing analysis tools to avoid needlessly creating new language. The analysis and quantification of information is common to many disciplines and we must build a necessary and sufficient language that does not replace existing methods unless absolutely necessary. All of the tools and language we are developing must be consistent with existing knowledge, as with the generalization of entropy to a scale-local form.
To calculate the entropy of a $q$-tuple ensemble we refer to the work of Hungarian mathematician Alfred Rényi. Rényi formulated a general approach to the calculation of entropy [@Renyi] that is directly applicable to our problem. Incorporating the scale generalization and bin dithering we can write the rank-$q$ Rényi entropy as: $$\begin{aligned}
S_q(e)&=&\frac{1}{1-q}log[<\sum_{i=1}^{M_{\phi}(e)}p_{i,\phi}^q(e)>_{\phi}]. \end{aligned}$$ Where $p_{i,\phi}(e)$ is the [**bin probability**]{} of the $i$th bin at dithering phase $\phi$, which varies as a function of the scale $e$ of the binning. This bin probability is simply the normalized [**bin occupancy**]{}, or number of data points that occupy the $i$th bin ($n_i$) divided by the total number of data points present in the embedding space ($N$). $p_i$ is defined so that $\sum_ip_i=1$ at a given scale $e$ and dithering angle $\phi$, with the sum taken over all bins in the partition. Of course, for bins that contain no points ([**void bins**]{}) $p_i=0$ and these bins do not contribute to the sum. We can represent this explicitly by taking the sum to be over only the $M_{\phi}(e)$ bins that are occupied.
The argument of the logarithm in the Rényi entropy can be more generally written as a normalized correlation integral $C_q(e)$. In this case we can use the approximation $C_q(e) \approx <\sum_{i=1}^{M(e)}p_i^q(e)>_{\phi}$. The reader will find the more general correlation integral approach completely described in [@SLTM]. For this treatment it is sufficient to adopt the scale-generalized Rényi entropy given above.
The rank-0 Rényi entropy is exactly the entropy we have used in previous examples: $$\begin{aligned}
S_0(e)&=&\frac{1}{1-0}log[<\sum_{i=1}^{M_{\phi}(e)}p_{i,\phi}^0(e)>_{\phi}] \\ \nonumber
&=&log[<\sum_{i=1}^{M_{\phi}(e)}1>_{\phi}] \\ \nonumber
&=&log[<M_{\phi}(e)>_{\phi}].\end{aligned}$$ Expressing $S_0$ in this form instead of in the Rényi form makes its meaning much clearer. It is a special entropy because it measures only the number of occupied bins as a function of scale and is insensitive to interparticle correlations within each individual bin.
The other case that must be considered separately is $q=1$: $$\begin{aligned}
S_1(e)&=&\frac{1}{1-1}log[<\sum_{i=1}^{M_{\phi}(e)}p_{i,\phi}^1(e)>_{\phi}] \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{log[1]}{0}.\end{aligned}$$ This calls for an application of L’Hôpital’s rule: $$\begin{aligned}
\lim_{q\rightarrow 1}S_q(e)&=&\lim_{q\rightarrow 1}\frac{log[<\sum_{i}p_{i,\phi}^q(e)>_{\phi}]}{1-q} \\ \nonumber
&=&\lim_{q\rightarrow 1}\frac{\frac{\delta}{\delta q}\{log[<\sum_{i}p_{i,\phi}^q(e)>_{\phi}]\}}{\frac{\delta}{\delta q}\{1-q\}} \\ \nonumber
&=&\lim_{q\rightarrow 1}\frac{-1}{ln[10]}\frac{\delta}{\delta q}\{ln[<\sum_{i}p_{i,\phi}^q(e)>_{\phi}]\} \\ \nonumber
&=&\lim_{q\rightarrow 1}\frac{-1}{ln[10]}\frac{1}{<\sum_{i}p_{i,\phi}^q(e)>_{\phi}}<\sum_{i}\frac{\delta}{\delta q}\{p_{i,\phi}^q(e)\}>_{\phi} \\ \nonumber
&=&\lim_{q\rightarrow 1}\frac{-1}{ln[10]}\frac{<\sum_{i}p_{i,\phi}^q(e)\:ln[p_{i,\phi}(e)]>_{\phi}}{<\sum_{i}p_{i,\phi}^q(e)>_{\phi}} \\ \nonumber
&=&-\frac{<\sum_{i}p_{i,\phi}^1(e)\:log[p_{i,\phi}(e)]>_{\phi}}{<\sum_{i}p_{i,\phi}^1(e)>_{\phi}} \\ \nonumber
&=&-<\sum_{i}p_{i,\phi}(e)\:log[p_{i,\phi}(e)]>_{\phi}. \\ \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Thus, we can write $S_1$ in a form that is equivalent to the Shannon entropy [@Info]: $$\begin{aligned}
S_1(e)&=&-<\sum_{i=1}^{M_{\phi}(e)}p_{i,\phi}(e)\:log[p_{i,\phi}(e)]>_{\phi}. \\ \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ For all $q > 1$ the Rényi entropy is well behaved, and most clearly expressed in the form written in equation (2.1).
Scale-local Information
-----------------------
Now that we have found an expression for the scale-local entropy we can formulate other scale-local measures. We start with the information. It is defined as the difference between two entropies, so given the scale-local Rényi entropy the scale-local information must be: $$\begin{aligned}
I_q(e)&=&S_{q,obj}(e)-S_{q,ref}(e).\end{aligned}$$ We have chosen to write the entropies as $S_{q,obj}$ and $S_{q,ref}$ to reflect the interpretation of the information as we will be applying it. When we calculate the information we are making a comparison between the data or [**object**]{} distribution and the results we would expect from some model that we adopt as a [**reference**]{}. This allows us to be model-explicit, whenever we calculate the relative information contained in some data distribution we must explicitly choose the model used to generate the reference. The selection of a reference is a key issue in this analysis, so we will explore it in detail in later sections.
Scale-local Dimension
---------------------
In addition to writing entropy, volume, and information as functions of scale we can also express the dimension of a distribution as a function of scale. We start with a standard definition of the dimension from [@Gollub]: $$\begin{aligned}
d_q&=&\frac{1}{q-1}\lim_{e\rightarrow 0} \Biggl[ \frac{log [\sum_{i=1}^Mp_i^q]}{log [e]} \Biggr] \\ \nonumber
&=&\lim_{e\rightarrow 0} \Biggl[ -\frac{S_q(e)}{log [e]} \Biggr].\end{aligned}$$ In this definition $M$ is the number of phase space elements required to cover the distribution (the number of bins in the support), $p_i$ is the normalized bin probability measure, and $e$ is the characteristic scale of the binning used to partition the phase space. In this standard approach, the dimension of a set is measured only in the limit of a zero-scale partition. As we did with the entropy, we can loosen this unnecessary restriction. After making an obvious substitution for the scale-local entropy we apply the definition of the derivative and rewrite the dimension as a scale-local function in terms of the scale derivative of the entropy: $$\begin{aligned}
d_q(e)&=&-\frac{\partial S_q(e)}{\partial log[e]}.\end{aligned}$$ Treating dimension as a scale-local function is a novel consequence of a scale-local entropy. To understand how the scale of a measurement can effect the perceived dimension of an object, consider the dimension of the planet Mercury. From the perspective of an observer on Earth, Mercury appears to be a single point (an object with zero dimension) to the naked eye. If we instead observe Mercury with a telescope that is orbiting the Earth we will increase the resolution of our observation (decrease the binning size) significantly. Mercury will now appear to be a small disc, betraying the fact that it has a rich internal structure that would not be present in a single point. In this regime the planet appears to be a two-dimensional object. Now consider the observations made by a probe orbiting Mercury itself. Since the orbiting probe moves around the planet it is clear that Mercury is a three-dimensional object in this regime. If the probe lands on the planet and moves around a small region of the surface, the planet will look essentially flat (two-dimensional again). This is the region of scale occupied by the “flat Earth" society. Finally, if the probe does an analysis of the surface material on an atomic scale, it will find that the planet is made of atoms and molecules that appear to be individual points. Thus, at this scale the planet is seen to be a collection of disconnected points and its dimension returns to zero.
A Simple Example
----------------
Now that we have done the work of deriving an appropriate form for the scaled entropy and related topological measures, we should look at a simple application of this analysis to gain insight into the meaning of its results. We start by calculating the scaled entropy and dimension (for a few different $q$ values) of a randomly generated 1d uniform distribution of $N$ points.
![Results of scaled correlation analysis applied to a distribution of 50,000 uniformly thrown random points in 1d. The distribution itself is shown in the top panel. The bottom panels show the entropy and dimension for $q=0$ (dashed lines) and $q=1$ (dotted lines).[]{data-label="1dRGUD"}](c2f3.eps){width="4in"}
To understand these results, consider the small, intermediate, and large scale regimes. In the small scale limit ($e << \frac{L}{N}$) each of the $N$ points in the data distribution occupies it’s own bin, so there are N occupied bins ($M=N$) each with bin probability $p_i=\frac{1}{N}$. Thus, the entropy approaches $log[N]$ as the bin size becomes vanishingly small: $$\begin{aligned}
\lim_{e\rightarrow 0}S_q(e)&=&\frac{1}{1-q}log[\sum_{i=1}^{N}(\frac{1}{N})^q] \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{1}{1-q}log[N^{1-q}] \\ \nonumber
&=&log[N]. \end{aligned}$$ This result is extremely general, being independent of the details of the correlations present in the data. This makes it independent of the rank ($q$) of the entropy being calculated and the dimension ($d$) of the embedding space in which the data resides.
At intermediate scales where the details of the correlations present in the data are probed by the binning we cannot make a convenient general statement about the expected results. However, if we idealize our uniform $N$ point 1d data distribution to one that is perfectly dense ($N\rightarrow \infty$) and of infinite extent ($L\rightarrow \infty$) then we know that at all scales the dimension of the distribution will be one. This is the same as saying that the dimension of a line is one. This generalization is also independent of the rank of the entropy calculated, but depends totally on the dimension of the embedding space. Thus, at intermediate scale regions where the point-like nature of this data is invisible to the binning (there are no void bins), the slope of the entropy distribution must be one.
At large scales ($e >> 1$) the entire distribution fits in a single bin, so $M=1$ and $p_i=1$. This yields the general result that the rank-$q$ entropy vanishes (for a bounded distribution) as the bin size approaches infinity.
To recap these results, the entropy and dimension are zero in the large-scale regime where the data looks like a single point. As the scale decreases and we pass through the scale of the embedding space (the unit interval; $e = 1$) we begin to see structure in the data. In this mid-scale regime, we find the entropy has a slope of one because the data behaves like a dense 1d distribution at these scales. This continues until the scale of the bins gets near the mean interparticle spacing of the distribution ($L/N$). At this point we begin to see the space between the points and find an increasing number of void bins as the scale continues to decrease. Finally, we reach the point where each of the $N$ points is in its own bin and the entropy levels off at $log[N]$. Thus, the results of figure \[1dRGUD\] make sense algebraically and intuitively.
Selecting a Reference
---------------------
To calculate the relative information between a data set and a reference, we must first select the reference distribution we wish to use as a model and calculate its entropy. There are two distinct approaches that one can take in selecting a reference.
![SCA results for a 1d randomly generated uniform distribution of 50k points using the data analyzed in figure \[1dRGUD\] as a reference. The distributions are identical in the large- and mid-scale regimes, only differing at scales in the vicinity of $-4.7$ where the differences in the distributions arising from statistical fluctuations are visible. The curves are $q=0$ (dashed), $q=1$ (dotted), and $q=2$ (dot-dashed).[]{data-label="1d50k"}](c2f4.eps){width="4in"}
Our first approach to generating a reference is to use an event as the reference model. In this simple example, we will use the data from the analysis of the previous section (see figure \[1dRGUD\]) as our reference event. We will create a data event by randomly generating a uniform distribution using the same process used to generate the reference. Because they contain the same correlation content, the only difference between these two distributions will be from statistical fluctuations, which appear only at small scales as in figure \[1d50k\].
In the previous example we have chosen the multiplicity of the data and reference events to be the same. If we instead choose events with differing multiplicities, we get very different results (see figure \[1d10k50r\]).
![SCA results for a 1d randomly generated uniform distribution of 10k points using the data analyzed in figure \[1dRGUD\] as a reference. The distributions are identical at large scales, but diverge rapidly when the difference in event multiplicities becomes visible (near $log[e/L]=-4$). In the small-scale limit the relative information is $I_q=log[10,000]-log[50,000] \approx -0.7$. The solid lines show the $q=0$ results for the reference distribution.[]{data-label="1d10k50r"}](c2f5.eps){width="4in"}
As one might expect, the information calculated for these two different distributions is essentially the same in the large- and mid-scale regimes. It is only in the small-scale region, where the difference in the multiplicities becomes visible to the binning, that the information becomes significantly non-zero. This is good to know because we have no control over the exact multiplicities of the events that come out of an actual experiment, and we would like to have the ability to make viable event comparisons. As long as we keep in mind that the difference in event multiplicities effects the information in the small-scale region increasingly with the magnitude of the difference, we can make meaningful comparisons between events of differing multiplicity.
The second approach to generating a reference is to use a model that allows us to calculate $S_{ref_q}(e)$ analytically. The most basic (and most useful) distribution for which the entropy can be solved analytically is the ideal uniform distribution (IUD). This is the distribution that will have the maximum entropy for a given multiplicity because it uniformly fills the embedding space. Because the IUD represents the maximum entropy hypothesis, using it as a reference yields an absolute measure for the information contained in a given event.
Derivation of $S_q(e)$ for an Ideal Uniform Distribution
--------------------------------------------------------
The scaled entropy of an ideal uniform distribution is special because it represents a maximum entropy hypothesis. This is the $N \rightarrow \infty$ ideal to which a uniform, random distribution aspires; the maximal filling of the embedding space. In some sense, this is the distribution that contains the least information. This makes it the logical choice for a benchmark from which any correlated distribution will vary.
To derive an analytic form for the scaled entropy ($S_q(e)$) of an IUD we will consider a two-dimensional distribution (and then extrapolate to $d$ dimensions). This is an ideal uniform distribution that exists in a square embedding space of side length L. The unique feature of the IUD is that it is distributed totally evenly throughout the embedding space. Thus, the probability of finding a portion of data from the distribution in any given bin is just a function of the bin size. The cartoon in figure \[DitherVariables2d\] shows the IUD binned with a general rectangular binning (thin dark lines). We need to calculate the bin contents for each bin (as a function of scale) and integrate over all possible dithering configurations to determine the analytic form for the entropy.
![A binning cartoon that illustrates the relationships among the relevant binning, event, and dithering variables in two dimensions.[]{data-label="DitherVariables2d"}](DitherVariables2d.eps){width="4in"}
For bins that are entirely contained within in the embedding space (interior bins), calculating the normalized bin contents (bin probability) is trivial. For these bins, $p_i$ is just the area of the bin divided by the total area of the data, $\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2}$. This is independent of any bin dithering, although the dithering must be taken into account in determining the total number of interior bins present. For edge and corner bins the problem is more difficult, so we will consider each type of bin, interior (white), edge (grey) and corner (dark grey) separately.
First consider the corner bins. These are bins that contain both an x- and y-axis embedding space edge. For all dithering configurations there are always four corner bins. The effective area of these corner bins is $e_xe_y$ scaled down by $f_xf_y$ where $f_i$ is the fraction of the bin along the $i$th axis that overlaps the data. By definition, the dithering phase along an axis is $\phi_i=(1-\alpha_i)$. Furthermore, we define $\Delta_i\equiv \frac{L}{e_i}-int(\frac{L}{e_i})$ for convenience. Thus, we can now express the amount of overlap between the last bin on axis i and the edge of the data along that axis as $\theta_i=\phi_i+\Delta_i-int(\phi_i+\Delta_i)$. With these definitions, calculating the contribution to the correlation integral of the corner bins is a matter of integrating over all $\phi$ values using the relevant bin probabilities. Labeling the corner bins from right to left starting with the upper left bin, we can write down the $\phi$-dependent corner bin probabilities: $$\begin{aligned}
p_{A}^q&=&(1-\phi_x)^q(1-\phi_y)^q(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q \\ \nonumber
p_{B}^q&=&(1-\phi_x)^q[\phi_y+\Delta_y-I(\phi_y+\Delta_y)]^q(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q \\ \nonumber
p_{C}^q&=&[\phi_x+\Delta_x-I(\phi_x+\Delta_x)]^q(1-\phi_y)^q(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q \\ \nonumber
p_{D}^q&=&[\phi_x+\Delta_x-I(\phi_x+\Delta_x)]^q[\phi_y+\Delta_y-I(\phi_y+\Delta_y)]^q(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q.\end{aligned}$$ We can calculate the dithering-averaged correlation integral $C_q=<\sum_i p_i^q>_{\phi}$ by integrating over the different dithering configurations for each bin and summing ($<\sum_i p_i^q>_{\phi}=\sum_i <p_i^q>_{\phi}$). Following this approach we simply need to integrate the $p_i^q$ expressions over the two dithering variables and sum their results to calculate the correlation integral. The $\phi$ integral over the first corner bin yields: $$\begin{aligned}
<p_{A}^q>_{\phi}&=&\int_0^1\int_0^1(1-\phi_x)^q(1-\phi_y)^q(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q d\phi_x d\phi_y \\ \nonumber
&=&(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q(\frac{1}{1+q})^2.\end{aligned}$$ The second term is a bit trickier: $$\begin{aligned}
<p_{B}^q>_{\phi}&=&[\int_0^1\int_0^1 (1-\phi_x)^q[\phi_y+\Delta_y-I(\phi_y+\Delta_y)]^q d\phi_x d\phi_y][(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q] \\ \nonumber
&=&(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q(\frac{1}{1+q})[\int_{\Delta_y}^1 v^q dv+\int_0^{\Delta_y} v^q dv] \\ \nonumber
&=&(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q(\frac{1}{1+q})^2.\end{aligned}$$ The third and fourth terms are similar to the first and second, so we see that each of the four corner bins contributes a term of $(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q(\frac{1}{1+q})^2$ to the total dithering-averaged correlation integral.
The contribution from edge bins is simpler to calculate than the corner bins. The overlap fraction $f_i=1$ in the direction parallel to the edge, so along that axis we simply need to count the number of edge bins. The integral along the other axis is the same as those from the corner bin calculations. Again there are four terms, but again there is a symmetry that simplifies the problem: $$\begin{aligned}
<p_{edge}^q>_{\phi}&=&\int_0^1\int_0^1 (\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q[I(\frac{L}{e_x}+1+\phi_x)-2](1-\phi_y)^q d\phi_x d\phi_y \\ \nonumber
&=&(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q(\frac{L}{e_x}-1)(\frac{1}{1+q}) \\ \nonumber
&=&\int_0^1\int_0^1 (\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q[I(\frac{L}{e_x}+1+\phi_x)-2][\phi_y+\Delta_y-I(\phi_y+\Delta_y)]^q d\phi_x d\phi_y \\ \nonumber
&=&(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q(\frac{L}{e_x}-1)(\frac{1}{1+q}).\end{aligned}$$ This is for the x-axis border bins, of course calculating the contributions from the y-axis bins is a simple matter of switching the indices. Thus, the contribution from border bins is: $$2(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q[(\frac{L}{e_x}-1)(\frac{1}{1+q})+(\frac{L}{e_y}-1)(\frac{1}{1+q})].$$ The only piece of the correlation integral calculation remaining is the integral over interior bins: $$\int_0^1\int_0^1 (\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q[I(\frac{L}{e_x}+1+\phi_x)-2][I(\frac{L}{e_y}+1+\phi_y)-2] d\phi_x d\phi_y = (\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q(\frac{L}{e_x}-1)(\frac{L}{e_y}-1).$$ Now that we have calculated the contributions from all bins the full correlation integral can be calculated: $$\begin{aligned}
C_q(e)&=&<\sum_i p_i^q>_{\phi}=\sum_i <p_i^q>_{\phi} \\ \nonumber
&=&[(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q][4(\frac{1}{1+q})^2+2(\frac{1}{1+q})(\frac{L}{e_x}-1)+2(\frac{1}{1+q})(\frac{L}{e_y}-1)+(\frac{L}{e_x}-1)(\frac{L}{e_y}-1)] \\ \nonumber
&=&[(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^q][2(\frac{1}{1+q})+(\frac{L}{e_x}-1)][2(\frac{1}{1+q})+(\frac{L}{e_y}-1)] \\ \nonumber
&=&[(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})^{q-1}][1+(\frac{1-q}{1+q})(\frac{e_x}{L})][1+(\frac{1-q}{1+q})(\frac{e_y}{L})].\end{aligned}$$ Plugging this result back into the definition of the rank-$q$ entropy, we find that: $$\begin{aligned}
S_q(e)&=&\frac{1}{1-q} log[C_q(e)] \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{q-1}{1-q} log(\frac{e_xe_y}{L^2})+\frac{1}{1-q} log[1+(\frac{1-q}{1+q})(\frac{e_x}{L})]+\frac{1}{1-q} log[1+(\frac{1-q}{1+q})(\frac{e_y}{L})] \\ \nonumber
&=&log(\frac{L^2}{e_xe_y})+\frac{1}{1-q}(log[1+(\frac{1-q}{1+q})(\frac{e_x}{L})]+log[1+(\frac{1-q}{1+q})(\frac{e_y}{L})]) \\ \nonumber
&=&\Biggl[log(\frac{L}{e_x})+\frac{1}{1-q}log[1+(\frac{1-q}{1+q})\frac{e_x}{L}]\Biggr]+\Biggl[log(\frac{L}{e_y})+\frac{1}{1-q}log[1+(\frac{1-q}{1+q})\frac{e_y}{L}]\Biggr].\end{aligned}$$ Because of the additivity of the log of a product we are able to break the entropy up in this case into two terms, one for each axis. This is suggestive of the $d$-dimensional generalization, namely simply adding another term for each axis that is relevant to the problem. Thus, we can generate the scaled entropy for a $d$-dimensional ideal uniform distribution based on an extrapolation of the 2d result.
Derivation Limitations
----------------------
We have found the rank-$q$ scaled entropy of an IUD (along a single axis) to be: $$S_q(e)=log(\frac{L}{e})+\frac{1}{1-q}log[1+(\frac{1-q}{1+q})\frac{e}{L}]$$ in the scale regions where interior bins are relevant. In the derivation of equation 2.18 we considered contributions from three types of bins: corner, border, and interior. In the 2d example used in the derivation this is only appropriate when both $e_x \le L$ and $e_y \le L$. If either of the bin scales is larger than the embedding space then there are no interior bins along that axis and 2.18 does not apply.
To derive the entropy for the IUD at large scales consider a single axis (we have shown the entropy to be factorizable so we will now take advantage of that fact) with $e \ge L$. In this case, when there is a bin edge in the embedding space we have exactly two corner bins, so we can express the bin probability of the second bin in terms of the first: $$\begin{aligned}
p_1^q&=&[(\alpha)(\frac{e}{L})]^q \\ \nonumber
p_2^q&=&[1-p_A]^q.\end{aligned}$$ When there is no bin edge in the embedding space then the entire space fits inside a single bin, and so $p_0=1$. This occurs when the distance from the edge of the embedding space to the nearest bin edge is larger than the size of the embedding space ($\alpha e \ge L$), thus we can write down and solve the relevant integrals: $$\begin{aligned}
<p_{0}^q>_{\alpha}&=&\int_{\frac{L}{e}}^1 [1]^q d\alpha \\ \nonumber
&=&1-\frac{L}{e},\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
<p_{1}^q>_{\alpha}&=&\int_0^{\frac{L}{e}} \alpha^q(\frac{e}{L})^q d\alpha \\ \nonumber
&=&(\frac{e}{L})^q\frac{1}{1+q}(\frac{L}{e})^{q+1}=\frac{L}{e}(\frac{1}{1+q}),\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
<p_{2}^q>_{\alpha}&=&\int_0^{\frac{L}{e}} [1-\alpha(\frac{e}{L})]^q d\alpha \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{L}{e}\int_0^1 u^q du = \frac{L}{e}(\frac{1}{1+q}).\end{aligned}$$ Since the definition of the corner bins is arbitrary, we could relabel them and get the same results. This symmetry requires that $<p_{1}^q>_{\alpha}=<p_{2}^q>_{\alpha}$, as we have confirmed analytically. These results can now be put together to calculate the scaled entropy: $$\begin{aligned}
S_q(e)&=&\frac{1}{1-q} log[C_q(e)] \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{1}{1-q} log[1-\frac{L}{e}+\frac{L}{e}(\frac{2}{1+q})] \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{1}{1-q} log[1+\frac{L}{e}(\frac{2}{1+q}-1)] \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{1}{1-q} log[1+(\frac{1-q}{1+q})\frac{L}{e}].\end{aligned}$$ This result allows us to write down the rank-$q$ scaled entropy for a 1d IUD in all scale regions: $$S_q(e)=\cases{log(\frac{L}{e})+\frac{1}{1-q}log[1+(\frac{1-q}{1+q})\frac{e}{L}],&if $e \le L$\cr
\frac{1}{1-q} log[1+(\frac{1-q}{1+q})\frac{L}{e}],&if $e \ge L$.\cr}$$ Of course, this result can be trivially extrapolated to the $d$-dimensional case. Notice that $S_q(e)$ is continuous at $e=L$. This is useful since it allows us to apply equation 2.8 and take the scale derivative of the entropy to calculate the scaled dimension (details are left as an exercise for the motivated reader). This yields: $$d_q(e)=\cases{\frac{1+q(1-\frac{e}{L})}{1+q(1-\frac{e}{L})+\frac{e}{L}},&if $e \le L$\cr
\frac{1}{1-q(1-\frac{e}{L})+\frac{e}{L}},&if $e \ge L$.\cr}$$ The scaled dimension provides a very nice consistency check. At all scales significantly smaller than the embedding space ($e \ll L$) the scaled dimension of the IUD should reflect the dimension of the embedding space that it fills independent of $q$. Taking the limit of the scaled dimension as $e \rightarrow 0$ yields: $$\lim_{e\rightarrow 0}d_q(e)=\frac{1+q}{1+q}=1,$$ as it must. Thus, we have derived believable analytic forms for the relevant topological measures for a 1d IUD, which can be trivially extrapolated to the $d$-dimensional case because of the extensivity of the scaled Rényi entropy.
Special Cases
-------------
As we saw earlier the $q=0$ and $q=1$ cases are somewhat special, so we will write them out explicitly. First, for $q=0$: $$S_0(e)=log[1+\frac{L}{e}].$$ At the beginning of this chapter we saw that the rank-0 entropy is the log of the number of occupied bins $M_0$. Because the IUD is perfectly dense (by definition) there are never any void bins. Thus, in this case $M_0=1+\frac{L}{e}$, the total number of (dithered) bins in the partition at scale $e$.
As we saw in section 2.6, an application of L’Hôpital’s rule was required to derive a well-behaved form for the $q=1$ Rényi entropy. This problem is also present in the analytical form for the entropy of the IUD. After applying L’Hôpital’s rule (again the details are left as an exercise for the motivated reader) one finds: $$S_1(e)=\cases{log(\frac{L}{e})+\frac{1}{2}\frac{e}{L},&if $e \le L$\cr
\frac{1}{2}\frac{L}{e},&if $e \ge L$.\cr}$$
Adding a Cutoff to the IUD Reference
------------------------------------
To test the results of the previous section we can use the entropy of an IUD as a reference in the SCA analysis of a discrete, randomly generated uniform distribution. Because the discrete nature of a distribution is invisible at scales much larger than the mean interparticle spacing, we expect to see exact agreement between the IUD reference and the discrete data distribution at medium and large scales. Only at small scales should there be any disagreement.
![SCA results for a 1d randomly generated uniform distribution of 50k points using the IUD entropy as a reference. The solid line is the IUD reference for $q=0$, comparable to the dashed line ($q=0$ for the data). Agreement is perfect at medium and large scales. At small scales the results diverge as the discrete nature of the data becomes visible.[]{data-label="fig2.7"}](c2f65.eps){width="4in"}
There indeed is significant disagreement between the IUD reference and the randomly generated data results at small scale. The distribution of “points" in the IUD is continuous and infinite, whereas in any real distribution of points it is finite and discrete. Thus, there arises a difference in the entropy at scales where the finite, discrete nature of the non-ideal distribution becomes visible to the binning system. To successfully make the IUD reference look more like the reference from a finite, discrete distribution we need to incorporate an appropriate cutoff factor into equations 2.24 and 2.25.
The data distribution in fig 2.7 rises with the IUD reference curve, but then smoothly goes to log N. We can make the IUD reference mimic this behavior by including a multiplicative factor in the reference entropy which is 1 at large scale and $\frac{N}{M_{q,eff}(e)}$ at small scale, where $M_{q,eff}(e)$ is the effective number of occupied bins in the IUD and is defined by $S_q(e)\equiv log[M_{q,eff}(e)]$. One simple function that fulfills this criteria is $f(e)=1-e^{-\frac{N}{M_{q,eff}(e)}}$. At large scale $M_{q,eff}(e) \rightarrow 1$, so $f(e) \rightarrow 1$ for large $N$. More importantly, at small scale $M_{q,eff}(e) \rightarrow \infty$, so if we expand the exponential term to first order in $M_{q,eff}(e)^{-1}$ then we are left with exactly the term we need: $$\begin{aligned}
f(e)&=&1-e^{-\frac{N}{M_{q,eff}(e)}} \\ \nonumber
&=&1-[1-\frac{N}{M_{q,eff}(e)}+\frac{1}{2}(-\frac{N}{M_{q,eff}(e)})^2+...] \\ \nonumber\
&\approx&\frac{N}{M_{q,eff}(e)}.\end{aligned}$$ Thus, incorporating the cutoff factor $f(e)$ into the IUD entropy yields the result $$\begin{aligned}
S_q(e)&=&log ([M_{q,eff}(e)][1-e^{-\frac{N}{M_{q,eff}(e)}}]),\end{aligned}$$ where $M_{q,eff}(e)$ is: $$\begin{aligned}
M_{q,eff}(e)&=&\cases{[\frac{L}{e}][1+(\frac{1-q}{1+q})\frac{e}{L}]^{\frac{1}{1-q}},&if $e \le L$\cr
[1+(\frac{1-q}{1+q})\frac{L}{e}]^{\frac{1}{1-q}},&if $e \ge L$.\cr} \end{aligned}$$ Naturally, we can also calculate the scaled dimension for an IUD with a cutoff: $$d_q(e)=\cases{\frac{1+q(1-\frac{e}{L})}{1+q(1-\frac{e}{L})+\frac{e}{L}}[1-(\frac{N}{M_{q,eff}(e)})(e^{\frac{N}{M_{q,eff}(e)}}-1)^{-1}],&if $e \le L$\cr
\frac{1}{1-q(1-\frac{e}{L})+\frac{e}{L}}[1-(\frac{N}{M_{q,eff}(e)})(e^{\frac{N}{M_{q,eff}(e)}}-1)^{-1}],&if $e \ge L$.\cr}$$ To test the quality of this cutoff function a comparison of these results to a discrete uniform distribution is in order.
Understanding the IUD Reference
-------------------------------
Comparison of the 1d randomly generated uniform distributions analyzed in the previous sections to the analytically derived IUD reference with a cutoff yields a somewhat disappointing result (see figure \[50kRUD\]).
![SCA results for a 1d randomly generated uniform distribution of 50k points using an IUD with a cutoff as the reference. The distributions are again identical at large scales, but diverge near the mean interparticle spacing scale ($\sim$-4.7) where the reference does not model the discrete nature of the data distribution well.[]{data-label="50kRUD"}](c2f7.eps){width="4in"}
The IUD entropy that includes the cutoff factor $f(e)=1-e^{-\frac{N}{M_{q,eff}(e)}}$ gives a fair approximation to the entropy of a discrete, randomly generated uniform distribution for $q=0$. However, as $q$ increases this reference increasingly underestimates the presence of void bins. This leads to an apparent information or [**pseudoinformation**]{}.
For a quantitative understanding of the pseudoinformation effect one must look at the approximation to the correlation integral made by calculating the entropy from a partitioned space. Ideally, the normalized correlation integral of a data set would be calculated by counting all $q$-tuples of scale $e$ or smaller and dividing by the total number of $q$-tuples in the set. For computational simplicity we are approximating the correlation integral as $C_q(e) \approx <\sum_{i=1}^{M(e)}p_i^q(e)>_{\phi}$. The pseudoinformation is a byproduct of this approximation and with a more complicated cutoff function one can get rid of it. I direct interested readers to an excellent and rigorous description of the mathematics of the pseudoinformation in [@SLTM].
Conclusions
-----------
We have succeeded in our goal of creating a model-independent correlation analysis system that can be made to explicitly incorporate model predictions when appropriate. By making a scale generalization of the Rényi entropy we have found a way to calculate the entropy, volume, information, and dimension of a data set all as a function of scale. This gives us the power to characterize the scale dependent correlation content in a data distribution and explicitly compare those results to various models and expectations.
With a little algebra we have derived an analytical form for the scaled topological measures of an idealized (continuous and infinite) uniform distribution. This reference is important because it represents a maximum entropy hypothesis. We have also seen the utility of using other data distributions as references. These analysis methods clearly illuminate the scale regions where the distributions are different, and can give unique insight into the differences in the correlation structure of the events analyzed. Now that we have built the analytical framework for SCA and analyzed some simple data to further our understanding of the results, we can begin to analyze a variety of more complicated distributions to gain deeper insight into the interpretation of SCA results.
SCA Applications: Analysis of Toy Models
========================================
Introduction
------------
The randomly generated uniform distributions analyzed in the previous chapter provided useful insights into the interpretation of scaled correlation analysis results. In this chapter we will discuss a variety of computer generated model distributions to further our understanding of the results of the SCA system. As we will find, a great deal can be learned about the meaning of SCA results by generating simple distributions and analyzing them. It is essential that we learn how to interpret SCA results if we are to reach meaningful conclusions based on this work.
Scaling the Uniform Distribution
--------------------------------
In the previous chapter we exhaustively analyzed the correlation structure of the one-dimensional randomly generated uniform distribution (RGUD). In those studies we generated data to fill the embedding space as completely as possible. Now we will consider an example in which the scale of the data is decreased, but the scale of the embedding space remains fixed. If our analysis is truly scale-local we should find that increasing the relative size of the space by an order of magnitude will only shift the analysis results down a decade in scale. The shape of the scaled topological measure curves should remain the same.
![A 1d randomly generated uniform distribution scaled down by a factor of 2 relative to the embedding space.[]{data-label="1dRGUD/2"}](c3f2.eps){width="4in"}
In the example shown in figure \[1dRGUD/2\] a one-dimensional randomly generated uniform distribution is scaled down by a factor of two relative to the embedding space. Comparing these results to those of figure \[1dRGUD\], it is clear that the form of the topological measures is the same. The only difference is a scale shift of the entropy by -0.3 corresponding to the base 10 logarithm of the distribution width scaling factor (0.5). The relative information between the scaled and unscaled uniform distributions shows us exactly what their relative widths are. Thus, the information can be interpreted as a measure of the [**effective width**]{} of the object distribution relative to the reference. In this example the scale shift is independent of the rank ($q$) of the information calculation, but this is not true in general. As we will see in the next example the rank-$q$ information is really a measure of the rank-$q$ effective width.
A Simple Correlation Example
----------------------------
To begin to understand how the SCA system works on data with interesting (non-trivial) correlations we begin by analyzing a data distribution with a single correlation feature constructed at a specific scale. Consider two uniform one-dimensional point distributions on the unit interval, one with $N_1$ points, and the second containing $N_2$ points. We can create a third distribution from these two by removing the center half of the second distribution and replacing the center of the first distribution with it. This distribution has a single correlation feature at a scale half the size of the embedding space.
This distribution resembles the scaled RGUD of the previous example. This resemblance is no accident, in fact, if we choose $N_1=0$ and $N_2=50,000$ this simple correlation example reduces to the scaled RGUD. Note that the uniform distribution can also be characterized in this way ($N_1=N_2$). We can take the same philosophical approach to this correlation example as we would to a signal on a background. For the uniform distribution the signal and background are at the same level, and thus indistinguishable. For the scaled RGUD the background vanishes and we have only the signal. This provides significant guidance for our expectations. As the background rises from nothing to the level of the signal the SCA results should smoothly go from those of the scaled RGUD to the RGUD that fills the embedding space (see figure \[1dBossBkgd\]).
![A study of a signal on an increasing background. Results for $q=0,1,2,5$ are shown.[]{data-label="1dBossBkgd"}](c3f3_1.eps){width="4in"}
It is important to note that because the background is increasing while the signal stays fixed the multiplicity increases from 25,000 to 50,000 in this example. However, the differing multiplicities are only relevant at small scales. This can be seen in the relative information between the data distribution and the ideal uniform distribution of the same multiplicity. The peak of the pseudoinformation moves down in scale as the multiplicity increases.
Focusing on a mid-scale point ($log (e/L)=-2$) the information results show the utility of performing an analysis for a variety of ranks. In the mid-scale region for $q=0$ we get no information about the structure of the data, we only see its support. This explains the dramatic difference in $I_0$ for the signal with no background when compared to the signal with a very slight background. The difference in the support of the data is dramatic, so the difference in $I_0$ is also dramatic. For $q>0$ the $I_q$ curves change smoothly as the background increases.
This example confirms that we can interpret the $I_q$ value at a given scale as the effective $q$-width of the distribution at that scale. For the case of no background the effective width at mid-scale is independent of $q$, and tells us that the distribution has a width of half of the embedding space. When a slight background is added the effective width of the distribution increases, so $I_q$ must increase to reflect the change. As $q$ increases the analysis system becomes increasingly sensitive to large clusters. Thus, when a background is added the results are no longer independent of $q$. The higher rank information measures are more sensitive to the large clusters of points in the signal than the smaller clusters of points in the background. This is why the effective width seen by the information decreases as $q$ increases. Of course, with even a slight background and large $q$ the effective width is larger than the actual width of the signal and with a significant background level the effective width increases to nearly the width of the embedding space.
Beyond the First Dimension
--------------------------
Thus far we have only considered one-dimensional data distributions in the interest of simplicity. Now that we have laid the groundwork for a basic understanding of the SCA results it will be useful to extend the scope of our data analysis to a two-dimensional embedding space. Since we derived the entropy of the IUD in two dimensions in the previous chapter, the logical starting point for moving beyond the first dimension is the two-dimensional RGUD with a two-dimensional IUD reference (see figure \[2dRGUD\]).
![SCA results for a 2d randomly generated uniform distribution ($N=50,000$) with a 2d IUD reference.[]{data-label="2dRGUD"}](c3f1_1.eps){width="4in"}
In this case we are distributing $N=50,000$ points randomly on the unit square instead of the unit interval, but otherwise the 1d and 2d distributions are in principle equivalent. Thus, for the 2d case we expect to see behavior similar to the 1d entropy result. Indeed, $S_q(e)$ behaves exactly as it does in 1d except the number of occupied bins increases much faster with decreasing scale in the 2d case. We know this must happen because the slope of the entropy curve of an RGUD is determined by the dimension of the embedding space. In terms of bin counting, this difference comes from the number of bins needed to cover the embedding space at a given scale. This is $M^1$ for the one-dimensional distribution, and $M^2$ for the two-dimensional case.
The difference between the 1d and 2d cases also has consequences for the illumination. Since the slope is larger in the midscale region we run out of illumination much sooner. Thus, the increase in the number of bins needed to cover the 2d space also accounts for the poor illumination of the scaled dimension curve afforded by 50,000 points. In the 1d case (see figure \[1dRGUD\]) a 50,000 point RGUD fully illuminates the embedding space; in the $-3.5 < log(e/L) < -2.5$ region the embedding space is fully illuminated as one-dimensional (for $q=0$). This is possible because the mean interparticle spacing is $\frac{L}{N}$ and so the granularity of the data is not fully apparent until we are in the neighborhood of $log(e/L)=log(1/N)\approx -4.7$. In the 2d case the mean interparticle spacing occurs at $\sqrt{\frac{L^2}{N}}$ so its granularity becomes apparent at larger scales, in the scale region near $\frac{1}{2}log(1/N)=-2.35$. To get the same quality of illumination as the 50,000 point 1d RGUD we would need 2.5 billion points for a 2d RGUD! One should note here that the scale axis in the 2d case refers to the side length of a square bin, so at scale $e/L$ we need $(L/e+1)^2$ bins to cover the whole embedding space.
Other than the difference of illumination and magnitude, the scaled dimension behaves exactly as one might expect from our previous experience. At large scales, the distribution looks like a point so the dimension is zero. As we move down in scale across the scale of the embedding space the dimension rapidly moves up toward the dimension of the embedding space (two in this case). As the scale gets very small and we resolve the individual points that make up the distribution the dimension again falls to zero. Now that we have confirmed that the intuition we have gained in analyzing 1d distributions is applicable to 2d distributions we will consider 2d data with some interesting correlation structures.
Analysis of Hierarchically Organized Point Distributions
--------------------------------------------------------
One approach to generating a distribution with correlations at a characteristic scale is to simulate a system of clusters. We can model cluster formation via condensation by generating a hierarchically organized point distribution. This will yield a distribution that has a multitude of correlation features rather than a single correlation feature as in the signal-on-a-background example. This type of model is particularly relevant to phase transition searches.
To create a two-dimensional, two-tier cluster hierarchy we start by generating a uniform distribution of $N_0$ cluster sites. This gives the distribution correlations at the characteristic length scale of $\frac{1}{\sqrt{N_0}}$, the mean separation between sites. At each cluster site we can now place a different randomly generated uniform distribution of $N_1$ points with width $\delta_1$. This gives the distribution a second characteristic length scale of $\frac{\delta_1}{\sqrt{N_1}}$.
Assuming the two tiers of the hierarchy are separated by a significant scale interval the sub-structure of the clusters will be invisible to the analysis at large scales ($e >> \delta_1$) . In that regime we expect the hierarchy to look exactly like an RGUD of $N_0$ points. Conversely, at small scales ($e \sim \delta_1$) the only apparent structure is the cluster structure that behaves like an RGUD of $N_1$ points. Thus, this two-tiered hierarchically organized distribution has a unique self-similarity that allows it to be an RGUD at scales $L$ and $\delta_1$ simultaneously (see figure \[2d2stepH\]). This is exactly the same type of self-similarity that one observes in fractal point distributions, only in this case it is restricted to a small scale range.
![SCA results for a two-tier hierarchy with $N_0=100$, $N_1=100$ & $\delta_1=0.001$. The scaled dimension of the data (dashed line) is compared to the IUD reference with the corresponding number of points ($N=N_0*N_1=10,000$) at scale $e/L=1$ (black solid line) as well as the IUD reference for $N=N_0=N_1=100$ at scales $1$ and $0.001$ (blue solid lines).[]{data-label="2d2stepH"}](h1010.eps){width="4in"}
The lower right panel of figure \[2d2stepH\] shows the [**dimension transport**]{} for the two-tier hierarchy. The dimension transport is the scale derivative of the information. It can be equivalently expressed as the difference between the scaled dimension of the data distribution and the scaled dimension of the reference distribution. As long as the two distributions compared in the calculation of the information have the same number of points the scale integral of the dimension transport is zero. The dimension transport shows how (relative to the reference distribution) the correlation of the data distribution has been transported on scale. In the example of the two-tier hierarchy there is an anti-correlation (relative to the RGUD of the same multiplicity) at large scale that causes the points to condense onto the cluster sites. The cost of creating this anti-correlation at large scale is an increase in the amount of correlation at small scale.
![A picture of the gradual onset of cluster formation ($\delta_1=0.03$) in a system with a fixed multiplicity ($N=10,000$).[]{data-label="6panelH"}](c3f6_1.eps){width="4in"}
An extended two-tier condensation example shows how small scale correlations are generated by condensing points of an RGUD onto cluster sites (see figure \[6panelH\]). At the onset of cluster formation ($\sim$3000 cluster sites, $\sim$3 points per cluster) the transport of dimension to smaller scale is barely visible (but still non-statistical). Once the size of the clusters becomes significant ($\sim$1000 cluster sites, $\sim$10 points per cluster) it becomes clear to the analysis (and the eye) that the distribution of points is in some way correlated. By the time the cluster size is 10% of the number of clusters ($\sim$300 cluster sites, $\sim$30 points per cluster) the dimension transport shows dramatically the movement of correlation from large to small scales.
The two-tier hierarchy can be extended by treating the points of the second tier as cluster sites for a third tier. At each of these $N_0*N_1$ sites uniform distributions of $N_2$ points and width $\delta_2$ would be placed giving the hierarchy a third characteristic scale of $\frac{\delta_2}{\sqrt{N_2}}$. Continuing in this manner it is in principle possible to generate a hierarchy with an arbitrarily large number of levels. The results of the application of the SCA system to a three-tier hierarchy with $N_0=50$, $N_1=50$ & $\delta_1=0.1$, $N_2=10$ & $\delta_2=0.001$ can be seen in figure \[3tierH\]. Notice how the small scale separation between the first two tiers ($\delta_1=0.1$) presents itself as a bimodal peak at large scale in the scaled dimension curve.
![SCA results for a three-tier hierarchy. The scaled dimension is compared to the IUD reference with the corresponding number of points ($N=N_0*N_1*N_2=25,000$) at scale $e/L=1$ (black solid line) as well as the IUD reference for $N=N_0=N_1=50$ at scales $1$ and $0.1$ (green solid lines). The scaled dimension for an IUD reference with $N=N_2=10$ at scale $0.001$ is not shown explicitly.[]{data-label="3tierH"}](h321_1.eps){width="4in"}
A 1d Distribution in a 2d Embedding Space
-----------------------------------------
We have already seen in the example of the scaled RGUD how the relationship between the data and the embedding space is irrelevant to the [*shape*]{} of the scaled topological measure curves. The data analysis results must be independent of the topology of the embedding space since it only serves as a platform for the data. The extrapolation of an embedding space from one to two dimensions creates an opportunity to test this idea. If the embedding space behaves as we expect it must then the results of an analysis of a 1d RGUD in a 2d embedding space should not substantively differ from the previous result of the same analysis in a 1d embedding space.
![Analysis results for a 1d RGUD in a 2d embedding space relative to a 2d IUD reference.[]{data-label="sfc4panel"}](c3f7_1.eps){width="4in"}
Indeed, as figure \[sfc4panel\] shows, the presence of the 2d embedding space does not substantively effect the analysis of a 1d distribution. The scaled entropy has exactly the slope that we expect (leading to a significant difference between the 1d RGUD data and a 2d IUD reference) and never rises above one.
The Space Filling Curve
-----------------------
Taking the previous example of a 1d distribution in a 2d embedding space further we will now focus our attention on a space filling curve [@Peano]. Like all previous examples, the distribution will be a collection of some number of points (in this case $N=10,000$) and not actually a proper curve. However, for the scale region in which we are most interested the particulate nature of the data will not be relevant.
To create a space filling curve we systematically fold a line ($x=y$) back on itself in 2d while holding fixed the number of component points. For an arbitrarily large number of iterations the data will be indistinguishable from a 2d RGUD with the same multiplicity. In this study we will examine the first 5 folding iterations to see how the space filling curve moves from a purely 1d distribution to nearly filling a 2d embedding space. This speaks to the greater issue of a system expanding to take advantage of new degrees of freedom, which is relevant to phase transition analysis.
![SCA analysis of 6 iterations of a line-folding generated space filling curve. Data are shown in box plot format with a 50x50 grid resolution.[]{data-label="sfc24panel"}](sc_1.eps){width="3.5in"}
The change in the scaled dimension as the space filling curve moves from one to two dimensions is quite revealing (see figure \[sfc24panel\]). Even as the large scale dimension increases toward that of a 2d RGUD, the small scale dimension retains knowledge of the inherent 1d nature of the space filling curve. However, the cost of meeting the demands of the 2d nature of the distribution at large scale is paid by the loss of illumination of its 1d nature at small scale. This interplay between the 1d and 2d nature of the data suggests that the scaled dimension can be a powerful tool for characterizing the data distribution; it has access to all scales which allows it to see the distribution as 2d, 1d, and something in between (in the relevant scale regimes). This is essential for understanding data that have complex and varying correlation structures over a broad range of scale.
A Fractal Example
-----------------
The space filling curve example suggests that our scaled dimension results will be most interesting for data that are exquisitely correlated over a large scale range. With this in mind, we will now calculate the scaled dimension of a well-known strange attractor and compare our results to the results in the literature. This will provide insight into the significance of a scale-local approach to dimension. For this analysis we choose to use a strange attractor of the Hénon map because of the calculational simplicity involved in such a straightforward mapping: $$\begin{aligned}
x&\mapsto&a+by-x^2 \\ \nonumber
y&\mapsto&x.\end{aligned}$$ The chaotic attractor we will analyze occurs for parameter values $a=1.4$ and $b=0.3$, and has been thoroughly investigated in the existing literature. Following the example of [@BRHunt] we analyze the dimension of whatever attractors exist in the square $-1.8 \le x,y \le 1.8$ for the aforementioned parameter values. It has been determined that all orbits are either trapped in this region or become unbounded. The reported $q=0$ dimension (box dimension) of this attractor is $\sim$1.28 [@PGrass] and the $q=1$ dimension (information dimension) is $\sim$1.258 [@BRHunt] using a standard $e\rightarrow0$ limit approach. Using scaled correlation analysis this can be extended to calculate the rank-$q$ dimension of the strange attractor as a function of the bin size $e$.
![The strange attractor of the Hénon map for parameter values $a=1.4$ and $b=0.3$.[]{data-label="Henon"}](HenonAttractor.eps){width="4in"}
To generate the attractor that we wish to analyze it is a simple matter of choosing some initial values and plugging them into the mapping. Of course, we must go through several iterations of the mapping until the initial state transients have vanished and we are left with only points on the attractor. By continuing to run iterations of the mapping we can generate this attractor with an arbitrarily large number of points. This is necessary to push down the small scale limit of the analysis; we need a high density of points on the attractor to allow us to analyze its small scale (non-limit) behavior. We can also generate the attractor using different initial conditions to test if the attractor’s scaled dimension is independent of the specific points used for illumination. In analyzing the attractor we first rescale the data points to fit within the unit square ($[0,1]\otimes[0,1]$). This makes no difference to the analysis as long as we are careful to maintain the relative position of points in the data.
![Dimension of the Hénon attractor as a function of scale. Curves for $q=0$ (solid line) and $q=1$ (dotted line) are shown. Reference lines are shown marking the zero scale limit values for $d_0$ and $d_1$. Below $log(e/L)=-3$ the analysis runs out of illumination ($N=10,000$), causing the dimension of the attractor to fall sharply.[]{data-label="HenonD"}](HenonDimensionality.eps){width="4in"}
The scaled dimension curves shown in figures \[HenonD\] and \[HenonDillum\] are calculated from two different point distributions, one with $N=10,000$ and another with $N=300,000$. These distributions were generated using different initial conditions, so the actual points illuminating the Hénon attractor are different in both data sets. Figure \[HenonD\] shows a close-up of the rich scale structure of the ($q=0$ and $q=1$) dimensions of the attractor over a limited scale range. Figure \[HenonDillum\] compares the dimension results of the two data sets and shows that the intricate structure of the scaled dimension extends as far as the available illumination will allow us to see. More importantly, the comparison between the different point distributions shows that in the large scale region where the illumination is good for both distributions the results are the same. Thus, we conclude that the scaled dimension results are in general independent of the specific points chosen to illuminate the attractor. This suggests an exciting result, that any strange attractor has a unique dimension profile that varies as a function of scale.
![Dimension of the Hénon attractor as a function of scale with differing levels of illumination ($N=10,000$ & $N=300,000$).[]{data-label="HenonDillum"}](HenonDimComparison.eps){width="4in"}
The rich, characteristic structure of the scaled dimension is another representation of the attractor’s unique correlation structure. It is only logical that the scaled dimension of an attractor will have meaningful features over the same scale range as the correlation content of the attractor. This is a significant improvement upon the conventional approach that summarizes the dimension of a complex fractal object in a single number at the asymptotic small-scale limit. While the zero-scale dimension is undeniably useful and easy to calculate, it cannot provide the full picture of the complex correlations present in a fractal system. A scaled dimension approach provides a broader view of the fractal and provides the tools to create meaningful alternatives to the simplistic formulation of canonical dimension definitions.
Conclusions
-----------
With a solid understanding of this menagerie of model distributions we now have the tools to analyze and interpret real data. We have seen how the scaling of the data effects the scale-local topological measures, highlighting the versatility of this analysis method. By varying the signal strength at various scale points in the hierarchical point distributions we have seen how clustering phenomena at a phase transition might look to a scaled correlation analysis. We saw in the space filling curve example how the opening of degrees of freedom effects the topological measures of a distribution. The analysis of the attractor of the Hénon map showcases the power of the scale-local dimension and gives us insight into exploring self-similar distributions with scaled correlation analysis. All of these toy models have given us a broad view of SCA results, and so we are now ready to move beyond simulation to real data analysis.
SCA Applications: Analysis of Physical Models and Data
======================================================
Event Spaces
------------
The whole purpose of the development of scaled correlation analysis has been to understand heavy-ion collision data. Thus, we must find a way to reach meaningful physics conclusions based on SCA results. Towards this end, we create an [**event space**]{} in which we can measure the similarity of two events by their spatial proximity. This allows us to easily identify unique and rare events within our experimental data.
We have seen how the correlation content of a data distribution can be fully described by its scaled dimension and so we will use this measure to characterize the data in the event-space system. The simplest way to create such an event space is to treat each point on the scaled dimension curve as a coordinate in this space. This gives us a $k$-dimensional space (where $k$ is the number of points on each scaled dimension curve) in which each event appears as a point. The distance between these event-space points is then a quantitative measure of the similarity of the analyzed events. To see how this system can work effectively consider an example where the system is applied to the well-known problem of face recognition.
The human detector system is spectacularly good at face recognition. Even when a person is disguised our brain’s software can often detect the nuances of individuality and correctly identify the subject. This problem is not so easy for computers and has only recently been approached seriously. To solve the computational face recognition problem, we need to be able to analyze a set of images of faces and find an event space in which these faces are reliably and quantitatively distinguishable. This is quite similar to the problem of event discrimination in heavy-ion collisions. In the heavy-ion collision analysis problem we want to differentiate between events in which a QGP has been made and events that have stayed in the hadronic regime (according to a class of theoretical predictions) [@hadronVqgp]. Thus, we will tackle the problems of face recognition and QGP finding in heavy-ion collision data with the same event-space approach.
Face Recognition Analysis
-------------------------
The data used in this face recognition analysis consists of 23 grey-scale images (29x38 pixels) of five different individuals. The images were composed uniformly with the subjects wearing shower caps to minimize the effect of differing hair styles on the final results. Subjects were asked to present a variety of differing facial expressions to do their best to fool the analysis system.
![Sample data images from the face recognition analysis study.[]{data-label="Faces"}](2faces_1.eps){width="5in"}
Before discussing the face recognition results, we must point out that the details of this analysis differ slightly from the previous analyses we have performed. Because this is real data it cannot be treated as a collection of individual points. The detector (in this case the CCD in a digital camera) has already performed a binning and so the data we have to work with is a list of bin occupancies $n_i$. We call data of this form [**pre-binned data**]{}. To calculate the scale-local topological measures we need a scheme for the scale-local rebinning of this data in a way that will not insert bias into the results. Because the only information we have is the list of bin occupancies at scale $e_{detector}$, the only fair assumption that can be made is that the data is uniformly distributed within each detector bin (a maximum entropy hypothesis). This serves to make the task of rebinning easy since the amount of data in a fraction of a bin will be the geometrical fraction of the bin considered times the occupancy of that bin ($f*n_i$). Of course, rebinning at scales smaller than $e_{detector}$ is irrelevant since that would only serve to illuminate the assumptions we have made about the distribution of data within a detector bin; no analysis can increase the physical resolution of the detector. Other than the procedural difference between rebinning a pre-binned data distribution and binning a simulated point distribution, the analyses of these two types of data are the same.
![Dimension transport results ($q=4$) for the face recognition example using an ensemble average reference. Blue bars mark the points in scale used to build the Cartesian event space.[]{data-label="FaceDdq"}](faceDd4.eps){width="3.8in"}
To generate the event space we must first apply the SCA system to the data and calculate the dimension transport for each image. However, to calculate the dimension transport we must select a reference. It doesn’t make sense to use an IUD or RGUD reference because the difference between an image of a subject’s face and a uniform reference is vastly greater than the difference between any two images in the data set. Since we want to discriminate between the slight differences in the data it makes sense to use an [**ensemble average**]{} reference. This reference allows us look for correlation content that deviates from the mean of the data ensemble and is particularly useful when looking for slight deviations between events. In this case the ensemble average is the most appropriate reference because we need to be sensitive to the details of an individual face, as they deviate from the average face shape.
Once the analysis has been done and we have the dimension transport results in hand we can use those results to build an event space that will allow us to discriminate between the subject’s faces. There are 30 points on the dimension transport curves in figure \[FaceDdq\] so we could build a 30-dimensional event space, but for the purposes of this example it will be sufficient to use a much simpler 3d space. In practice, a 30-dimensional space would contain a great deal of redundant information anyway, and it is much easier to understand the event-space results when they are easily visualizable, as in the case of a 3d Cartesian space. We choose scale points at $-0.7$, $-0.4$, and $-0.1$ for event-space coordinates $x$, $y$, and $z$, respectively. These scale points were selected specifically to maximize the descriminatory power of the event space (minimize the redundancy of scale points). This is a crude version of a principal component analysis in which the significant degrees of freedom in the data are obtained by a formal procedure [@PCA].
![The Cartesian event space formed from the face recognition analysis results. The five different marker types each represent a different subject.[]{data-label="FaceEvSpc"}](face3dCartesian.eps){width="4in"}
The 3d Cartesian event space does an excellent job of discriminating among the different face images in the data set. Each marker type in figure \[FaceEvSpc\] represents a different person’s face, and in spite of the subjects’ attempts to fool the recognition system by varying their expressions the clustering of each individual’s data points is quite dramatic. By calibrating an event space such as this with some reference images one could easily apply this system to the face recognition problem in the field and successfully identify an individual based solely on an image of their face.
STAR Trigger Simulations
------------------------
The first application of SCA to heavy-ion collisions came in a trigger study for the STAR experiment in 1995. Even before the detector was built we were trying to create a trigger that could distinguish between normal events and events in which a phase transition was made into the QGP regime. By making this distinction at the trigger level we hoped to maximize the number of QGP events recorded. To calibrate this SCA-based trigger, simulated data was generated and modified according to a variety of QGP models [@Ron]. The events were designated as rhic, landau, chiral, and smoke, named according to the method used to modify the simulated data. These event tags were hidden from the analysis system, which was given the whole data set blindly along with two sets of toy model data (poisson1 and poisson2). Taking all of the data together the SCA system compared each event to the ensemble average reference and the rank-4 dimension transport was calculated. Figure \[STARDdq\] shows the different event classes’ dimension transport results.
![Dimension transport results ($q=4$) from simulated STAR trigger models.[]{data-label="STARDdq"}](STARDdq_1.eps){width="4in"}
The dimension transport results alone show how distinct the different event classes are, so it came as no surprise that we had good event class separation in the Cartesian event space (see figure \[STAREvSpc\]). This was a great success, but one major obstacle remained. How could we streamline the analysis to run on a time scale appropriate for a triggering analysis? Running the analysis over the full scale window was prohibitively slow. Most of our time was being lost in the binning of the data, so the solution was to calibrate the analysis on these simulations (our primitive approach to principal component analysis) and determine which scale points to use for the event space. Once those determinations were made we were able to streamline the analysis. By restricting the scale axis to three points (one for each axis of the Cartesian space) we were able to get away with applying only three different partitions to the space. This, coupled with some clever code optimization, made it possible to take the event data available to the trigger and calculate an event’s position in event space in 5 milliseconds. This was necessary to process events at the design rate of the level-three trigger. The funding for the high-level triggers in STAR never materialized, but this successful study lead us to take SCA seriously as an analysis tool. Based on these results we moved beyond triggering into developing the full scaled correlation analysis system presented in chapters 2 and 3.
![Event-space results from the STAR trigger study.[]{data-label="STAREvSpc"}](STAREvSpc.eps){width="4.5in"}
Scaled Correlation Analysis of NA49 Data
----------------------------------------
The scaled correlation analysis system was applied to main TPC central collision data from the NA49 experiment. This analysis was done for each event on the 1d $\Delta m_t=m_t-m_{\pi}$ distribution. The scaled-entropy of the transverse mass distribution was calculated for each event and compared to an ensemble average reference. The rank-4 dimension transport was used to form an event space in which a class of anomalous events was identified.
![Dimension transport results ($q=4$) from NA49 central data.[]{data-label="NA49Ddq"}](NA49Ddq.eps){width="4in"}
Typical dimension transport results for three different classes of data are shown in figure \[NA49Ddq\]. The vanilla event class is a random selection of a few of the events that were found to behave similar to the ensemble average. This population serves to show the increasing statistical spread of the dimension transport with decreasing scale and defined the normalization procedure that was used to generate the SCA-normed results. By definition these events must be uninteresting, and they are. The Poisson event class is from a toy model generator that created events with no correlation features beyond Poisson statistics and with multiplicity matching exactly those of existing data events. These results prove that there are no extra-statistical correlations in the vanilla event sample. The anomalous event class was defined by forming an event space with 300k events and identifying regions of the event space that differed from the vanilla/Poisson expectation (see figure \[NA49EvSpc\]).
![Event-space results from NA49 data.[]{data-label="NA49EvSpc"}](NA49EvSpc.eps){width="5.4in"}
In this case three scale points were used to build the Cartesian event space that was then transformed into spherical coordinates. The spherical space is preferable because the distance of an event from the origin of this space is a direct measure for the difference between an event and the ensemble average reference. If less than 10% of the central events make the phase transition into the QGP regime at the CERN SPS (as some theories suggest), then we expect these few QGP events to appear significantly distant from the origin of the event space. Since we calculate the dimension transport with respect to an ensemble average reference we expect to see all “normal" events clustered near the origin, and any rare anomalous events at a radius much larger than the average.
Anomalous events (occuring at about the 10% level) were indeed found. Upon further investigation we discovered the anomalous event structure was consistent with data contamination by electron pairs from $\pi^0$ decay (and subsequent gamma conversion). This was suggestive of beam-gas interactions contaminating the anomalous events, and led to the eventual discovery that these events with anomalous topology were in fact [**pile-up events**]{} [@NA49SCA]. These were events that had two primary interaction vertices; one beam particle interacted with the target, and another interacted independently with the TPC gas. This caused a unique correlation signature that was readily apparent to the SCA system.
![Plots showing the presence of a secondary vertex in an anomalous event found in the NA49 data.[]{data-label="PileUp"}](PileUp_1.eps){width="5.4in"}
Figure \[PileUp\] shows plots of the slope against the intercept in the non-bending plane for tracks from an anomalous event. Particles originating from a common vertex will appear on the same line in this space. In the left-panel plot particles originating from a primary vertex in the target will appear on the main diagonal, in the right-panel plot the space has been transformed so that particles originating from the target are clustered at $y=0$. In both plots one can clearly see the presence of a secondary vertex displaced from the target position, in the right-panel plot a fit has been made to the secondary (pile-up) vertex. Using the slope-intercept method shown in figure \[PileUp\] a pile-up rejection system was developed and added to the detector. In future data taking runs these events were rejected at the trigger level. Other than these pile-up events no significant class of anomalous events was identified by SCA in NA49 data.
Conclusions
-----------
The SCA system was successful in analyzing NA49 data in that it was able to identify rare events using a model-independent scale-local approach. It was unsuccessful in that the analysis was unable to identify events that underwent a phase transition into the QGP regime.
To judge if this is a failure or not we need to compare the SCA non-result to the results of other analysis tools. If the other analyses find QGP events where SCA finds none then it is clearly a failure as a QGP event finder. There is also the possibility that the SPS is at too low an energy to make collisions that cross the phase transition into the QGP regime. In spite of CERN’s very public statements to the contrary [@CERNPressQGP] many in the field doubt that deconfined quark matter was made at the SPS.
At this point there is not enough data to make a definitive statement about QGP formation at SPS energies; no one really understands quark matter at those energies. However, we can look to the other event-by-event measures used on NA49 data. As we will see in the following chapters none of our other NA49 measurements supports a phase transition scenario in the observed collisions. Thus, the scaled correlation analysis system seems to have performed as well as could be expected on NA49 data given the relevant physics at the SPS.
SCA After NA49
--------------
Shortly after the anomalous NA49 events were found and identified as pile-up events, we also discovered a significant non-zero charge-dependent signal in the $p_t$ fluctuations (and related two-particle correlations). This provocative result served to draw our attention to fluctuation measure approaches at the same time that we discovered that the community was not ready to embrace a bold, mathematically complex approach like SCA. We had succeeded in discovering and understanding an anomalous event population, but it taught us an important lesson: a model-independent correlation analysis is just a likely to discover systematic error effects as it is interesting physics. This ruled out SCA as an effective tool for early STAR analysis since none of the instrumental effects were well understood at that point in the experiment’s evolution. Thus, motivated by the provocative NA49 fluctuation results, the state of STAR data at that point, and the pressures of the community, we turned our focus to global variable fluctuation analysis and two-particle correlations. We brought the same mathematical rigor to this problem, but its grounding in the $\Phi_{p_t}$ measure and our suggestive preliminary results made this approach more palatable to the community.
Fluctuation Analysis
====================
Introduction
------------
In contrast to the exquisite complexity of scaled correlation analysis, we have also taken a more simplistic approach to event-by-event analysis of relativistic heavy-ion data. Measuring fluctuations in global variables is calculationally simple, and in the case of event-wise mean transverse momentum ($<p_t>$), easily related to the physics of the collision. Because transverse phase space is initially empty (before the collision occurs all of the energy is in axial degrees of freedom), $<p_t>$ is a good measure of the energy involved in the collision. Thus, a measurement of the non-statistical fluctuations present in the $<p_t>$ distribution can be interpreted as a measurement of temperature fluctuations beyond statistical expectations.
The analysis presented here will cover numerical and graphical results for $<p_t>$ fluctuations in STAR central and minbias triggered events. This is an analysis of the unidentified charged hadrons produced in Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=130$ GeV. This represents the first analysis of fluctuations in a large acceptance detector at these energies. While more recent data taken at higher energies (with significant detector improvements) exists, analysis of that data must be left to future work. The newest data ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200$ GeV) is not yet thoroughly understood and the improved state of the detector requires a reassessment of systematics and detector effects before that data can be properly analyzed.
$<p_t>$ Fluctuation Analysis Motivation
---------------------------------------
We expect to see non-statistical fluctuations in the region of the QGP phase boundary. This makes the measurement of $<p_t>$ fluctuations a simple probe that can tell us if we have indeed crossed into the QGP regime. Furthermore, a substantial change in fluctuations with energy or centrality could serve to pinpoint the region of the phase diagram in which the QGP transition resides. Additionally, fluctuation measures may be able to provide valuable insight into the properties of the QGP medium, early stage scattering, and the equilibration process [@FluctReview].
The event-wise mean transverse momentum, $$\begin{aligned}
<p_t>&=&\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^{N}p_{t_i},\end{aligned}$$ is an estimator of the collision temperature for transverse phase space; hotter collisions involve more energy, which is then free to dissipate through the initially empty transverse degrees of freedom. If we are to have any chance of understanding the formation and decay of QGP matter in RHI collisions we must be able to measure and understand its temperature. $<p_t>$ is a good starting point for this work since it is trivial to calculate from the measured track parameters and it relates directly to the temperature of the particles produced in the collision, assuming particles produced in secondary interactions can be filtered out of the data sample.
Data Filtering
--------------
The sensitivity of event-scale fluctuation analysis makes it particularly prone to experimental and systematic errors. To insure robust results an effort has been made to understand and minimize these effects. The most important aspect of this error minimization effort is to create the cleanest possible data sample. Any deviation in the reconstructed $p_t$ values from the parent $p_t$ distribution can appear as an excess fluctuation signal. Thus, tracks that have been poorly reconstructed will have a significant negative impact on this analysis. Particles that arise from secondary interactions such as resonance decays would also contribute excess non-statistical fluctuations, so we must also be careful to include only particles produced by the primary interaction in this analysis. To address these possible sources of error and insure that only highest possible quality data is used, a strict series of track and event cuts has been applied.
### Event Cuts
First of all, at the event level, we remove all events that do not have a reconstructible [**primary vertex**]{} within 75 cm of the center of the detector ($|v_z| < 75$ cm). To properly identify tracks that originate from the primary interaction, it is essential to determine the precise position of the interaction within the detector. It isn’t always possible to definitively reconstruct the primary vertex from the tracks measured by the detector, particularly for events that have been corrupted in some way. It is impossible to separate secondary from primary tracks in an event without a primary vertex, so any such events must be rejected for logistical as well as quality considerations. In addition to finding the primary vertex, it is important to find a [*centered*]{} primary vertex.
The TPC gas drifts longitudinally along the beam axis away from a central membrane independently in the east and west halves of the TPC. Thus, it is difficult to reconstruct particle tracks that travel across this membrane. This problem is irrelevant for a properly centered vertex where nearly all of the tracks are heading radially away from the center, and only a few tracks will bend in such a way as to cross the membrane. A significantly off-center primary vertex also changes the $\eta$ acceptance of the detector for that event.
Even at $75$ cm the vertex displacement can cause problems, but the current limitations of the collider make it impossible to place the vertex position closer to the central membrane reliably. To maintain a significant amount of data for this analysis we were forced to include events that have substantially displaced primary vertices. Systematic errors arising from displaced vertices are further addressed in section 5.7. The primary vertex cut is the only cut made at the event level. At the track level however, a variety of cuts are applied, mostly to insure that tracks arising from secondary interactions are removed from the data volume.
### Track Cuts
After the reconstruction software has processed all of the found clusters in the TPC volume and determined which clusters are to be associated with which tracks, each of the tracks that pass within 3 cm of the reconstructed primary vertex are considered to be primary track candidates. The reconstruction then performs a track refit that requires the first point on every primary track candidate to coincide with the position of the primary vertex. Tracks that can be satisfactorily refit in this way are considered to be primary tracks. The first track cut we apply restricts the active data volume to tracks identified as [**primary tracks**]{} according to this definition. This population will certainly contain some tracks arising from secondary interactions, but this process has been designed to minimize such contamination.
Sometimes the track reconstruction will not properly associate sections of a single track. This may cause a single normal track to appear as two or more short segments. These are known as [**split tracks**]{}. This can be a significant source of error because it makes a single particle appear to be two or more particles. The track splitting problem is easily dealt with by applying a cut on the ratio of the number of fit points for a track to the maximum number of points possible ($\frac{n_{fit}}{n_{max}} > 0.5$). This insures that we are not counting any particles multiple times; a track cannot be split into two segments in which both are more than half of the total combined length.
The next cut is applied purely to remove tracks that represent a failure in the reconstruction software. When the reconstruction is done all tracks that it finds are saved, even tracks that the software itself knows are likely to be incorrectly reconstructed. These are removed by cutting on a track quality parameter that is positive for good tracks and negative for bad ones ($iFlag > 0$).
Additional quality information can be found in the $\chi^2$ parameter calculated during the reconstruction. This parameter measures the quality of the track fit to the found clusters in the TPC. Ideally, large $\chi^2$ values correspond to tracks that are poorly reconstructed and a cut would be made to remove them. However, problems with the reconstructed $\chi^2$ prevent this (details are discussed in section 5.7.3).
The $p_t$ of accepted tracks is restricted ($0.1 < p_t < 2.0$ GeV) to remove abnormally high momentum tracks and cut out the low $p_t$ region where the reconstruction process is most vulnerable to error. This also serves to limit the scope of our analysis to the soft-physics regime in which we are most interested. High $p_t$ jets would likely add excess fluctuation to the $<p_t>$ distribution that might obfuscate the fluctuation contributions from the effects we are looking for.
We also apply a cut on pseudorapidity ($-1.0 < \eta < 1.0$). The full pseudorapidity coverage of the STAR detector ranges from about -1.2 to 1.2, but at extreme pseudorapidity the track quality is rather low because of the limited detector volume covering that region. For quality reasons it might be preferable to make an even tighter cut on $\eta$, but we have found that the results do not change substantially, and the uncertainty would be significantly larger if we rejected so much data.
Finally, after all of these track cuts have been applied we check to insure there is at least one track of each sign present. If not, then that event is rejected since we need at least one particle of each charge species to calculate the charge-dependent fluctuation measures.
Cut Efficiency, Acceptance Correction, and Measure Bias
-------------------------------------------------------
For the accepted events, the track quality cuts accept $\sim$60% of the viable primary track candidates. Because we have chosen to utilize the $\Delta\sigma_{p_t}$ fluctuation measure an extrapolation to full detector acceptance based on this cut efficiency is necessary. One might naively assume that this problem could be effectively avoided by measuring the fluctuation per particle, or using a similar “acceptance independent" approach. This is not the case. The available so-called acceptance independent fluctuation measures simply avoid acceptance correction issues by harboring inherent assumptions about the scalability of measured fluctuations. The necessary work of studying the variation in fluctuations with acceptance must be done explicitly (see section 5.6). It cannot be avoided by making simplistic and wrong assumptions about scalability. A great effort has been made to utilize the least biased possible fluctuation measure for this analysis. We have found this to be the $\Delta\sigma_{p_t}$ measure that is minimally biased, but requires the aforementioned acceptance correction.
The $\Delta\sigma_{p_t}$ Numerical Fluctuation Measure
------------------------------------------------------
The absolute fluctuation in $<p_t>$ is trivially calculable. However, much like the calculation of information or dimension transport in the SCA system we are not interested in measuring only the absolute fluctuations. We want to know if the measured fluctuations differ from our expectations derived from known physics and statistics. To calculate the non-statistical fluctuations we need a reference to tell us what we should expect in the case of an uninteresting (purely statistical fluctuation) result. The simplest theoretical reference one can use in this comparison is the distribution that would arise from a purely statistical sampling of the parent physics. The [**central limit theorem**]{} gives us a simple form for such a reference, assuming the parent distribution is fixed. This means that the collisions made would all have the same physical properties (centrality, temperature, etc.); each collision would simply be a different glimpse of the same physics picture.
The central limit theorem (CLT) tells us that when sampling from a fixed parent distribution $x$, the deviation of the parent will be equal to the number of samples times the deviation of the mean of $x$, as calculated from the different sampling events [@CLT]. For the purposes of this analysis the parent distribution is the inclusive transverse momentum distribution (the aforementioned $x$ is $p_t$ in this case) and each collision event provides a sampling of $N_e$ particle $p_t$ values from this parent. Thus, the CLT requires that the width of the inclusive $p_t$ distribution ($\sigma_{p_t}^2$) be equivalent to the mean event multiplicity ($\overline{N}$) times the width of the event-wise mean $p_t$ distribution ($\sigma_{<p_t>}^2$). A comparison of these widths yields a numerical measure of the fluctuations in excess of expectation: $$\Delta\sigma_{p_t}^2=\overline{N(<p_t>-\hat{p_t})^2}-\sigma_{p_t}^2.$$ Where we use $\overline{N(<p_t>-\hat{p_t})^2}$ instead of $\overline{N}\sigma_{<p_t>}^2=\overline{N}\:\overline{(<p_t>-\hat{p_t})^2}$ because of the varying event-by-event multiplicity of accepted particles. Of the variety of possible formulations of a CLT-based width measure this one is the least biased [@TATMeasureBias].
By calculating the $\Delta \sigma_{p_t}$ values for the different charge species independently we can investigate the charge-dependence of the non-statistical $<p_t>$ fluctuations. We combine $\Delta\sigma_{{p_t}_{+}}$ and $\Delta\sigma_{{p_t}_{-}}$ as follows: $$\Delta{\sigma^2}_\Sigma=\frac{1}{N}(N_+\Delta\sigma^2_{{p_t}_+}+N_-\Delta\sigma^2_{{p_t}_-}+2\sqrt{N_+N_-}\Delta\sigma^2_{{p_t}_+{p_t}_-})$$ $$\Delta{\sigma^2}_\Delta=\frac{1}{N}(N_+\Delta\sigma^2_{{p_t}_+}+N_-\Delta\sigma^2_{{p_t}_-}-2\sqrt{N_+N_-}\Delta\sigma^2_{{p_t}_+{p_t}_-}),$$ to highlight the charge-dependent and -independent contributions to the non-statistical fluctuations. As defined above, $\Delta{\sigma^2}_\Sigma$ measures the charge-independent component and $\Delta{\sigma^2}_\Delta$ measures the charge-dependent component.
If there are some events that cross the phase boundary into the QGP region then we expect to see substantial non-statistical fluctuations in the event-by-event temperature. This means that each collision would not be sampling from the same parent because the parent $p_t$ distribution depends on temperature ($\frac{1}{T}$ is the slope). Significant event-by-event fluctuations in the parent distribution will show up in our fluctuation measure as width in excess of the CLT expectation ($\Delta\sigma_{p_t} > 0$).
Numerical Results
-----------------
### $<p_t>$ Fluctuations in STAR Central Events at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=130$ GeV
For the 15% most central $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=130$ GeV STAR events we measure the $<p_t>$ fluctuation excess to be ${\Delta\sigma_{p_t}}_{\Sigma}=52.6 \pm 0.3$ MeV and ${\Delta\sigma_{p_t}}_{\Delta}=-6.6 \pm 0.6$ MeV (errors are statistical only) with $\overline{N}=735$, $\sigma_{\hat{p_t}}=359$ MeV, and $\hat{p_t}=535$ MeV. This analysis includes only the best quality primary tracks (see section 5.3) from 183k events.
This result is not the whole story, we still need to extrapolate to the full acceptance of the experiment. To understand how to do this properly we randomly reject tracks to simulate decreasing acceptance and plot the change in the measured fluctuations with multiplicity. For these data the acceptance variation is linear in both the sum and difference measures with slopes $m_{\Sigma}=0.0665$ and $m_{\Delta}=-0.00974$ (see figure \[Acceptance\]).
![Study of the effect on $\Delta\sigma$ of varying acceptance. Tracks were randomly rejected in four separate analyses (75%, 50%, 25%, and 0%). Circle, square and triangle markers are results from $\Delta\sigma_{+}$, $\Delta\sigma_{-}$, and $\Delta\sigma_{+-}$ respectively. Inverse triangle (point down) and open circle markers show results for $\Delta\sigma_{\Sigma}$ and $\Delta\sigma_{\Delta}$.[]{data-label="Acceptance"}](efficBig.eps){width="4in"}
Since we have a measure for the full acceptance mean multiplicity [@STARSpectra] and this acceptance study shows a linear relationship between the measured fluctuations and this multiplicity, we can extrapolate the fluctuation results to the full detector acceptance: ${\Delta\sigma_{p_t}}_{\Sigma}=75 \pm 11$ MeV and ${\Delta\sigma_{p_t}}_{\Delta}=-9 \pm 1.4$ MeV, with $\overline{N}=1050$. Errors on the extrapolated values reflect the full statistical and systematic error. The dominant contribution is a $\pm15\%$ systematic error reflecting the uncertainty in the extrapolation procedure [@STARpt].
### Centrality Dependent $<p_t>$ Fluctuations in STAR at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=130$ GeV
Using the minimum-bias trigger data centrality classes were defined by binning the total TPC track multiplicity. The $N_{ch}$ distribution was divided into 8 centrality classes, each containing approximately 12.5% of the events in the total minbias data sample. Results are shown in figure \[mptCentrality\] for ${\Delta\sigma_{p_t}}_{\Sigma}$ and ${\Delta\sigma_{p_t}}_{\Delta}$ in these 8 centrality bins with extrapolation to full detector acceptance using the same scaling as for central data.
![$<p_t>$ fluctuation analysis results for 205k minimum-bias triggered events at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=130$ GeV. Results using quality cuts equivalent to those used on central events are shown with triangle markers. An additional cut ($\chi^2 < 2$) was applied for results shown with circle markers. Solid markers are $\Delta\sigma_{\Sigma}$ results, open markers are used for $\Delta\sigma_{\Delta}*3$. The extrapolation to full acceptance is also shown with blue error bands determined by the dominant $\pm15\%$ systematic error.[]{data-label="mptCentrality"}](centralityPRL_1.eps){width="5.4in"}
Systematic Error Sources
------------------------
In addition to filtering for data quality to insure robust results, great care was taken to account for sources of systematic error in the $<p_t>$ fluctuation analysis.
### Tracking Across the TPC Central Membrane
The STAR TPC is physically divided into two separate active detector volumes by a mylar central membrane. The TPC operates by drifting the charge deposited in the gas-filled active volume to the detectors at the endcaps. This charge-drift occurs independently in the two TPC halves. If the calibrations of the drift velocity of the TPC gas ($v_{drift}$) or the time at which the drift was initiated ($t_0$) are imperfect, tracks that travel across the membrane may not be properly reconstructed. The resulting track discontinuities at the membrane can cause a significant error in the physical parameters of the reconstructed tracks. This could cause an apparent increase in $p_t$ fluctuations.
We can insure that this effect does not significantly bias our results by checking the measured $p_t$ fluctuations of tracks in forward (positive) and backward (negative) $\eta$ separately. If the primary vertex is in the forward part of the TPC then none of the forward directed tracks will cross the central membrane. Similarly, for vertices in the backward part of the TPC no backward directed tracks will cross the membrane. Thus, if we calculate the fluctuations of the tracks in the same $\eta$ region as the vertex separately from tracks in the opposite region, we can compare results for a population of tracks that have no membrane-induced discontinuities to a population that has a maximal number of membrane crossing tracks.
To insure the results of these analyses are comparable we must limit the accepted vertex positions to a small region near the central membrane; if the vertices are too far from the central membrane then the accepted multiplicities in the separate halves might differ enough that an acceptance correction would be required to make meaningful comparisons of the results. For vertices within $25$ cm of the central membrane the same-side result is ${\Delta\sigma_{p_t}}_{\Sigma}=53.68$ MeV ($\overline{N}=378$) and the opposite-side result is ${\Delta\sigma_{p_t}}_{\Sigma}=53.66$ MeV ($\overline{N}=376$). The result for tracks chosen independent of vertex position is ${\Delta\sigma_{p_t}}_{\Sigma}=53.67$ MeV ($\overline{N}=377$). The differences here are certainly within our existing systematic error, so we can ignore central membrane effects with impunity.
### $\chi^2$ Cut Systematics
In trying to insure track quality it is logical to remove tracks that do not effectively represent the path taken by a particle produced in the collision. After the track reconstruction is performed on the TPC cluster points a goodness-of-fit is calculated ($\chi^2$) to measure how well this potential track fits the trajectory that was actually measured. To insure only the highest track quality a strict cut of $\chi^2 < 2$ was placed on the track population.
Unfortunately, application of this cut is problematic. The inclusive reduced $\chi^2$ distribution is peaked at around 0.9, suggesting the error estimates for the cluster positions are too small. Also, the $\chi^2$ distribution did not exhibit the expected $P_{\chi}$ behavior, suggesting that it does not properly measure of the goodness-of-fit. Reconstruction experts admit [@Helen] that the calculated value for $\chi^2$ only loosely represents a measure of the goodness of fit of a track. In addition to (or perhaps because of) the problems in the $\chi^2$ variable, there are a number of efficiency and acceptance problems in applying a goodness-of-fit cut.
First of all, in very central events the tracking quality deteriorates relative to peripheral events due to the high density of clusters in the TPC. This causes a significant broadening in the $\chi^2$ distribution for central events and a dynamic cut efficiency in centrality for the $\chi^2$ cut that favors peripheral and mid-peripheral events.
Secondly, the cutting on reduced $\chi^2$ has inherent problems because of the broad range of degrees of freedom available to the various tracks. Acceptable tracks can be made with as few a 5 clusters or as many as 45. To remove bias from different numbers of fit points we have defined a bias-free form $\chi^2_{fix}=\sqrt{\nu}(\chi^2/\nu-1)$, similar to the reduced $\chi^2$. This normalizes the widths of the reduced $\chi^2$ distributions so that a single cut rejects approximately the same percentage of tracks for varying $\nu$. This could be achieved more precisely by changing the cut limits for different values of the number of degrees of freedom. But this adds a level of complexity that makes characterization of the cut acceptance difficult.
Furthermore, the maximum number of clusters on a track is effected by the physical acceptance of the TPC with very large $|\eta|$ tracks having fewer possible points. This makes the eta acceptance of the $\chi^2$ cut non-trivial and invites unintended consequences. The acceptance dependence issue is at the heart of most of the most significant problems affecting the $\chi^2$ cut. In addition to a complicated eta acceptance this cut also suffers from a complicated $p_t$ acceptance. The $p_t$ acceptance has a direct effect on the measured $<p_t>$ and the measurement of the fluctuations of $<p_t>$. Without a clear understanding of the reconstructed $\chi^2$ cut we are forced to abandon it; we can’t trust the effect it will have on the $<p_t>$ distribution to preserve the physics of the collision.
### DCA Cut Systematics
This analysis depends strongly on the exclusion of tracks that do not originate from the primary vertex. The technical definition of a primary track in STAR is any track that passes within 3 cm of the primary vertex position, which has then been refit with the primary vertex as a track point. This will certainly include some secondaries ([*e.g.,*]{} heavy resonance decays). Ideally, by tightening our definition of a primary vertex track we decrease the total number of tracks accepted while increasing the percentage of true primaries. Unfortunately, the DCA cut has the same problem as the $\chi^2$ cut; changing the DCA cut significantly changes our $p_t$ acceptance.
Tracks that come directly from the primary vertex are less likely to experience a significant Coulomb scatter if they have very high $p_t$. Thus, tightening the cut on primary vertex DCA has the unintended consequence of increasingly rejecting low $p_t$ tracks. Even with this expected $p_t$ dependence we were surprised by the results of a DCA cut systematic study. Varying the DCA upper limit from 3 cm (standard primary track definition) to 2 cm we find $\Delta\sigma_{p_t}=60$ MeV. Going further and placing the DCA cut at 1 cm we find $\Delta\sigma_{p_t}=165$ MeV. Clearly the correlation per particle is rising quite rapidly. As we will see in the STAR results in the next chapter, taking the high or low $p_t$ populations alone increases the correlation per particle since the high-low cross-correlations contain a substantial anti-correlation component. Thus, the sculpting of the $p_t$ distribution by both the DCA and $\chi^2$ cuts may cause abnormally high fluctuation results because of these cross-correlations.
### Elliptic Flow Punch-Through
The measurement of significant elliptic flow effects at RHIC are well documented [@STARFlow] [@PHENIXFlow]. We expect that there might be some effect of the elliptic flow signal on the measured non-statistical $<p_t>$ fluctuations. To model this we sculpt the $\phi$ distribution to introduce a large, known azimuthal anisotropy. This mimics a particle distribution that would arise from a very dramatic elliptic flow signal.
The procedure we use is to create three different distributions with different levels of azimuthal anisotropy: 1) we discard half of the tracks in the event by removing 100% of the tracks in back-to-back $\phi$ quadrants; it is as if the reaction plane of each event is aligned and there is no out-of-plane emission. This inserts the largest possible elliptic flow signal into the data. 2) we discard 25% of the tracks from two opposing quadrants and 75% of the tracks from the others. This models an intermediate flow signal (but still much stronger than we would reasonably expect from the data). 3) we discard half the tracks in the event independent of azimuth. This inserts no additional flow signal beyond that present in the data.
The results for the analysis of the simulated flow effects are as follows: 1) for the largest possible azimuthal anisotropy $\Delta\sigma_{\Sigma}=43.4$ MeV. 2) for the intermediate flow signal $\Delta\sigma_{\Sigma}=29.5$ MeV. 3) for no additional flow signal $\Delta\sigma_{\Sigma}=25.4$ MeV. For all data sets $\overline{N} \sim 375$. A realistic elliptic flow signal would be at least an order of magnitude smaller than the second case. Thus, we conclude that we can safely ignore elliptic flow effects on the $\Delta\sigma_{p_t}$ measure.
Graphical Fluctuation Measures
------------------------------
Tannenbaum [@Tann] has taken the CLT reference further than a width comparison. He has shown that a Gamma distribution with parameters determined by the data (inclusive mean $p_t$, $N$) can act appropriately as a reference to the full $<p_t>$ distribution. This provides, for the first time, a theoretical reference for this type of fluctuation analysis. In the past the most popular graphical reference used has been a mixed-event reference. The concept behind a mixed-event comparison is that the inclusive correlations in the data can be removed by constructing simulated events from random particles taken from different collision events. Because these particles are taken from the same event population as the data analysis the relevant global parameters remain intact while the event-by-event correlations are removed.
This works well in principle as an approximate CLT reference because we are, by construction, randomly sampling from the same parent as the data. With the mixed-event $<p_t>$ distribution as a reference we expect the difference between data and reference to measure only the width contribution of the event-by-event fluctuations. However, because the mixed-event reference is only a numerical approximation of the true CLT reference (the gamma distribution) there is no point in wasting the significant computational effort required for its construction. There is significant emotional attachment within the community to the mixed-event reference that many find comfortable and familiar, but we reject it in favor of the more precise, and less wasteful CLT reference. Why use a numerical approximation to a theoretical reference that can be trivially derived?
Graphical Data Comparisons
--------------------------
For the graphical data/reference comparison we choose to present the $<p_t>$ distribution in a format that is portable. This allows for the comparison of results from different experiments with varying acceptance and energy. Subtracting the inclusive mean $p_t$ and dividing by the width (second moment) of the distribution puts the $<p_t>$ distribution on a universal axis where the mean is at the origin, and deviations from the mean are measured in units of the width of the distribution. This is compared to a reference gamma distribution whose parameters are determined by the data: $$\begin{aligned}
g_{\overline{n}}(<p_t>)&=&\frac{\alpha_0}{\hat{p_t}}\frac{e^{-\alpha_0\overline{n}<p_t>/\hat{p_t}}}{(\alpha_0\overline{n}-1)!}(\alpha_0\overline{n}\frac{<p_t>}{\hat{p_t}})^{\alpha_0\overline{n}-1}. \\ \nonumber\end{aligned}$$
![The $<p_t>$ distribution for 183k STAR cental events at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=130$ GeV. The data is presented in the aforementioned universal format along with two references. The green dotted line is the reference gamma $g_{\overline{n}}(<p_t>)$. The blue solid line is the same reference gamma scaled to include the non-statistical excess width measured in the numerical analysis (see section 5.6).[]{data-label="mPtvG"}](mptvg.eps){width="4in"}
Figure \[mPtvG\] shows the data and reference $<p_t>$ distribution comparisons. The data is in excellent agreement with the gamma reference that has been scaled to include the excess width measured in the numerical analysis. The slight differences between the data and width-scaled gamma are highlighted in a difference measure plot (see figure \[mPtvGd\]).
![The normalized difference between the STAR central $<p_t>$ data and a CLT reference. The solid black line shows the difference between the CLT gamma (red dashed line) and the excess width-scaled gamma.[]{data-label="mPtvGd"}](mptvgd.eps){width="4in"}
Graphically we observe a significant fluctuation excess in close agreement with our numerical results in the $-2 < \sigma < 2$ range. Farther out in the $<p_t>$ distribution the data is somewhat higher than the width-scaled gamma reference. This is the region where the error is largest, nevertheless there does seem to be a significant trend with the data that is not addressed by the reference gamma. However, keeping this result in context, these apparently anomalous events consist of a few hundred out of a sample of 183k events ($\sim$0.2%). Additionally, beyond the $5\sigma$ range of these plots there were 19 outlier events that were rejected from the analysis. Most of these events had anomalous $<p_t>$ values due to known detector and reconstruction software problems.
Beyond clear confirmation of our numerical result the graphical comparison allows us to rule out the existence of a small class (between 1 and 10 percent) of anomalous events above statistical expectation at high $<p_t>$ values. Early predictions [@EarlyMeanpt] suggested that QGP events might present themselves in such a direct way.
Comparisons With Other Experiments
----------------------------------
Comparisons of non-statistical fluctuation measurements are tricky. The measures of choice ($\Phi_{p_t}$ and $\Delta\sigma_{p_t}$) are approximately equal algebraically, but their explicit multiplicity dependence makes it impossible to directly compare values from different experiments. Because each experiment applys a different set of quality cuts and operates with different angle and rapidity coverage there is no way to make direct comparisons. However, it is important to survey what is known and has been measured to appreciate the context of the STAR result. Thus, keeping in mind the caveat that these data represent significantly different measurements, we present the world data set for charge-independent non-statistical $<p_t>$ fluctuations (see figure \[world\]).
![$<p_t>$ fluctuation world data set for heavy-ion experiments. Red points are at SPS energies ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}=17$ GeV), green and blue at RHIC ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}=130$ GeV). The square marker corresponds to NA49 data taken at forward rapidity ($4 < y_{\pi,cm} < 5.5$) [@NA49pt]. The triangle marker represents the CERES/NA45 data taken at mid-rapidity ($2.1 < \eta_{lab} < 2.6$) [@CERESpt]. The circle marks the PHENIX data taken at $|\eta| < 0.35$ in $\Delta\phi=58.5^{\circ}$ [@PHENIXpt]. The filled star represents the STAR measurement in the widest acceptance $|\eta| < 1$ with full angle coverage. The open star is the result from the STAR acceptance study in which 75% of the tracks were randomly rejected.[]{data-label="world"}](wpt.eps){width="5in"}
We have chosen to plot the fluctuation measures against multiplicity to highlight the variation in results with acceptance. The error bars on the fluctuation measures are statistical and systematic errors taken together, these are dominated by systematic errors for all experiments. The errors presented on the multiplicity value are taken to be the width of the multiplicity distribution of events used in the different analyses. There is no multiplicity error bar reported on the CERES result since the width of the multiplicity distribution is not reported in [@CERESpt].
It is worth noting that the CERES and PHENIX results are consistent with the line determined by the STAR acceptance dependence study. This is a provocative result, but it is by no means definitive. If each experiment independently observed the same (random-rejection) acceptance dependence slope this might be meaningful. Otherwise, it is just coincidence, which is likely considering the PHENIX error bar and acceptance. The STAR measurement for the same multiplicity as PHENIX ($\overline{N}\sim 60$) is $\Delta\sigma_{\Sigma}=2$ MeV. If we improve on this comparison by abandoning random-rejection in favor of cutting the STAR acceptance to match exactly that of the PHENIX measurement ($|\eta| < 0.35$ in $\Delta\phi=58.5^{\circ}$) the STAR result becomes $\Delta\sigma_{\Sigma}=8$ MeV [@QJLiu]. Both results are within the broad PHENIX error bar, but the direct acceptance comparison is clearly superior. This shows precisely how these results are highly dependent on not just the accepted multiplicity, but how those accepted tracks are chosen. Thus, no direct comparison to the NA49 result is possible since it is measuring tracks in a completely different rapidity region from the other measurements. It is entirely possible that there is a rapidity dependence of the non-statistical fluctuations that causes them to vanish outside of central rapidities, explaining the apparent disagreement between NA49 and the other experiments.
Conclusions
-----------
In conclusion, we have a striking result from this first fluctuation analysis in STAR. We measure a 14% $<p_t>$ fluctuation excess for the full acceptance corrected charge-independent analysis. This is a provocative result that is not inconsistent with the previous measurements of non-statistical fluctuations, but also stands on its own as unique. No other experiment has been able to measure fluctuations with so many primary particles. As for interpretations of this result, the unique centrality dependence might be explained by suppression of initial state scattering effects in central collisions [@TATISS].
The charge-dependent results are consistent with slight global temperature fluctuations, and are compatible with the two-particle correlation results that will be discussed in the next chapter. The comparison of the charge-dependent results to the NA49 measurement at SPS energies suggests that these fluctuations are slightly smaller at RHIC and deserve further attention.
Two-Particle Correlation Analysis
=================================
Introduction
------------
One of the most basic analytical methods used in characterizing nuclear interactions is multiparticle correlation analysis. It is present in Hanbury-Brown Twiss interferometry [@HBT], intermittency [@Intermit], $\Phi_{p_t}$ calculations [@PhiPt], and a variety of other methods. For the event-by-event multiparticle correlation analysis presented here we have chosen to focus entirely on two-particle correlations.
The $\Phi_{p_t}$ variable ($\Phi_{p_t} \equiv \sqrt{\frac{\overline{Z^2}}{\overline{N}}}-\sigma_{p_t}$) provides strong motivation for using two-particle correlations for event-by-event physics analysis. To understand the relationship between fluctuations and correlations we must understand the components of $\Phi_{p_t}$, most importantly $\overline{Z^2}=\overline{N^2(<p_t>-\overline{p_t})^2}$. This is the data piece of a data/central limit reference comparison. We start our investigation of $\Phi_{p_t}$ by breaking $\overline{Z^2}$ into two parts: a central limit term from which interesting correlations deviate, and an excess fluctuation term that measures all of the correlations beyond those expected from the CLT. $$\begin{aligned}
\overline{Z^2}&=&\frac{1}{M}\sum_{e=1}^{M}[N^2_e(\frac{1}{N_e}\sum_{i=1}^{N_e}p_{t_i}-\overline{p_t})^2] \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{1}{M}\sum_{e=1}^{M}[(\sum_{i=1}^{N_e}p_{t_i}-N_e\overline{p_t})^2] \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{1}{M}\sum_{e=1}^{M}[(\sum_{i=1}^{N_e}p_{t_i})^2-2N_e\overline{p_t}(\sum_{i=1}^{N_e}p_{t_i})+N_e^2\overline{p_t}^2] \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{1}{M}\sum_{e=1}^{M}[(\sum_{i,j=1}^{N_e}p_{t_i}p_{t_j})-2N_e^2<p_t>_e\overline{p_t}+N_e^2\overline{p_t}^2] \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{1}{M}\sum_{e=1}^{M}[(\sum_{i\neq j}^{N_e}p_{t_i}p_{t_j})+(\sum_{i=1}^{N_e}p_{t_i}^2)-2N_e^2<p_t>_e\overline{p_t}+N_e^2\overline{p_t}^2] \\ \nonumber
&=&\overline{\sum_{i\neq j}^{N_e}p_{t_i}p_{t_j}}+\frac{1}{M}\sum_{e=1}^M(\sum_{i=1}^{N_e}p_{t_i}^2)-\overline{2N_e^2<p_t>_e\overline{p_t}}+\overline{N_e^2\overline{p_t}^2} \\ \nonumber
&=&\overline{\sum_{i\neq j}^{N_e}p_{t_i}p_{t_j}}+\frac{1}{M}{\cal P}^2_t-2\overline{p_t}\overline{N_e^2<p_t>_e}+\overline{N^2}\overline{p_t}^2 \\ \nonumber
&=&\overline{\sum_{i\neq j}^{N_e}p_{t_i}p_{t_j}}+\overline{N}\overline{p_t^2}-2\overline{p_t}\overline{N_e^2<p_t>_e}+\overline{N^2}\overline{p_t}^2\end{aligned}$$ In this expression of $\overline{Z^2}$ we have used the fact that the total transverse momentum squared for all particles in all events can be written as ${\cal P}_t^2=M\overline{N}\overline{p_t^2}$. With $\overline{Z^2}$ broken down in this form the path is clear, we must add and subtract the terms we need to get the requisite central limit term: $$\begin{aligned}
\overline{Z^2}&=&\overline{Z^2}+(\overline{N}\overline{p_t}^2-\overline{N}\overline{p_t}^2)+(\overline{N^2}\overline{p_t}^2-\overline{N^2}\overline{p_t}^2) \\ \nonumber
&=&\overline{\sum_{i\neq j}^{N_e}p_{t_i}p_{t_j}}+\overline{N}\overline{p_t^2}-2\overline{p_t}\overline{N_e^2<p_t>_e}+\overline{N^2}\overline{p_t}^2+(\overline{N}\overline{p_t}^2-\overline{N}\overline{p_t}^2)+(\overline{N^2}\overline{p_t}^2-\overline{N^2}\overline{p_t}^2) \\ \nonumber
&=&[\overline{\sum_{i\neq j}^{N_e}p_{t_i}p_{t_j}}-\overline{N^2}\overline{p_t}^2+\overline{N}\overline{p_t}^2]-[2\overline{p_t}\overline{N_e^2<p_t>_e}-2\overline{N^2}\overline{p_t}^2]+[\overline{N}\overline{p_t^2}-\overline{N}\overline{p_t}^2] \\ \nonumber
&=&[\overline{\sum_{i\neq j}^{N_e}p_{t_i}p_{t_j}}-\overline{N_e(N_e-1)}\overline{p_t}^2]-2\overline{p_t}[\overline{N_e^2<p_t>_e}-\overline{N^2}\overline{p_t}]+\overline{N}\sigma_{p_t}^2. \\ \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Thus, if we define $A^2\equiv \overline{\sum_{i\neq j}^{N_e}p_{t_i}p_{t_j}}-\overline{N_e(N_e-1)}\overline{p_t}^2$ and $B^2\equiv 2\overline{p_t}[\overline{N_e^2<p_t>_e}-\overline{N^2}\overline{p_t}]$, we can write $\overline{Z^2}=A^2-B^2+\overline{N}\sigma_{p_t}^2$. Substituting back into the definition of $\Phi_{p_t}$ we see why this formulation is useful: $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi_{p_t}&=&\sqrt{\frac{\overline{Z^2}}{\overline{N}}}-\sigma_{p_t} \\ \nonumber
&=&\sqrt{\frac{A^2-B^2+\overline{N}\sigma_{p_t}^2}{\overline{N}}}-\sigma_{p_t} \\ \nonumber
&=&\sqrt{\frac{A^2-B^2}{\overline{N}}+\sigma_{p_t}^2}-\sigma_{p_t}. \\ \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ When $A^2-B^2$ vanishes, then $\Phi_{p_t}$ also vanishes. Thus, the meaning of $\Phi_{p_t}$ as a correlation measure hinges on the correlations measured by $A^2$ and $B^2$.
The $A^2$ Term of $\Phi_{pt}$
-----------------------------
First, consider $A^2=\overline{\sum_{i\neq j}^{N_e}p_{t_i}p_{t_j}}-\overline{N_e(N_e-1)}\overline{p_t}^2$. It’s first term is the sum over the product of all transverse momentum pairs in an event (excluding self-pairs). Thus, if we create a $p_t\otimes p_t$ space where each point in the space is defined by the ordinal pair ($p_{t_i},p_{t_j}$) we can calculate the first term in $A^2$ by integrating the product of the pair values over all pairs in this space. Note that for a given event $e$ this space will be populated with $N_e(N_e-1)$ pairs. This is simply the two-point correlation integral. The second $A^2$ term can now be seen to be a reference term that is the integral over a space that is populated by $N_e(N_e-1)$ pairs each with value ($\overline{p_t},\overline{p_t}$). Thus, $A^2$ is a measure of the two-particle correlations in the event sample beyond what you would expect to see from the simplest possible transverse momentum distribution. This motivates us to look at the full two-particle transverse momentum correlation space. We choose to look at the full correlation space instead of the reference subtracted integral to avoid the problems of $\Phi_{pt}$ and other central limit measures that summarize all correlations in a single number.
While an integral measure such as $A^2$ may seem to be easily interpretable, there is some danger in using a single number to represent the correlation content of the data. Significant correlations in one part of correlation space may conspire with equally significant anti-correlations in another region to add to zero, and thus present the erroneous picture that the data in question is trivially correlated. The only way to unambiguously address the full correlation content of the data is to consider the full, unintegrated correlation space.
The $B^2$ Term of $\Phi_{pt}$
-----------------------------
For completeness we must also examine the $B^2$ term. It’s meaning becomes clear if we rearrange it in terms of the total transverse momentum in an event ${P_t}_e$ and make the approximation $\overline{N^2}\approx\overline{N}^2$: $$\begin{aligned}
B^2&\equiv&2\overline{p_t}[\overline{N_e^2<p_t>_e}-\overline{N^2}\overline{p_t}] \\ \nonumber
&=&2\overline{p_t}[\overline{N_e{P_t}_e}-\overline{N^2}\overline{p_t}] \\ \nonumber
&\approx&2\overline{p_t}[\overline{N_e{P_t}_e}-\overline{N}^2\overline{p_t}] \\ \nonumber
&\approx&2\overline{p_t}[\overline{N_e{P_t}_e}-\overline{N} \overline{P_t}] \\ \nonumber
&\approx&2\overline{p_t}\sigma^2_{N,P_t}.\end{aligned}$$ Because $B^2\propto\sigma^2_{N,P_t}$, the covariance between the event multiplicity and the total transverse momentum of the event, we know that it is a measure of correlation between $N$ and $P_t$. Of course, we expect to see a significant correlation between multiplicity and total transverse momentum from energy conservation in the collision. A high-energy collision will produce more particles with a higher total $p_t$ than a low-energy collision. Energy conservation dictates that $B^2$ must be significantly non-zero. There is no such clear restriction on $A^2$, suggesting that in the absence of significant two-particle correlations $\Phi_{p_t}$ will be abnormally low due to energy conservation. Studies done on the covariance of $A^2$ and $B^2$ suggest that there may be a substantial contribution to $A^2$ from energy conservation as well [@GRoland], but no understanding of the physical mechanism for this has been reached.
Flattening the $m_t \otimes m_t$ Space
--------------------------------------
In generating two-particle $p_t$ correlation spaces there are some technical tricks that we can use to make the task simpler. The biggest problem we face here is the variation of statistical power with $p_t$. The frequency of high $p_t$ particle production vanishes exponentially, so correlation measures in the high $p_t$ region will have large error bars. We are saved from an exponentially increasing error by redefining the variable we use in the analysis. The $\frac{1}{m_t}\frac{dN}{dm_t}$ distribution is truly exponential for particles emitted from a thermalized source [@ThermalMt] and can be flattened with a temperature hypothesis and a simple transformation. Since $p_t$ and $m_t$ are closely related such a move lets us approach the same physics from a slightly different (and advantageous) perspective.
The flattening transformation rebins the $m_t$ distribution with bins of exponentially increasing width designed so that all bins will have roughly equivalent occupancy if the thermalized collision has temperature $T$. This provides uniform statistics, which allows us to make direct comparisons between different regions of correlation space. Such a transformation can neatly map the $m_t$ distribution ($[0,\infty ) \rightarrow [0,1)$) in such a way as to include the full $m_t$ range while highlighting the soft physics region ($0.2 < m_t < 0.8$) in which we are most interested.
To flatten the transverse mass distribution based on a temperature hypothesis we follow the example of [@NumRep]. We want the function that will take a pure exponential density distribution ($\rho (m_t) = e^{\frac{-m_t}{T}}$) on $\frac{1}{m_t} \frac{dN}{dm_t}$ and transform it to a uniform density distribution ($\rho(x) = 1$) on $\frac{dN}{dx}$. Using a substitution for the unitless quantity $y\equiv \frac{m_t}{T}$ we can express the relationship between the two spaces as: $$\begin{aligned}
\rho (y) dy&=&{\vert\frac{dx}{dy}\vert}dy=e^{-y} dy.\end{aligned}$$ Solving for x will yield the flattening function, so we solve the above equation for dx and integrate: $$\begin{aligned}
x&=&\int dx=\int^y_0 y'e^{-y'} dy' \\ \nonumber
&=&[-y'e^{-y'}]^y_0 +\int^y_0 e^{-y'} dy' \\ \nonumber
&=&-ye^{-y}-[e^{-y'}]^y_0=-(ye^{-y}+e^{-y}-1) \\ \nonumber
&=&1-(1+\frac{m_t}{T})e^{-\frac{m_t}{T}}.\end{aligned}$$ Using this transformation we can map any physical $m_t$ value into the unit interval, $m_{\pi} < m_t < \inf \mapsto 1-(1+\frac{m_{\pi}}{T})e^{\frac{m_{\pi}}{T}} < x < 1$. This is a little unwieldy and we would rather have x range from zero to 1, so we just shift x down by the offending factor and rescale. This yields the desired mapping: $$\begin{aligned}
x&=&1-[(1+\frac{m_t}{T})e^{-\frac{m_t}{T}}][(1+\frac{m_{\pi}}{T})e^{-\frac{m_{\pi}}{T}}]^{-1}.\end{aligned}$$
![Flattening transformation $m_t \rightarrow x$ applied to NA49 data with temperature hypothesis $T=202~MeV$.[]{data-label="mtTrans"}](mtTransform.eps){width="4in"}
Figure \[mtTrans\] shows this transformation applied to NA49 data. A fit of the $\frac{1}{m_t}\frac{dN}{dm_t}$ vs. $m_t$ distribution gives us a good temperature hypothesis that is then incorporated into the flattening transformation. Once the transformation is applied the distribution on $x$ is not perfectly flat because of the physical features in the $m_t$ distribution that deviate from thermal. However, by selecting the proper reference any features present in the inclusive distribution can be removed from the problem.
Sibling and Mixed Pair Spaces
-----------------------------
To extract event-scale physics from the full two-particle correlation space we will need to find a way of separating the inclusive correlations in the space from the event-by-event correlation content. To form a two-particle correlation space with both the inclusive and event-scale correlations we need only to form a space from pairs of particles taken within a single event. This [**sibling pair**]{} space is populated by all possible non-self-pairs for each event we are analyzing. If we have $M$ events, each with $N$ particles, the sibling pair space will be populated by $M*N*(N-1)$ pairs. To remove the inclusive correlation content from this space we must have an inclusive reference pair space for comparison. The reference space we choose to use is a [**mixed pair**]{} space. This is a space made of pairs of particles where each particle in a pair comes from an event different from the other pair particle. This is useful because the space of particle pairs from different events contains no event-by-event physics; we have designed the space to contain only correlations present in the inclusive distribution. Thus, the mixed pair reference will contain any inclusive physics correlations and systematic effects that arise in the inclusive distribution (such as acceptance effects). Now that we have an idea of how to form the data and reference correlation spaces we must consider carefully the details of generating these spaces and making comparisons between them.
Forming Two-Point Correlation Spaces
------------------------------------
Single-point distributions from distinct events $a$ and $b$ can be used to generate pairs by taking the coordinates of two points from the single-point distributions as the x and y coordinates of a point in a two-dimensional pair space. We can generate two distinct types of pairs this way: those using points from the same event (sibling pairs: $a\otimes a$, $b\otimes b$) and those using points from different events (mixed pairs: $a\otimes b$, $b\otimes a$).
When we have generated all the sibling and mixed point pairs for the two events we can bin the two-dimensional pair spaces and make comparisons between the 2d mixed and sibling pair histograms. For off-diagonal bins in the sibling and mixed pair histograms we determine the bin contents to be ${\cal S}=m_{a}n_{a}+m_{b}n_{b}$ and ${\cal M}=m_{a}n_{b}+m_{b}n_{a}$ respectively, where we have defined single-point distribution bin contents as in figure \[evprod\] (following the example of [@Zajc]).
![A cartoon of the method used to construct two-point histograms from single-point distributions for events a and b.[]{data-label="evprod"}](evprod.eps){width="5in"}
With this prescription for creating sibling and mixed pair distributions, a Monte Carlo study was carried out. Approximately 40,000 single-point distributions of 160 points each were generated from uniform random distributions of points on the interval \[0,1). We binned the inclusive single-point distribution with a 25-bin histogram. Using simple Poisson statistics we determined the root-mean-square error on the occupancy of a single bin in this histogram to be $2\cdot10^{-3}$. From the single-point distributions of these Monte Carlo events we created sibling and mixed pair distributions as outlined in figure \[evprod\]. These spaces were binned using 25x25 bin two-dimensional histograms. If the pairs in these pair spaces were randomly distributed on the 2d space, the [*rms*]{} error on the occupancy of a single 2d histogram bin would be $0.8\cdot10^{-3}$. This, however, is not what was observed in the simulation. Instead, the error on the occupancy of a bin in the pair space exceeded $10^{-3}$. This discrepancy in errors arises from correlations due to single-point statistical fluctuations appearing in the pair space as a “statistical plaid", which has an amplitude comparable to the [*rms*]{} fluctuations in the single-point distribution ($2\cdot10^{-3}$). The single-point errors are present in the 2d comparison measure because in this study we generated the sibling and mixed pair spaces using different events. If we had used the same pool of events for generating the two spaces (as we will outline in detail in the next section) these errors would cancel in the comparison space and we would be left with an error appropriate to 2d Poisson statistics.
In the present example, if the mixed pair reference is properly formed then the projected marginal of the ratio distribution should have an [*rms*]{} amplitude of ${0.8\cdot10^{-3}}/{\sqrt{25}} \sim 0.16\cdot10^{-3}$ (uncorrelated 2d errors). If not, this marginal error could be as large as the initial single-point error ($2\cdot10^{-3}$) illustrating a dramatic difference between correct and incorrect reference construction.
Error Minimization in Two-Point Correlation Comparisons
-------------------------------------------------------
To understand how to remove the correlations in the pair spaces that arise from statistical fluctuations of the single-point or marginal distributions we focus on calculating contributions to the expected variance in the pair-space histogram bins. We can make this task easier by rewriting the single-point histogram bin contents ($m_a$, $m_b$, $n_a$, $n_b$) to separate the mean behavior from fluctuations about the mean: $m_a\equiv m+\mu_a$, $m_b\equiv m+\mu_b$, $n_a\equiv n+\nu_a$, and $n_b\equiv n+\nu_b$. Here we have defined $m$ and $n$ to be the mean single-point histogram bin contents relevant to the pair-space bin of interest ($m=\frac{1}{\cal N}\sum m_i$ where the sum is over all events ${\cal N}$, similarly for $n$). Fluctuations about this mean for a particular event and bin being considered are then $\mu_a$, $\nu_a$, etc. This formulation allows us to rewrite $\cal S$ and $\cal M$ as: $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal S}&=&(m+\mu_a)(n+\nu_a)+(m+\mu_b)(n+\nu_b) \\ \nonumber
&=&2mn+m(\nu_a+\nu_b)+n(\mu_a+\mu_b)+\mu_a\nu_a+\mu_b\nu_b\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal M}&=&(m+\mu_a)(n+\nu_b)+(m+\mu_b)(n+\nu_a) \\ \nonumber
&=&2mn+m(\nu_a+\nu_b)+n(\mu_a+\mu_b)+\mu_a\nu_b+\mu_b\nu_a,\end{aligned}$$ which along with the mean values of ${\cal S}$ and ${\cal M}$, $\overline{\cal S}=2mn=\overline{\cal M}$, allows us to calculate the variances. $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{\cal S}^2&=&<[{\cal S}-2mn]^2> \\ \nonumber
&=&<[m(\nu_a+\nu_b)+n(\mu_a+\mu_b)+\mu_a\nu_a+\mu_b\nu_b]^2> \\ \nonumber
&=&<[m\nu+n\mu]^2+2[m\nu+n\mu][\mu_a\nu_a+\mu_b\nu_b]+[\mu_a\nu_a+\mu_b\nu_b]^2> \end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{\cal M}^2&=&<[{\cal M}-2mn]^2> \\ \nonumber
&=&<[m(\nu_a+\nu_b)+n(\mu_a+\mu_b)+\mu_a\nu_b+\mu_b\nu_a]^2> \\ \nonumber
&=&<[m\nu+n\mu]^2+2[m\nu+n\mu][\mu_a\nu_b+\mu_b\nu_a]+[\mu_a\nu_b+\mu_b\nu_a]^2> \end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma_{\cal SM}^2&=&<[{\cal S}-2mn][{\cal M}-2mn]> \\ \nonumber
&=&<[m\nu+n\mu+\mu_a\nu_a+\mu_b\nu_b][m\nu+n\mu+\mu_a\nu_b+\mu_b\nu_a]> \\ \nonumber
&=&<[m\nu+n\mu]^2+[m\nu+n\mu][\mu_a\nu_a+\mu_a\nu_b+\mu_b\nu_a+\mu_b\nu_b] \\ \nonumber
&&+[\mu_a\nu_a+\mu_b\nu_b][\mu_a\nu_b+\mu_b\nu_a]> \end{aligned}$$ We have defined $\mu\equiv \mu_a+\mu_b$ and $\nu\equiv \nu_a+\nu_b$ for simplification. If we now consider the difference histogram ${\cal D}={\cal S}-{\cal M}$ where $\cal S$ and $\cal M$ are created from the same 2 events, the variance of $\cal D$ is simply: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\sigma_{\cal D}^2}{{\cal D}^2}&=&\frac{1}{\overline{\cal S}^2}(\sigma_{\cal S}^2+\sigma_{\cal M}^2-2\sigma_{\cal SM}^2)=\frac{\sigma_{\cal S}^2}{\overline{\cal S}^2}+\frac{\sigma_{\cal M}^2}{\overline{\cal M}^2}-\frac{2\sigma_{\cal SM}^2}{\overline{\cal S}\,\overline{\cal M}} \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{1}{(2mn)^2}(<[\mu_a\nu_a+\mu_b\nu_b]^2+[\mu_a\nu_b+\mu_b\nu_a]^2 \\ \nonumber
&&-2[\mu_a\nu_a+\mu_b\nu_b][\mu_a\nu_b+\mu_b\nu_a]>) \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{<[\mu_a\nu_a+\mu_b\nu_b-\mu_a\nu_b-\mu_b\nu_a]^2>}{(2mn)^2} \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{<[(\mu_a-\mu_b)(\nu_a-\nu_b)]^2>}{(2mn)^2} \end{aligned}$$ If 1) the event multiplicity is approximately constant and 2) the parent distribution for the event ensemble doesn’t change significantly from event to event then the deviations from the mean bin contents in the marginal distributions are exactly what we would expect from simple Poisson statistics. Thus, $\mu_a\sim\sqrt{m}\sim\mu_b$ and $\nu_a\sim\sqrt{n}\sim\nu_b$. Using these assumptions, if the sibling and mixed pairs are made from precisely the same event sample then the variance of the sibling-to-mixed difference is of order $(mn)^{-1}\sim \sqrt{\cal S}\sim \sqrt{\cal M}$. Not surprisingly, we find this is also the variance of the sibling-to-mixed ratio (${\cal R}=\frac{\cal S}{\cal M}$):
$$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\sigma_{\cal R}^2}{{\cal R}^2}&=&\frac{\sigma_{\cal S}^2}{\overline{\cal S}^2}+\frac{\sigma_{\cal M}^2}{\overline{\cal M}^2}-\frac{2\sigma_{\cal SM}^2}{\overline{\cal S}\overline{\cal M}}=\frac{\sigma_{\cal S}^2+\sigma_{\cal M}^2-2\sigma_{\cal SM}^2}{(2mn)^2} \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{<[(\mu_a-\mu_b)(\nu_a-\nu_b)]^2>}{(2mn)^2}\end{aligned}$$
Now, consider sibling and mixed pairs created from different event populations ([*e.g.,*]{} sibling made from $a\otimes a$, $b\otimes b$; mixed made from $c\otimes d$, $d\otimes c$). Here the correlations from single-point distribution fluctuations in the two pair spaces will differ, and there will be no cancelation of terms as before. Thus, in this case, the leading term in the variance of the difference is: $(<[m\nu_{\cal S}+n\mu_{\cal S}]^2-[m\nu_{\cal M}+n\mu_{\cal M}]^2>)(2mn)^{-2}$, which is of order $\frac{m^2n+n^2m}{(2mn)^2}=\frac{m+n}{4mn}$. Also, the covariant error between ${\cal S}$ and ${\cal M}$ vanishes when the pair spaces are made from different events, $\sigma_{\cal D}^2=\sigma_{\cal S}^2+\sigma_{\cal M}^2$, which allows us to confirm the order of the error on ${\cal D}$ in this case by using a simple error calculation: $$\begin{aligned}
\frac{\sigma_{\cal M}^2}{{\overline{\cal M}}^2}\sim\frac{\sigma_{\cal S}^2}{{\overline{\cal S}}^2}&=&\frac{1}{(2mn)^2}\left(\left[\frac{\partial {\cal S}}{\partial m}\right]^2\sigma_m^2+\left[\frac{\partial {\cal S}}{\delta n}\right]^2\sigma_n^2\right) \\ \nonumber
&=&\frac{m^2n+n^2m}{(2mn)^2}=\frac{mn(m+n)}{4m^2n^2}=\frac{m+n}{4mn}\end{aligned}$$ Thus, we can understand how the error on the comparison measures between the sibling and mixed pair histograms behaves for the two different cases. In the case of pair spaces generated from the same single-point data, the single-point statistical fluctuations in those data cancel in the difference or ratio, revealing the true two-point statistical fluctuations of a 2d distribution and the physics of interest. In the case where the sibling and mixed pair spaces are generated from [*different*]{} data, the fluctuations in the 1d distributions do not cancel and so they dominate the error in the 2d space.
Event Multiplicity Fluctuations
-------------------------------
In the previous section we assumed that the event multiplicity was constant. In order to minimize the error this approximation is necessary because the fluctuations away from the mean bin contents for each event ($\mu_a$, $\nu_a$, etc.) include any variation in multiplicity in addition to counting statistics. To study the effect of multiplicity variation on the [*rms*]{} error of ${\cal R}$ we have simulated 4 sets of $\sim$40k events each with varying levels of multiplicity fluctuation.
![Comparison of error for random (triangles) and multiplicity-ordered (circles) mixing as a function of event multiplicity error.[]{data-label="poplo"}](poplo.eps){width="5in"}
These events were generated by constructing each event from a randomly generated uniform distribution, so they carry no correlations beyond statistical fluctuations. By varying the degree of multiplicity variation we can observe the increasing error in the comparison measure (in this case the ratio) with increasing multiplicity fluctuations. This increase in error arises from the single-point fluctuations that don’t cancel completely when multiplicity fluctuations are present. These correlations present themselves as a “statistical plaid” in the comparison measure histogram.
If the fixed-multiplicity stipulation is relaxed, the error in the ratio increases as shown in figure \[poplo\]. However, additional correlations that give rise to this error can be removed by forming the proper reference using a more careful event mixing. In the derivation of $\sigma_{\cal R}$ we only considered two events. Thus, the approximation does not need to be valid for all events; only locally in an event space ([*e.g.,*]{} events sorted by multiplicity). If we only mix events with similar multiplicity the approximation is valid for the error contribution from those mixed pairs. If the approximation is valid for all mixed pairs in the space then we expect to see no increase in error or correlations. Thus, by ordering events according to multiplicity and mixing only [**nearest-neighbor events**]{} we construct a space that has the same error as a space built from randomly mixing events that all have the same multiplicity.
![Ratio of sibling to mixed pair histograms formed from simulated data with random (left panel) and event-ordered (right panel) mixing methods for $\frac{\sigma_N}{N}=0.5$. The vertical scale is $1 \pm 0.003$.[]{data-label="nfcomp"}](nfcomp.eps){width="5in"}
A similar approach can be taken to ease the restriction on the stability of the sampled parent distribution, assuming an event space can be defined in which events from the same or similar parent states are located close by, and events from different parent states are well separated.
A Sample Analysis
-----------------
In the sample analysis presented here we considered two separate blocks (A and B) of 50k events and generated the sibling and mixed pair spaces separately for these two data blocks. The sibling pairs were generated by taking all possible (non-self) pairs for each transverse momentum distribution. The mixed pairs were generated by mixing multiplicity-ordered nearest-neighbor events (based only on an event index number: event $i$ is mixed with event $i+1$), which gives approximately twice as many mixed pairs as sibling pairs.
![Sibling/mixed pair histogram ratios illustrating the characteristic plaid pattern of an ill-formed reference. The [*top*]{} two panels show the pair histogram ratio results for mixed pairs formed from events [*different*]{} from those used to generate the sibling pairs. The [*bottom*]{} two panels show the pair histogram ratio results for mixed pairs formed from the [*same*]{} events as those used to generate the sibling pairs. The vertical scale is $1 \pm .007$.[]{data-label="ABmake"}](ABmake.eps){width="4.4in"}
When we look at the ratio of the sibling and mixed pair histograms generated from different data, the effect of the 1d statistical fluctuations from the transverse momentum distribution is obvious (the aforementioned “statistical plaid”). These fluctuations obscure the physics content of the distribution, which can be seen clearly only when the sibling-to-mixed histogram ratio is taken with histograms generated from the same data, as shown in figure \[ABmake\].
In forming a mixed pair reference from event pairs, sibling and mixed pairs must be generated using the same event population. It is [*essential*]{} to use event pairs with matching global characteristics (in this case total multiplicity). This conclusion follows from the recognition of statistical fluctuations as a form of correlation. The single-point statistical fluctuations in marginal distributions can be successfully removed from the 2d pair distributions if a proper reference is formed, leaving only true two-point statistical fluctuations in the difference or ratio comparison distribution. If events with significantly different multiplicity or distribution shape are combined to generate mixed pairs then the assumptions that allow us to cancel the single-point distribution statistical errors are invalid.
NA49 $m_t\otimes m_t$ Correlation Analysis
------------------------------------------
Using the aforementioned correlation space formation and comparison techniques, a two-particle correlation analysis was done with 100k central Pb-Pb events recorded in the NA49 detector [@Reid01]. The track filtering cuts used in this analysis are similar to those used in the STAR fluctuation and two-particle correlation analyses. The $\phi$ coverage is the same (full) but maintaining track quality in NA49 requires that we use tracks matched between the two main detector volumes (main and vertex TPCs), which means our rapidity coverage is somewhat forward ($4 < y_{\pi} < 5.5$) [@NA49]. As in the STAR analysis particles in the region $0.01 < p_t < 2.0$ GeV were used and track splitting was avoided by using the standard ($\frac{n_{fit}}{n_{max}} < 0.5$) cut. To remove secondaries the distance of closest approach of a track to the primary vertex was restricted to be within 3 sigma of the vertex position. Events with abnormal multiplicities ($850 < N < 1450$ before cuts; $N < 100$ after) were also rejected to minimize contamination, particularly from non-central events. The quality cuts used in this analysis have been chosen to be functionally identical to those used in the NA49 $<p_t>$ fluctuation analysis [@NA49pt]. It was essential to preserve compatibility between these analyses because of the aforementioned connection between two-particle correlations and non-statistical fluctuations.
After the cuts were applied we flattened the $m_t$ distribution as outlined in section 6.4. Fitting the $m_t$ distribution yields a temperature of 202 MeV and flattens the distribution reasonably well (see figure \[mtTrans\]). Event ordering was not necessary in this analysis because of the multiplicity restrictions placed on events in the cuts. The results for the various charge-pair combinations shown in figure \[NA49mtmt\] bear this out since there is not an overwhelming statistical error as in the example shown in figure \[ABmake\].
![NA49 two-point pair density ratio results for 100k central events. Ratio spaces shown are for pairs with the same charge ($[++]$ upper left, $[--]$ upper right), opposite charge ($[+-]$ lower left) and all pairs ($[cc]$ lower right).[]{data-label="NA49mtmt"}](NA49mtmt_1.eps){width="4.5in"}
The most striking two-particle correlation features in the central NA49 data come at small scale and arise from well-understood physical mechanisms. At low momentum in the same-sign spaces ($[++]$ and $[--]$) there is a clear Bose-Einstein signal that rises significantly above the mixed event reference. We expect this from the substantial two-particle correlation effect of Bose statistics. This has been well documented by HBT analysis and measured in NA49 [@NA49HBT]. It is interesting to note that as the total momentum of the particle pairs increase, these Bose-Einstein correlations decrease. In fact, for pairs with high total momentum there is a substantial anti-correlation in the positive charge same-sign pair space. There is no corresponding (statistically significant) anti-correlation present in the negative charge pair space. This could be an effect of the non-participant protons that sit at high $m_t$.
In the opposite sign pair space ($[+-]$) there are no Bose-Einstein correlations (since we are looking at correlations between particles with different charge) but there is a substantial peak at very low momentum that comes from the Coulomb attraction of oppositely charged particles. In addition to these small-scale correlation features there are substantial large-scale correlations. This trend is made more clear by fitting the density ratio histograms. Figure \[mtFit\] shows the positive charge same-sign and the opposite charge pair spaces in a perspective view (looking down the main diagonal from the far corner). A multiparameter fit was done excluding the central corridor (particles with small $\Delta m_t$) to focus on the large scale features. The fits show that there are significant correlations present in the high-low momentum same-sign pairs and significant anti-correlations present in the high-low momentum opposite-sign pairs.
![NA49 two-particle correlation results for $[++]$ and $[+-]$ spaces compared to fits.[]{data-label="mtFit"}](mtFit_1.eps){width="4.5in"}
The low total momentum region of these fits tells an interesting physics story. The fits show that there is a systematic deficiency of pairs at low total momentum in the same-sign pair space that is not present in the opposite-sign pair space. This difference is due to the differing physical mechanisms that cause the small-scale features at low total momentum. Because the density ratio spaces shown are normalized by the mixed pair background there is a conservation of pairs at work here. Any feature in the space must come at the cost of another region to maintain the normalization. Thus, the deficiency of pairs near the low total momentum region of the same-sign pair space should be expected. Because Bose-Einstein correlations are relatively weak only pairs with small $\Delta m_t$ will be affected. Pairs that make up the correlation feature must come from the local region of $m_t \otimes m_t$ space. Even though we have removed the ridge of Bose-Einstein correlations by excluding the central corridor from the fit, we still see evidence of it in the low-momentum region of the same-sign $m_t \otimes m_t$ space. The decreasing magnitude of the correlation ridge with increasing $m_t$ is consistent with the rapid decrease in the magnitude of the pair deficiency seen in the fit. The Coulomb interaction, on the other hand, is quite strong and so particles from all over $m_t \otimes m_t$ space are swept into its low-momentum peak. Thus, there is no analogous pair deficiency at low momentum in the opposite-sign pair space.
STAR $m_t\otimes m_t$ Correlation Analysis
------------------------------------------
The technique of event-ordering to minimize statistical error was essential in the STAR two-particle correlation analysis. The event multiplicities were much higher in STAR than in NA49 due to the higher energy collisions made at RHIC. Thus, this data (100k of the 15% most central STAR events at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=130$ GeV) had a substantially larger spread in multiplicity than the NA49 data. Additionally, in the STAR data the displacement of the primary vertex from the center ($\pm 75$ cm) biased the $\eta$ values of the tracks. Thus, event ordering was necessary in both event multiplicity and vertex placement. A coarse binning of the $N$ vs. $v_z$ space was made and only events within the same bin were used to generate mixed pairs following the error minimization techniques outlined in previous sections. Two-point pair densities (sibling pairs/event-ordered mixed pairs) were calculated, results are shown in figure \[STARmtmt\].
![STAR two-point pair density ratio results for 100k central (15%) events. Ratio spaces shown are for pairs with the same charge ($[++]$ upper left, $[--]$ upper right), opposite charge ($[+-]$ lower left) and all pairs ($[cc]$ lower right).[]{data-label="STARmtmt"}](fig3_1.eps){width="4.5in"}
The STAR results show the same large scale saddle feature observed in the NA49 data. This feature corresponds to a deficiency of pairs with high momentum difference in the sibling pairs when compared to the mixed pair reference. The Bose-Einstein features at small scale have been intentionally excluded from this analysis by rejecting small $\Delta m_t$ pairs in the $[++]$ and $[--]$ spaces. This is the source of the significant pair deficiency along the main diagonal in all but the $[+-]$ space. There has been no systematic rejection of low momentum pairs enhanced by the Coulomb effect, and so there is still a small-scale feature present at low momentum in the $[+-]$ space.
There is one significant difference between the NA49 and STAR results. The large scale feature highlighted by the fit shown in figure \[mtFit\] is different in the same-sign pair spaces. The NA49 data has a correlation effect acting at large $\Delta m_t$ whereas the STAR data has an anti-correlation effect acting in the same region. In the opposite-sign pair spaces both experiments have an anti-correlation effect acting in the large $\Delta m_t$ region.
Experimental Comparisons
------------------------
We can make comparisons between this analysis and the $<p_t>$ fluctuation analysis by decomposing the two-point ratios into a charge-dependent part and a charge-independent part. To do this we combine the two-point ratio histograms as $([++] + [--])*([+-] + [-+])/4$ for the charge-independent part and $([++] + [--])/([+-] + [-+])$ for the charge-dependent part. When this ratio histogram arithmetic is done we find results that are consistent with our fluctuation analysis.
In NA49 the same-sign density histogram looks inverted compared to the opposite-sign histogram. Thus, taking the product of the two yields a null results in the charge-independent formulation. In the charge-dependent formulation this causes an enhancement of the correlation effect. By comparison, the fluctuation results in NA49 central events found a charge-independent signal consistent with zero ($0.6 \pm 1$ MeV), and a significant (negative) excess fluctuation ($-8.5 \pm 1.5$ MeV).
In the STAR central data the same- and opposite-sign histograms exhibit identical large-scale behavior. Thus, when composing the charge-independent measure this correlation effect is enhanced, and when composing the charge-dependent measure the large-scale correlation feature will almost completely cancel itself out. Again, the fluctuation results agree. The charge-independent signal is substantial for central STAR data ($52.6 \pm 0.3$ MeV). The charge-dependent signal is much smaller in magnitude ($-6.6 \pm 0.6$ MeV) but still significant.
Physics Interpretations
-----------------------
While it is gratifying that the two-particle analysis can confirm the results of the fluctuation analysis, that was not its main purpose. Our main goal has been to identify the correlation features in the full two-particle correlation space and understand the physical mechanisms that give rise to them. All of the small-scale features arose from well-understood physics (Bose-Einstein correlations, Coulomb attraction), but there is no easy explanation for the large-scale saddle feature that dominates these spaces.
Theoretical predictions suggest that event-by-event temperature fluctuations contribute to the variance of the event-wise mean $p_t$ [@CLT]. Since an increase in the fluctuation measure must have some corresponding effect in the two-particle correlation space, a theoretical estimate of the effect of $T$ fluctuations on the pair density spaces was made. These results are shown in figure \[MCmtmt\].
![A theoretical prediction of the effect of temperature fluctuations on pair-space density histograms. Histograms shown are for pairs with the same charge ($[++]$ upper left, $[--]$ upper right), opposite charge ($[+-]$ lower left) and all pairs ($[cc]$ lower right).[]{data-label="MCmtmt"}](MCmtmt_1.eps){width="4.5in"}
Monte Carlo simulated data incorporating temperature fluctuations was also analyzed and served as a calibration of this effect [@Lanny]. The STAR data, theory prediction, and Monte Carlo simulation are all in qualitative agreement. All analyses show a substantial deficiency of sibling pairs in the large $\Delta m_t$ region (independent of charge combination) and an abundance of sibling pairs at high-$m_t$ near the main diagonal ($\Delta m_t \approx 0$). The temperature fluctuations in the Monte Carlo study were at the 5% level, and the order of magnitude of the resulting saddle feature was a factor of 10 larger than in the data. Thus, we place an upper limit on temperature fluctuations in the STAR data at the 0.5% level.
Interpretation of the NA49 data is a more difficult problem. The inconsistency between the temperature fluctuation results and the NA49 data in the same-sign pair space suggests that there is an additional physical mechanism at work. The fact that this effect serves to cancel out the effect in the opposite-sign pair-space yielding a null result in the charge-independent formulation is suggestive. Substantial additional work will need to be done to understand the charge-dependent results that are at the heart of this puzzle.
Conclusions
-----------
Starting from the algebra of the non-statistical fluctuation measures we found a deep connection between fluctuations and two-particle correlations. Rather than try to summarize the rich structure of the two-particle correlation landscape in a single number or measure, we have chosen to approach the full two-particle correlation space directly. In the process we have created a new method of event comparison using pair-space density ratios and a carefully constructed mixed pair reference.
Substantial utility has been found in the connection between two-particle correlation spaces and non-statistical fluctuation measures. By devising a method of highlighting the charge-(in)dependence of the correlation results we have found qualitative agreement between the fluctuation results of NA49 and STAR and their respective correlation contents. While questions about the mechanism behind the charge-dependent results remain unanswered, theoretical predictions and simulations show qualitative agreement between the charge-independent results and temperature fluctuation models. Calibration of the models with simulation allow us to place an upper limit on $T$ fluctuations in STAR at the 0.5% level.
These methods have been quite productive in the hands of Aya Ishihara at the University of Texas in Austin. She has provided significant insight into the nature of the emitting source by looking at correlations in axial phase space [@Aya] among other substantial contributions. Increasingly these methods are being adopted in other groups within NA49 and STAR and the outlook is very positive for adoption by the broader community [@QM02Pratt]. This has been the true success of this work, providing the community with a set of self-consistent and useful tools to help it move toward an understanding of deconfined quark matter.
Summary and Conclusions
=======================
Overview
--------
We have tackled the complex problems facing event-by-event physics in relativistic heavy-ion collisions with three distinct approaches. We used a general approach in scaled correlation analysis, improved upon the $\Phi_{p_t}$ fluctuation measure finding striking results in the STAR data, and we extended the theory of fluctuation analysis to incorporate a connection to two-particle correlations. The goal has been to provide significant direction to the burgeoning event-by-event physics community, and we have succeeded.
Scaled Correlation Analysis Summary
-----------------------------------
In the development of a model-explicit analysis system we generalized the partition used to calculate the entropy. By pushing the entropy beyond the zero-scale limit and incorporating dithered binning technology we were able to formulate a novel method for measuring multiparticle correlations in a model-independent way. Once the scale generalization of the entropy was made, scale-local measures of the correlation integral, information, dimension, dimension transport, and volume all logically followed. We probed the behavior of these newly scale-localized topological measures with a randomly generated uniform distribution. Comparing those results with a reference derived analytically from an ideal uniform distribution, we found that a cutoff factor had to be incorporated into the IUD reference to make it realistic and useful. Understanding this cutoff and the related pseudoinformation provided insight into the relationship between the scaled entropy and factorial moments.
To apply the scaled correlation analysis system effectively to RHI collision data we needed to understand how to interpret the results that might come from the analysis. We examined a variety of toy-model generated distributions to calibrate our expectations for scaled correlation analysis results. We started by focusing on the most simplistic point distributions, one-dimensional randomly generated uniform distributions. That example was extended by scaling the data relative to the embedding space, providing clear evidence that SCA results are unique for each correlation mechanism and independent of the scale of the embedding space. We moved past one-dimensional distributions to 2d examples. First, we confirmed the extrapolation of 1d results into 2d, then we looked at simple clustering simulation data to understand how a simplistic phase transition might appear in the SCA system.
We looked at increasingly complex point distributions including a model of a space-filling-curve and one of the well-known strange attractors of the Hénon map. In the case of the Hénon map attractor we discovered the rich and unique structure of its scaled-dimension, which cannot be adequately expressed in the zero-scale limit dimension of conventional topological approaches. An extended example was analyzed using grey scale digital images of human faces to illustrate the utility of using an event-space approach with SCA results. By calculating the dimension transport between each individual image and an ensemble average we were able to form an event space in which different images of a single subject’s face could be distinguished from the faces of other subjects. This same approach was taken in analyzing NA49 data and we found anomalous events at the 10% level. These were identified as pile-up events in which beam/gas interactions occured in addition to the primary beam/target interaction. A pile-up rejector was added to the detector and in later runs these contaminating events were successfully removed.
Fluctuation Analysis Summary
----------------------------
Starting from the $\Phi_{p_t}$ measure and the work of Gaździcki and Mrówczyński we have expanded significantly on the field of fluctuation analysis in heavy-ion collisions. By defining a fluctuation measure based directly on the central limit theorem [@CLT] we have provided the community with an unbiased and interpretable measure. Defining the measure is simply the beginning, the real work of this analysis is in maintaining data quality and insuring robust results. By applying a strict set of event and track cuts we have minimized the contamination of the primary particle data sample from particles originating from secondary interactions. After these quality cuts are applied to STAR data a numerical fluctuation analysis found fluctuations above the statistical expectation at the 15% level. To insure our results were robust we did simulations and estimations of systematic error sources including analysis of tracking effects, cut systematics, and signal contamination from other sources. A graphical data/reference comparison was made that confirmed our numerical results. Comparisons with fluctuation results from other experiments revealed that this was a unique measurement because of the large multiplicity of our events and the statistical significance of our result. Further comparisons need to be made, specifically the multiplicity scaling of the results in other experiments remains to be understood, but the preliminary results are promising.
Two-Particle Correlation Analysis Summary
-----------------------------------------
The inherent relationship between the non-statistical fluctuations and two-particle correlations in an event motivated our development of a comprehensive two-particle correlation analysis. Rather than look at an over-simplified correlation measure like the integral over the two-particle correlation space we looked at the full spectrum of two-particle correlations. We first flattened the $m_t$ distribution with a temperature-dependent transformation that maps the whole transverse mass space into the unit interval ($[0,\infty) \rightarrow [0,1)$). This mapping served to make the statistical error uniform over the whole space as well as highlight the soft physics region ($0.2 < p_t < 0.8$). With the flattened $m_t$ space we formed all possible pairs between same and different events and built a sibling/mixed pair density ratio histogram. This space presented a picture of the full scale spectrum of two-particle correlations in the data. The STAR two-particle correlation analysis showed a rich structure consistent with the fluctuation analysis results.
Conclusions and Future Directions
---------------------------------
This work represents a significant beginning for event-scale physics techniques in heavy-ion collisions. Never before have the statistics at the event level been so favorable. With the recent 200 GeV full-energy run at RHIC and the startup of the CERN LHC on the horizon, event multiplicity will continue to grow, increasing the opportunities for event-by-event analysis. Clearly this is a critical time for event-by-event physics. With that in mind, it is important to emphasize that a more coherent fluctuation analysis community is needed. Right now these are the most exciting results coming out of the event-by-event physics programs. Unfortunately, because of the acceptance dependence of the measures used, making coherent comparisons among the experiments is nearly impossible. To make the results understandable and convincing to the broader physics community a method of standardizing the results and making comparisons must be defined by the relevant experts. Also, there needs to be more theoretical support for this analysis. While there is a strong community producing some great work, we are still lacking directly testable hypotheses from theorists. The experimental results we have are quite provocative, but without solid predictions from theory they are of limited utility.
For our part, we must continue to refine and simplify the techniques we have been developing. Finding digestible component pieces of the larger analysis picture that can be broken off and explored fully and independently is important. It is useful and satisfying to completely specify and understand the intricate relationships between all of these analyses, but this is not enough. To truly serve the physics community we must strive to find self-contained approaches to the specific problems at hand that can be applied and understood independently of the larger picture. Much like the theory community, we too must serve the greater interest by providing tractable analysis tools and interpretable results.
Through our efforts to understand the effect of various physical mechanisms on SCA analysis results we found that simulations are essential to this work. Increasing the number of simulations done to provide context for the experimental results will be a key part of the future analysis efforts. This is not to say that we need yet another event generator or overly complex physics simulation package. Rather, it is much more convincing (and tractable) to approach the problem piecemeal by using simple toy simulation models to represent different physics effects. It is not that the existing event generators are not useful, on the contrary they are essential. However, we have enough of them already and they are often too complicated (and poorly understood) for the job of isolating the effect of a specific physics mechanism on the analysis results.
Event-by-event physics is the most exciting and rapidly growing subfield in heavy-ion physics. There is no doubt that in the next 20 years it will prove to be a key part in the quest to understand quark matter.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
In the days immediately following the contested June 2009 Presidential election, Iranians attempting to reach news content and social media platforms were subject to unprecedented levels of the degradation, blocking and jamming of communications channels. Rather than shut down networks, which would draw attention and controversy, the government was rumored to have slowed connection speeds to rates that would render the Internet nearly unusable, especially for the consumption and distribution of multimedia content. Since, political upheavals elsewhere have been associated with headlines such as “High usage slows down Internet in Bahrain” and “Syrian Internet slows during Friday protests once again,” with further rumors linking poor connectivity with political instability in Myanmar and Tibet. For governments threatened by public expression, the throttling of Internet connectivity appears to be an increasingly preferred and less detectable method of stifling the free flow of information. In order to assess this perceived trend and begin to create systems of accountability and transparency on such practices, we attempt to outline an initial strategy for utilizing a ubiquitious set of network measurements as a monitoring service, then apply such methodology to shed light on the recent history of censorship in Iran.
, national Internet, Iran, throttling, M-Lab
author:
- 'Collin Anderson[^1]'
bibliography:
- 'paper.bib'
subtitle: Detecting Throttling as a Mechanism of Censorship in Iran
title: Dimming the Internet
---
Introduction {#sec:introduction}
============
*“Prison is like, there’s no bandwidth.”*[ - Eric Schmidt]{}[^2]
The primary purpose of this paper is to assess the validity of claims that the international connectivity of information networks used by the Iranian public has been subject to substantial throttling based on a historical and correlated set of open measurements of network performance. We attempt to determine whether this pattern is the result of administrative policy, as opposed to the service variations that naturally occur on a network, particularly one subject to the deleterious effects of trade restrictions, economic instability, sabotage and other outcomes of international politics. Overall, we outline our initial findings in order to provoke broader discussion on what we perceive to be the growing trend of network performance degradation as a means of stifling the free flow of information, and solicit feedback on our claims in order to create universally applicable structures of accountability. Furthermore, to the fullest extent possible, we focus our assessment on that which is quantitatively measurable, and limit attempts to augur the political or social aspects of the matters at hand. As in any other closed decision-making system, a wealth of rumors dominate the current perception of the actions taken by the government and telecommunications companies. Where these rumors are mentioned, they are discussed in order to test validity, and not cited as evidence.
This paper is not intended to be comprehensive, and we err on the side of brevity where possible. Toward these ends, our contributions are threefold:
1. outline a methodology for the detection of the disruption of network performance and infer purposeful intent based on indicators, differentiated from normal network failures;
2. begin to identify potential periods of throttling, based on available historical data;
3. attempt to enumerate those institutions that are not subject to interference.
The experiments described herein are motivated toward collecting initial, open-ended data on an opaque phenomenon; where possible our results and code are publicly available for outside investigation at:
> <http://github.com/collina/Throttling>
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. In the following section, we identify the infrastructural properties of networks relevant to our line of inquiry that enable states and intermediaries to control access to content and service performance. We describe the dataset core to our investigation in Section \[sec:setup\] and Section \[sec:mathishard\] describes a mixed methods approach used to interpret measurements and extract broader information on the nature of the network. Finally, these techniques are applied in Section \[sec:findings\] toward identifing periods of significant interest in the connectivity of Iran-originating users. We conclude by enumerating the outstanding questions and future research directions.
Domestic Network Structure Considerations {#sec:infrastructure_considerations}
=========================================
After the declaration that the incumbent president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, had won a majority in the first round of voting, supporters of reformist candidates rallied against what was perceived to be election fixing in order to preserve the status quo of the power structure of the state. Already well-acquainted with bypassing Internet filtering using circumvention and privacy tools, such as VPNs and Tor, government blocks on YouTube and Facebook were minor impediments for activists to share videos and news in support of their cause. Unused to large-scale challenges against the legitimacy and integrity of the system, the government appears to have responded by ordering the shutdown of mobile phone services, increased filtering of social media sites and the disruption of Internet access [@bailey2011censorship].
Iran’s telecommunications infrastructure and service market differs substantially from the regulatory environment of broadcast television, wherein the state maintains an absolute monopoly on authorized transmissions [@imp:control]. The current on network ownership was initially shaped by the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution in 2001 under the directives ““Overall Policies on Computer-based Information-providing Networks” and “Regulations and Conditions Related to Computerized Information Networks” [@cso_trc; @ihrdc:ctrl]. Internet Service Providers (ISPs), which offer last-mile network connectivity, are privatized, but subject to strict licensing requirements and communications laws that hold companies liable for the activities of their customers.[^3] In addition to administrative requirements for filtering according to a nebulous and growing definition of subjects deemed ‘criminal,’ ISPs are forced to purchase their upstream connectivity from government-controlled international gateways, such as the state-owned telecommunications monopoly, the Telecommunication Company of Iran (TCI), which appear to implement an auxiliary, and often more sophisticated, censorship regime on traffic in transit across its network. Even amongst privately-owned networks, perspective entrepreneurs appear to be encouraged or coerced into ownership consortiums with the ever present set of Bonyads, charitable trusts often connected with the Iranian ideological establishment [@turkcell]. While a substantial amount has been written on controls imposed on content, the salient principles to our domain of research are the obligations of independent providers to the state’s administrative orders and the infrastructural centrality of two entities in Iran’s network, the TCI’s subsidiary, the Information Technology Company (ITC, AS12880), and the Research Center of Theoretical Physics & Mathematics (IPM, AS6736). As a result, all traffic to foreign-based hosts, and likely a majority of connections internally, route through entities with either direct or informal relationships to the government, as demonstrated in Figure \[fig:pathways\].
![International Pathways to Iranian Hosts (Traceroute)[]{data-label="fig:pathways"}](resources/m_lab_ips_2013_02_annonated.png){width="\textwidth"}
The centralization of international communications gateways and domestic peering (the linkages between networks) enables anticompetitive and potentially undemocratic practices that would be more administratively difficult and economically expensive in an open and multi-stakeholder telecommunications market. This design is not specific to Iran alone nor is it an indicator of a government’s desire to control citizen access. Centralization often resembles a commonplace model of public-sector infrastructure development or state revenue generation from telecommunications surcharges [@roberts2011mapping]. With the introduction of the Internet, regulators reflexively extended their mandate to include online communications, as the most common forms of physical connectivity often utilize telephony networks, as well as bringing competitive services such as voice-over-IP. When the network monitoring company Renesys addressed this topic in response to the Internet shutdowns of Egypt and Syria, they framed the dangers and fragility of the centralization of gateways as “the number of phone calls (or legal writs, or infrastructure attacks) that would have to be performed in order to decouple the domestic Internet from the global Internet,” naming 61 countries at ‘severe risk’ for disconnection [@renesys:couldit].
Although disconnection, failure and filtering are more perceivable forms of disruption, the same principles of risk and exposure apply to the degradation of connections. Throttling is not on its own a form of censorship or intent to stifle expression. In the context of Iran, a scarcity of available bandwidth and inadequate infrastructure has created a demonstrable need for limiting resource-intensive services and prioritizing real-time communications traffic, especially in rural markets [@hassani2010qos]. In other cases, often under the terms “quality of service” or “traffic shaping,” throttling is a means of providing higher performance to less bandwidth-intensive applications, through initially provisioning of faster speeds to a connection that is then slowed after a threshold is reached. These practices have spurred heated debate between civil society and telecommunications providers in the United States and Europe within the framework of “network neutrality,” pitting the core principle that communications on the Internet be treated equally against claims by companies that the bandwidth demands of online services exceeds current availability. However, the allegations of throttling we attempt to address differ substantially from these debates in scope and execution, and fit into a history of interference with the free flow of information, offline and online, and recurrent security intrusions on the end-to-end privacy of the communication of users, often originating from government-affiliated actors [@foxitdiginotar].
Setup {#sec:setup}
=====
Degradations in network performance and content accessibility can be the product of a number of phenomenon and externalities, localized to one point or commonly experienced across a wider range of Internet users. In order to accurately and definitively measure broadly-targeted degradation, such as throttling, it is necessary to obtain data from a diversity of hosts, in terms of connection type, physical location, time of usage and nature of usage.
A number of tools have been developed to actively probe qualities of infrastructure directly relevant to throttling and disruption [@dischinger2010glasnost; @filasto2012ooni; @kreibich2010netalyzr]. These techniques compare whether traffic flows of differing types sent at an identical rates are received differently, thereby comparing against an established baseline to give a clear indication of potential discrimination. Where such data has been core to network neutrality debates, for countries such as Iran, government opacity on broadband deployment means that domestic civil society and private parties have had few opportunities to embrace quantitative data to push for policy changes. Our research interest biases observations that are ubiquitous, recurrent and not necessitating the intervention of users, in order to plot historical trends and account for localized aberrations, even if at the cost of precision or confidence. As a result, to meet our operational needs, we resort to the use of measurements that, while not specifically designed to detect throttling, broadly assess relevant characteristics of the network in a manner that may indicate changes in the performance and nature of the host’s connectivity.
In order to collect a statistically significant set of network performance datapoints, we utilize the data collected by client-initiated measurements of the Network Diagnostic Tool (NDT) hosted by Measurement Lab (M-Lab) [@dovrolis2010measurement], which contains both a client-to-server (C2S) and server-to-client (S2C) component. The throughput test consists of a simple ten second transfer of data sent as fast as possible through a newly opened connection from a M-Lab server to a NDT client. In addition to measuring the throughput rate, the NDT test also enables the collection of diagnostic data that can assess factors such as latency, packet loss, congestion, out-of-order delivery, network path and bottlenecks on the end-to-end connectivity between client to server.
![Unique Clients and Tests from Iran (Weekly), Jan 2010 - Jan 2013[]{data-label="fig:clientstests"}](resources/IR_Tests_2010-2013.png){width="\textwidth"}
M-Lab’s added value is both methodological and institutional. Founded and administered by a consortium of non-governmental organizations, private companies and academic institutions, including New America Foundation’s Open Technology Institute, PlanetLab, and Google, M-Lab is an open data platform focused on the collection of network measurements related to real-world broadband connectivity, and is not in itself a human rights or political cause. M-Lab’s data is both non-partisan and widely-accepted, having been used by telecommunications regulators and development agencies in Austria, Cyprus, the European Commission, Greece and the United States. With the inclusion of NDT as a connectivity diagnostic test in version 2.0 of the Bittorrent file-sharing client $\mu$Torrent, M-Lab gained a significant increase in NDT measurements and a wider audience of users[@blog:utorrent]. Since 2009, M-Lab has collected over 725 Terabytes of data based on around 200,000 tests conducted per day. More relevant to our purposes, in the month of January 2013, M-Lab collected 2,925 tests from 2,158 clients from Iran that we consider valid under the definitions and parameters described in Section \[sec:mathishard\]. Figure \[fig:clientstests\] demonstrates the rapid growth of network measurements originating from Iran after the inclusion of NDT in $\mu$Torrent, with unique clients representing the number of IP addresses seen and tests describing the total number of tests. While M-Lab contains measurements from 2009, we consider data beginning in 2010 to take advantage of the critical mass of clients that resulted from the inclusion.
During the process of preparing and running our experiments, we took special care to not violate any laws or, considering the diminishing opportunities for international collaboration, expose individuals within Iran to potential harm. All our experiments were in accordance to any applicable terms of service and within reasonable considerations of network usage, taking care to not engage in behavior that would be considered intrusive. The contribution of measurements of a network to NDT or M-Lab does not denote political activities on the part of the user, particularly as the use of Bittorrent file-sharing has broad appeal and apolitical implications. Moreover, use of Bittorrent or NDT do not appear to violate Iranian law, especially given the copyright and intellectual property framework of Iran. All data originating from M-Lab is openly available to the public, and collected in a manner that does not reveal potentially identifiable user information, outside of the client’s IP address.
Parameters & Calculations {#sec:mathishard}
=========================
NDT provides a multiplicity of metrics and diagnostic information that describe the test session. As outsiders attempting to assess the behavior and actions of network intermediaries, we are relegated to beginning from assumptions and hypotheses founded on general principles of networking and how others accomplish throttling. Additionally, we are limited in the lessons to be gained from the corpus of research on assessing violations of network neutrality, as we struggle to establish control measurements and perform the active probing necessary for proper comparative analysis. Most methods for measuring broad or application-specific throttling assume that connections are initially allocated a higher level of throughput, which is then throttled or terminated upon identification by a network intermediary or exceeding a bandwidth quota. Therefore, our primary form of detection of abnormal network conditions is comparative assessment of selected indicators based on historical trends and incongruities between subgroups of clients. In order to allow this comparative assessment through baselines that serve as controls, we define a set of measurements and aggregate clients in a consistent and non-abitrary manner.
For the introductory purposes of this study, and based on cursory analysis of existing M-Lab data which was generated during suspected throttling events, we substantially rely on NDT’s measurements of round trip time, packet loss, throughput and network-limited time ratio as potential identicators of network disruption.[^4]
Round Trip Time (RTT)
: ($MinRTT, MaxRTT, \frac{SumRTT}{CountRTT}$)\
The time taken for the round trip of traffic between the server to client, computed as the difference between the time a packet is sent and the time an acknowledgement is received, also known as latency. There are a diversity of causes for latency, including ‘insertion latency’ (the speed of the network link), the physical distance of the path taken, ‘queue latency’ (time spent in the buffer of network routers), and ‘application latency.’ The last of these components, application latency, is accounted for within the NDT test under the metrics of *Receiver and Sender-limited time windows*. We are interested in latency that occurs due to network properties, primarily the queue, insertion and path latencies. Since the time taken should not change dramatically, fluctuations indicate a meaningful change in connectivity, such as a network outage that increases latency due to traffic to taking a longer route and telecommunications equipment having taken on additional load. NDT also provides different approaches to this measurement, which allow alternative perspectives on the network. The minimum round trip time record (MinRTT) mostly occurs before the network reached a point of congestion, and therefore is generally not thought to be indicative of real performance. Alternatively, the average of RTTs, through the division of the sum of all round trip times by the number of trips may more closely approximate latency, but is also vulnerable to outlier values. [@findingthelatency]
Packet Loss
: ($\frac{CongSignals}{SegsOut}, \frac{SegsRetrans}{DataSegsOut}$)\
The transmission of traffic across a route is not guaranteed to be reliable, and network systems are designed to cope with and avoid failure. These mechanisms include maintaining an internal timer that will give up on traffic the system has sent, alerts from the network that congestion is occurring, and notification from the other end that data is missing. Packet loss for our purposes is defined as the the number of transmission failures that occurred, due to all forms of congestion signals recorded under NDT’s test, including *fast retransmit*, *explicit congestion notifications* and *timeouts*. In order to address this relative to the amount of extensiveness of the test, packet loss is measured as a probability against the number of packets sent.
Network-Limited Time Ratio
: ($\frac{TimeCwnd}{TimeRwin + TimeCwnd + TimeSnd}$)\
The network stack of operating systems maintain internal windows of the amount of traffic that has been sent and not acknowledged by the other party. This enables the system to avoid over-saturating a network with traffic and to detect when a failure has occurred in communications. The NDT test attempts to send enough traffic to create congestion on the network, where the transmitting end of traffic exceeds this window of unacknowledged traffic and is waiting for clearance from the other side to continue sending. The Network-Limited Time Ratio is calculated as the percentage of the time of the test spent in a ‘Congestion Limited’ state, where sending of traffic by the client or server was limited due to the congestion window.
Network Throughput
: ($\frac{HCThruOctetsAcked*8}{TimeRwin + TimeCwnd + TimeSnd}$)\
The NDT test attempts to send as much data as quickly as possible between the client and an M-Lab server for a discrete amount of time in order to stress the capacity of the network link. For the upload performance, this is calculated based of the amount of data received from the client, and with the download being the number of sent packets that were acknowledged as received. The throughput rate is then calculated against the time that the test lasted.
Measurements of connection properties allow for the indirect inference of broader network conditions, particularly when applied in a comparative fashion. For example, others have noted the varying degrees of correlation between round trip time and the total load presented on a network[@biaz2003round]. While these studies hold a higher correlation on a slow link than on a fast one, the former of which appears to more accurately describe the domestic connectivity of Iran. In this scenario, it may be possible to identify periods where an increase in load has created a bottleneck in the network or a build-up in the traffic queue on network devices. Therefore, we assume that the decrease of throughput, or increase of loss, will be associated with an increase in latency where traffic congestion is occurring. Additionally, while most inter-network routing protocols will attempt to route traffic over the best path to a destination, which can differ based on load balancing and service agreements, a change in round trip time may indicate a change in the path traversed by the data sent from the client to M-Lab. Due to the variability in network conditions that can affect latency, we use two measurements: the minimum RTT recorded in the session and the uniform average over the entire test.
Aggregation and Comparative Methods
-----------------------------------
In order to assess the general performance of the domestic network, client measurements are aggreggated across higher-level groupings and evaluated based on their median value. Where multiple tests are performed by a client during an evaluation period, the most performant measurement is used in order to mitigate potential bias in samples. Through giving preference to faster measurements, we intentionally bias our pool of data against our hypothesis and assume that less favorable numbers are aberrations. Furthermore, we prefer calculations that accomodate for outlier values, such as false positives that occur in geolocation services when foreign-hosted networks are registered to domestic entities. Finally, we assume the natural shifts in consumer behavior or infrastructure development that may affect measurements, such as the adoption of mobile broadband, are gradual and upward trends. In practice this assumption appears to not only hold, but we are led to question whether the availability of high-speed connectivity has declined, due to administrative limitations imposed on consumer providers and delays in the development of mobile data licensing.
For our purposes, we discretely aggregate measurements across three dimensions related to the character of the tests or location of the client,
National:
: Measurements are grouped on a country level. Aggregation for large geographic areas or service providers may represent a diverse strata of connectivity types, such as ADSL, dialup, WiMAX and fibre.
Internet Service Providers and Address Prefixes:
: We use the Autonomous System Number (ASN) as a proxy for ISPs. Within a research methodology, aggregation based on the ASN provides a larger pool of clients at the cost of being less granular than address prefixes. Autonomous Systems are generally defined as a set of routers under a single technical administration, which keep an understanding of global network routes to direct traffic and announce their ownership of blocks of IP addresses (address prefixes). There is a limited pool of available numbers for the labeling of Autonomous Systems, and not every network has the need to advertises its own set of routing policies, particularly where directly connected networks have the same upstream connection. Therefore, a large ISP, such as Afranet, will generally maintain one or more Autonomous Systems, bearing the responsibility to maintain announcements and peering, for the connectivity leased to other smaller ISPs, government agencies, educational institutions or commercial organizations. Additionally, since traffic paths across networks are constructed using centrally allocated components of ASNs and address prefixes, both are registered and externally queriable.
Control Groups:
: We attempt to identify logical, coherent groups of networks and clients based on common characteristics, such as the nature of the end user or performance. Control group measurements differ from service providers because they are defined as narrowly as the data allows, rather than existing segmentations. Such groups, particularly when defined by network degradation, are possibly deterministic, however, these often produce surprising and mixed results, as described in Section \[sec:findings\]. Furthermore, the grouping of networks or entities, such as state agencies or educational institutions, during one incident is testable under other circumstances and may serve as a control for future monitoring.
Finally, detection of significant events generally follows one of two themes. These mechanisms are designed to highlight precipitous changes of service quality as a warning system to flag potential events, however, they are not the holistic determinant of interest.
Threshold:
: A maximum and minimum threshold of reasonable values are established based on previous trends. Since our dataset is frequently limited to a small amount of clients that are subject to varying network conditions and unrelated externalities, producing wide fluctuations in measurements, a Poisson distribution is established based on a rolling average. Detection of an abnormal event occurs when the trend breaches these bounds [@danezis2011anomaly].
Variance:
: Internet Service Providers offer a diversity of products with varying levels of performance across different markets, leading to variations in qualities, such as connection speed and reliability. This technological and commercial variation is exacerbated by informal differences, such the scrutiny placed on the documentation necessary to obtain faster broadband implementation of administrative orders (elaborated in Section \[sec:controlgroups\]) and ability to acquire network infrastructure, despite scarcity created by sanctions and exchange rates. While these differences may change across time, there should be a consistent trend of diversity within a free market. We evaluate the variation that occur in service quality amongst our subgroups such as ISPs or prefixes. Therefore we presume that when external limitations are not imposed, variation will be high, while the contrapositive holds that at a time of control, the variation will be low. We use the classic variance of the average of the squared deviations from the mean to accomodate proportional change.
Analysis based on the variance of performance measurements day over day across short historical periods can be applied to a single network or client as between ISPs. We would anticipate that if an administrative ceiling were imposed on throughput speed, particularly at a limit below the potential capacity of the network, the variation would near zero, as the tests would cap out at the maximum available bandwidth. We would also expect that trend line of such an incident to follow a peak and valley model, where a sudden decrease or increase leads to a spike in variance when the limit is imposed or lifted, with low variance during the throttling. Figure \[fig:nov11:thuvar\], demonstrates that in practice this hypothesis holds mixed results. While peaks do occur, the variance, particularly the relative variance, remains high.
As these mechanisms serve as a warning system to direct further investigation, rather than being a sole determinant of interest, we are less concerned about its robustness. Additionally, for the purposes of identifications and coding of events, we generally call attention to extremely abnormal values, relative to the normal trends. Once a significant change in service is identified, it is subject to correlation against other metrics. More constrained boundaries simply lead to more research cost and false positives. We assume throttling designed to stifle expression or access is not a subtle event.
Limitations
-----------
While the integration of NDT into $\mu$Torrent has enabled the massive proliferation of points of observation across a variety of geographic locations and network conditions, we remain relegated to user-contributed data collection based on a limited set of volunteers. Changes in connectivity or quality of service cannot directly be infered as an administratively-imposed censorship event. Additionally, the Network Diagnostic Test’s data collection does not occur in isolation of other externalities that are likely to affect performance. Cross traffic, local and upstream network activities from other applications or users, independent of the test can bias results through introducing additional latency or failures as the test mechanism competes for bandwidth and computing resources. As an end user is positioned at the border of the network, they cannot independently account for the conditions outside of their control that may impact the results of this test. Therefore, like others before, we attempt to mitigate and account for externalities based on interpretations derived from observable data and general networking principles [@salamatian2003cross; @weinsberg2011inferring].
![Diurnal Patterns of Throughput Measurements, Iran, Jan - Mar 2013[]{data-label="figure:mathishard:diurnal"}](resources/IR-Throughput_Diurnal_2013.png){width="\textwidth"}
The extent of externalities often vary based on diurnal patterns of use and in response to specific incidents. Using the performance metric of throughput, Figure \[figure:mathishard:diurnal\] demonstrates that observed network speed is higher in the early hours of the morning, Iran time (GMT +4:30), than during the day. These trends are mirrored in the performance across the week, and within other measurements, such as packet loss. It would appear that Iran’s network does not handle the additional load of office hours and evening use gracefully.
M-Lab-based services attempt to perform testing under favorable conditions by selecting the measurement server by geographic proximity. These servers are physically located across the world, including in Australia, Austria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Japan, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Slovenia, Sweden, Taiwan, the United Kingdom and the United States. Although one of these M-Lab hosts countries directly peers with Iran,[^5] the selection mechanism predominantly directed NDT clients to Greece (of the 2921 tests in January 2013, 50.39%), United States (22.08%), United Kingdom (16.40%) and France (9.28%), with the remaining three countries constituting 1.85% of tests. It may be possible that if there were M-Lab servers in Turkey or Azerbajian, NDT tests would result in higher throughput measurements, however, we derive our conclusions from relative changes, rather than absolute numbers. Addditionally, users that are connected to anti-filtering tools during the test are likely to be recorded by M-Lab as originating from the country that the tool routes its traffic through, and therefore not included in our sample. We also constrain our expectations on the types of throttling or disruption that NDT will detect. As a diagnostic of direct connectivity between hosts, the test is based on traffic patterns that likely have yet to inspire scrutiny from intermediaries. Other protocols, such as those employed in VPN tunnels, HTTP proxies, Tor, voice-over-IP and streaming media, have at varying times been claimed to be subject to targeted interference, based on port or deep packet inspection. NDT’s measurement methodology is unlikely to detect more sophisticated discimination against specific forms or destination of traffic.
Lastly, we assume that intermediaries have not sought to interfere or game the data collection of M-Lab through artifically biasing measurements from hosts.
Findings {#sec:findings}
========
Using median country-level throughput, evaluated based on the most performant measurement per client per day, we find two significant and extended periods of potential throttling within our dataset, occuring *November 30 2011 - August 15 2012* (a 77% decrease in download throughput) and *October 4 - November 22 2012* (a 69% decrease). We identify an additional eight to nine short-term instances where the throughput or variance between providers underwent a precipituous change, triggering the attention of detection mechanisms. These events are correlated with a reduction of service quality across all networks, often more significantly impacting home consumers than commercial institutions. In most cases, these changes mirror more overt increases of interference of communications channnels. Lastly, within available indicators or traffic routes, we do not find evidence that these fluctuations are the result of externalities, such as changes to international connectivity or domestic network use.
Periods of Significant Interest {#sec:throttling_events}
-------------------------------
Figures \[findings:throughput\] and \[findings:variance\] outline the periods of time where fluctuations in values and variance of throughput exceeded thresholds, respectively. The performance measurements and indicators outlined in the prior section during these two extended periods of interest are documented in the graphs of Figures \[findings:throttling\_events:oct\_2012\] and \[findings:throttling\_events:nov\_2011\].
Although our methodology has not taken a deterministic view from prior awareness, these two major events mirror our prior understanding of periods of disruption. While we could not find instances where M-Lab or similar tests were used in the commission of news reports on Iran’s Internet, our results often mirror claims such as “The Internet In Iran Is Crawling, Conveniently, Right Before Planned Protests”[@tnw:crawling]. We also find potential events as detected by changes in performance surrounding holidays, notable protests events, international political upheaval and important anniversaries, such as Nowruz, the Arab Spring and 25 Bahman (Persian calendar date, early-to-middle February). These also often parallel more overt forms of disruption, such as the filtering of secure Google services (September 24 - October 1 2012) and significant jamming of international broadcasts (January 31 - February 7 2011, October 2012).
Figure \[findings:tablesevents\] demonstrates the reverse methodology, correlating reported incidents of public protests or opposition rallies with NDT measurements.[^6] The dates identified focus on country-wide mobilizations, rather than localized events such as protests by Iran’s Ahvaz Arab minority population in Khuzestan during April 2011. While it is probable that localized throttling occurs, due to limitations in sampling, it may not be possible to detect such actions until more nodes of measurement are available. In addition to the throughput for the primary or initial day of the event, the table identifies the data trends of the week and the time period of the month before and after. This timeframe takes into consideration the measures applied by the state to stifle mobilizations for publicly-announced events and mitigate further political activities. These reactions are reflected both online and offline, during Winter 2011, in reaction to plans to protest on 25 Bahman, former Presidential candidates Mir-Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi were detained and kept in house arrest by security forces for their role in the reformist politics. These mobilizations are compared against a two month window as a baseline of the general capacity of the network at that time.
We find a direct correlation between the precipituous decline in connectivity for February 2012’s anniversary of the detention of Mousavi and Karroubi, as well as October 2012’s currency protests. During all events, variation between the average RTT of two month mean and those recorded during the event stayed within a 20% threshold. While we anticipated 10 February 2010 as a potential throttling event, we find that three days later, the date of our minimum measurement during the period, was associated with both street protests and the hacking of opposition news sites [@rsf:internetenemies]. Similarly, while our weekly minimum for the first anniversary of the 2009 Presidental election falls on the anticipated day, the decrease in performance does not exceed a reasonable threshold of variation. Finally, March 2010 stands out as a strong case of a negative correlation across the two-month context, however, it may be reasonsable to consider the patterns of network use established previously and this period’s proximity to the Nowruz holiday. Contrarily, if lower-end consumer users are subjected to more aggressive throttling, and as a result decide stay off the Internet until speeds improve, the median of the national throughput would increase. Against our two-month baseline, there was a 16% decrease in NDT clients on May 16 and a weekly minimum of 41% decrease. Thus, this undergirds the need to detect both precipitous decreases *and increases* in performance.
[|L|c|L l l|c|c|c|]{} Event & Day Of & & Wk-Min & & Wk-Mean & 2-Month\
2010-02-11 & 0.18 & 0.14 & 2010-02-14 & -34.3% & 0.20 & 0.19\
2010-03-16 & 0.26 & 0.19 & 2010-03-13 & +7.3% & 0.22 & 0.17\
2010-06-12 & 0.16 & 0.16 & 2010-06-12 & -21.6% & 0.19 & 0.20\
2011-02-14 & 0.18 & 0.15 & 2011-02-17 & -18.9% & 0.18 & 0.18\
2011-02-20 & 0.22 & 0.15 & 2011-02-17 & -21.1% & 0.20 & 0.18\
2011-03-01 & 0.18 & 0.12 & 2011-03-04 & -52.3% & 0.17 & 0.19\
2011-03-08 & 0.16 & 0.16 & 2011-03-08 & -14.0% & 0.18 & 0.19\
2012-02-14 & 0.03 & 0.03 & 2012-02-14 & -102.9% & 0.07 & 0.06\
2012-10-03 & 0.25 & 0.09 & 2012-10-04 & -86.2% & 0.20 & 0.16\
We anticipate based on the network principles and diurnal patterns previously established that network load will be directly correlated with higher roundtrip times. In Figures \[findings:throttling\_events:oct\_2012:rtt\] and \[findings:throttling\_events:nov\_2011:rtt\], there appears to be no such relationship between the round trip time of the clients’ traffic and measurements of service quality. It is less likely that these changes were the product of heavy use.
Generally, sudden drops in service quality can be attributable to changes in domestic networks or the availability of upstream providers, due to a multitude of factors such as physical damage or electronic attacks. During the interval of throttling identified as the beginning of October 2012 and described in Figure \[findings:throttling\_events:oct\_2012\], the main international gateway provided by Information Technology Company (AS12880), experienced routing failures to networks connected through Telecom Italia Sparkle (AS6762)[@renesys:bulletin_oct_2012; @renesys:bulletin_oct_2012_2]. However, Iran’s international gateways are amongst the most unstable on the Internet, with frequent, short periods of routing failures even during normal operations [@nanog:bgp_update]. Therefore, it is important to differentiate relatively routine failures from protracted and wide-cutting outages. Additionally, as latency is a partial product of the psychical distance of a network path, changes in distances of traffic traversing paths to the global Internet should show as changes in latency. It remains unclear whether these reported disruptions were due to connectivity failures, or downtime due to maintance and application of changes to the network. In the case of the October currency crisis event, these reported failures were short-lived as normal service appears to have been restored within minutes, and little change in latency is measured.
Despite the centralization of domestic peering through the key points of control, Iran has a diversity of physical pathways connecting the country to the global Internet, creating upstream redundancy. A clear demonstration of the effect, and minimal impact for our purposes, of infrastructural failure occurs within our October 2012 event, when an attack against a natural gas pipeline by the Kurdistan Workers Party caused damage to infrastructure providing connectivity through Turkcell Superonline [@renesys:blasts]. While these changes were detected in Figure \[findings:throttling\_events:oct\_2012:throughput\], they were within the tolerance levels established during the ongoing throttling event. This event also appears to be reflected in a marginal increase of the average and minimum round trip times of Figure \[findings:throttling\_events:oct\_2012:rtt\], as clients compete over diminished resources and traverse potentially longer routes to M-Lab servers.
Thus far, we have primarily focused on two extended periods of time for analysis in order to explore the technical metrics outlined in Section \[sec:setup\] in an environment subject to false positives. In Figure \[findings:tablesvalues\], we enumerated those events that triggered our detection mechanism, including shorter term periods without vetting their veracity. As discussed throughout the paper, the deeper we narrow our evaluation to a network-level granularity, the more subject we are to the limitation of the manner in which our data was collected. The longer a detected abnormality lasts, the higher confidence we can assert our results are not aberrant testing, that independent mechanisms are causing peculiarities in network that should not otherwise occur.
![Throughput Variance on Daily Medians per ASN, November 2011 - January 2012[]{data-label="fig:nov11:thuvar"}](resources/IR-Throughput_Variance_2011-11-02-2012-01-31.png){width="\textwidth"}
Applying these lessons, it would appear that a number of false positives, general the result of wide fluctuations in measures, trigger the detection mechanism of one metric but do not register on elsewhere. We remain especially interested in the reported incidents February 2010, March 2010, Feburary 2012, and January 2013. Additionally, we manually identify early April 2010 as an interesting period based on low variance between ISPs, the amount of time spent in a network-congested state and a rapid change in the daily variance of throughput measurements on the top five networks. Other remaining periods of interest consist of short timeframes that bear noteworthy links between metrics, but we cannot confidently assert are meaningful, including several periods in June 2010, late October 2010 and July - August 2011.
![Throughput Variance Amongst Iranian ASNs, February 2011 - May 2011[]{data-label="fig:nov11:var"}](resources/IR-Variance_2010-02-02-2010-05-31.png){width="\textwidth"}
Control Groups {#sec:controlgroups}
--------------
While throttling and disruption of international connectivity may be useful for intermediaries that intend to stifle the free flow information for the general public, Internet-based communications have grown to be a core component of state operations, diplomatic functionalities and international business transactions. The identification and segmentation of critical networks provides a means to mitigate the deleterious effects of communications loss. Traffic prioritization or exemptions to disruptions for white-listed users and protocols should be trivally easy in any modern network appliance. The utilization of such features for non-censoring purposes on Iranian networks is already well documented [@hassani2010qos]. Therefore, we expect that high value networks, such as government ministries and banks, would potentially be spared the majority of disruptions if possible.
Conversely, from the perspective of inferring meaning from raw data, we can posit a diversity of circumstances for why a particular network or client would be less aversely affected by country-level disruptions. Since all connections appear to route through the same intermediaries, those that continue to have normal service likely have been purposefully excluded. However, it remains unclear as to whether throttling occurs at the international gateway or is left to be implemented by the service providers. It may hold that throttling is mandated administratively through the legal authority of the telecommunications regulators, but implemented technically by the service providers. Comments from former staff of Iranian ISPs have indicated that bandwidth restrictions have previously been enforced through an order delivered over the phone or by fax. These claims have gone on to allege that some ISPs, generally smaller and regional providers, delay or limit compliance as they attempt to balance the demands of the state with the possibility of losing customers over poor quality of service.[^7] If certain ISPs are more likely to delay implementation of throttling orders, this may add an indicator to our detection and establish performance disruptions based on intent. In such a scenario, after a mandate is distributed, we would anticipate seeing that larger ISPs enter into periods of throttling before smaller providers.
Were the granularity of our dataset to allow for it, this question would potentially be answered by demonstrating that the majority of networks witnessed changes within a very close promixity of each other due to central coordination of implementation, as opposed to the delays and differing interpretations that may come with diffuse, independent implementation. This would likely require a data source that is statistically valid when reduced to an hourly basis, rather than our daily aggregation in Figure \[findings:throttling\_events:nov\_2011:asn\]. Additionally, this hypothesis requires prefix-level evaluation, and thus inevitably runs into the limitations of passive, crowdsourced datacollection, as smaller networks will have fewer users running NDT tests, thus rendering assessment less truthworthy or responsive. This claim also assumes that smaller ISPs are not subject to the throttling of upstream domestic peers.
![Throughput, Aggregated based on ASN, November 2011 - December 2011[]{data-label="findings:throttling_events:nov_2011:asn"}](resources/IR-ASN_Throughput_November_2011.png){width="\textwidth"}
As M-Lab’s NDT data contains the IP address for clients, we are able to identify those networks within higher tiers of performance, which could then be used to create a control group or baseline in order to track service changes. Using the two significant throttling events described in Section \[sec:throttling\_events\], we then identify networks based on a threshold of 95^th^ percentile of throughput rates, and thus networks that may have priority during disruptions. In order to test this hypothesis, we compare the median throughput rates of our privileged subset against the national median. Since the sample of clients is based on a minority of domestic Internet users and more susceptable to fluctations or misattributions, we are more interested in the trends of these users and the identification of the types of networks they belong to. Figure \[fig:vip:comparative\] demonstrates the relationship between these higher tier services before and after a suspected throttling event. Based on our assumptions of the narrowness of exemption rules, these clients are aggregated within the most restrictive IP prefix available through Team Cymru’s IP to ASN Mapping service [@cymruip].
Appendix Figures \[appendix:vip:before\] and \[appendix:vip:during\] enumerate the number of clients that recorded measurements within the higher percentiles for the country, based on address prefix. As the number of addresses in a prefix varies according to how they were assigned originally, the immediate value of such data is limited. A proper evaluation of the trends of networks requires an understanding of scale and utilization of the network. For example, Parsonline’s *91.98.0.0/15* and *91.99.32.0/19* address prefixes are large consumer IP pools of over 135,000 addresses, across a range of connectivity methods and customer types. It would therefore be less interesting if these networks contained a substantial number of high percentile clients than if a smaller ISP with less customers or peculiar ownership to perform well. Also within this set is Mobin Net, the nationally licensed WiMAX data monopoly, which appears to provide service from 128kbps to 2Mbps packages, far beyond most ADSL offerings.
ASN Owner $\Delta$ $\Delta$ (+2) $\Delta$ (+10) Oct 2012
--------- ------------------------------------------ ---------- --------------- ---------------- ----------
AS12660 Sharif University of Technology -74.64% -70.46% -2.43% -58.62%
AS12880 Information Technology Company (ITC) -95.77% -93.26% -84.94% -91.57%
AS16322 Parsonline -94.26% -91.83% -67.05% -86.46%
AS25124 DATAK Internet Engineering -90.74% -93.42% -76.66% -87.23%
AS25184 Afranet -87.73% -78.46% -32.25% -68.23%
AS29068 University of Tehran Informatics Center -79.99% -90.31% -47.37% -69.43%
AS31549 Aria Rasana Tadbir -94.46% -93.19% -82.86% -91.60%
AS39074 Sepanta Communication Development -89.39% -90.92% -75.06% -91.60%
AS39308 Andishe Sabz Khazar -90.34% -76.92% -82.14% -80.96%
AS39501 Neda Gostar Saba Data Transfer Company -94.29% -89.80% -70.38% -86.13%
AS41881 Fanava Group -79.30% -83.64% -83.98% -73.19%
AS43754 AsiaTech Inc. -89.12% -89.49% -82.57% -86.36%
AS44244 Irancell -87.68% -88.40% -69.52% -77.57%
AS44285 Shahrad Net Company Ltd. -91.81% -85.17% -80.06% -62.23%
AS48159 Telecommunication Infrastructure Company -94.72% -94.76% -89.54% -87.06%
AS49103 Asre Enteghal Dadeha -95.51% -91.48% -71.45% -69.02%
AS50810 Mobin Net Communication Company -95.50% -94.63% -80.26% -91.10%
Thus, for our purposes in assessing the trends of networks, we rely on statistical measurements of relative changes. In the interest of stronger sampling, we rely on larger ASN aggregation and define a threshold for consideration to those that have performed measurements for at least half as many days as the time period. Figure \[finding:nov2011\_asn\_diff\] demonstrates the recovery of network throughput by comparing the mean values of the two month period preceding the November 2011 incident with,
the two months immediately after,
February to April 2012,
August to October 2012,
the comparative degradation of performance during the October 2012 event. Accordingly, between the two months preceding and the first two month following the November 2011 event, every network under consideration experienced more than a 74% drop in througput. Even within those networks (ASNs) that do not meet our qualifications, only one experienced an increase in throughput performance immediately after the November 30 2011 disruption, the prefix 80.191.96.0/19 run by the ITC, which according to reverse DNS records on the block appears to provide commercial hosting services and connectivity for academic institutions, such as Shiraz University.
![Throughput for Sharif University (AS12660), Oct 2011 - Jan 2013[]{data-label="fig:sharif_throttle"}](resources/Sharif-Variance_2011-09-05-2013-02-04){width="\textwidth"}
While no major network appeared to have escaped the events of November 2011 or October 2012, clear trends exist in the level of disruption and the rate of return to normality. Academic institutions, as evinced in Figure \[appendix:vip:before\], have historically had access to faster connectivity prior to the November event [@upen:faa]. Figure \[fig:sharif\_throttle\], the trends for Sharif University of Technology, demonstrates that while the university has been significantly affected by network degradation, it recovered faster than other networks. The networks owned by the Fanava Group, University of Tehran Informatics Center, and Sharif University were the only three to experience less than a 80% decline in throughput. Eight months later, only Sharif, University of Tehran and Afranet had begun to return to their normal levels. This mirrors Figure \[fig:vip:comparative\], where the trend of the mean of the $95^{th}$ percentile of tests was impacted by the throttling at the initial event. However, this subset recovered to an approximation of prior values more quickly than others.
Considering its large consumer dialup and ADSL Internet offerings, on first glance Afranet’s strong recovery is unexpected in comparison to other ISPs, such as Parsonline. While there are no upfront indicators of the type of connection used for a specific client, it is possible to infer the nature of the source or the network it is associated with, from indirect means. First, the registration and announcement of routing information may provide labeling of the use, such as “Shabake Almas Abi,” hinting that the client originated from a smaller ISP that Afranet is the upstream provider for, or “AFR@NET company, Tehran, Dialup pool,” which is most likely a consumer address pool. When we perform reverse DNS queries on the address and prefix, the answers may reveal the owner of the network through the domains pointing to the space. However, any prefix returning more than a marginal number of responses likely indicates that the network is used for commercial purposes, as consumers generally do not host sites on home connections, especially where addresses change dynamically. In our recover period of August to October 2012, the majority of clients performing NDT tests on Afranet originated from the blocks of 217.11.16.0/20 and 80.75.0.0/20, which appear to host the infrastructure or provide connectivity for prominent commercial entities, such as Iranohind and Saipa Automotive, or 79.175.144.0/20 and 31.47.32.0/20, which we suspect to be smaller ISPs or hosting providers. No clients originated from the home and dial up address pools that were identified at 78.109.192.0/20 and 79.175.176.0/24.
Conclusions and Further Questions {#sec:conclusions}
=================================
Absent independent, quantative evidence of claims, Iranian public officials have argued that, “in spite of negative ads and fallacies …recent numbers prove that Internet speed is very satisfactory in Iran,” defying the everyday experience of the public [@citlab2012]. In this paper, we sought to establish a historical, quantitative dataset used to describe a phenomenon that thus far has existed solely in the realm of rumors and anecdote. Immediately upon the most shallow evaluation of the trends, we find frequent and prolonged changes to the service quality of clients originating from Iran. We attempt to account for these changes based on more quotidian explanations of upstream connectivity degradation, domestic infrastructure failure, or increased network traffic. While we do find noteworthy incidences of publicly-reported network outages and diurnal patterns of service quality, these do not account for the length and timing of disruption, or the extent of impact.
In order to test the hypothesis under consideration, we present a number of testable assumptions about how artificial throttling would manifest within our measurements, grounded in an understanding of the technological and administrative principles at work. While we quickly run into frustrations arising from the scope and breadth of our dataset, we are also able to derive an initial set of answers. When we are limited in the confidence of results due to the sample size, origin or consistency of information, then we can narrow our investigation based on the correlation of multiple analyses. Rather than detecting based on simple indicators of throughput or variance, we are required to look at a range of measurements.
By its nature, throttling is opaque occurrence and technical measurements can rarely infer intent, however, the service disruptions documented herein cannot be accounted for within normal expectations of network operations. We establish that the periods of disruption identified are widely applied across all networks but vary in magnitude and recovery, lasting from only a few days to several months. These differences parallel the purpose of the networks, thus implying special consideration of the socioeconomic impact in application of the disruption.
Finally, apart from citing specific historical and infrastructural circumstances, this paper attempts to describe the first steps of a broader framework to account for the stability and accessibility of international connectivity in states that impose limitations on free expression and access to information. As noted by others, Iran is within a large cohort of countries that have centralized international communications transit to a limited set of gateways.
Remaining Questions
-------------------
In order to continue the development of such a monitoring and accountability tool, we anticipate the integration of NDT tests with independent sources of complementary data and solicit input toward a number of outstanding questions:
- **What remaining TCP/IP and NDT indicators apply to throttling?**
Thus far, our indicators have relied largely on a few metrics available from NDT that we anticipated would be directly associated with disruption. This subset does not represent the full suite of measurements and properties available from M-Lab. Of particular interest remains the raw network stream captures retained from the individual NDT tests. We anticipate using the *time to live* (TTL) IP property, a counter that decrements for each router it traverses in order to detect routing loops, to detect changes in the network, as well as monitoring fields that may be manipulated by an intermediary attempting to prioritize traffic, such as the ToS field.
- **What could we learn from vendor documentation?**
The principles undergirding our hypothesis and analysis have largely been derived from the documentation available for the Linux *traffic control* subsystem, which provides the means for the Linux operation system to perform throttling and shaping on egress network traffic. This documentation is especially useful given the wealth of peer-reviewed publications on its implementation concepts, configuration and performance, as well as the proliferation of Linux-based devices at the core of modern public networks. Similar features exist for Cisco devices, under quality of service traffic classes such as *rate-limit* and *traffic-shape* [@ciscoqos], and for Huawei within the *traffic behavior* definitions [@huaweiqos]. Few telecommunications equipment vendors produce network stacks that are written from scratch or ignore the basic principles used for managing traffic flows, such as ‘token bucket’ mechanisms. Furthermore, open source reporting indicates that equipment from both of the prior mentioned manufacturers are core to Iran’s Internet [@wapo:intranet]. Therefore, performance testing, emulation of environments, identification of instruments of implementation and the development of more precise methodologies that are closer to real world conditions can potentially be accomplished using off-the-shelf equipment or documentation if the quality of data allows.
- **What is the correlation between the disruption events and the measured increase of packet loss or latency?**
We have previously asserted that the decrease in performance without a corresponding increase in loss or latency constitutes an abnormal network condition that may represent the imposition of rate limits. However, we do not hold directly that throttling cannot be associated or accomplished through these means. We hold both scenarios as loose relationships, and infact the literature on *traffic control* describes artifical loss as a means of throttling. Routers may police the rate of traffic flows by dropping packets once an assigned buffer is filled. Thus, the relationship between throttling and the factors of loss and latency is nebulous. In the case under consideration, the former is particularly pressing. While during three days in January and February 2010, aggregated measurements register a 100% increase in round trip time within twenty four hour periods, this instability is unmatched within our three year dataset and potentially dismissible due to the small sample size during that time. The rapid degradation of Iran’s connectivity in late November 2011 is associated with over 30% packet loss, a nearly 1000% increase over the preceeding days, only a few days within this period registered less that 10% loss. The October 2012 throttling event fits this theme with a consistent rate of about 10% loss. The only metric of latency that matches the throttling event is the pre-congestion round trip time, which registers a 49% increase, and maximum RTT, -10.5% decrease, in November 2011, but is not paralleled by the measurements of average and minimum time that we focus on.
- **At which level of network infrastructure does throttling occur?**
As we note throughout discussions on Iran’s infrastructure and our findings, rumors and references in public documents have pinpointed some level of throttling occuring on the part of the end-consumer Internet providers. This is to be expected considering that ISPs retain legal responsibilities to police criminal content, with the TCI serving an auxiliary role running its own filtering and deep packet inspection. Thus far, NDT has not clearly provided the granularity of data required to answer this question under the rubric outlined in Section 5.2. Although these records show variations in the extent of disruption, at any level in the path, an administrator would be able to differentiate the rules for handling traffic from different networks. These questions also reflect the frustrations in determining the most narrow application of exemptions to disrupt, as we search for IP prefixes, ASN and even cities that have been less aversely affected by disruption.
- **Is the technical application of disruption rules consistent across domestic ISPs, instances of throttling, and countries?**
Thus far we have avoid asserting a set of properties that we believe are direct and exclusive evidence of intermediary throttling. We have noted at length the difficulties of establishing such confidence within the nature of the test and the opacity of administration. However, we also anticipate variances in implementation. Between any service provider or, more expansively, countries, differences of technical capacity and infrastructure will lead to different opportunities or approaches. The example of Bittorrent throttling by American and European ISPs provides an independent and more thoroughly investigated illustration of the diversity of means available to manipulate the connections that pass through a network, and demonstrates the role of specific equipment in various strategies. Additionally, intent matters. If an intermediary is primarily concerned with disrupting streaming media, Internet telephony or anti-filtering connections, then dropping packets or sending connection resets may be a more efficient approached. Moreover, in such a case, ISPs may even offer their users an initial burst of fast speeds, that are then throttled down. Thus, a universal and explicit formula, as opposed to statistical inference and manual inspection, is unlikely to ever be possible.
- **What is the most appropriate criteria to filter tests for consistency?**
We impose conditions regarding the length and integrity of the records used in our assessment, in order to filter out misleading or error prone measurements. These limitations are: tests that lasted longer than 9 seconds and less than an hour, and exchanged at least 1 packet and less than 120,000 packets. Additionally, it may be useful to impose restrictions based on the M-Lab server, for purposes of consistency in routes and network conditions. However, such a decision would require tests to ensure this does not impede m-labs ability to accommodate changes in international routes. We do not consider upstream tests solely for the sake of brevity, although this direction may be equally important should the throttling of upload connect be a means of curtailing the outward flow of media.
- **What is the future relevance of NDT in monitoring the next generation of throttling?**
Iran’s strategies of censorship have followed a historical trend of increasing precision of disruption. Whereas the June 2009 elections corresponded with a multiple week outage of SMS services, by early Spring 2013 keyword filtering on political slogans or terms associated with controversial issues had become a normal occurrance. The blocking of SSL in February 2012 had shifted to the blocking of SSL to selection networks and the redirection of secure traffic through the interception of DNS requests \[IIIP 1\] . Similiarly, reports of throttling appear more specific, such as SSL or multimedia traffic in general, or SSL to services such as Google \[IIIP 3\]. The more that a censoring intermediary narrows its understanding and limiting of offensive traffic to a ‘black list,’ a strategy that has substantial political and economic value, the less that these disruptions will be reflected within the NDT test. However, a countervaling pressure is presented by the adoption of sophisticated strategies by anti-filtering tools to disguise or randomize their network traffic in a manner that makes deep packet inspection increasingly difficult and costly, such as the obfsproxy mechanism employed by Tor and Psiphon. Without the ability to confidently distinguish normal traffic from privacy-perserving connections that it cannot control, censors may be forced back into more to the broad throttling regime or shifting to a ‘white list’ strategy that NDT would detect.
- **How do we best filter tests for consistency and accuracy?** We limit the records used in our assessment in order to filter out misleading or error prone measurements. Limit the measurements to those downstream tests that lasted longer than 9 seconds and less than an hour, and exchanged at least 1 packet and less than 120,000 packets. Additionally, it may be useful to further limit based on the m-lab server, for purposes of consistency in routes and network conditions. However, such a descision would require tests to ensure this does not impede m-labs ability to accomodate changes in international routes. We do not consider upstream tests solely for the sake of brevity. This direction may be equally important should the throttling of upload connect be a means of curtailing the outflow flow of media.
Acknowledgements
================
This research would not have been possible if not for the substantial contributions of a number of individuals who I am privileged to even know and deeply regret not being able to acknowledge in name; the chilling effect of censorship and state intimidation is not limited to the borders of a country. Fortunately, it is possible to recognize Briar Smith, Meredith Whittaker and Philipp Winter for their technical, professional and moral support, making this matter of curiosity into something more professional, which I hope contributes to the ability of the public to protect such an important medium of expression.
Appendix {#sec:appendix}
========
SHARIF-EDU-NET Sharif University of Technology, Tehran,Iran 213.233.160.0/19 165
------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ -----
NGSAS Neda Gostar Saba Data Transfer Company 188.158.0.0/16 126
UT-AS University of Tehran Informatics Center 80.66.176.0/20 112
SHARIF-EDU-NET Sharif University of Technology, Tehran,Iran 81.31.160.0/19 73
ASIATECH-AS AsiaTech Inc. 79.127.32.0/20 60
PARSONLINE PARSONLINE Autonomous System 91.98.0.0/15 53
IR-ASRETELECOM-AS Asre Enteghal Dadeha 188.34.0.0/17 49
NGSAS Neda Gostar Saba Data Transfer Company 188.159.0.0/16 48
PARSONLINE PARSONLINE Autonomous System 91.99.0.0/19 45
PARSONLINE PARSONLINE Autonomous System 91.99.0.0/16 42
DNET-AS Damoon Rayaneh Shomaj Company LLC 86.57.120.0/21 40
PARSONLINE PARSONLINE Autonomous System 91.98.160.0/19 38
DCI-AS Information Technology Company (ITC) 217.218.0.0/17 37
IR-ASRETELECOM-AS Asre Enteghal Dadeha 188.34.48.0/20 35
PARSONLINE PARSONLINE Autonomous System 91.99.32.0/19 34
IRANGATE Rasaneh Esfahan Net 212.50.244.0/22 33
DCI-AS Information Technology Company (ITC) 78.39.0.0/17 30
DCI-AS Information Technology Company (ITC) 78.39.128.0/17 30
DCI-AS Information Technology Company (ITC) 85.185.0.0/17 30
ASK-AS Andishe Sabz Khazar Autonomous System 95.82.40.0/21 27
DCI-AS Information Technology Company (ITC) 2.176.0.0/16 56
------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ ----
MOBINNET-AS Mobin Net Communication Company 178.131.0.0/16 40
PARSONLINE PARSONLINE Autonomous System 91.98.0.0/15 36
PARSONLINE PARSONLINE Autonomous System 91.99.32.0/19 33
NGSAS Neda Gostar Saba Data Transfer Company 188.158.0.0/16 25
PARSONLINE PARSONLINE Autonomous System 91.98.160.0/19 25
PARSONLINE PARSONLINE Autonomous System 91.99.0.0/19 25
TIC-AS Telecommunication Infrastructure Company 2.185.128.0/19 25
DCI-AS Information Technology Company (ITC) 2.181.0.0/16 24
IUSTCC-AS Iran University Of Science and Technology 194.225.232.0/21 24
TIC-AS Telecommunication Infrastructure Company 2.180.32.0/19 23
DCI-AS Information Technology Company (ITC) 46.100.128.0/17 22
PARSONLINE PARSONLINE Autonomous System 91.99.0.0/16 22
DCI-AS Information Technology Company (ITC) 2.185.0.0/16 21
NGSAS Neda Gostar Saba Data Transfer Company 188.158.96.0/21 21
SHARIF-EDU-NET Sharif University of Technology, Tehran,Iran 213.233.160.0/19 21
DCI-AS Information Technology Company (ITC) 217.218.0.0/17 20
DCI-AS Information Technology Company (ITC) 2.182.32.0/19 19
PARSONLINE PARSONLINE Autonomous System 91.98.208.0/20 19
UT-AS University of Tehran Informatics Center 80.66.176.0/20 19
FANAVA-AS Fanava Group 95.38.32.0/19 18
[^1]: This project received grant funding from the Center for Global Communication Studies at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg School for Communcation and Google Research.
[^2]: Remarks before Mobile World Congress. February 28, 2012
[^3]: While ISPs are the public face of Internet access to the Iranian public, these companies are only one component of a broader domestic telecommunications infrastructure responsible for delivering domestic and international traffic. ISPs interconnect with each other, known as *peering*, to provide accessibility to hosts within their network and share routes for traffic between others. Not all ISPs are consumer-facing, with some infrastructure companies acting as dedicated Internet exchange points (IXPs) between networks.
[^4]: For the purpose of space we have abbrievated the NDT-recorded variables of SndLimTimeRwin, SndLimTimeCwnd, SndLimTimeSnd
[^5]: Based on Hurricane Electric’s public data of the peering of AS12880, of these countries, Iran is only directly connected with Italy
[^6]: We identify as incidents of public protests, the following dates: 2010-02-11, 2010-03-16, 2010-06-12, 2011-02-14, 2011-02-20, 2011-03-01, 2011-03-08, 2012-02-14, 2012-10-01
[^7]: We note these anecdotal stories as a theoretical condition capable of being tested, not as evidence or an asserted mechanism of implementation. Publicly-disclosable documentation of the ISP role in censorship from either tool-makers or former staff has been difficult to source due to the security issues.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
Measurements of black hole spin made using the continuum-fitting method rely on the assumption that the inclination of the black hole’s spin axis to our line of sight is the same as the orbital inclination angle $i$ of the host binary system. The X-ray and radio jet data available for the microquasar XTE J1550–564 offer a rare opportunity to test this assumption. Following the work of others, we have modeled these data and thereby determined the inclination angle $\theta$ of the jet axis, which is presumed to be aligned with the black hole’s spin axis. We find $\theta \approx 71
\degr$ and place an upper limit on the difference between the spin and orbital inclinations of $|\theta - i| < 12$ deg (90% confidence). Our measurement tests for misalignment along the line of sight while providing no constraint perpendicular to this plane. Our constraint on the misalignment angle supports the prediction that the spinning black hole in XTE J1550–564 has aligned itself with the orbital plane and provides support for the measurement of its spin via the continuum-fitting method. Our conclusions are based on a simple and reasonable model of a pair of symmetric jets propagating into a low density cavity whose western wall is $\approx20$% closer to XTE J1550–564 than its eastern wall.
author:
- 'James F. Steiner and Jeffrey E. McClintock'
title: |
Modeling the Jet Kinematics of the Black Hole Microquasar\
XTE J1550-564: A Constraint on Spin-Orbit Alignment
---
Introduction {#section:Intro}
============
Although it is thought that the Galaxy is host to tens of millions of stellar-mass black holes, only about 50 have been discovered [@Ozel_2010]. All of them are accretion-powered X-ray sources that are located in X-ray binary systems. Most such systems, which are similar to our featured black hole binary XTE J1550–564, have short orbital periods ($P \sim 1~{\rm d}$) and are comprised of a low-mass ($\lesssim 1~{\rm M_{\sun}}$) donor star and a $\sim10~{\rm M_{\sun}}$ black hole. A stream of gas from the Roche-lobe-filling star feeds into the outer part of an accretion disk that encircles the black hole. On a time scale of weeks, viscous forces in the disk cause this gas to move radially inward to the center. Within a few hundred kilometers of the black hole, the optically-thick gas reaches a temperature of $\sim10^7$ K and produces an X-ray luminosity that is near the Eddington limit ($L \sim 10^{39}$ erg s$^{-1}$). Accretion onto the black hole is not a steady process: A typical source is luminous for only about a year, and then it fades into a quiescent state for years or decades.
XTE J1550–564 (hereafter J1550) is a much-studied Galactic black-hole transient system that was discovered on 1998 September 6 using the All-Sky Monitor (ASM) onboard the [*Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer*]{} ([*RXTE*]{}). Thereafter, it was observed almost daily during its entire 8-month outburst cycle using [RXTE’s]{} pointed instruments [@Sobczak_2000]. Two weeks into outburst, the source abruptly rose fourfold in intensity and produced a brilliant 7-Crab flare. During this X-ray flare, J1550 was approximately at its Eddington limit for $\approx1$ day [@Steiner_j1550spin_2011]. Four days later, radio observations made using the Australian Long Baseline Array (LBA) revealed relativistic ejecta moving both eastward and westward from J1550 [@Hannikainen_2009]. The two components were observed to be separated by $\sim250$ mas and moving at relative speed of $\mu_{\rm app}\approx65$ mas/d, equivalent to an apparent separation velocity of $\sim1.7$c. Nearly two years later, [[*Chandra *]{}]{}imaging observations revealed large-scale ($\gtrsim 20\arcsec$) relativistic jets undergoing deceleration [@Corbel_2002]. This landmark discovery of a pair of ballistic X-ray jets was the first detection of its kind for a Galactic source.
By modeling an extensive collection of optical and infrared data for J1550, @Orosz_Steiner_2011 have determined the mass of the black hole primary, $M=9.1\pm0.6~{\rm M_{\sun}}$, the distance to the binary, $D=4.38^{+0.58}_{-0.41}~{\rm kpc}$, and the inclination of its orbital plane, $i=74{.\!\!^\circ}7\pm3{.\!\!^\circ}8$. Assuming that the black hole’s spin is aligned with the orbital angular momentum, @Steiner_j1550spin_2011 have measured the spin using the continuum-fitting method to be ${a_{*}}= 0.34^{+0.20}_{-0.28}$, where ${a_{*}}\equiv cJ_{\rm spin}/GM^2$ is the black hole’s dimensionless spin parameter and $J_{\rm spin}$ its angular momentum. Steiner et al. also measured the spin using the independent Fe-line method and find ${a_{*}}= 0.55^{+0.10}_{-0.15}$; taken together, the two measurements imply ${a_{*}}\approx 0.5$. The continuum-fitting method relies on a model for the thermal emission from an accretion disk [@Zhang_1997], while the Fe-line method relies on a model of the relativistically broadened fluorescence features emitted by the disk [@Fabian_1989].
For a black-hole binary system like J1550, with a low-mass companion, the ratio of the orbital angular momentum to the spin angular momentum of the black hole is given by $$J_{\rm orb}/J_{\rm spin} \approx 65~ {a_{*}}^{-1} \left(\frac{M}{10~{\rm M_{\sun}}}\right)^{-4/3}\left(\frac{M_2}{{\rm M_{\sun}}}\right)\left(\frac{P}{1~{\rm d}}\right)^{1/3},$$ where $M_2$ is the mass of the secondary star. For J1550, this ratio is $\approx$50, and thus it is reasonable to expect that, given a means of interaction, the spin of the black hole will eventually come into alignment with the orbital angular momentum. The time scale for this to occur is an important question for continuum-fitting spin measurements because in applying this method one generally must assume that the two vectors are aligned.
If there is an initial misalignment between the spin and the orbital angular momenta, then Lense-Thirring precession will cause the inner X-ray-emitting portion of the disk to line up with the spin of the black hole [@Bardeen_Petterson]. At the same time, at very large scales, the disk will align itself with the orbital plane, and the transition between these regimes will manifest as a warp in the disk. When a misalignment is present, the black hole will be torqued into alignment by the accreting matter acting with a lever arm of order the warp radius (e.g., @Natarajan_Pringle_1998). Using a maximally conservative (minimum-torque) assumption, @Fragos_2010 concluded (based on a population synthesis study) that the spin axes of most black hole primaries will be tilted less than 10$\degr$. Fragos et al. assumed that the torque acts at the innermost stable circular orbit, $R_{\rm ISCO}<6 GM/c^2$ for $a_*>0$, whereas the warp radius has been estimated to be located at $R_{\rm w}
\approx 200 GM/c^2$ [@King_2005; @Lodato_Pringle_2006].
For a typical system, the time scale for accretion to torque the black hole into alignment has been estimated to be $t_{\rm align} \sim
10^{6}-10^{8}$ years (@Martin_j1655_2008 [@Maccarone_2002])[^1]. Therefore, one expects alignment to occur early in the lifetime of an old-population transient system, such as J1550, and that most such systems will presently be well aligned.
It is obviously important to test this theoretical expectation. However, it has proved challenging to obtain a firm measurement of the degree of alignment for any black hole binary. Such a measurement requires a determination of the position angle of the binary on the plane of the sky. While this may be possible in the future for J1550, we lack the requisite orbital astrometric data for the system and are therefore limited to testing for alignment along the line of sight. Measuring the orbital inclination angle of the binary is relatively simple and is routinely done by modeling optical data (e.g., @Orosz_2009). In contrast, it has proved difficult to obtain reliable estimates of the inclination of the inner disk.
Currently, the most direct way of determining the inner-disk inclination is by modeling jet ejecta, which are presumed to be aligned with the black hole’s spin axis. For the case of symmetric ejecta, see the review by @Mirabel_Rodriguez. The jet ejecta that are relevant to this paper are pairs of discrete, detectable condensations of radio-emitting plasma, which we generally refer to in shorthand as “jets.”
An alternative approach to measuring the inner-disk inclination is via the same Fe-line method that is used to measure black hole spin [@Reynolds_Nowak_2003]. However, existing models make simplifying assumptions concerning how the ionization state of the disk varies with radius. Given that there is a degeneracy between ionization and inclination in Fe-line/reflection models for stellar-mass black holes, these inclination estimates are subject to a systematic uncertainty of unknown magnitude. Meanwhile, prospects are good that more advanced reflection models will provide robust estimates of inclination.
Based on observations of radio jets, two confirmed black hole systems, GRO J1655–40 and SAX 1819–2525, are good candidates for hosting misaligned black holes. In the case of GRO J1655–40, using a kinematic model for the jets and measurements of proper motion, @Hjellming_Rupen reported a jet inclination angle of 85$\degr$. However, the authors give no error estimate for either the jet inclination angle or the proper motion. Furthermore, the reliability of the estimate for the jet inclination angle is called into question by the intrinsic and variable asymmetries that were observed for the opposing jets [@Mirabel_Rodriguez]. Taking the 85$\degr$ jet inclination angle at face value, one concludes that the jet axis and orbital vector are misaligned by $>15\degr$ [@Greene_2001].
In the case of SAX J1819–2525, the evidence is less certain. There is only a single observation of extended radio emission (because the source faded promptly). By making the assumption that this emission was associated with a major X-ray outburst that occurred hours earlier, superluminal motion ($\beta_{\rm app} > 10c$) and a misalignment angle of $> 50\degr$ were inferred [@Orosz_v4641_2001; @Hjellming_2000]. However, as @Chaty_2003 have argued, the jet may have been ejected a couple of weeks before the major outburst, in which case the Lorentz factor of the jet was modest and its inclination consistent with the inclination of the binary. This is a reasonable possibility given that the source was observed to be active at optical wavelengths for several weeks before the X-ray outburst.
Compared to the jets in these two systems and those in other Galactic microquasars, the jet ejections observed for J1550 are remarkable. They were observable for years (rather than weeks or months), and therefore their physical separation from J1550 was observed to become exceptionally large. These are possibly the largest resolved jets observed for any black hole when considering the dimensionless distance between them, i.e., $d/M$ (@Hao_Zhang_2009, and see @Heinz_2002). By this measure, the maximum 0.7 pc distance between the jet and J1550 corresponds to 7 Mpc for a supermassive black hole of $10^{8}$ $M_{\odot}$.
In a previous study, @WDL_2003 modeled the evolution and light curve of J1550’s ballistic jets using the same model we employ, namely, an expanding jet interacting with the interstellar medium (ISM). They modeled the data for the eastern jet, attributing the X-ray emission to a reverse shock, and found that the gas density around J1550 is unusually low. Later, their work was extended by @Hao_Zhang_2009 to include the western jet. Both groups focused their attention on the properties of the environment around J1550; accordingly, they adopted nominal and fixed values for jet inclination (50$\degr$ and 68$\degr$, respectively), initial Lorentz factor (3), and jet energy (3.6$\times10^{44}$ erg). Both groups found evidence for the existence of a low density cavity around J1550 (modeled in more detail by Hao & Zhang), and a possible east-west asymmetry in the ambient gas.
While we follow in the footsteps of Wang et al. and Hao & Zhang, our aim is different. We are focused on the question of the alignment of the inclination angle of the black hole’s spin axis and the orbital inclination angle. Therefore, in distinction with the earlier work, we disregard the X-ray light-curve data, which are primarily useful in constraining the emission mechanisms or the electron density and magnetic fields in the jet. Rather, we concentrate on modeling the kinematics of the ballistic jets and deriving reliable values and error estimates for the kinematic parameters. The parameter of chief interest is the inclination of the black hole’s spin axis.
Data {#section:data}
====
We use archival [[*Chandra *]{}]{}[*X-ray Observatory*]{} data for eight observations of J1550 that were obtained using the Advanced CCD Imaging Spectrometer (ACIS) between 2000 June and 2003 October. The exposure times range from $4-50$ ks. Pipeline processed level-2 event files[^2] were used to produce images of the field of J1550. When detected, images of the eastern (approaching) jet yielded 16–40 counts and the western (receding) jet 100–400 counts; J1550 itself was always detected and yielded 60–3000 counts.
These same [[*Chandra *]{}]{}data were used by @Hao_Zhang_2009 in their analysis of the X-ray jets. They relied on the absolute astrometric precision of [[*Chandra *]{}]{}in order to derive positions for each jet and thereby its offset from J1550. We have reduced the astrometric errors severalfold by directly measuring in each image the relative separations between J1550 and the jets.
In measuring the precise jet positions, which are given in Table \[tab:obs\], we smoothed each image using a 1$\arcsec$ Gaussian kernel and then determined the centroid of each jet using the DAOphot [find]{} routine [@DAOPHOT]. This procedure was used to derive initial estimates for all the jet positions. Then, 1000 Poisson random realizations of each field were produced, and the centroid measurements were repeated. In most cases, the positions for a given jet were tightly clustered about a single value, and a separation and error were derived from this distribution. However, for three observations of the eastern jet (Obs. X1, X3, and X6 in Table \[tab:obs\]) the images are particularly faint (possibly because the emission is extended), which resulted in a broad distribution of positions. In these cases, a Gaussian-weighted mean based on the jet position angle $\phi_j$ for each realization $j$ was used to derive the separation between the jet and J1550. As a reference value, we used the average position angle for the jets $\phi_{\rm PA}$ along with its error $\sigma_{\rm PA}$, $\phi_{\rm PA}
= 94{.\!\!^\circ}25 \pm 0{.\!\!^\circ}3$ (measured east of north). This value is consistent with those determined by @Hannikainen_2009 and @Corbel_2002 and was measured for a single frame generated by coaligning and coadding all of the X-ray images. The weights $w_j$ were calculated according to ${\rm log}(w_j) =
-\frac{1}{2}(\phi_j-\phi_{\rm PA})^2/\sigma_{\rm PA}^2$. Typically, the position errors for the eastern jet were several tenths of an arcsec, while for the brighter western jet they were $\lesssim
0.1\arcsec$.
In addition to the positions derived using the [[*Chandra *]{}]{}data, we include in our analysis two radio positions (Obs. R1 and R2 in Table \[tab:obs\]). These measurements are taken from @Corbel_2002, who derived positions from observations obtained using the Australia Telescope Compact Array (ATCA) on 2000 June 1 and 2002 January 29. In the first observation, only the eastern jet is observed, whereas in the second, the eastern jet has faded and the western jet alone is present.
As a final constraint on our kinematic jet model, we require that the apparent separation speed of the jets at launch match the value measured using the LBA, $65.5\pm13.2$ mas/d @Hannikainen_2009. This speed and the jet positions are the sole inputs to our principal model in Section \[section:results\]. However, in Section \[subsec:radio\], we additionally consider radio intensity measurements given by @Hannikainen_2009. They report 2.29 GHz flux densities taken four and six days after the X-ray flare with intensity ratios of $S_{E1}/S_{W1} = 3.55$ and $S_{E2}/S_{W2} = 2.40$, respectively; we assume that these ratios are uncertain by 25%. We also adopt their measurements of the radio spectral index, $\psi_{1} =
-0.43$ and $\psi_{2} = -0.21$, taken from flux densities measured with the ACTA at 4.8 and 8.6 GHz. The spectral index measurements and corresponding LBA images, while not strictly simultaneous, were obtained within several hours of one another.
[lrcc]{} \[tab:obs\] R1 & 620.5 & 21.9$\pm$0.3 &\
X1 & 628.5 & 21.5$\pm$0.5 &\
X2 & 701.4 & 22.7$\pm$0.2 &\
X3 & 722.2 & 23.7$\pm$0.5 &\
R2 & 1227.5 & & 22.6$\pm$0.3\
X4 & 1268.8 & 28.5$\pm$0.2 & 22.78$\pm$0.05\
X5 & 1368.5 & & 23.19$\pm$0.07\
X6 & 1466.0 & 29.6$\pm$0.6 & 23.44$\pm$0.10\
X7 & 1591.3 & & 23.76$\pm$0.10\
X8 & 1859.6 & & 24.4 $\pm$0.2\
The Jet Model {#section:model}
=============
The development of our kinematic jet model follows @Hao_Zhang_2009 and @WDL_2003. The model we use has been designed to describe gamma-ray bursts, but it is applicable to a relativistic, adiabatically expanding jet. To begin, we consider a pair of symmetric jets, each launched with a kinetic energy $E_0$ and Lorentz factor $\Gamma_0$. As the jets expand into their environments, they entrain material from the surrounding medium, dissipate their kinetic energy at the shock front and heat the ISM. We neglect radiative losses and assume that the jets are confined and evolve adiabatically. Following @WDL_2003, we assume that particles are accelerated uniformly and randomly at the shock front. Each such jet obeys the relation $$E_0 = (\Gamma-1) M_0 c^2 + \sigma(\Gamma_{\rm sh}^2-1) m_{\rm sw} c^2,
\label{eq:energy}$$ where $\Gamma$ is the instantaneous bulk Lorentz factor of the jet, $M_0$ is the mass of the jet ejecta, and $\Gamma_{\rm sh}$ is the Lorentz factor at the shock front. The mass of the entrained material, $m_{\rm sw}$, that has been swept up by the shock is approximately $m_{\rm sw} = \Theta^2 m_{\rm p} n \pi R^3/3 $, where $\Theta$ and $R$ are respectively the jet half opening angle and the distance the jet has traveled. The numerical factor $\sigma$ varies from $\approx 0.35$ for ultrarelativistic shocks to $\approx 0.73$ in the nonrelativistic limit [@WDL_2003; @BM76]. Following @Huang_1999, we adopt a simple numerical scaling to interpolate between the two regimes: $\sigma = 0.73 - 0.38 \beta$, ($\beta =
\sqrt{1-1/\Gamma^2}$).
At the shock front, the jump condition relates the bulk Lorentz factor of the jet to that of the shocked gas [@BM76]: $$\Gamma^2_{\rm sh} = \frac{(\Gamma+1)[\hat{\gamma}(\Gamma-1)+1]^2}{\hat{\gamma}(2-\hat{\gamma})(\Gamma-1)+2}.$$ The adiabatic index $\hat{\gamma}$ varies between 4/3 and 5/3, which are respectively its ultrarelativistic and nonrelativistic limits. We interpolate between these regimes via $\hat{\gamma} =
(4\Gamma+1)/3\Gamma$ [@Huang_1999; @WDL_2003; @Hao_Zhang_2009].
On the plane of the sky, the apparent proper motions of the approaching and receding jets, $\mu_a$ and $\mu_r$, are given by $$\mu_{a} = \frac{\beta\ c\ {\rm sin } \theta}{D (1-\beta\ {\rm cos} \theta)}, \qquad \mu_{r} = \frac{\beta\ c\ {\rm sin } \theta}{D (1+\beta\ {\rm cos} \theta)}.$$
As we show in Section \[section:results\], the simple model governed by Eqn. \[eq:energy\] fails to fit the observations. Motivated by the results of @Hao_Zhang_2009 and @WDL_2003, we have generalized Eqn. \[eq:energy\] to allow for the jets to first propagate through a low density cavity before encountering and shocking against the ISM. In the east-west direction, we allow for the cavity to differ in size. We additionally consider the possibility of an intrinsic asymmetry in the jets. Eqn. \[eq:energy\] becomes: $$\eta E_0 = (\Gamma-1) \eta M_0 c^2 + \sigma(\Gamma_{\rm sh}^2-1) m_{\rm sw} c^2, \\
\label{eq:energyupdate}$$ and the entrained mass is now $$m_{\rm sw} = \frac{\Theta^2 m_{\rm p} n \pi}{3} \times \left\{
\begin{array}{l l}
R^3, & \quad R \leq \zeta R_{\rm cr},\\
(\zeta R_{\rm cr})^3 + \delta [R^3 - (\zeta R_{\rm cr})^3], & \quad R > \zeta R_{\rm cr},
\end{array} \right.
\label{eq:mupdate}$$ where $R_{\rm cr}$ and $\delta$ are respectively the radius of the cavity centered on J1550 and the density jump at the cavity boundary. The ratio of the western-to-eastern cavity dimensions is given by $\zeta$. Similarly, $\eta \equiv \frac{(E_0/n\Theta^2)_{\rm
west}}{(E_0/n\Theta^2)_{\rm east}}$ parameterizes the asymmetry of the jets. In application, the asymmetry parameters $\zeta$ and $\eta$ are taken to be unity for the eastern jet and can vary for the western jet.
In order to obtain a model solution for a particular set of parameters, we evolve the energy equation as the jet expands (either Eqn. \[eq:energy\] or Eqn. \[eq:energyupdate\]) in 4-hour time-steps by sequentially solving for $\Gamma(t)$ in the rest frame of J1550. At each time step, we calculate the separation between each jet and the central source by integrating $\beta(t)$ and by calculating the projected angles $\alpha$: $\alpha(t^\prime) =
R(t) {\rm sin}~\theta/D$. Here, $t^\prime = t \mp R(t) {\rm
cos}~\theta/c$ is the observer’s time, which takes into account the time delay between J1550’s rest frame and that of the observer for whom the light-travel paths of the approaching and receding jets are respectively shortened and elongated.
Our model requires up to eight physical parameters: $\theta$, $\Gamma_0$, $D$, $R_{\rm cr}$, $\delta$, $\eta$, $\zeta$, and lastly the “effective energy” $\tilde{E}$ which we now define. As alluded to above, a degeneracy exists in our model between jet energy, ambient gas density, and the jet opening angle. These three quantities appear as a single and inseparable term in the kinematic equations, $E_0/ n
\Theta^2$. To make physical sense of this combined quantity, we assume that the density of the ISM is a standard $n_{\rm ISM} = 1\
{\rm cm}^{-3}$, so that $n=1/\delta$ cm$^{-3}$, and adopt $\Theta =
1\degr$ (@Kaaret_2003). Predicated upon our assumed values for $n_{\rm ISM}$ and $\Theta$, the jet energy $E_0$ is then $E_0 =
\tilde{E}$.
Finally, we go beyond our principal, kinematic model to consider the ratio of the radio intensities of the two jets. We consider the simplest case of the ejection of a pair of identical and unimpeded condensations. When measured at equal separation from the black hole, one has $$\frac{S_a}{S_r} = \left(\frac{1+\beta\ {\rm cos}\ \theta}{1-\beta\ {\rm cos}\ \theta}\right)^{3-\psi},
\label{eq:radio}$$ where $\psi$ is the spectral index and the subscripts $a$ and $r$ refer to the approaching and receding jets, which are taken to be discrete ejecta [@Mirabel_Rodriguez]. Because the jets are observed at unequal distances from the black hole, we must adopt a model of how jet intensity varies with time; we assume a simple power-law dependence. Then, allowing for our case of intrinsically asymmetric jets, Eqn. \[eq:radio\] becomes $$\frac{S_a}{S_r} = \left[\frac{\Gamma_r(1+\beta_r\ {\rm cos}~\theta)}{\Gamma_a(1-\beta_a\ {\rm cos}~\theta)}\right]^{3-\psi-\Delta} \eta^q,
\label{eq:radioupdate}$$ where $\Delta$ is a fit parameter, which for positive values describes a decay in brightness with time. The effect of jet asymmetry on the radio emission is captured by $q$, which can range from -1 to 1.5 depending on the source of asymmetry: $E_0$ ($q=-1$), $n$ ($q=0$), or $\Theta$ ($q\in[1,1.5]$).
Markov Chain Monte Carlo {#section:mcmc}
========================
Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) is a powerful statistical technique by which random samples are drawn from a posterior distribution of arbitrary form. In our case, the posterior distribution is the probability of our model parameters, given the data. MCMC algorithms perform a “guided walk” of transitions through parameter space such that, after an initial burn-in phase, the chain directly reproduces the likelihood surface for the model. MCMC has several advantages over traditional gridded-search algorithms when the number of parameters is large. For example, the search time with MCMC scales approximately linearly with the number of parameters rather than exponentially [@Martinez_2009]. Furthermore, the ergodic property of the Markov Chain guarantees (asymptotically) that the chain will fully explore parameter space and reach the optimum global solution.
Transitions in the chain are effected via a “jump” distribution[^3] $J(x^* | x_n)$ (e.g., a multivariate Gaussian) that defines a probability of selecting a candidate transition to a new state $x^*$ given the current state $x_n$. The transition probability from $x_n$ to $x^*$ is governed by the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm [@MH] and is determined by the ratio $r$ of probability densities $$r = \frac{ p(x^* | y ) J(x_n | x^*) }{ p(x_n | y) J(x^* | x_n) },
\label{eqn:MH}$$ where $y$ refers to the data, and $p(a | b)$ should be read in the usual way as the probability of $a$ given $b$. The term $p(x^* |
y)/p(x_n | y)$ in the equation above gives the likelihood ratio of the two states, while the remaining term corrects for bias introduced by the jump-distribution density at each state. The state of the next link in the chain, $x_{n+1}$, is then chosen according to $$x_{n+1} = \left\{
\begin{array}{l l}
x^*, & \quad {\rm with~probability~min}[r,1],\\
x_n, & \quad {\rm otherwise }.
\end{array} \right.
\label{eqn:select}$$ The likelihood ratio appearing in Eqn. \[eqn:MH\] is calculated by evaluating the $\chi^2$ for each state while taking into account the prior $\wp$ on all of the model parameters. In this case, the priors are introduced independently so that $\wp \equiv
\displaystyle\prod_{k=1}^{\rm N} \wp_k$, where N is the number of parameters and $\wp_k$ gives the prior for parameter $k$. Omitting additive constants, the log-likelihood for state $x$ is $${\rm log}\left(p(x | y)\right) = -\frac{1}{2}\left[\chi^2(x) - 2~ {\rm log}\left(\wp(x)\right)\right].
\label{eqn:lik}$$
MCMC in Practice
----------------
As Eqn. \[eqn:lik\] makes apparent, the prior acts as a penalty to $\chi^2$, and for the special case that a prior is “flat” (i.e., independent of $x$), one recovers the usual least-squares formula. It is also worth noting that because the prior only enters into the MCMC chain generation as a ratio (Eqn. \[eqn:MH\]) the scaling of the prior is arbitrary. We introduce a new term for this penalized $\chi^2$, namely $\chi^2_\wp$, such that $$\chi^2_\wp(x)\equiv\chi^2(x) - 2~ {\rm log}\left(\wp(x)\right).$$ Unless stated otherwise, we choose to normalize the prior so that the penalty term (2 log$\left[\wp(x)\right]$) is zero at the best fit, i.e., at the minimum value of $\chi^2_\wp$.
We adopt an asymmetric Gaussian prior on the distance because it has been previously measured using optical and near-infrared photometry (see Section \[section:Intro\]; @Orosz_Steiner_2011). For the asymmetric terms, we adopt a log-flat prior on the difference from unity, i.e., $\wp_\eta \propto {\rm min}[1/\eta,\eta]$ (and likewise for $\wp_\zeta$). As an example and stated differently, we consider a term implying a 10-fold asymmetry to be [*a priori*]{} one tenth as likely as one that is symmetric. We adopt flat priors on $\theta$ and $R_{\rm cr}$ and flat priors on the log-values of scale parameters (i.e., the jet energy, $\Gamma_0$ and $\delta$). The priors and parameter ranges[^4] are discussed further and illustrated in Section \[section:results\].
In order to initialize the chain and the jump distribution, we make starting guesses for the model parameters and step sizes. These initial values are improved upon by running a sequence of “training” iterations. The training phase incrementally improves the jump function until its shape is a close approximation to the posterior covariance matrix, thereby greatly increasing the MCMC efficiency. The sequence becomes increasingly tuned to the likelihood surface, simultaneously refining $\Sigma$ (the covariance estimate)[^5] and optimizing the solution.
The training phase continued for a minimum of 15 iterations, each of which generated a trial chain with 2000 elements. Training terminated either after 25 cycles were completed or when the chain attained an acceptance fraction between 24% and 37%[^6].
Upon completing the training cycle, 8 chains were generated and run in parallel using the trained jump function, each to a length of 110 thousand elements. Seven of the starting positions were chosen by sampling using a dispersed covariance $\Sigma^\prime=10~\Sigma$ about the final training position, and the eighth was started directly from the end location reached by the training sequence. The initial 10,000 elements of each chain were rejected as the “burn-in” phase during which the chains relax toward a stationary distribution. Our final results are based on a total of 8$\times10^5$ MCMC samples. Convergence of the MCMC run is determined using the criterion of @Gelman_Rubin, $\hat{R}$. The closeness of this criterion to unity is the measure of convergence.
In Figure \[fig:convergence\], we plot a trace of our parallel runs over time for inclination in our adopted model (see Section \[section:results\]). In the bottom panel, we show the Gelman & Rubin convergence diagnostic of the chain over time. Typically, a chain is considered converged if $\hat{R}\leq1.1$, or 1.2 (see, e.g., @Verde_2003)[^7]. For $\theta$, our parameter of interest, we obtain $\hat{R} < 1.01$.
[![[*top*]{}: The trace of $\theta$ for Model AC of Section \[section:results\]. Eight parallel chains are used; for each, the initial $10^4$ elements are generated during the burn-in phase and discarded from the analysis. [*bottom*]{}: The convergence of the chain over time. The chains reach convergence quickly, which is indicative of efficient sampling.[]{data-label="fig:convergence"}](fig1.eps "fig:"){width="8.85cm"}]{}
[![The best-fitting model and fit residuals for the eastern jet (filled circles) and western jet (open circles). The cavity locations are marked by dashed horizontal lines, which indicate that the western wall (for the receding jet) is closer to the black hole than the eastern wall. For clarity, residuals for the coincidentally detected eastern and western jets are shown slightly offset in time. In the top panel, the error bars are smaller than the symbols.[]{data-label="fig:fit"}](fig2.eps "fig:"){width="8.85cm"}]{}
[![MCMC results for Model AC. Probability densities are shown for each parameter on an arbitrary scale and have been obtained by marginalizing over all other parameters. An overlay for each prior shape is drawn as a dashed line. Note that the only two parameters which closely track the prior function are the system distance and $\Gamma_0$ (at high values only). Otherwise, the prior contributes minimally to the parameter distribution. []{data-label="fig:mcmcresults"}](fig3.eps "fig:"){width="8.85cm"}]{}
Results {#section:results}
=======
In this section we consider three symmetric-jet models, including our adopted model. For these models, and for the additional models discussed in the following section, we assume that the jets were launched at the time of J1550’s giant X-ray flare (Section \[section:Intro\]).
Two Preliminary Models
----------------------
We first consider and rule out two simple models. For the simpler of these, which we refer to as Model S1, the jets are symmetric and propagate through a uniform medium (Eqn. \[eq:energy\]; i.e., $\eta =
\zeta = \delta =1$ and $R_{\rm cr}=0$). The strong deceleration of the jets at late times is not accommodated by this model, and the best fit achieved is unacceptable, ${\chi_\wp^{2}/\nu}= 68$. For Model S2, we introduce a symmetric cavity centered on J1550 with $\delta$ and $R_{\rm cr}$ as free fit parameters. The fit is significantly improved, ${\chi_\wp^{2}/\nu}= 42$, but it is still far from acceptable. The results for both models are given in Table \[tab:results\].
Our Adopted Model
-----------------
We now consider our primary model – an extension of Model S2 that allows the source to be positioned off-center in the cavity. This asymmetric cavity model (Model AC) is obtained by freeing the fit parameter $\zeta$ (while leaving $\eta$ fixed at unity; see Eqn. \[eq:energyupdate\]). As illustrated in Figure \[fig:fit\], for a modest (22%) degree of asymmetry, this model produces a successful fit to the data with ${\chi_\wp^{2}/\nu}= 1.44$. Results are given in Table \[tab:results\] and marginal distributions from the MCMC run are shown for each parameter in Figure \[fig:mcmcresults\].
The eastern and western cavity walls are located respectively at $0.6$ pc and $0.5$ pc from the black hole and the density contrast at the boundary of the cavity is $\sim100$. The gas density within the cavity is much lower than that of the ISM. This must be the case in order for the jets to have passed through without sweeping up enough mass to halt their expansion. Motion within the cavity lasted for $\approx$1.5 years (in the frame of J1550), until the receding western jet impacted the dense ISM at its cavity wall and abruptly began decelerating in advance of its eastern counterpart (see Fig. \[fig:fit\]).
The total energy for both jets is an impressive $E_{\rm tot} \approx
10^{46}~{\rm erg}~ \frac{n_{\rm ISM}}{1 {\rm cm}^{-3}}
\left(\frac{\Theta}{1~\rm{deg}}\right)^2$. At launch, the Lorentz factor of the jets is constrained to be $\Gamma_0 > 1.6$ (99.7% confidence). However, the data provide no upper limit on $\Gamma$, as implied by Figure \[fig:mcmcresults\], which shows that for large values of $\Gamma$ the distribution closely tracks the prior. Likewise, the data only weakly constrain J1550’s distance. However, the remaining five parameters are well determined by the data and are quite independent of their priors (Fig. \[fig:mcmcresults\]). For the key parameter, the jet inclination angle, we obtain $\theta
\approx 71\degr$ ($64\degr < \theta < 83\degr$ at 90% confidence) and find only moderate correlations with the other fit parameters. The strongest of these correlations are with $\zeta$ and with $R_{\rm
cr}$, which are illustrated in Figure \[fig:contours\].
Constraining Spin-Orbit Alignment
---------------------------------
We now use Model AC and the results of our MCMC analysis to examine the relationship between the spin axis of the black hole (the same as that of the jet; see Section \[section:Intro\]), and the orbital angular momentum vector. We assume that the inclination of the orbital plane $i$ is Gaussian distributed: $i=74{.\!\!^\circ}7\pm3{.\!\!^\circ}8$ [@Orosz_Steiner_2011].
Our constraints on the locations of both axes are illustrated in Figure \[fig:globe\], which was derived using one million Monte-Carlo draws to represent each axis. This figure shows how readily our results are able to falsify the alignment hypothesis, even though we lack a measurement of the position angle of the orbital plane. Specifically, (1) over 80% of the sky, we are able to rule out the possibility that the spin and orbital axes are aligned[^8]; and (2) the probability by random chance that the inclination angles agree so closely (see Fig. \[fig:tilt\]) is less than 10%.
Because the continuum-fitting method depends only on inclination angle (and not position angle), and because the difference between the inclination $\theta$ of the spin/jet axis and the inclination $i$ of the orbital plane is of critical importance in measuring the spin of J1550, we now use Model AC to determine $\theta - i$. Our results are shown in Figure \[fig:tilt\] where it is obvious that there is no evidence for any misalignment along the line of sight. That is, our results are consistent with $\theta=i$. We place upper limits on the absolute difference between orbital and spin inclinations of $8\degr$ and $12\degr$ at the 68% and 90% levels of confidence, respectively.
Given the $<10$% a priori chance that the inclination angles agree as closely as measured, our results provide support for the hypothesis that the two axes are aligned. However, without knowledge of the position angle of the binary axis (which can lie anywhere along the grey band in Fig. \[fig:globe\]), we cannot conclude whether they are, in fact, aligned.
[![Shown for Model AC are the MCMC density contours for the two parameters that correlate most strongly with inclination: cavity size $R_{\rm cr}$ and the cavity asymmetry parameter $\zeta$. The densities are calculated by marginalizing over all unshown parameters. Red contours mark the 68%, 95%, and 99.7% confidence regions about the most likely value, which is normalized to a density of unity. The central value of $\theta$ changes from 70$\degr$ to 80$\degr$ as $R_{\rm cr}$ varies from 0.65 pc to 0.58 pc, and as $\zeta$ decreases from 0.78 to 0.74. []{data-label="fig:contours"}](fig4.eps "fig:"){width="8.85cm"}]{}
[![ The celestial sphere centered about J1550 with the observer situated along the pole. The angular momentum of the orbital plane is constrained to lie along the grey band (drawn with 1$\sigma$ width), and the spin angular momentum axis derived from the jets is overlaid in red (1$\sigma$ about the most likely value). The position angle is completely unbounded for the orbital angular momentum, whereas the jets provide a tight constraint on the position angle of the black hole’s spin axis (Section \[section:data\]). In fact, the uncertainty in the position angle of the jets is so small ($\pm0.3$ deg) that for purposes of illustration it has been tripled to make it visible in this figure.[]{data-label="fig:globe"}](fig5.eps "fig:"){width="8.85cm"}]{}
[![The difference in orbital and jet inclination angles derived from the MCMC run of Model AC. The results show no sign of a misalignment along the line of sight; 68% and 90% upper limits on the difference between inclinations are $8\degr$ and 12$\degr$, respectively. []{data-label="fig:tilt"}](fig6.eps "fig:"){width="8.85cm"}]{}
[lccccccccccc]{} \[tab:results\] $\theta$ (degrees) & $0 - 89.99$ & F & $53.9\pm0.7$ & $58.16\pm1.7$ & $70.8_{-4.5}^{+7.3}$\
$\Gamma_0$ & $1 - 1000$ & LF & $210^{+390}_{-160}$ & $50_{-43}^{+320}$ & $36_{-32}^{+300}$\
$\tilde{E}\tablenotemark{b} $ ($10^{45}$ erg) & $10^{-10} - 10^{10}$ & LF & $91.8^{+9.6}_{-6.7} $ & $ 74^{+18}_{-14} $ & $ 5.9_{-2.3}^{+3.6}$\
$D $ (kpc) & $3 - 7$& N(4.38$^{+0.58}_{-0.41}$) & $3.07\pm0.06$ & $4.30_{-0.23}^{+0.29}$ & $ 4.48_{-0.34}^{+0.43}$\
$R_{\rm cr}$ (pc) & $0 - 5$ & LF & & $0.46\pm0.03$ & $ 0.63\pm0.06$\
$\delta $ & $0.1 - 10^4$ & LF & & $940_{-790}^{+4900}$ & $104_{-34}^{+70} $\
$\zeta $ & $10^{-2} - 10^2$ & LF (max\[$\zeta$,$\zeta^{-1}$\]) & & & $ 0.78\pm0.03$\
min(${\chi_\wp^{2}/\nu}$) & & & 67.93 (543.4/8) & 41.59 (249.6/6) & 1.44 (7.21/5)\
min(${\chi^{2}/\nu}$) & & & 67.61 & 40.94 & 1.22
Radio Intensities and Asymmetric-Jet Models {#subsec:radio}
===========================================
We now consider the radio intensity measurements discussed in Section \[section:data\] in order (1) to identify any intrinsic asymmetry in the jets and (2) to check the consistency of our kinematic model. In doing this, we are motivated by observations of the microquasar GRO J1655–40, which in 1994 displayed multiple ejection events, each of which expanded and decayed on a time scale of a few days. The approaching and receding jets were found to be intrinsically asymmetric; additionally, the sense of the asymmetry changed from event to event [@Hjellming_Rupen; @Mirabel_Rodriguez].
Before introducing intrinsic jet asymmetry into the model, we first proceed by extending Model AC to create Model RAC. This latter model retains the traits of Model AC but now incorporates Eqn. \[eq:radioupdate\] and uses the additional free parameter $\Delta$ to model the radio data. The data set for Model RAC is likewise extended and includes its two radio intensity measurements (Section \[section:data\]; @Hannikainen_2009). Re-fitting the data using Model RAC and comparing with the results obtained for Model AC, we find a slight ($2\degr$) increase in the jet angle and similar small changes in the other parameters (Table \[tab:moreresults\]). The fit is good, ${\chi_\wp^{2}/\nu}= 1.44$, and $\Delta$, the decay rate of the jet emission, is positive and in the range $\approx1-5$.
We now examine intrinsic jet asymmetry, and introduce Model RAJ, a model that considers both kinematics and radio emission. In this case, the cavity is presumed to be symmetric, while the energy term ($E_0/n\Theta^2$) is allowed to vary between the eastern and western jets. Specifically, we set $\zeta = 1$, free $\eta$, and introduce the parameter $q$, which characterizes the type of asymmetry in the jets (Eqn. \[eq:radioupdate\]). The fit results for Models RAC and RAJ are shown in Table \[tab:moreresults\]. Model RAJ returns a significantly larger jet inclination angle than Model RAC, $\theta
\approx 82\degr$, and it implies a large difference between the eastern and western jets, $\eta^{-1} \sim15$. Because $q\approx0$, for this model the gross asymmetry can be attributed to an east-west difference in the gas density (rather than an asymmetry in the energies or opening angles of the jets; see Section \[section:model\]).
To assess the performance of Model RAC relative to Model RAJ, we exploit the similarities in the way these models are structured. In particular, their respective priors have identical form. Therefore, because we attribute equal likelihood to either type of asymmetry, we can apply the penalty normalization from Model RAC to Model RAJ. This yields the goodness-of-fit results shown in Table \[tab:moreresults\]. Model RAJ is effectively ruled out: min($\chi2_{\wp, {\rm RAJ}}) - $min($\chi2_{\wp, {\rm RAC}}) = 8.2$.
We now test the strength of this result by considering a kinematic-only variant of this asymmetric-jet model, Model AJ, which ignores the radio intensity data. Model AJ has the virtue that it can be directly compared with our primary model, Model AC, because both models have the same number of parameters (seven) and their priors are identically structured. As in the comparison above, we apply the penalty normalization of Model AC (Section \[section:results\]) to Model AJ. The fit results for the two models are given respectively in Tables \[tab:results\] and \[tab:moreresults\]. Based on the substantial difference in $\chi2_\wp$, min($\chi2_{\wp, {\rm AJ}}) -
$min($\chi2_{\wp, {\rm AC}}) = 7.5$, and the even larger difference obtained when the radio-intensity data are included, we conclude that the asymmetric cavity model is favored over the asymmetric jet model at the $99\%$ level of confidence.
Unlike the manifestly asymmetric jets of GRO J1655–40, the available evidence indicates that the jets of J1550 are likely intrinsically symmetric: Model AC is favored over Model AJ, and Model RAJ implies an implausibly large (factor of 15) difference in the density of the ISM from west to east.
In comparison with Model AJ or RAJ, our adopted Model AC gives a reasonable and satisfying description of J1550 as a system comprised of intrinsically symmetric jets propagating through an evacuated cavity with eastern and western walls located out at 0.6 pc and 0.5 pc, respectively.
[lccccccccccc]{} \[tab:moreresults\] $\theta$ (degrees) & $86.2_{-3.1}^{+2.4}$ & $72.8_{-5.4}^{+7.4}$ & $81.9_{-6.8}^{+5.1} $\
$\Gamma_0$ & $22_{-19}^{+270}$ & $37_{-33}^{+390}$ & $1.41_{-0.14}^{+0.33} $\
$\tilde{E}\tablenotemark{a} $ ($10^{45}$ erg) & $213_{-65}^{+83}$ & $6.1_{-2.3}^{+3.8}$ & $80_{-34}^{+30} $\
$D $ (kpc) & $4.83\pm0.36$ & $4.49_{-0.35}^{+0.43}$ & $3.57_{-0.44}^{+0.50} $\
$R_{\rm cr}$ (pc) & $0.46\pm0.05$ & $0.63\pm 0.06$ & $0.35_{-0.05}^{+0.04} $\
$\delta $ & $510_{-410}^{+1700}$ & $98_{-30}^{+57}$ & $740_{-590}^{+3300} $ &\
$\zeta $ & & $0.78\pm0.03$ &\
$\eta $ & $0.065\pm 0.014$ & & $0.068_{-0.013}^{+0.016}$\
$\Delta$ & & $1.9_{-1.1}^{+3.2}$ & $1.8_{-6.5}^{+5.3} $\
$q$ & & & $-0.28_{-0.35}^{+0.52} $\
min(${\chi_\wp^{2}/\nu}$) & 2.95 (14.74/5) & 1.44 (8.63/6) & 3.36 (16.81/5)\
min(${\chi^{2}/\nu}$) & 1.11 & 1.11 & 1.31
Discussion {#section:discussion}
==========
If we assume that the jets were produced continuously over the day-long Eddington-limited X-ray flare [@Steiner_j1550spin_2011], then the nominal total jet energy of $\approx 10^{46}$ erg implies that a significant fraction of the mass accreted onto J1550 during the flare was directly used to fuel the jets. Roughly, the initial mass in the jets was then $\sim 10^{24}$ g and the matter was accelerated to $\Gamma_0\sim10$.
We note that the moderate asymmetry we find (with the western cavity $\approx20$% smaller in radius than the eastern) is opposite in sense from the asymmetry determined by @Hao_Zhang_2009. We attribute this difference to several factors: Hao & Zhang simply adopted reasonable, ad-hoc values for several key parameters ($\theta$, $\tilde{E}$, and $\Gamma_0$), and they found a high degree of asymmetry with $\eta^{-1} \approx 30$ and $\zeta = 1.4$. (We note that this particular pair of values of $\eta$ and $\zeta$ allowed a reasonable fit to be achieved to their data set.) By improving the quality and quantity of the astrometric data, we were able to determine that just one asymmetry parameter is required to explain the data, and that the resultant asymmetry is less extreme.
Based on results obtained for the sub-pc scale ($\lesssim 0.1$ pc) jets of GRS 1915+105 and GRO J1655–40, @Heinz_2002 has proposed that black hole microquasars preferentially inhabit environments that are under-dense compared to their AGN counterparts. Heinz offers several explanations, notably that microquasars may produce self-encasing low density bubbles either as a remnant of the birthing supernova explosion, or via persistent kinetic outflows from the compact source.
The enthalpy of the low density cavity in J1550, $\sim10^{40}-10^{42}$ erg, is likely maintained by the steady (or quasi-steady) AU-scale jets known to be present in the hard or quiescent state of black hole binaries [@RM06; @Gallo_2006]. The $\sim20\%$ measured asymmetry in the east-west extent of the cavity is unlikely to be a result of a high proper motion of the binary because this would require an extreme velocity $\sim 0.1c$. Rather, this asymmetry is easily explained as arising from a moderate 20% variation in the density of the ISM across the pc-scale region spanned by the jets. This supposition is quite plausible, given that J1550 is located only $\sim140$ pc from the Galactic plane.
One interesting feature of our best-fitting model is shown in Figure \[fig:fit\]: The onset of X-ray emission for the western jet is first observed after the jet has reached the outer wall of the cavity, whereas for the eastern jet it occurs well before reaching the outer wall. Although there is not enough data to draw a firm conclusion, this difference in behavior suggests that our model oversimplifies by describing a succession of low-grade density jumps (from previous episodes of jet activity) as one single jump at $R_{\rm
cr}$. Alternatively, perhaps one or several dense filaments of gas breached the eastern cavity walls, causing X-ray brightening at the shock front, but without contributing appreciable mass.
We close our discussion by noting again that our lack of knowledge of the position angle of the binary restricts us to testing for spin-orbit alignment along the line of sight. The test we have performed nevertheless provides important support for the continuum-fitting measurement of J1550’s spin, which used the orbital inclination angle as a proxy for the inclination of the black-hole spin axis [@Steiner_j1550spin_2011]. For the case of J1550, we have shown that these two inclination angles are consistent within several degrees.
Conclusions
===========
Building on earlier work by @Hao_Zhang_2009 and @WDL_2003, we have used [[*Chandra *]{}]{}and radio imaging data to model the ballistic motion of the jets of J1550. We take the time of J1550’s giant X-ray flare, which was promptly accompanied by the ejection of small-scale ($\sim1000$ AU) relativistic radio jets, as the launch date of the large-scale ballistic jets. Using our MCMC code and a kinematic model of the jets, we find that J1550 is enclosed in a pc-scale cavity that is moderately asymmetric, and that the jets are inclined by between 64$\degr$ and 83$\degr$ to our line of sight (90% confidence). These impulsive jets are extremely energetic, having been launched with a total energy of $\sim10^{46}~{\rm erg}~
\frac{n_{\rm ISM}}{1 {\rm cm}^{-3}}
\left(\frac{\Theta}{1~\rm{deg}}\right)^2$.
By comparing our derived inclination angle for the spin axis of the black hole (taken to be the jet inclination angle) to the orbital inclination angle, we arrived at our primary result: We find no evidence for misalignment in our comparison of orbital and jet inclinations, and we conclude that the spin and orbital inclinations differ by $<12$ degrees (90% confidence). This result has a likelihood of less than 10% of occurring by chance.
Theory predicts that accretion torques acting over time will have brought most black holes into alignment with the orbital plane of their binary hosts. This prediction underpins the continuum-fitting method. In the case of J1550, our results provide support for such alignment and for the measured spin of its black hole primary.
JFS was supported by the Smithsonian Institution Endowment Funds and JEM acknowledges support from NASA grant NNX11AD08G. We thank Bob Penna, Sasha Tchekovskoy, and Ramesh Narayan for constructive ideas which helped shaped the direction of this work, and both Joey Neilsen and Lijun Gou for their comments on the manuscript. We thank an anonymous referee for helpful feedback which has improved this paper. The MCMC analyses were run using the Odyssey cluster supported by the FAS Science Division Research Computing Group at Harvard University.
[37]{} natexlab\#1[\#1]{}
, J. M., & [Petterson]{}, J. A. 1975, , 195, L65
, R. D., & [McKee]{}, C. F. 1976, Physics of Fluids, 19, 1130
, S., [Charles]{}, P. A., [Mart[í]{}]{}, J., [Mirabel]{}, I. F., [Rodr[í]{}guez]{}, L. F., & [Shahbaz]{}, T. 2003, , 343, 169
, S., [Fender]{}, R. P., [Tzioumis]{}, A. K., [Tomsick]{}, J. A., [Orosz]{}, J. A., [Miller]{}, J. M., [Wijnands]{}, R., & [Kaaret]{}, P. 2002, Science, 298, 196
, A. C., [Rees]{}, M. J., [Stella]{}, L., & [White]{}, N. E. 1989, , 238, 729
, T., [Tremmel]{}, M., [Rantsiou]{}, E., & [Belczynski]{}, K. 2010, , 719, L79
, E., [Fender]{}, R. P., [Miller-Jones]{}, J. C. A., [Merloni]{}, A., [Jonker]{}, P. G., [Heinz]{}, S., [Maccarone]{}, T. J., & [van der Klis]{}, M. 2006, , 370, 1351
Gelman, A., Roberts, G., & Gilks, W. 1996, in Bayesian Statistics, ed. J. M. Bernado [et al.]{}, Vol. 5 (OUP), 599
Gelman, A., & Rubin, D. 1992, Statistical Science, 7, 457
, J., [Bailyn]{}, C. D., & [Orosz]{}, J. A. 2001, , 554, 1290
, D. C., [et al.]{} 2009, , 397, 569
, J. F., & [Zhang]{}, S. N. 2009, , 702, 1648
Hastings, W. 1970, Biometrika, 97
, S. 2002, , 388, L40
, R. M., & [Rupen]{}, M. P. 1995, , 375, 464
, R. M., [et al.]{} 2000, , 544, 977
, Y. F., [Dai]{}, Z. G., & [Lu]{}, T. 1999, , 309, 513
, P., [Corbel]{}, S., [Tomsick]{}, J. A., [Fender]{}, R., [Miller]{}, J. M., [Orosz]{}, J. A., [Tzioumis]{}, A. K., & [Wijnands]{}, R. 2003, , 582, 945
, A. R., [Lubow]{}, S. H., [Ogilvie]{}, G. I., & [Pringle]{}, J. E. 2005, , 363, 49
, G., & [Pringle]{}, J. E. 2006, , 368, 1196
, T. J. 2002, , 336, 1371
, R. G., [Tout]{}, C. A., & [Pringle]{}, J. E. 2008, , 387, 188
, V. J., [Saar]{}, E., [Mart[í]{}nez-Gonz[á]{}lez]{}, E., & [Pons-Border[í]{}a]{}, M.-J., eds. 2009, Lecture Notes in Physics, Berlin Springer Verlag, Vol. 665, [Data Analysis in Cosmology]{}
, I. F., & [Rodr[í]{}guez]{}, L. F. 1999, , 37, 409
, P., & [Pringle]{}, J. E. 1998, , 506, L97
, J. A., [et al.]{} 2001, , 555, 489
—. 2009, , 697, 573
, J. A., [Steiner]{}, J. F., [McClintock]{}, J. E., [Torres]{}, M. A. P., [Remillard]{}, R. A., [Bailyn]{}, C. D., & [Miller]{}, J. M. 2011, , 730, 75
, F., [Psaltis]{}, D., [Narayan]{}, R., & [McClintock]{}, J. E. 2010, , 725, 1918
, R. A., & [McClintock]{}, J. E. 2006, , 44, 49
, C. S., & [Nowak]{}, M. A. 2003, , 377, 389
, G. J., [McClintock]{}, J. E., [Remillard]{}, R. A., [Cui]{}, W., [Levine]{}, A. M., [Morgan]{}, E. H., [Orosz]{}, J. A., & [Bailyn]{}, C. D. 2000, , 544, 993
, J. F., [et al.]{} 2011, , 416, 941
, P. B. 1987, , 99, 191
, L., [et al.]{} 2003, , 148, 195
, X. Y., [Dai]{}, Z. G., & [Lu]{}, T. 2003, , 592, 347
, S. N., [Cui]{}, W., & [Chen]{}, W. 1997, , 482, L155
[^1]: @Maccarone_2002 overestimated $t_{\rm align}$ as the result of a numerical error in his Eqn. 6, which implies a time scale that is 50 times longer than that implied by his Eqn. 1.
[^2]: using CXC DS-7.6.10
[^3]: We implement a particular class of the algorithm known as random-walk MCMC. In this approach, a sequence of transitions from the current parameter values are proposed and are then incrementally accepted or rejected.
[^4]: While it is optimal to use an unbounded parameter space in performing MCMC sampling, it is also sensible to set physically meaningful constraints on the parameters (e.g., $\Gamma_0 > 1$). To achieve both objectives, we have transformed each parameter using a logit function to map a parameter $z$ from its range \[$z_{\rm min},z_{\rm max}$\] onto an infinite scale: ${\rm logit}(t)
\equiv z_{\rm min} + ({z_{\rm max}-z_{\rm min}})/({1+e^{-t}})$ for $-\infty<t<\infty$.
[^5]: $\Sigma$ is calculated from the chain positions and is used to define the jump function for each sequence. The jump function is taken to be a $t-$distribution with 4 degrees of freedom that is symmetric about the present position.
[^6]: The target acceptance fraction was set at $\approx 32\%$. The optimal value ranges from $\approx 23\%$ for an infinite-dimensional problem to $\approx 45\%$ for a univariate problem [@Gelman95]. Each run produced an acceptance fraction of at least 20%
[^7]: Larger values of $\hat{R}$ suggest that either the parameter space is insufficiently sampled or that the chains are not fully evolved.
[^8]: at 90% confidence
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The process of single $W$ boson production at the energies of Next Linear Colliders is considered. We discuss in details the contributions from $s$ and $t$ channel diagrams, technical aspects of the complete tree level calculation with a finite $W$ width, and the quark mass effects.'
author:
- |
E.E. Boos, M.N. Dubinin\
[*Institute of Nuclear Physics, Moscow State University*]{}\
[*119899 Moscow, Russia*]{}\
title: 'Single $W$-boson Production at Linear Colliders '
---
The process of single $W$-boson production $e^+ e^- \to e^- \bar \nu_e
u \bar d$ (“CC20 process” in the four fermion channels classification of [@eventWW]) has been considered in details both from experimental and theoretical viewpoints. From the experimental point of view this process gives an important contribution to the cross section of $W^+ W^-$ pair production as well as to the rate of single $W$ production, when the initial electron (positron) goes to the beam pipe. At the same time CC20 process represents the main background to signals of new physics (especially $R$-parity conserving or violating SUSY processes) and provides a strong restrictions on the anomalous three vector boson couplings $WW\gamma$, $WWZ$. From the theoretical point of view the cross section of $e^+ e^- \to e^- \bar \nu_e u \bar d$ channel is sensitive to a huge gauge cancellations between the individual diagrams from the complete tree level set, and the singularity of the amplitude at zero scattering angle of the electron, when the treatment of finite $W$-boson width and finite electron mass is delicate and needs much care [@theor1; @theor2]. It will be also pointed out that the ISR corrections to CC20 process should be calculated with different characteristic energy scales for the two gauge invariant subsets of contributing diagrams.
The set of 20 diagrams of the process CC20 can be divided into two gauge invariant (with respect to the SM gauge group) subsets of 10 $t$-channel (Fig.1) and 10 $s$-channel diagrams (Fig.2). If the lepton and the corresponding neutrino in the final state of $e^+ e^- \to e^- \bar \nu_e u \bar d$ are replaced by the muon or tau with corresponding neutrino, only 10 $s$-channel diagrams remain and represent the analogous $\mu$ and $\tau$ CC10 channels. Electron scattering at zero angle from the $t$-channel subset is absent in these channels. It is a simple proof that both CC10 channels are gauge invariant. The less trivial statement is that these two CC10 classes are the minimal gauge invariant SM subsets. In fact it follows from the general theorem proved recently in [@boos_ohl].
Our calculation of the total rate have been performed by means of [*CompHEP*]{} package [@CompHEP]. The squared amplitude with finite electron mass $m_e=$ 0.511 MeV have been used in this calculation, so the forward electron pole is regulated by the kinematical cutoff $t_{max}=-m_e^2
(M^2/s)^2$, where $M$ denotes an invariant mass scale for the $\bar \nu_e
u \bar d$ system (see Fig.3). Results of $CompHEP$ calculation are shown in Table 1 together with the results of other groups obtained by means of $grc4f$ [@grace], $KORALW$ [@koralw] and $WPHACT$ [@wphact] generators. $grc4f$ and $WPHACT$ generators also use the finite fermion mass amplitude and $KORALW$ contains $grc4f$ matrix element inside. Their phase space intergation routines are different. Good agreement between the three generators ($CompHEP$, $grc4f$, $WPHACT$) is observed while $KORALW$ results obtained for $\sqrt{s}=$500 GeV are somewhat smaller. The agreement of cross sections is not trivial since $CompHEP$, $grc4f$ and $WPHACT$ are using different prescriptions for the insertion of Breit-Wigner propagator into the complete tree level amplitude.
In the ’overall’ prescription (also called the ’preserved gauge’ scheme) used by $CompHEP$ and $WPHACT$, resonant and nonresonant parts of the amplitude $$\frac{a_{\mu}}{p^2_W-m^2_W} + b_{\mu}$$ are squared, summed and then multiplied by the ’overall’ factor $$\frac{(p^2_W - m^2_W)^2}{(p^2_W - m^2_W)^2 + m^2_W \Gamma^2_W}$$ In $CompHEP$ the number of overall factors is equal to the number of $W$ propagators in the diagram set, and the prescription has beed applied to two gauge invariant CC10 subsets separately in order to avoid an artificial suppression of CC10-t part in the phase space region close to the position of the second $W$ pole from the CC10-s part.
$grc4f$ and $KORALW$ prescriptions [@theor1] are based on the gauge-invariance motivated redefinition of the leptonic tensor $\L_{\mu \nu}$ [@theor1; @gutbrod] for the $t$-channel subset $$\begin{aligned}
L_{\mu \nu}&=
&2(p_{\mu} p^\prime_{\nu} + p_{\nu} p^\prime_{\mu}) + q^2 \,g_{\mu \nu}\end{aligned}$$ to the form $$\begin{aligned}
L^\prime_{\mu \nu}&=&4(p_{\mu} -\frac{p_0}{q_0}\, q_{\mu})
(p_{\nu} -\frac{p_0}{q_0}\, q_{\nu}) + q^2 \, g_{\mu \nu}\end{aligned}$$ Unadequate treatment of finite $W$ width violates the gauge cancellation of the double pole $1/t^2=1/(p^\prime_e-p_e)^4$ for $t$-channel gamma and leads to nonunitary (powerlike) energy behaviour of the amplitude. The overall prescription or the redifinition $L_{\mu \nu} \to L^\prime_{\mu
\nu}$ ensures a numerically stable cancellation of the double pole to the single one $1/t$. This cancellation in the preserved gauge scheme used in $CompHEP$ can be explicitly demonstrated if we plot the distribution in $log_{10} \, |t|$ (see Fig.3 (1)). Flat part of the distribution is related to the unitary behaviour $d\sigma/dt \sim
1/t$. In the framework of the equivalent gamma approach this behaviour corresponds to the canonical Wieszacker-Williams approximation. The falldown of the distribution starting at about $log_{10} \, |t| \sim$ -6-7 reflects an improved Wieszacker-Williams behaviour [@mangano] The $W$ peak is observed in Fig.2 at $log_{10} \, |t| \sim$ 4. [^1]
We present the results of $CompHEP$ calculation for contributions of separately taken $s$-channel and $t$-channel subsets to the total rate, as well as their interference contribution, at various energies in Table 2. Quark phase space cuts $E_q > 3$ GeV, $M_{ud} > 5$ GeV and/or lepton phase space cut $\cos\vartheta_e >$ 0.997 are imposed. From Table 2 and Fig.4 one can see that the contribution of $t$-channel subset increases rapidly with energy while the $s$-channel cross section goes down and becomes smaller than the $t$-channel at the energy about 320 GeV. The $s$-$t$ interference is extremely small in all the energy range under consideration (100 GeV - 1 TeV). At LEP2 energies the single $W$ production process is less important than the $W^+W^-$ pair production, but at the energies of LC single $W$ creation plays the dominant role.
Table 3 contains the cross section values at different energies without cuts, when the $t$-channel gamma pole and the $t$-channel $u/d$ quark poles in the ladder diagram are regulated by the electron and light quark masses $m_u=$ 5 MeV, $m_d=$ 10 MeV. It is important to point out that at nonzero electron mass the finite numerical result exists even for massless quarks. If we denote the minimal quark momentum fraction by $x_{min}$ $$\begin{aligned}
x_{min}=\frac{(m_u+m_d+m_e)^2}{s}\end{aligned}$$ the maximal gamma momentum transferred $$\begin{aligned}
t_{max}= - m^2_e \, \frac{x^2_{min}}{1-x_{min}}\end{aligned}$$ and the kinematical cutoff near the pole still exists at $m_u=m_d=$ 0. It is important to understand a role of the multiperipheral diagrams in the CC10 $t$-channel subset. However, it makes no sense to compute straightfrwardly a contribution from that diagrams because they do not form a gauge invariant class. But one can get an information about a size of the multiperipheral diagrams contribution by calculating a dependence of the cross section on a quark mass. These diagrams represent the only production mechanism that could depend significantly on the values of quark masses. We calculated the cross section dependence on the quark mass $m_q=m_u=m_d$ changing from 1 MeV to 100 MeV (see Table 4 and Fig.4). The total rate decreases from 1442 fb to 1414 fb, so rather weak but distinct dependence on the quark mass takes place. Therefore one can expect a rather small ’resolved photon’ contribution to CC20 process rate. Instructive comparison can be done with the case of resolved photon contribution to the single $W$ production process at HERA ($ep$ collisions), where the latter is estimated to be of order 10-15% of the total $W$ rate [@resolved]. In the case of $ep$ collisions the most important $t$-channel diagram topology (see diagram 7 in Fig.1) contains a quark line and $t$-channel gamma, giving rise to potentially high resolved cross section $\gamma^* q \to$ [*hadrons*]{}. In the case of $e^+ e^-$ collisions this contribution is absent and only subleading multiperipheral topologies (see diagrams 2,3 in Fig.1) could give the resolved $\gamma^* q \to$ [*hadrons*]{}.
The calculation of initial state radiative corrections (ISR) to CC20 process needs a special care. Two different scales of ISR radiator function should be used for the $t$ and $s$ channel subsets of diagrams. If we take $Q^2=s$ for $s$ channel and $Q^2=0$ for $t$-channel, the cross section can be calclated as a sum of $s$-channel contribution with ISR and $t$-channel contribution without ISR from the Table 2. The same is also true for the value of $\alpha_{QED}$ which should be taken differently for $t$-channel and $s$-channel sets. Obviously, the characteristic scale for the $t$-channel part is $Q^2=0$ and therefore one should use 1/137 while a typical scale of the $s$-channle piece is of the order $s$ and a value of about 1/128 should be used.
The authors are grateful to E. Accomando, A. Ballestrero and G. Passarino for useful discussions and to DESY-Zeuthen TESLA group for the kind hospitality. This work was partly supported by the joint RFBR-DFG grant 99-02-04011.
[99]{}
Event generators for $WW$ physics, conveners D. Bardin, R. Kleiss, in: [*Physics at LEP2*]{}, ed. by G. Altarelli, T. Sjoestrand, F. Zwirner, CERN report 96-01, 1996, vol.II
Y. Kurihara, D. Perret-Gallix, Y. Shimizu, Phys.Lett. B349 (1995) 367
W. Beenakker et. al., Nucl.Phys. B500 (1997) 255
G. Passarino, hep-ph/9810416
E. Boos, T. Ohl, Phys.Rev.Lett. 83 (1999) 480
E. Boos, M. Dubinin, V. Ilyin, A. Pukhov, V. Savrin, preprint INP MSU 94-36/358, 1994 (hep-ph/9503280)\
P.Baikov et.al, in: [*Proc.of X Workshop on High Energy Physics and Quantum Field Theory*]{}, ed.by B.Levtchenko, V.Savrin, Moscow, 1996, p.101\
A. Pukhov et.al., hep-ph/9908288\
see also [http://theory.npi.msu.su/\~comphep]{}
T. Ishikawa, T. Kaneko, K. Kato, S. Kawabata, Y. Shimizu, H. Tanaka, KEK report 92-19, 1993
S. Jadach, W. Placzek, M. Skrzypek, B.F.L. Ward, Z. Was, CERN-TH-98-242, 1998
E. Accomando, A. Ballestrero, Comp.Phys.Comm., 99 (1997) 270
A. Ballestrero, talk at LEP2 miniworkshop, CERN, 12-13 March 1999
F. Gutbrod, Z. Rek, Z.Phys. C1 (1979) 171
S. Frixione, M. Mangano, P. Nason, G. Ridolfi, Phys.Lett. B319 (1993) 339
M.N. Dubinin, H.S. Song, Phys.Rev. D57 (1998) 2927\
U .Baur, J. Vermaseren, D. Zeppenfeld, Nucl.Phys. B375 (1992) 3
(16,10) (-5.8,-21)[ ]{}
(16,10) (-5.8,-21)[ ]{}
[|c|c|c|c|c|]{} & CompHEP & grc4f & KORALW & WPHACT\
\
$q$ cuts, no ISR & 1076(1) & 1080(2) & & 1074(1)\
$q$ cuts, with ISR & 1039(1) & 1040(1) & & 1038(2)\
$q$, $e$ cuts, no ISR & 520(1) & 521(1) & & 512(1)\
$q$, $e$ cuts, with ISR & 478(1) & 480(1) & & 479(2)\
\
$q$ cuts, no ISR & 1417(2) & 1419(2) & 1395(6) & 1418(1)\
$q$ cuts, with ISR & 1357(5) & 1359(2) & 1336(6)& 1358(2)\
$q$, $e$ cuts, no ISR & 939(3) & 939(1) & 909(5) & 936(1)\
$q$, $e$ cuts, with ISR & 864(9) & 874(1) & 840(5)& 847(2)\
\
$q$ cuts, no ISR & 2140(4) & 2146(3) & & 2138(3)\
$q$ cuts, with ISR & 2048(4) & 2046(3) & & 2042(2)\
$q$, $e$ cuts, no ISR & 1687(4) & 1697(2) & &1692(3)\
$q$, $e$ cuts, with ISR & 1597(3) & 1597(2) & & 1593(2)\
[|c|c|c|c|c|]{} $\sqrt{s}$ & $\sigma(CC10-t)$ & $\sigma(CC10-s)$ & $\sigma(t-s \;
interf.)$ & $\sigma_{tot}$\
\
183 & 130(0) & 655(1) & 0.2(0) & 785(1)\
190 & 147(0) & 680(1) & 5(0) & 832(1)\
350 & 635(1) & 420(1) & 21(0) & 1076(1)\
500 & 1127(2) & 270(0) & 19(0) & 1417(2)\
800 & 1981(4) & 143(0) & 16(0) & 2140(4)\
\
183 & 117(0) & 566(1) & 0.2(0) & 683(1)\
190 & 132(0) & 603(1) & 5(0) & 739(1)\
350 & 587(1) & 432(1) & 20(0) & 1039(1)\
500 & 1049(5) & 289(0) & 19(0) & 1357(5)\
850 & 1873(4) & 159(0) & 16(1) & 2048(4)\
\
183 & 102(0) & 2(0) & 0.0(0) & 104(0)\
190 & 116(0) & 2(0) & 0.0(0) & 118(0)\
350 & 513(1) & 7(0) & 0.2(0) & 520(1)\
500 & 928(2) & 10(0) & 0.3(0) & 938(2)\
800 & 1671(4) & 15(0) & 0.4(0) & 1686(4)\
\
183 & 92(1) & 2(0) & 0.0(0) & 94(1)\
190 & 103(1) & 2(0) & 0.0(0) & 105(1)\
350 & 472(1) & 6(0) & 0.0(0) & 478(1)\
500 & 854(9) & 10(0) & 0.3(0) & 864(9)\
800 & 1581(3) & 15(0) & 0.4(0) & 1596(3)\
[|c|c|c|c|c|]{} $\sqrt{s}$ & $\sigma(CC10-t)$ & $\sigma(CC10-s)$ & $\sigma(t-s \;
interf.)$ & $\sigma_{tot}$\
\
183 & 141(0) & 655(1) & 0.2(0) & 796(1)\
190 & 158(0) & 680(1) & 5(0) & 843(1)\
500 & 1141(2) & 271(0) & 19(0) & 1531(2)\
800 & 2000(6) & 143(0) & 16(0) & 2159(6)\
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$m_q$ (MeV) $\sigma(CC10-t)$ $\sigma(CC10-s)$ $\sigma(t-s \; $\sigma_{tot}$
interf.)$
------------- ------------------ ------------------ ---------------- ----------------
0 1160(4) 270(0) 20(0) 1450(4)
0.5 1154(3) 270(0) 20(0) 1444(3)
1 1152(3) 270(0) 20(0) 1442(3)
5 1147(2) 270(0) 20(0) 1437(3)
10 1142(2) 270(0) 20(0) 1432(3)
50 1131(2) 270(0) 20(0) 1421(2)
100 1124(2) 270(0) 20(0) 1414(2)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: The total rate for the process $e^+ e^- \to e^- \bar \nu_e u \bar d$ (fb) at various quark masses.
(16,10) (-3.0,-1)[ ]{}
(16,10) (-1.0,-2.5)[ ]{}
[^1]: Detailed comparison of the same kind as indicated above at LEP2 energies $\sqrt{s}=$ 183 and 190 GeV can be found in [@ballestrero].
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Recall that a locally compact group $G$ is called unimodular if the left Haar measure on $G$ is equal to the right one. It is proved in this paper that $G$ is unimodular iff it is approximable by finite quasigroups (Latin squares).'
author:
- 'L.Yu.Glebsky, E.I.Gordon and C.J.Rubio'
title: 'On approximation of topological groups by finite algebraic systems. II'
---
Introduction
============
This paper is a continuation of the paper [@GG]. We prove here the statement that was formulated in [@GG] as a conjecture, namely, the following theorem.
\[Main\_th\] A locally compact group $G$ is unimodular iff it is approximable by finite quasigroups (see Definitions 2 and 3 in [@GG]).
Notice that this theorem gives a solution of an old problem, formulated in [@HR]: to characterize the class of all unimodular locally compact groups.
The sufficiency was proved in [@GG] (Corollary 1 of Proposition 5). It was proved also that any discrete group is approximable by finite quasigroups (Proposition 4). So in this paper we prove only the following
\[main\_prop\] Any non-discrete locally compact unimodular group $G$ is approximable by finite quasigroups.
The proof of this proposition that will be discussed in the paper is rather complicated. We start with the case of a compact group $G$ to outline the main ideas of this proof. The case of locally compact groups requires some technical modification that will be discussed at the end of the paper. A nontrivial combinatorics of latin squares based on a generalization of one result of A.J.W.Hilton [@Hil; @Hil2] is involved in the proof. This combinatorics is discussed in [@GC]. As in [@GG] we also use the language of nonstandard analysis in some proofs of this paper. It allows to simplify essentially the proofs of Theorems \[Partition\] and \[lpartition\]. All theorems are formulated in standard language and we hope that the main ideas of the proofs are understandable for the readers non-familiar with nonstandard analysis.
A proof of Proposition \[main\_prop\] for a compact group $G$.
==============================================================
We assume in this section that $G$ is a non-discrete compact group. All subsets of $G$ we deal with are assumed to be measurable with respect to the Haar measure $\nu$ that is assumed to be normalized — $\nu(G)=1$. Recall that any compact group is unimodular and thus $\nu$ is left and right invariant. Let $U$ be a neighborhood of the unit in $G$ and ${{\cal P}}$ be a finite partition of $G$. We say that ${{\cal P}}$ is $U$-fine if $\forall P\in{{\cal P}}\ \exists g\in G\ (P\subseteq gU)$ and ${{\cal P}}$ is equisize if all sets in ${{\cal P}}$ have the same Haar measure. The following theorem will be proved in the next section.
\[Partition\] There exists a $U$-fine equisize partition for any neighborhood of the unit $U\subseteq G$.
Let ${{\cal P}}=\{P_1,\dots,P_n\}$ be a partition that satisfies the conditions of this theorem for some $U$. Consider the following three-index matrix $w={\langle}w_{ijk}\ |\ 1\leq i,j,k\leq n{\rangle}$, where $$w_{ijk}=\mathop{\int\!\int}\limits_{G\times
G}\chi_i(xy^{-1})\chi_j(y)\chi_k(x)d\nu(x)d\nu(y), \eqno (1)$$ here $\chi_m(x)=\chi_{P_m}(x)$ is the characteristic function of a set $P_m$, $m\leq n$.
Obviously $w_{ijk}\geq 0$. Let $S={\mbox{supp}}\ w=\{{\langle}i,j,k{\rangle}\ |\ w_{ijk}>0\}$.
\[Prop\_w\] The three-index matrix $w_{ijk}$ has the following properties.
1. $\sum\limits_iw_{ijk}=\sum\limits_jw_{ijk}=
\sum\limits_kw_{ijk}=\frac 1{n^2}$
2. $S\subseteq\{{\langle}i,j,k{\rangle}\ |\nu(\ P_i\cdot P_j\cap P_k)>0\}$
The statement 2 follows immediately from the Fubini’s theorem. To prove the statement 1 we need the following identity $\sum\limits_m\chi_m(t)=1$ for any $t\in G$, that follows from the fact that ${{\cal P}}$ is a partition of $G$.
Now it is easy to see that, for example, $$\sum\limits_jw_{ijk}=
\int\limits_G\chi_k(x)d\nu(x)\int\limits_G\chi_i(xy^{-1})d\nu(y)=
\int\limits_G\chi_k(x)d\nu(x)\int\limits_G\chi_i(y)d\nu(y)=
\nu(P_k)\nu(P_i).$$ We used here the left invariance of $\nu$ and the unimodularity of $G$ that implies $\int\limits_Gf(y)d\nu(y)=\int\limits _Gf(y^{-1})d\nu(y)$. Since the partition ${{\cal P}}$ is equisize we have $\nu(P_i)=\nu(P_k)=\frac 1n$.
To motivate the following consideration let us use an analogy with two-index matrices. Recall that an $n\times n$ matrix $B=\|p_{ij}\|$ is called is called bistochastic if $p_{ij}\geq 0$ and $\sum\limits_{i=1}^np_{ij}=\sum\limits_{j=1}^np_{ij}=1$. According to a well-known G.Birkhoff’s theorem (cf., for example, [@Ryser]) in this case $B$ is a convex hull of permutations - the matrices that consist of zeros and ones and contain the unique one in an each row and in an each column. Then there exists a permutation $T$ such that ${\mbox{supp}}\ T\subseteq{\mbox{supp}}\ B$. Assume for a moment that the similar fact holds for the three-indexed matrices. We say that a three-index matrix is three-stochastic if it is nonnegative and the sum of elements in each line is equal to one. We call a line any set $L$ of triples of elements of $\{1,\dots,n\}$ such that in all triples in $L$ two indexes are fixed and the third run over $\{1,\dots,n\}$. Notice that if $w_{ijk}$ satisfies Lemma \[Prop\_w\] then $n^2w_{ijk}$ is three-stochastic. So we assume that the following statement is true.
(A). If $w_{ijk}$ satisfies Lemma \[Prop\_w\] then there exists a matrix ${\delta}_{ijk}$ that consists of zeros and ones, contains the unique one in each line and such that ${\mbox{supp}}\ {\delta}_{ijk}\subseteq{\mbox{supp}}\
w_{ijk}$.
By the properties of ${\delta}_{ijk}$ it is easy to see that ${\mbox{supp}}\ {\delta}_{ijk}$ is the graph of the operation $\circ$ on $\{1,\dots,n\}$ such that $i\circ j=k$ iff ${\gamma}_{ijk}=1$. Let us denote the algebra $\{1,\dots,n\}$ with the operation $\circ$ by $Q$. Since for any $i$ and $k$ there exists the unique $j$ such ${\gamma}_{ijk}=1$ and for any $j$ and $k$ there exists the unique $i$ that ${\gamma}_{ijk}=1$ we have that the left and right cancellation laws hold in $Q$ and thus $Q$ is a quasigroup.
Fix an arbitrary injection ${\alpha}:Q\to G$ such that for any $i\leq n$ holds ${\alpha}(i)\in P_i$. Notice that if $i\circ j=k$ then ${\langle}i,j,k{\rangle}\in{\mbox{supp}}\ {\gamma}_{ijk}\subseteq{\mbox{supp}}\ w_{ijk}$ and thus $P_i\cdot P_j\cap P_k\neq\emptyset$ by Lemma \[Prop\_w\] (2).
So we proved under assumption (A) the following
\[injection\] For any neighborhood of the unit $U$ of a compact group $G$ and for any $U$-fine equisize partition ${{\cal P}}$ of $G$ there exists a finite quasigroup $Q$ and an injection ${\alpha}:Q\to G$ such that
1. $\forall P\in{{\cal P}}\exists q\in Q\ ({\alpha}(q)\in P);$
2. $\forall q_1,q_2\in Q\ ({\alpha}(q_1)\in P_1\in{{\cal P}}\land
{\alpha}(q_2)\in P_2\in{{\cal P}}\land {\alpha}(q_1\circ q_2)\in P_3\in{{\cal P}}\Longrightarrow P_1\cdot P_2\cap P_3\neq\emptyset)$.
Unfortunately the statement (A) is not true in general (see, for example [@GC] ) and a proof of Lemma \[injection\] is more difficult. We will discuss it later in this section. At first let us show how Lemma \[injection\] implies Proposition \[main\_prop\] for a compact group $G$.
We will use the nonstandard criterion of approximability by finite quasigroups - the Proposition 9 of [@GG]. According to this Proposition and using the fact that any element of the nonstandard extension ${\,^*\!}G$ of a compact group $G$ is nearstandard [@GG], Proposition 8(3), we have to prove the existence of a hyperfinite quasigroup $Q$ and an internal map ${\alpha}:Q\to{\,^*\!}G$ that satisfy the following conditions
- $\forall g\in G\exists q\in Q\ ({\alpha}(q)\approx G);$
- $\forall q_1,q_2\in Q\ ({\alpha}(q_1\circ q_2)\approx
{\alpha}(q_1)\cdot{\alpha}(q_2)).$
Fix an infinitesimal neighborhood of unit $U\subseteq {\,^*\!}G$ i.e. $U$ is an internal open set and $e\in U\subset\mu(e)$, where $\mu(e)$ is the monad of ${\varepsilon}$. We may assume that $U$ is symmetric ($U=U^{-1}$) without loss of generality.
By Theorem \[Partition\] and the transfer principle there exist a hyperfinite $U$-fine equisize partition ${{\cal P}}$ and thus there exists a hyperfinite quasigroup $Q$ and an internal map ${\alpha}:Q\to
G$ that satisfy Lemma \[injection\]. Let us show that ${\langle}Q,{\alpha}{\rangle}$ satisfies the conditions (i) and (ii).
It is easy to see that all elements of any $X\in{{\cal P}}$ are infinitesimally close to each other since $U$ is infinitesimal and ${{\cal P}}$ is $U$-fine. Thus if $X,Y\in{{\cal P}}$ then all elements of $X\cdot
Y$ are infinitesimally close to each other.
Let $g\in G$. Since ${{\cal P}}$ is a partition of ${\,^*\!}G\supset G$ there exists $P\in{{\cal P}}$ such that $g\in P$ By the condition (1) of Lemma \[injection\] there exist $q\in Q$ such that ${\alpha}(q)\in P$. So ${\alpha}(q)\approx g$ and (i) is proved.
Let ${\alpha}(q_1)\in P_1,\ {\alpha}(q_2)\in P_2,\ {\alpha}(q_1\circ q_2)\in P_3$. By the condition (2) of Lemma \[injection\] there exists $h\in P_1\cdot P_2\cap P_3$. Then ${\alpha}(q_1)\cdot{\alpha}(q_2)\approx h$ and ${\alpha}(q_1\circ q_2)\approx h$. This proves (ii) and Proposition \[main\_prop\] for a compact group $G$.
We have only to prove Lemma \[injection\].
Let $Q$ be a quasigroup and ${\sigma}$ an equivalence relation on $Q$ which we will identify with a partition of $Q$ by equivalence classes. So ${\sigma}=\{Q_1,\dots, Q_n\}$. Denote by $Q/{\sigma}$ the subset of $\{1,\dots,n\}^3$ such that ${\langle}ijk{\rangle}\in Q/{\sigma}$ iff there exist $q\in Q_i$ and $q'\in Q_j$ with $q\circ q'\in Q_j$. Notice that if ${\sigma}$ is a congruence relation on $Q$ (i.e. it preserves the operation $\circ$) then the introduced set is exactly the graph of the operation in the quotient quasigroup $Q$ by ${\sigma}$ and so we will call the set $Q/{\sigma}$ - a generalized quotient quasigroup (gqq).
The following weakening of the statement (A) holds.
\[weak-birkhoff\] Let a non-negative three indexes matrix $u={\langle}u_{ijk}\ |\ 1\leq i,j,k\leq n{\rangle}$ satisfy the following condition $$\sum\limits_iu_{ijk}=\sum\limits_ju_{ijk}=\sum\limits_ku_{ijk}=l$$ for some positive $l$. Then there exist a finite quasigroup $Q$ and its partition ${\sigma}=\{Q_1,\dots, Q_n\}$ such that the gqq $Q/{\sigma}\subseteq{\mbox{supp}}\ u$.
This theorem easily follows from results of A.J.W.Hilton, [@Hil]. See also [@GC] for a proof. Now we are able to complete the proof of Lemma \[injection\].
Let ${{\cal P}}=\{P_1,\dots,P_n\}$ be a $U$-fine equisize partition of $G$. Consider the three indexes matrix $w$ defined by formula (1). By Lemma \[Prop\_w\] (1) the matrix $w$ satisfies the conditions of Theorem \[weak-birkhoff\] and thus there exists a finite quasigroup $Q$ and its partition ${\sigma}=\{Q_1,\dots, Q_n\}$ such that $Q/{\sigma}\subseteq{\mbox{supp}}w$. Consider an arbitrary injection ${\alpha}:Q\to
G$ such that ${\alpha}(Q_i)\subset P_i$ for any $1\leq i\leq n$. Since all $P_i$ are infinite (our group $G$ is non-discrete) such an injection ${\alpha}$ exists. Obviously the first condition of Lemma \[injection\] holds. If ${\alpha}(q_1)\in P_1,\ {\alpha}(q_2)\in P_2,\
{\alpha}(q_1\circ q_2)\in P_3$ then $q_1\in Q_1,\ q_2\in Q_2$ and $q_1\circ q_2\in Q_3$. Then ${\langle}123{\rangle}\in Q/{\sigma}$ by the definition of $Q/{\sigma}$ and thus ${\langle}123{\rangle}\in{\mbox{supp}}w$ by Theorem \[weak-birkhoff\]. So $P_1\cdot P_2\cap P_3\neq\emptyset$ by Lemma \[Prop\_w\]. $\Box$
Proof of Theorem \[Partition\]
==============================
In this section again $G$ is a non-discrete compact group and $\nu$ the Haar measure on $G$ such that $\nu(G)=1$
We will use the following version of Marriage Lemma for finite non-atomic measurable spaces due to Rado [@Rado]
\[Rado\] Let $S$ be a measurable space with a finite non-atomic measure $\mu$, $\{S_1,\dots,S_n\}$ - a collection of subsets of $S$ such that $\bigcup\limits_{i=1}^nS_i=S$, ${\langle}{\varepsilon}_1,\dots,{\varepsilon}_n{\rangle}\in{{\bf R}}^n$, ${\varepsilon}_i>0,\ \sum\limits_{i=1}^n{\varepsilon}_i=\mu(S)$. Then the following two statements are equivalent:
1. there exists a partition $\{P_1,\dots, P_n\}$ of $S$ such that $\mu(P_i)={\varepsilon}_i,\
P_i\subseteq S_i,\ i=1,\dots,n$;
2. for any $I\subseteq\{1,\dots,n\}$ holds $\mu\left(\bigcup\limits_{i\in I}S_i\right)\geq\sum\limits_{i\in I}{\varepsilon}_i$.
Indeed, Theorem \[Rado\] is a very particular case of the theorem, proved in [@Rado].
\[HU\]
For any neighborhood $U$ of the unit in $G$ there exists a finite set $H\subset G$ such that
1. $HU=G$;
2. $\forall\ I\subseteq H\ \nu(IU)\geq\frac {|I|}{|H|}$.
Theorem \[Partition\] follows immediately from Theorem \[Rado\] and Lemma \[HU\]. Indeed, let $H$ satisfy Lemma \[HU\], $H=\{h_1,\dots,h_n\}$. Consider the collection $\{h_1U,\dots,h_nU\}$ of subsets of $G$ and put ${\varepsilon}_i=n^{-1},\
i=1,\dots,n$. Then the condition (2) of Theorem \[Rado\] is equivalent to the condition (2) of Lemma \[HU\] and thus there exists the partition ${{\cal P}}$ that satisfies the conditions of Theorem \[Rado\]. Obviously this partition satisfies Theorem \[Partition\].
The remaining part of this section is dedicated to a proof of Lemma \[HU\].
Let ${{\cal U}}$ be the base of neighborhoods of the unit of $G$ that consists of all symmetric ($V=V^{-1}$) neighborhoods. For $V\in{{\cal U}}$ put
$${\Gamma}(V)=\bigcup\limits_{n=1}^{\infty}V^n.$$
It is well known (cf. for example [@HR]) that ${\Gamma}(V)$ is a complete, and thus clopen, subgroup of $G$. Let ${\Gamma}_1(V)={\Gamma}(V),{\Gamma}_2(V),\dots,{\Gamma}_m(V)$ be a collection of all left cosets of ${\Gamma}(V)$. It is easy to see that for any $i\leq m$ and for any neighborhood of the unit $W\subseteq V$ holds: $${\Gamma}_i(V)W={\Gamma}_i(V). \eqno(2)$$
\[measure\] Let $U\in{{\cal U}}$. Let $A\subseteq G$. If there exists coset ${\Gamma}_i(U)$ such that ${\Gamma}_i(U)\cap A\neq\emptyset$ and ${\Gamma}_i(U)\backslash\overline{A}\neq\emptyset$, then $$\nu(\overline{A})<\nu(AU). \eqno (3)$$
It is easy to see that $AU=\overline AU$ since $U$ is open. Let us show that $AU\neq\overline A$. Indeed, if $AU=\overline A$ then $AU^2=\overline AU=AU=\overline A$. By induction $AU^n=\overline A$ and thus $A{\Gamma}(U)=\overline A$. But ${\Gamma}_i(U)=g{\Gamma}(U)$ for any $g\in {\Gamma}_i(U)\cap A$ and thus ${\Gamma}_i(U)\subseteq\overline A$. The contradiction. So $AU\setminus\overline A\neq\emptyset$ and since this set is open we have $\nu(AU\setminus\overline A)>0$. This inequality implies inequality (3) since $\overline A\subset AU$.
In the remaining part of Lemma \[HU\] we use the language of nonstandard analysis (cf. [@GG], where this language is discussed).
We will need some modification of theorem about invariant integral introduced in [@GG] (cf. formula (6) in [@GG]).
Let $L$ be a locally compact group, $C\subseteq L$ — a compact set, $U$ — a relatively compact neighborhood of the unit. Fix an arbitrary infinitesimal neighborhood of the unit $O\subseteq{\,^*\!}L$ and an internal ${\,^*\!}$compact set $K$ such that $L\subseteq K\subseteq{\,^*\!}L$. Since $U$ and $C$ are standard it is easy to see that the following conditions hold: $O\cdot O^{-1}\subseteq{\,^*\!}U;\ ({\,^*\!}C)^2\subseteq K;\ {\,^*\!}C\cdot{\,^*\!}U\subseteq K$. It was shown in the proof of Lemma 1 of [@GG] that if under these conditions a hyperfinite set $H\subseteq{\,^*\!}L$ is an optimal left $O$-grid of $K$ then $H$ can be endowed with a binary operation $\circ$, making $H$ a left quasigroup that is a ${\,^*\!}(C,U)$-approximation of $L$. Since this holds for all standard $C$ and $U$ we see that the left quasigroup $H$ is a hyperfinite approximation of $G$. Now applying Lemmas 2,3 and Proposition 5 of [@GG] we obtain the following
\[integral\] Let $L$ be a locally compact group, $V\subseteq L$ - a compact set with the non-empty interior, $O$ - an infinitesimal neighborhood of the unit in ${\,^*\!}L$, $K$ - an internal compact set such that $L\subseteq K\subseteq{\,^*\!}L$, $H\subseteq L$ - a hyperfinite set that is an optimal left (right) $O$-grid for $K$, $\Delta=|H\cap V|^{-1}$. Consider the functional $\Lambda_V(f)$ defined by the formula $$\Lambda_V(f)={\,^\circ\,\!\!}\left(\Delta\sum\limits_{h\in H}{\,^*\!}f(h)\right).$$ Then $\Lambda_V(f)$ is a left (right) invariant finite positive functional on $C_0(L)$ and thus defines the left (right) Haar measure $\nu_V$ on $L$.
\[boundary\] If under conditions of Proposition \[integral\] $C$ is a compact and $\nu_V(\partial C)=0$ then $\nu_V(C)=\Lambda_V(\chi_C)$, in particular, if $\nu_V(\partial V)=0$ then $\nu_V(V)=1$.
Corollary \[boundary\] follows immediately from Proposition 1.2.18 of [@Gor] $\Box$.
\[comp-integral\] Let $G$ be a compact group, $O$ - an infinitesimal neighborhood of the unit in ${\,^*\!}G$ and $H\subseteq {\,^*\!}G$ an optimal left or right $O$-grid in ${\,^*\!}G$ then the functional $\Lambda$ defined by the formula $$\Lambda(f)={\,^\circ\,\!\!}\left(\frac 1{|H|}\sum\limits_{h\in H}{\,^*\!}f(h)\right).$$ is a positive invariant finite functional on $C(G)$ and thus defines the normalized Haar measure $\nu$ on $G$.
We are going to proof the existence of a hyperfinite set $H\subset{\,^*\!}G$ such that for any standard neighborhood of the unit $U\in{{\cal U}}$ holds
1. $H{\,^*\!}U={\,^*\!}G$;
2. $\forall$ internal $I\subseteq H\ {\,^*\!}\nu(I{\,^*\!}U)\geq
\frac{|I|}{|H|}$.
By the [**transfer principle**]{} this implies Lemma \[HU\]. Let $O$ be an infinitesimal neighborhood of the unit in ${\,^*\!}G$ and $H$ - an optimal $O$-covering of ${\,^*\!}G$ (see [@GG]). We are going to prove that $H$ satisfies the conditions (H1) and (H2).
Consider the functional $\Lambda(f)$ defined in Corollary \[comp-integral\]. Then for any $f\in C(G)$ holds $$\Lambda(f)=\int\limits_Gfd\nu.$$ Now it is easy to see that for any compact set $C\subseteq G$ holds $$\nu(C)\geq \Lambda(\chi_C), \eqno (4)$$ and for any open set $W\subseteq G$ holds $$\nu(W)\leq \Lambda(\chi_W). \eqno (5)$$
Indeed by the general theory of integration on locally compact spaces (see for example [@Halmos]) $$\nu(C)=\inf\{\Lambda(f)\ |\ f\in C(G),\ f\geq\chi_C\}.$$ By the positivity of $\Lambda$ for any $f\geq\chi_C$ holds $\Lambda(f)\geq \Lambda(\chi_C)$. This proves (4). To prove (5) it is enough to apply (4) to the set $G\setminus W$.
[**Remark**]{}. The inequalities (4) and (5) hold for an arbitrary locally compact group $G$ if an open set $W$ is relatively compact. But inequality (5) in this case requires a little bit more complicated proof, using, for example, regularity of a Haar measure.
For an arbitrary (internal or external) set $I\subseteq G$ put ${\mbox{st}}(I)=\{{\,^\circ\,\!\!}x\ |\ x\in G\}$.
\[Nonst\] Let $W\subseteq G$ be a standard open set, $U$ - a standard open neighborhood of the unit in $G$ and $I\subseteq{\,^*\!}G$ - an internal set. Then the following inclusions hold:
1. $I{\,^*\!}W{\,^*\!}U\supseteq {\,^*\!}({\mbox{st}}(I)W)$;
2. ${\,^*\!}({\mbox{st}}(I)U)\supseteq I$.
1). We will prove the stronger inclusion ${\,^*\!}(\overline{{\mbox{st}}(I)W})\subseteq I{\,^*\!}W{\,^*\!}U$. We have $$\overline{{\mbox{st}}(I)W}=\overline{{\mbox{st}}(I)}\overline W={\mbox{st}}(I)\overline W,
\eqno(6)$$ since ${\mbox{st}}(I)$ is a closed set for any internal $I$ (this follows from saturation - see, for example, [@Alb]). Let $x\in{\,^*\!}(\overline{{\mbox{st}}(I)W})$ then there exists $b\in\overline{{\mbox{st}}(I)W}$ such that $x\approx b$ since $\overline{{\mbox{st}}(I)W}$ is a compact set. By (6) the element $b$ can be represented in the form $b={\,^\circ\,\!\!}i\cdot a$ for some $i\in I$ and $a\in\overline W$. By the nonstandard characteristic of the closure of a standard set there exists $w\in{\,^*\!}W$ such that $w\approx a$ and thus $x\approx iw$. This implies that $x\in iw{\,^*\!}U\subseteq I{\,^*\!}W{\,^*\!}U$.
2\) We will show that $I\subseteq {\mbox{st}}(I){\,^*\!}U\subseteq{\,^*\!}({\mbox{st}}(I)U)$. Indeed, since $G$ is a compact set for any $i\in I$ there exists ${\,^\circ\,\!\!}i\in{\mbox{st}}(I)$ and since $i\approx{\,^\circ\,\!\!}i$, we have $i\in{\,^\circ\,\!\!}i\cdot{\,^*\!}U\subseteq {\mbox{st}}(I){\,^*\!}U$.
To complete the proof of Lemma \[HU\] we will prove that the constructed hyperfinite set $H$ satisfies the conditions (H1) and (H2). Let $U$ be an arbitrary (standard) neighborhood of the unit. Since $HO={\,^*\!}G$ and $O$ is an infinitesimal neighborhood of the unit, and thus $O\subset{\,^*\!}U$ we see that the condition (H1) holds. We have to prove only that ${\,^*\!}\nu(I{\,^*\!}U)\geq\frac{|I|}{|H|}$ for any internal $I\subseteq H$.
Fix three neighborhoods of the unit $U_1,U_2$ and $U_3$ such that $U_2\in{{\cal U}}$ and $U_1U_2U_3\subseteq U$. Put $A={\mbox{st}}(I)U_1$. There are two possibilities.
1). The set $\overline A$ is the union of $k$ cosets of ${\Gamma}(U_2)$. Let $G=\bigcup\limits_{i=1}^m{\Gamma}_i(U_2)$ be the decomposition of $G$ on the left cosets of ${\Gamma}(U_2)$ and $\overline A=\bigcup\limits_{i=1}^k{\Gamma}_i(U_2)$. By the equality (2) $$\overline A\subseteq
AU_2\subseteq\left(\bigcup\limits_{i=1}^k{\Gamma}_i(U_2)\right)\cdot
U_2=\bigcup\limits_{i=1}^k{\Gamma}_i(U_2)=\overline A.$$ So $AU_2=\overline A$ and thus $\nu(AU_2)=\frac k{m}$
Let $H_i={\,^*\!}{\Gamma}_i(U_2)\cap H$. Then all sets $H_i,\ i=0,\dots, m$ have the same cardinality. Indeed, since $O$ is infinitesimal and thus $O\subseteq{\,^*\!}U_2$ we have ${\,^*\!}{\Gamma}_i(U_2)O={\,^*\!}{\Gamma}_i(U_2)$ by (2). So $H_iO\subseteq {\,^*\!}{\Gamma}_i(U_2)$ and since $HO=G$ we have $H_iO=
{\,^*\!}{\Gamma}_i(U_2)$. Now if $|H_i|<\frac 1{m}|H|$ for some $i$ then using the left shifts of $H_i$ we obtain the $O$-cover of $G$ that contains less number of elements than $H$, but this contradicts to the optimality of $H$.
By Proposition \[Nonst\] (1) we have ${\,^*\!}\nu(I{\,^*\!}U)\geq\nu(AU_2)=\frac k{m}$. By Proposition \[Nonst\] (2) $I\subseteq {\,^*\!}A\cap H\subseteq\bigcup\limits_{i=1}^kH_i$. So $|I|\leq\frac {k|H|}{m}$ and thus ${\,^*\!}\nu(I{\,^*\!}U)\geq\frac{|I|}{|H|}.$
2). The sets $A$ and $U_2$ satisfy Proposition \[measure\]. Then ${\,^*\!}\nu(I{\,^*\!}U)\geq \nu(AU_2)$ as above; $\nu(AU_2)>\nu(\overline A)$ by Proposition \[measure\]; $\nu(\overline A)\geq
\Lambda(\chi_A)={\,^\circ\,\!\!}\left(\frac{|{\,^*\!}A\cap H|}{|H|}\right)$ by (4). But $I\subseteq {\,^*\!}A\cap H$ as above. So, ${\,^\circ\,\!\!}({\,^*\!}\nu(I{\,^*\!}U))>{\,^\circ\,\!\!}(\frac{|I|}{|H|})$ and, consequently, ${\,^*\!}\nu(I{\,^*\!}U)\geq\frac{|I|}{|H|}$ $\Box$
Proof of Proposition \[main\_prop\] in the general case {#Sec_general_case}
=======================================================
In this section we consider the general case of a locally compact unimodular group $G$. We denote by $\nu$ a (left and right simultaneously) Haar measure and by ${{\cal U}}$ - the base of neighborhoods of the unit that consists of all symmetric relatively compact neighborhoods. Our proof of Proposition \[main\_prop\] is based on the following generalization of Theorem \[Partition\]
\[lpartition\] For any neighborhood of the unit $U$ and any compact set $B\subset G$ there exist a compact set $C\supset B$ that has a $U$-fine equisize partition of $C$.
We will prove this theorem in the next section.
Let ${{\cal P}}=\{P_1,\dots,P_n\}$ be a $U$-fine equisize partition of a compact set $C$. Similarly to (1) consider the three indexes matrix $w={\langle}w_{ijk}\ |\ 1\leq i,j,k\leq n{\rangle}$, where $$w_{ijk}=\mathop{\int\!\int}\limits_{C\times
C}\chi_i(xy^{-1})\chi_j(y)\chi_k(x)d\nu(x)d\nu(y), \eqno (7)$$
Let $S=\{{\langle}i,j{\rangle}\ |\ P_i\cdot P_j\subset C\}$.
\[lProp\_w\] (Compare with Lemma \[Prop\_w\]) The three-index matrix $w_{ijk}$ has the following properties.
1. $\sum\limits_{i=1}^nw_{ijk},\sum\limits_{j=1}^nw_{ijk},
\sum\limits_{k=1}^nw_{ijk}\leq\frac{\nu(C)^2}{n^2}$
2. $\forall\ {\langle}i,j{\rangle}\in S\
\sum\limits_{k=1}^nw_{ijk}=\frac{\nu(C)^2}{n^2}$
3. $\forall {\langle}i,j{\rangle}\in S\exists k\ w_{ijk}>0$ and $\forall {\langle}i,j,k {\rangle}w_{i,j,k}>0\Longrightarrow
\nu(\ P_i\cdot P_j\cap P_k)>0$.
Notice that since ${{\cal P}}$ is a partition of $C$ we have $\sum\limits_{a=1}^n\chi_a(t)=\chi_C(t)$ and since ${{\cal P}}$ is equisize $\forall i\leq n\ \nu(P_i)=\frac{\nu(C)}{n}$
Now $$\sum\limits_{i=1}^nw_{ijk}=\mathop{\int\!\int}\limits_{C\times
C}\chi_C(xy^{-1})\chi_j(y)\chi_k(x)d\nu(x)d\nu(y)\leq
\mathop{\int\!\int}\limits_{G\times
G}\chi_j(x)\chi_k(y)d\nu(x)d\nu(y)=\frac{\nu(C)^2}{n^2}$$ $$\sum\limits_{j=1}^nw_{ijk}=\mathop{\int\!\int}\limits_{C\times
C}\chi_i(xy^{-1})\chi_C(y)\chi_k(x)d\nu(x)d\nu(y)\leq$$ $$\mathop{\int\!\int}\limits_{G\times
G}\chi_i(xy^{-1})\chi_k(x)d\nu(x)d\nu(y)=
\int\limits_G\chi_k(x)d\nu(x)\int\limits_G\chi_k(xy^{-1})d\nu(y)$$ Due to the unimodularity of $G$ we have $\int\limits_G\chi_k(xy^{-1})d\nu(y)=\int\limits_G\chi_k(y)d\nu(y)$ and thus $\sum\limits_{j=1}^nw_{ijk}\leq \frac{\nu(C)^2}{n^2}$. The third inequality in 1) can be proved similarly.
To prove the equality notice that since $P_i\cdot P_j\subseteq C$ the equality $\chi_i(xy^{-1})\chi_j(y)=1$ implies $\chi_C(x)=1$ and thus $$\sum\limits_{k=1}^nw_{ijk}=\mathop{\int\!\int}\limits_{C\times
C}\chi_i(xy^{-1})\chi_j(y)\chi_k(x)d\nu(x)d\nu(y)=
\mathop{\int\!\int}\limits_{C\times
C}\chi_i(xy^{-1})\chi_j(y)\chi_C(x)d\nu(x)d\nu(y)=$$ $$=\mathop{\int\!\int}\limits_{G\times
G}\chi_i(xy^{-1})\chi_j(y)d\nu(x)d\nu(y)=\frac{\nu(C)^2}{n^2}.$$ In the last equality we used the right invariance of $\nu$. The first part of statement 3) follows immediately from the statement 2) and the second - from Fubini’s Theorem.
The proof of this Lemma is the only place in the proof of Proposition \[main\_prop\], where the assumption about the unimodularity of $G$ is used.
Since the statements of Lemma \[lProp\_w\] are weaker than those of Lemma \[Prop\_w\] we need a generalization of combinatorial Theorem \[weak-birkhoff\].
Let $\circ:{\mbox{dom}}(\circ)\to Q$ be a partial binary operation on a set $Q$, i.e. ${\mbox{dom}}(\circ)\subseteq Q\times Q$. We say that $Q$ is a partial quasigroup if for any $a,b\in Q$ each of the equations $a\circ x=b$ and $x\circ a=b$ has no more than one solution.
\[Part-complete\] Any finite partial quasigroup $Q$ can be completed to a finite quasigroup, i.e. there exists a finite quasigroup $(Q',\circ')$ such that $Q\subseteq Q'$ and $\circ\subseteq\circ'$.
The proof of this lemma follows immediately from the fact that any Latin subsquare can be completed to a Latin square [@Ryser]. We used this fact in [@GG] to prove the approximability of discrete groups by finite quasigroups (Propsition 4 of [@GG]).
Let ${\sigma}$ is an equivalence relation on a partial quasigroup $Q$ that we identify with the partition $\{Q_1,\dots,Q_n\}$ of $Q$ by ${\sigma}$-equivalence classes. Then the generalized quotient partial quasigroup $Q/{\sigma}\subseteq\{1,\dots,n\}^3$ is defined exactly in the same way as the generalized quotient quasigroup (see Section 2).
\[gen-birkhoff\] Let a non-negative three indexes matrix $w={\langle}w_{ijk}\ |\ 1\leq i,j,k\leq n{\rangle}$ and a set $S\subset\{1,\dots,n\}^2$ satisfy the following conditions:
1. $\sum\limits_{i=1}^nw_{ijk},\sum\limits_{j=1}^nw_{ijk},
\sum\limits_{k=1}^nw_{ijk}\leq l$;
2. $\forall\ {\langle}i,j{\rangle}\in S\ \sum\limits_{k=1}^nw_{ijk}=l$
for some positive real $l$.
Then there exists a finite partial quasigroup $(Q,\circ)$ and a partition ${\sigma}=\{Q_1,\dots,Q_n\}$ of $Q$ that satisfy the following conditions:
1. the set $\bigcup\limits_{{\langle}i,j{\rangle}\in S}Q_i\times Q_j\subseteq{\mbox{dom}}(\circ)$;
2. the generalized partial quotient quasigroup $Q/{\sigma}\subseteq{\mbox{supp}}\,w$
Theorem \[gen-birkhoff\] is proved in [@GC]. Now we are able to complete the proof of Proposition \[main\_prop\]. Similarly to the case of compact groups we will use the nonstandard criterion of approximability of locally compact groups by finite quasigroups. We have to show that there exist a hyperfinite quasigroup $(Q',\circ)$ and an internal injective map:${\alpha}:Q'\to {\,^*\!}G$ such that
1. $\forall g\in G\exists q\in Q'\ {\alpha}(q)\approx g$;
2. $\forall q_1,q_2\in{\alpha}^{-1}\left({\mbox{ns}}({\,^*\!}G)\right)\
{\alpha}(q_1\circ q_2)\approx{\alpha}(q_1)\cdot{\alpha}(q_2)$.
Recall that ${\mbox{ns}}({\,^*\!}G)$ is the set of all nearstandard elements of ${\,^*\!}G$. Since $G$ is a locally compact group, there exists an internal compact set $C\supseteq{\mbox{ns}}({\,^*\!}G)$. By Theorem \[lpartition\] and the transfer principle we may assume that $C$ has a hyperfinite $U$-fine equisize partition ${{\cal P}}=\{P_1,\dots,P_N\}$ for some infinitesimal neighborhood $U$ of the unit in ${\,^*\!}G$. Let $w={\langle}w_{ijk}\ |\ 1\leq i,j,k,\leq N {\rangle}$ be an internal three indexes matrix defined by formula (7) with this partition ${{\cal P}}$. Notice that if $P_i$ contains at least one nearstandard point then $P_i\subseteq{\mbox{ns}}({\,^*\!}G)$, and if $P_i,P_j\subseteq{\mbox{ns}}({\,^*\!}G)$ then $P_i\cdot P_j\subseteq{\mbox{ns}}({\,^*\!}G)$. So if $S\subseteq\{1,\dots,N\}^2$ is the set defined before Lemma \[lProp\_w\] then $$S\supseteq\{{\langle}i,j{\rangle}\ |\ P_i,P_j\subseteq {\mbox{ns}}\}.$$
Let $(Q,\circ)$ be a hyprfinite partial quasigroup and ${\sigma}=\{Q_1,\dots, Q_N\}$ — its partition that satisfy the conditions of Theorem \[gen-birkhoff\]. Let $Q'$ be a hyperfinite quasigroup that completes $Q$ (see Lemma \[Part-complete\]). Now consider an arbitrary internal injection ${\alpha}:Q'\to{\,^*\!}G$ such that ${\alpha}(Q'\setminus Q)\subseteq {\,^*\!}G\setminus C$, ${\alpha}(Q_i)\subseteq P_i$, $i=1,\dots,N$. The rest part of the proof is exactly the same as for the case of compact group $\Box$.
Proof of Theorem \[lpartition\]
===============================
Theorem \[lpartition\] follows immediately from Theorem \[Rado\] and the following modification of Lemma \[HU\]
\[HUC\] For any compact set $B\subseteq G$ and for any neighborhood of the unit $U$ there exist a compact set $C\supseteq B$ and a finite set $F\subset C$ such that $C\subset FU$ and $\forall I\subseteq F\
\nu(IU\cap C)\geq\frac{|I|}{|F|}\nu(C)$
The proof of this lemma repeats mainly the proof of Lemma \[HU\] but requires some additional considerations.
Once again we assume without loss of generality that $U$ is symmetric. This relatively compact symmetric neighborhood of the unit $U$ is fixed throughout this section. We say that a set $S\subseteq G$ is $U$-disconnected if there exists a set $A\subseteq S,\ A\neq\emptyset,\ A\neq S$ such that $AU\cap S=A$. Otherwise $S$ is called $U$-connected.
\[U-con\] Any set $K$, such that $U^n\subseteq
K\subseteq U^{n+1}$ for some $n\geq 0$, is $U$-connected.
Let $K$ satisfy conditions of the Lemma and be $U$-disconnected. So there exists a set $X\subset K$ such that $\emptyset\neq X,\ XU\cap K=X,\ Y=K\setminus X\neq\emptyset$. Thus $\{X,Y\}$ is a partition of $K$ and $XU\cap Y=\emptyset$. The last equality implies that $X\cap YU^{-1}=\emptyset$ and thus $X\cap
YU=\emptyset$ since $U$ is symmetric. Thus $YU\cap K=Y$. Consider the map $\Phi:2^K\to 2^K$ such that $\Phi(A)=AU\cap K$. This map obviously has the following properties:
- if $A\subseteq B$ then $\Phi(A)\subseteq\Phi(B)$;
- $\Phi^{n+1}(\{e\})=K$, where $e$ is the unit of $G$
- $\Phi(X)=X,\ \Phi(Y)=Y$.
But $e\in X$ or $e\in Y$. This brings us to a contradiction.
We say that a compact set $C$ is regular if it is equal to the closure of its interior. The following lemma is a modification of Proposition \[measure\] for compact case.
\[<\] Let $C$ be a regular compact $C_0$ - its interior. If $C_0$ is $U$-connected, $A\cap C_0\neq\emptyset$, and $C\setminus\overline
A\neq\emptyset$ then $\nu(\overline A\cap C)<\nu(AU\cap C)$
Since $\overline A\subseteq AU$ holds $\nu(\overline
A\cap C)\leq\nu(AU\cap C)$. We have only to prove that this inequality is strict. It is enough to prove that $\nu(\overline
A\cap C_0)<\nu(AU\cap C_0)$. It will be proved if we show that $C_0\cap AU\neq C_0\cap \overline A$. Indeed in this case the set $(C_0\cap AU)\setminus (C_0\cap\overline A)=C_0\cap
AU\setminus\overline A\neq\emptyset$. And since this set is open holds $\nu((C_0\cap AU)\setminus(C_0\cap\overline A)>0$.
Since $U$ is open holds $AU=\overline AU$. We have $$C_0\cap\overline AU\supseteq C_0\cap(\overline A\cap
C_0)U\supseteq C_0\cap\overline A.$$
Suppose that the last inclusion here is indeed the equality. Let us show that $C_0\setminus (C_0\cap\overline
A)=C_0\setminus\overline A\neq\emptyset$. Indeed, if $C_0\subseteq\overline A$ then $\overline C_0\subseteq\overline A$ and since $C$ is regular we have $C\subseteq\overline A$, but this contradicts the condition $C\setminus\overline A\neq\emptyset$. This implies that $C_0$ is $U$-disconnected (take $C_0\cap A$ for $A$ and $C_0$ for $S$ in the definition of a $U$-disconnected set). Contradiction.
Proposition \[Nonst\] also needed to be modified for the case of a locally compact group.
\[cnonst\] Let $C\subseteq G$ be a compact set, $W\subseteq G$ - an open relatively compact set, $U\subseteq G$ - a relatively compact neighborhood of the unit and $I\subseteq {\,^*\!}C$ - an internal set. Then ${\,^*\!}({\mbox{st}}(I)W\cap C)\subseteq I{\,^*\!}W{\,^*\!}U\cap{\,^*\!}C$ and $I\subseteq{\,^*\!}({\mbox{st}}(I)U\cap C)$
The proof of this Lemma is exactly the same as the one of Proposition \[Nonst\] $\Box$.
In the proof of Lemma \[HU\] we used the functional $\Lambda(f)$ that is indeed the functional $I(f)$ introduced in [@GG] for a locally compact group $G$. This functional is defined for all bounded functions on $G$ and for $f\in C_0(G)$ holds $I(f)=\int\limits_Gfd\nu$. For more general functions $f$ the last equality may fail. It may fail even for the characteristic function of a regular compact set $C$. But it follows from Proposition 1.2.18 of [@Gor] that if $C$ is a regular compact set and $\nu(\partial C)=0$ then $I(\chi_C)=\nu(C)$. In what follows we need to deal with a compact set $C$ for which the last equality holds. The following Proposition shows that we can always find such a compact set big enough.
\[m-zero\] For every $n\in{{\bf N}}$ there exists a regular compact set $K$ such that $U^n\subseteq K\subseteq U^{n+1}$ and $\nu(\partial K)=0$.
Let $(K)_0$ denote the interior of a set $K$. Consider the family ${{\cal K}}$ of all all compact sets $K$ such that $U^n\subseteq K\subseteq U^{n+1}$. Consider the partial order $\prec$ on ${{\cal K}}\times{{\cal K}}$ such that $K_1\prec K_2$ iff $K_1\subseteq (K_2)_0$. Let $\Xi$ be a maximal chain in ${{\cal K}}$ with respect to this partial order. If $\Xi$ is uncountable then $Z$ contains at least one compact set $K$ with $\nu(\partial K)=0$ since $\nu(U^{n+1})$ is finite. So we may assume that $\Xi$ is countable. There are three possibilities under this assumption:
1). There exist $X,Y\in\Xi$ such that $X\prec Y$ but there does not exist $Z\in\Xi$ such that $X\prec Z\prec Y$. In this case due to regularity of $G$ there exist an open set $W$ and a compact set $K$ such that $X\subseteq W\subseteq K\subseteq (Y)_0$. Due to the maximality of $\Xi$ either $K=X$ and thus $X$ is a clopen set, or $K=Y$ and $Y$ is a clopen set. Since the boundary of a clopen set is the empty set, we are done in this case.
2). The maximal chain $\Xi$ contains the maximal element $X$. Then the similar consideration shows that $X$ is clopen.
3). The order type of $\Xi$ is either $\eta$ or $1+\eta$, where $\eta$ is the order type of ${{\bf Q}}$. Let us show that this case is impossible. Let us discuss the case of $\eta$, the case of $1+\eta$ is absolutely similar.
Let $\Xi=\{X_{{\alpha}}\ |\ {\alpha}\in{{\bf Q}}\}$, and $X_{{\alpha}}\prec X_{{\beta}}$ iff ${\alpha}<{\beta}$. Fix an arbitrary irrational number $a$ and put $Y=\overline{\bigcup_{{\alpha}<a}X_{{\alpha}}}$. Then it is easy to see that for all ${\alpha}<a$ one has $X_{{\alpha}}\prec Y$ and for ${\alpha}>a$ one has $Y\prec X_{{\alpha}}$. This contradicts the maximality of $\Xi$.
So we proved that there exists a compact set $K$ such that $U^n\subseteq K\subseteq U^{n+1}$ and $\nu(\partial K)=0$. If this $K$ is not regular we can consider $K'=\overline{(K)_0}$. It is well known that $K'$ is always regular, $\partial K'\subseteq\partial
K$ and thus $\nu(\partial K')=0$ and $K'\subseteq U^{n+1}$. On the other hand an open set $U^n\subseteq K$ and thus $U^n\subseteq
(K)_0\subseteq K'$
The proof of Lemma \[HU\] used the finite decomposition of the compact group $G$ by the cosets of subgroup $\Gamma(U)=\bigcup\limits_{n=1}^{\infty}U^n$. In general case this subgroup may not be compact, but it is complete and thus clopen. Also the number of cosets may not be finite. So we need the following modification of the mentioned decomposition.
\[decomp\] For any symmetric relatively compact neighborhood of the unit $V$ and for any compact set $B\subseteq G$ there exist a regular compact set $C'$ and a finite set $\{g_1,\dots, g_n\}\subset G$ such that
- the interior $(C')_0$ of $C'$ is $V$-connected;
- $\nu(\partial C')=0$;
- $B\subseteq\bigcup\limits_{i=1}^ng_iC'$;
- if $i\neq j$ then $g_iC'V\cap g_jC'V=\emptyset$
Consider the decomposition of $G$ into the family (maybe infinite) of left cosets of $\Gamma(V)$. Since the cosets are clopen sets there exist only finitely many cosets $\Gamma_1=g_1\Gamma(V),\dots,\Gamma_n=g_n\Gamma(V)$ such that $\Gamma_i\cap B\neq\emptyset,\ i=1,\dots,n$ and there exists an $m\in{{\bf N}}$ such that for all $i\leq n$ holds $\Gamma_i\cap B\subseteq g_iV^m$. By Proposition \[m-zero\] there exist regular compact set $C'$ with $\nu(\partial C')=0$ such that $V^m\subseteq C'\subseteq V^{m+1}$. By Lemma \[U-con\] the set $C'$ is $V$-connected. It is easy to see that $C'$ satisfies all other conditions of this lemma. For example, $g_i\Gamma(V)\cdot V= g_i\Gamma(V)$ and thus the last condition holds.
We are able now to complete the proof of Lemma \[HUC\]. Similarly to the proof of Lemma \[HU\] we will show that there exist a compact set $C\supseteq B$ and a hyperfinite set $F\subset {\,^*\!}C$ such that ${\,^*\!}C\subset F{\,^*\!}U$ and for any internal $I\subseteq F\ {\,^*\!}\nu(I{\,^*\!}U\cap {\,^*\!}C)\geq\frac{|I|}{|F|}\nu(C)$. Lemma \[HUC\] follows from this statement by Transfer Principle.
Let $U=U_1U_2U_3$. We may assume that $U_2$ is symmetric without the loss of generality. Let $C'$ and $g_1,\dots,g_n$ satisfy conditions of Lemma \[decomp\] for $B$ and $V=U_2$. Put $C=g_1C'\cup\dots\cup g_nC'$. Consider an internal compact $K$ satisfying $\Gamma (U_2)\subseteq K\subseteq{\,^*\!}\Gamma(U_2)$.
There exists a hyperfinite set $M$ such that
- $\{g_1,\dots,g_n\}\subseteq M$;
- $G\subseteq MK$;
- for any $m_1\neq m_2\in M$ holds $m_1K{\,^*\!}U_2\cap m_2K{\,^*\!}U_2=\emptyset$.
Indeed, let $G\subseteq X\subseteq {\,^*\!}G$ be an internal compact set. Let $D=\{E\in{\,^*\!}G/{\,^*\!}\Gamma(U_2)\ |\ E\cap X\neq\emptyset\}$. Then $D$ is hyperfinite and for any $g\in G$ one has ${\,^*\!}(g\Gamma(U_2))\in D$. Consider an internal set $M'$ of representatives of the internal family $D\setminus\{g_1{\,^*\!}\Gamma(U_2),\dots,g_n{\,^*\!}\Gamma(U_2)\}$ and put $M=M'\cup\{g_1,\dots,g_n\}$. If $m_1\neq m_2\in M$ then $m_1{\,^*\!}\Gamma(U_2){\,^*\!}U_2\cap m_2{\,^*\!}\Gamma(U_2){\,^*\!}U_2=\emptyset$ since $\Gamma(U_2)U_2=\Gamma(U_2)$ and thus $m_1K{\,^*\!}U_2\cap m_2K{\,^*\!}U_2=\emptyset$.
Let $O\subseteq{\,^*\!}G$ be an infinitesimal neighborhood of the unit and a hyperfinite set $H$ be an optimal $O$-grid for $K$. Then obviously $MH$ is an optimal $O$-grid for $MK$. Put $F=MH\cap C$. By Proposition \[integral\] the functional $$\Lambda(f)={\,^\circ\,\!\!}\left(\frac 1{|F|}\sum\limits_{x\in MH}{\,^*\!}f(x)\right)$$ restricted on $C_0(G)$ is an invariant functional, which induces the Haar measure $\nu_C$ on $G$ such that $\nu_C(C)=1$, for it is easy to see that $\nu(\partial C)=0$. In what follows we identify $\nu_C$ and $\nu$.
Fix an arbitrary internal $I\subseteq F$. We have to prove that ${\,^*\!}\nu(I\cdot{\,^*\!}U\cap{\,^*\!}C)\geq\frac{|I|}{|F|}$.
Let $A={\mbox{st}}(I)\cdot U_1$. There are two possibilities.
1). The set $\overline{A}\cap C$ is the union of $k\leq n$ sets $g_iC'$, say, $\overline{A}\cap C=\bigcup\limits_{i=1}^kg_iC'$. Then $A\cdot U_2\cap C=\overline{A}\cap C$. Indeed $$\overline {A}\cap C=\overline{A\cap C}\subseteq
(A\cap C)\cdot U_2\cap C\subseteq
(\bigcup\limits_{i=1}^kg_iC'U_2)\cap C =\overline{A}\cap C.$$
The last equality holds since $g_iC'U_2\cap g_jC'=\emptyset$ for $i\neq j$.
So we have $\nu(AU_2\cap C)=\frac kn.$
Let $F_i=F\cap g_i{\,^*\!}C'$. Then $F_i=MH\cap g_i{\,^*\!}C'=g_iH\cap g_i{\,^*\!}C'=g_i({\,^*\!}C'\cap H)$. Thus all $F_i$ have the same cardinality and so $|F_i|=\frac {|F|}n$. By Lemma \[cnonst\] $I\subseteq {\mbox{st}}(I){\,^*\!}U_1\cap {\,^*\!}C$, thus $|I|\leq\frac{k|F|}n$.
Again by Lemma \[cnonst\] ${\,^*\!}({\mbox{st}}(I)\cdot U_1\cdot U_2\cap C)\subseteq I{\,^*\!}U\cap C$, thus $${\,^*\!}\nu(I{\,^*\!}U\cap {\,^*\!}C)\geq\nu({\mbox{st}}(I)\cdot U_1\cdot U_2\cap C)=
\frac kn\geq\frac{|I|}{|F|}.$$
2). For some $i\leq n$ the sets ${\mbox{st}}(I)U_1$, $g_iC'$ and $U_2$ satisfy the conditions of Lemma \[<\] for $A,C$ and $U$ respectively. Using Lemma \[<\], Lemma \[cnonst\] and inequality (4) we obtain: $${\,^*\!}\nu(I\cdot{\,^*\!}U\cap C)\geq\nu({\mbox{st}}(I)\cdot U_1\cdot U_2\cap C)>
\nu(\overline{{\mbox{st}}(I)\cdot U_1\cap C})\geq$$
$$\geq\Lambda(\chi_{{\mbox{st}}(I)\cdot U_1\cap C})=
{\,^\circ\,\!\!}\left(\frac{|({\mbox{st}}(I)\cdot U_1\cap C)\cap F|}{|F|}\right)\geq
{\,^\circ\,\!\!}\left(\frac{|I|}{|F|}\right)\approx\frac{|I|}{|F|}\
\Box$$
Approximation of unimodular groups by loops
===========================================
In this section we sketch a proof of a result a little bit stronger than Theorem 1, namely, the following
\[loop\] Any locally compact abelian group $G$ is approximable by finite loops.
Recall that an element $e$ of a quasigroup $(Q,\circ)$ is called [*the unity*]{} if $\forall a\in Q\, a\circ e=e\circ a=a$. A quasigroup with the unity is called [*a loop*]{}.
Recently, Miloš Ziman [@Ziman] proved that any discrete group is approximable by loops, so we have to prove only the following
\[prop-loop\] Any non-discrete locally compact unimodular group is approximable by finite loops.
To prove this proposition we need the following modifications of Lemma 4 and Theorem 6.
\[loop1\] The three-index matrix $w_{ijk}$ has the following properties.
1. $\sum\limits_{i=1}^nw_{ijk},\sum\limits_{j=1}^nw_{ijk},
\sum\limits_{k=1}^nw_{ijk}\leq\frac{\nu(C)^2}{n^2}$
2. $\forall\ {\langle}i,j{\rangle}\in S\
\sum\limits_{k=1}^nw_{ijk}=\frac{\nu(C)^2}{n^2}$; $\forall\ {\langle}i,k{\rangle}\in S'\
\sum\limits_{j=1}^nw_{ijk}=\frac{\nu(C)^2}{n^2}$; $\forall\ {\langle}j,k{\rangle}\in S''\
\sum\limits_{i=1}^nw_{ijk}=\frac{\nu(C)^2}{n^2}$;
3. $\forall {\langle}i,j,k {\rangle}\; w_{ijk}>0 \Longrightarrow\nu(\ P_i\cdot
P_j\cap P_k)>0$,
where $S'=\{{\langle}i,k{\rangle}\; |\; P_i^{-1}\cdot P_k\subseteq C\}$, $S''=\{{\langle}j,k{\rangle}\; |\; P_k\cdot P_j^{-1}\subseteq C\}$.
The proof is the same as the one of Lemma \[lProp\_w\] (see Section 4).
\[loop2\] Let a non-negative three indexes matrix $w={\langle}w_{ijk}\ |\ 1\leq
i,j,k\leq n{\rangle}$ and sets $S,S',S''\subset\{1,\dots,n\}^2$ satisfy the following conditions:
1. $\sum\limits_{i=1}^nw_{ijk},\sum\limits_{j=1}^nw_{ijk},
\sum\limits_{k=1}^nw_{ijk}\leq l$;
2. $\forall\ {\langle}i,j{\rangle}\in S\ \sum\limits_{k=1}^nw_{ijk}=l$; $\forall\ {\langle}i,k{\rangle}\in S'\ \sum\limits_{j=1}^nw_{ijk}=l$; $\forall\ {\langle}j,k{\rangle}\in S''\ \sum\limits_{i=1}^nw_{ijk}=l$.
for some positive real $l$.
Then there exists a finite partial quasigroup $(Q,\circ)$ and a partition ${\sigma}=\{Q_1,\dots,Q_n\}$ of $Q$ that satisfy the following conditions:
1. the set $\bigcup\limits_{{\langle}i,j{\rangle}\in S}Q_i\times
Q_j\subseteq{\mbox{dom}}(\circ)$;
2. equation $a\circ x=b$ ($x\circ a=b$) has a solution for ${\langle}a,b{\rangle}\in \bigcup\limits_{{\langle}i,j{\rangle}\in S'}Q_i\times Q_j$ (for ${\langle}a,b{\rangle}\in\bigcup\limits_{{\langle}i,j{\rangle}\in S''}Q_i\times
Q_j$);
3. the generalized partial quotient quasigroup $Q/{\sigma}\subseteq{\mbox{supp}}\,w$
The proof is an easy modification of the one of Theorem \[gen-birkhoff\] (see [@GC]).
Using Lemma \[loop1\] and Theorem \[loop2\] one immediately obtains that the quasigroup $Q'$ and the map ${\alpha}:Q'\to{\,^*\!}G$ constructed in the proof of Proposition 1 for the general case (see the very end of Section 4) satisfy the following condition.
[*(I) If ${\alpha}(x),{\alpha}(z)\in{\mbox{ns}}$ and ($x\cdot y =z$ or $y\cdot
x=z$) then ${\alpha}(y)\in{\mbox{ns}}$*]{}.
Now we introduce a new loop operation $*$ on $Q'$ such that $(Q',*)$ approximate $G$ with the same ${\alpha}$.
Construction:
- Take $q_0\in Q'$, such that ${\alpha}(q_0)\approx e$ ($e\in G$ is the unity).
- Find permutation $a:Q'\to Q'$ such that $q_0\circ a(x)=x$. By the property (I) $a(x)\in{\mbox{ns}}$ if and only if $x\in {\mbox{ns}}$. So, if $x\in{\mbox{ns}}$ then $a(x)\approx x$.
- Find permutation $b:Q'\to Q'$ such that $b(x)\circ a(q_0)=x$. By the same argument $b(x)\approx x$ for $x\in{\mbox{ns}}$. It easy to check that $b(q_0)=q_0$.
- Define operation $x*y=b(x)\circ a(y)$. It is easy to see that $(Q',*)$ is a loop with the unity $q_0$ and $(Q',*)$ with ${\alpha}$ approximates $G$.
This proves Proposition \[prop-loop\] $\Box$
[100]{}
Albeverio S., Fenstad J-E., Hoegh-Krohn R., Lindstroem T. [*Nonstandard Methods in Stochastic Analysis and Mathematical Physics*]{}. Academic Press, New York, 1986.
J.K. Dugdale, A.J.W.Hilton, J.Wojciechowski, Fractional latin squares, simplex algebras, and generalized quotients. Journal of statistical planning and inference. 86, 457-504 (2000).
L.Yu. Glebsky, E.I. Gordon, On approximation of topological groups by finite algebraic systems, preprint math.GR/0201101, http://xxx.lanl.gov/. submitted to Illinois Math. J.
L.Yu. Glebsky, Carlos J. Rubio, Latin squares, partial latin squares and its generalized quotients, preprint math.CO/0303356, http://xxx.lanl.gov/. submitted to Combinatoric and Graphs.
E.Hewitt, K.A.Ross. Abstract Harmonic Analysis.
E. Gordon. Nonstandard Methods in Commutative Harmonic Analysis. AMS, Providence, Rhode Island, 1997.
Paul R. Halmos, Measure Theory, Springer-Verlag, New York 1974.
A.J.W. Hilton, Outlines of latin squares. Ann. Discrete Math. 34, 225-242 (1987)
R. Rado. A theorem on General Measure Function. [*Proc. London Math. Soc*]{}, [**44**]{}, 1938, pp. 61-91.
H. J. Ryser, Combinatorial Mathematics, The Carus Mathematical Monographs, 15, The Mathematical Association of America, 1963.
M. Ziman, On local embeddability of groups and groups algebras, unpublished.
Instituto de Investigación en Communicación Optica de Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, México
Eastern Illinois University, USA
IICO-UASLP
Av. Karakorum 1470
Lomas 4ta Sección
San Luis Potosí SLP 7820
México
Phone: 52-444-825-0892 (ext. 120)
e-mail:[email protected]\
Mathematics Department 1-00036
Eastern Illinois University
600 Lincoln Avenue
Charleston, IL 61920-3099
USA
Phone: 1-217-581-6282
e-mail: [email protected]
1991 [*Mathematics Subject Classification*]{}. Primary 26E35, 03H05; Secondary 28E05, 42A38
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'In this article, we demonstrate theoretically and experimentally how one can exploit correlations generated in monolithic semiconductor quantum light sources to enhance the performance of optical target detection. A prototype target detection protocol, the quantum time-correlation (QTC) detection protocol, with spontaneous parametric down-converted photon-pair sources, is discussed. The QTC protocol only requires time-resolved photon-counting detection, which is phase-insensitive and therefore suitable for optical target detection. As a comparison to the QTC detection protocol, we also consider a classical phase-insensitive target detection protocol based on intensity detection. We formulated the target detection problem as a probe light transmission estimation problem, and we quantify the target detection performance with the Fisher information criterion and the receiver operation characteristic analysis. Unlike classical target detection and ranging protocols, the probe photons in our QTC detection protocol are completely indistinguishable from the background noise and therefore useful for covert ranging applications. Finally, our technological platform is highly scalable and tunable and thus amenable to large scale integration necessary for practical applications.'
author:
- 'Han Liu, Amr S. Helmy, '
bibliography:
- './References.bib'
title: Enhancing classical target detection performance using nonclassical Light
---
[Haoyu : Non-classical Semiconductor Photon Sources Enhancing the Performance of Classical Target Detection Systems]{}
INTRODUCTION
============
Optical target detection has been receiving increasing attention owing to many emerging applications in the domains of computing, human/machine interaction, LIDAR, and non-invasive biological imaging, amongst others. Conventionally, the sensitivity of optical target detection could be improved by increasing the source brightness, detector sensitivity or improving the throughput of the optical setup. In addition, computational imaging has been providing astounding advantages to the fidelity of various imaging modalities [@gariepy2016detection], those can be utilized on top of any hardware improvement brought about due to enhanced device performance. Recent work has also explored the extension of target detection techniques and equipment to novel illumination wavelengths suitable for remote sensing of distant objects [@barzanjeh2015microwave]. Practical platforms for these purposes will find applications in sensing, surveillance, and autonomous driving.
Aside from the aforementioned approaches, a novel and radical way to improve the target detection performance is to use a non-classical state of light as the source. Current LIDAR systems are based on illumination sources that can be described by classical electromagnetism. However, the properties of classical states of electromagnetic radiation pose ultimate limits, such as the thermal and shot noise. On the other hand, non-classical states of electromagnetic radiation could exploit two key properties arising in quantum mechanics, namely *quantization of the electromagnetic field* (where the quantized excitations are referred to as *photons*) and *quantum entanglement and correlation*. [^1] It has been shown that the quantum entanglement [@lloyd2008enhanced] and correlations [@Lopaeva:2013; @england2019quantum] that exist within non-classical states of light could be utilized to enhance the accuracy of target detection in the lossy and noisy environment.\
The basic idea of non-classical source enhanced target detection pivots upon non-classical *twin beams* in either radio or optical frequencies. The nonclassical twin beams constitute the *probe* and *reference* light (also referred in the literature as *signal* and *idler* light, respectively) that are highly entangled and correlated with each other. The probe light is sent towards the target and the back-reflected light is collected for detection. The reference light is stored and detected locally. Through analyzing the quantum entanglement, or classical correlation, between the collected light (which could be probe light or noise light when the target is absent) and the reference light with an appropriate measurement scheme, it is possible to distinguish the presence and absence of the target object even in the presence of strong environmental noise. This is because, unlike the probe light, environmental noise is not correlated or entangled with the reference light.
One of the most prominent approaches to utilize such quantum advantages is *quantum illumination*, which utilizes the entanglement between the reference and probe light to significantly boost the target detection sensitivity beyond the classical limit [@lloyd2008enhanced]. Recent work suggests that such benefits of entanglement could even survive through an extremely lossy and noisy target detection channel [@Zhang:2015]. However, in order to profit from such entanglement benefit, a significant level of complexity in the instrumentation, including phase-sensitive joint detection[^2], is essential. For example, the implementation in [@Zhang:2015] requires sub-wavelength-level stabilization of optical phases between the probe and reference light, which is far from practical if the target distance is unknown or fluctuating. As such, formidable challenges lie ahead on the route to harvesting the entanglement advantages. An alternative strategy to enhance the target detection performance while mitigating the complexity of quantum illumination is to only use classical correlations that exist in the non-classical twin beams. Unlike entanglement, the measurement of correlation only entails independent measurements of the probe and reference light and is therefore much more feasible for practical implementation. The key aspect of correlation enhanced target detection protocols is the type of correlation that is utilized, which could be intensity correlation, amplitude correlation or time-frequency correlation, etc.\
The most important component of correlation enhanced target detection protocols is the non-classical light sources. There has been astounding progress in the prowess of such non-classical sources in the last decade [@Kang:2016; @Kang:2015]. In particular, it has been shown that integrated monolithic semiconductor devices can be used to generate and tailor high-quality quantum states of light in active semiconductor structures, such as aluminum gallium arsenide (AlGaAs) devices [@Valles:2013; @Horn:2012]. Such structures can directly produce non-classical twin beams without any additional off-chip interferometry, spectral filtering, compensation, or post-selection. The generated twin beams could be effectively coupled into optical fiber or integrated target detection systems. The flexibility in waveguide structure design also allows for efficient dispersion control and quantum state engineering.\
In this article, we provide a review of the recent advances in optical target detection that exploit the strong temporal correlation of non-classical twin beams [@liu2019enhancing; @trans]. We theoretically analyze and experimentally demonstrate a prototype target detection protocol with a semiconductor waveguide source. The experimental result shows substantial enhancement of the target detection performance as compared to the classical protocol that does not utilize correlation. Moreover, we show that the semiconductor waveguide source is suitable for practical implementations due to its flexible tailorability and potential in high-density integration.
CORRELATION ENHANCED TARGET DETECTION
=====================================
The general schematic of correlation enhanced target detection protocols consists of three sections: *source*, *transceiver*, and *detection*, as shown in Fig. \[SETUP\]. In the source section, the non-classical probe and reference light are generated and separated (through, for example, wavelength or polarization demultiplexing). The probe and reference light could be (simultaneously) correlated in many degree of freedoms, such as such as time, frequency and intensity, etc. The probe light is sent to probe the target in the transceiver section. The back-reflected light from the target object (none if the target object is absent) is collected for detection in the detection section. Despite the presence of the target object, strong background noise always couples into the detection section and gets detected. The background noise is assumed to be continuous-wave (CW) and broadband white noise that is completely uncorrelated with the reference light. The reference light is directly sent to the detection section and get detected. The optical path lengths of the reference and probe light do not have to be balanced. The detection section consists of two photo-detectors (the probe detector and reference detector) that can resolve the correlated degree of freedoms of the probe and reference light. The presence or absence of the target object could be determined by analyzing the correlation between the collected light and the reference light since only probe light that is reflected by the target object could be correlated with the reference light. The *correlation enhancement* of the target detection performance is most pronounced in a noisy environment: the strong correlation between the probe and reference light can help to easily distinguish the reflected probe light from the noise background. The measurement of the correlation only requires independent and separate measurements of the probe and reference light. Therefore the non-classical entanglement between them is not directly observed. However, the correlation enhancement of the target detection performance can still be considered as a quantum benefit because the correlation strength between the probe and reference light can exceed the classical limit[@Lopaeva:2013; @england2019quantum]. For comparison, the current state-of-the-art in LIDAR simply transmits photons towards the target and observes the reflection. In other words, no correlation of any kind is used. This classical protocol will be referred to as the CI (classical intensity) protocol in the rest of the paper. In the case of radars, it is possible to do better than this using match filtering. However, that is not easily possible in the optical regime. Hence, such a direct intensity detection scheme for LIDAR can be considered as the baseline for comparison.\
{width="0.8\columnwidth"}
The key aspect of correlation enhanced target detection protocols is the correlation between the probe and reference light. To date, the most widely adopted approach to generate correlated twin beams is spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC). The generated probe and reference light could be correlated in multiple degrees of freedom, based on which different types of target detection protocols could be designed. To give an intuitive and quantitative comparison between different protocols, it is instructive to quantify the strength of different types of correlation. Assuming the detection outcome of the two detectors obey the joint distribution $p(x,y)$, the correlation between the probe light and the reference light could be quantified as the *mutual information* (MI) [@bavaud2005introduction]: $$\begin{gathered}
\text{MI} = \sum\limits_{x\in \mathcal{X},y\in\mathcal{Y}} p(x,y)\text{log}_2(\frac{p(x,y)}{p(x)p(y)})\label{MIEQ}\end{gathered}$$ where $\mathcal{X},\mathcal{Y}$ are the spaces of detection outcome $x,y$ for the probe and reference detector. Since the target detection performance is directly limited by the transmitted probe power, it is useful to consider the normalized mutual information, which is defined as the mutual information divided by the average number of transmitted probe photons. The expression of the normalized mutual information could serve as a theoretical measure for the correlation enhancement of the target detection performance, despite that its specific expression may not be directly used for practical performance characterization.
Intensity Correlation
---------------------
The intensity correlation that exists within the probe and reference light simply means that the number of generated probe photons and reference photons are always equal. In other words, the detection of a reference photon implies that one single probe photon has been sent to probe the target object. Intensity correlation has already been used in quantum imaging to reduce the noise below the standard quantum limit [@brida2010experimental]. In the implementations [@Lopaeva:2013; @england2019quantum; @He:2018] of intensity correlation enhanced target detection protocols (will be referred to as intensity correlation protocols in the rest of this paper), the correlated twin beams are generated through pulse pumped SPDC: a short wavelength pump light pulse with narrow temporal duration interacts with the nonlinear medium and generates a pair of short duration wave packets for the probe and reference light. The number of generated probe and reference photons in their respective wave packets are always equal. The detection section of the intensity correlation protocols consists of time-resolved photon-counting detectors for both the collected light and reference light. The temporal resolution of the detectors is required so that each probe light wave packet and its correlated reference light wave packet are resolved and “paired” correctly. In practical implementations, the nonlinear conversion efficiency is usually very low that the probability $\bar{n}$ of generating a probe (reference photon) in a wave packet is much less than unity. Under this approximation, the probability distribution $p_I(x,y)$ of generating $x$ probe and $y$ reference photons is given by: $$\begin{gathered}
p_I(0,0) = 1-\bar{n}\hspace{1cm}p_I(1,1) = \bar{n} \\
p_I(1,0) = p_I(0,1) = 0 \end{gathered}$$ The normalized mutual information $\text{MI}_\text{I}$ between the probe and reference photon number could be calculated according to : $$\begin{gathered}
\text{MI}_\text{I} = \frac{ -\bar{n}{\text{log}_2}(\bar{n}) - (1-\bar{n}){\text{log}_2}(1-\bar{n}) }{\bar{n}} \simeq -{\text{log}_2}\bar{n}\end{gathered}$$ As can be seen, the intensity correlation is very high with low mean probe photon number per pulse $\bar{n}$ but diminishes rapidly as $\bar{n}$ increases. Therefore for pulse pumped intensity correlation protocols, the correlation enhancement is limited to the low $\bar{n}$ regime [@england2019quantum].
Temporal Correlation
--------------------
For the intensity correlation protocol that is based on pulse pumped SPDC process, the correlation enhancement is limited to the low mean photon number per pulse ($\bar{n}$) regime. A way to increase the target detection performance without sacrificing the correlation enhancement is to increase the repetition rate of the probe pulses but keep the mean probe photon number per pulse $\bar{n}$ fixed. In the limit where the repetition period equals the pulse duration of the pump light, the pump light becomes CW. This generalized protocol with CW pump light will be termed the quantum temporal correlation (QTC) protocol since the probe and reference photon are generated in pairs ‘almost simultaneously’ [@liu2019enhancing]. The correlation time $\Delta t$, which is defined as the standard deviation of the time difference between the generation of probe and reference photon, quantifies the intrinsic temporal correlation. To utilize such temporal correlation, the detectors must be able to resolve the detection time of each incoming photon. It is worth noting that the detection of the probe and reference photons does not have to be simultaneous since their optical path lengths are not equal in general. The temporal correlation analysis is done in post data processing. For simplicity of the following analysis, the detectors are assumed to have a perfect temporal resolution. To model the probability distribution of the different detection outcomes, it is convenient to consider a long quasi-CW pump pulse, during which the probability of generating a photon pair is $\bar{n}$. When a photon pair is generated, then the conditional joint probability distribution of detection time $t_p,t_r$ of the probe and reference photon, respectively, could be approximated as a bivariate Gaussian distribution. Then the joint probability $p_T$ of the detection outcomes is: $$\begin{gathered}
p_T(\text{no pairs}) = 1-\bar{n}\\
p_T(t_p,t_r) = \frac{\bar{n}}{2\pi\sigma_+\sigma_-} \exp(-\frac{(t_p-t_r)^2}{4\sigma^2_-}-\frac{(t_p+t_r)^2}{4\sigma^2_+})\end{gathered}$$ where $\sigma_+$ characterizes the duration of the quasi-CW pump pulse and $\sigma_-=\Delta t/\sqrt{2}$ quantifies the intrinsic temporal correlation time of the photon pairs. The normalized mutual information $\text{MI}_T$ corresponds to the probability distribution of the measurement outcomes is given by: $$\begin{gathered}
\text{MI}_\text{T} = \text{MI}_\text{I} -\frac{1}{2}{\text{log}_2}(1-(\frac{\sigma_+^2-\sigma_-^2}{\sigma_+^2+\sigma_-^2})^2)\end{gathered}$$ The additional term of $\text{MI}_\text{T}$ is the temporal correlation enhancement, which is inversely related to the pump duration $\sigma_+$ and directly related to the intrinsic temporal correlation time $\Delta t$. Ideally, to achieve large correlation enhancement, the intrinsic temporal correlation time $\Delta t$ should be as short as possible. However, it should be noted that the detector temporal resolution could limit the amount of intrinsic temporal correlation that could be utilized for target detection. The comparison between the normalized mutual information for different protocols is shown in Fig. \[MI\].
![Comparison between the normalized mutual information for target detection protocols enhanced by (blue) intensity correlation and (red,magenta and orange) temporal correlation. The pump pulse duration $\sigma_+$ for the temporal correlation protocol is set to 1 ns.[]{data-label="MI"}](fig2.pdf){width="0.6\columnwidth"}
FIGURE OF MERIT FOR TARGET DETECTION PROTOCOLS
==============================================
In correlation enhanced target detection protocols, multiple detectors (i.e. the probe and reference detector) are used to resolve the correlation between the probe and reference photon. Therefore the probability distribution of the different detection outcomes is multi-dimensional. However, it is generally hard to directly infer the presence or absence of the target object from the experimentally observed multidimensional distribution. Instead, a practical approach for target detection is to construct a *target detection signal*, defined in terms of the experimentally measured quantities, to quantify the probability of the presence of the target object. Based on different definitions of target detection signal, the target detection performance could also be quantified by different figures of merit. A general and suitable figure of merit for target detection is important for quantifying and comparing the performances of different target detection protocols.\
The Signal-to-noise Ratio Figure Of Merit
-----------------------------------------
For intensity correlation protocols, one way to construct the target detection signal is to directly define it as the covariance between the output of the probe and reference detectors. In reference [@Lopaeva:2013; @He:2018] the target detection signal is defined as the covariance between the number of photons that are detected on the probe and the reference detector: $$\begin{gathered}
S_{COV} = N_pN_r - {\langle N_p \rangle}{\langle N_r \rangle}\end{gathered}$$ where $N_p$ and $N_r$ stand for the number of collected photons and reference photons detected in a pair of probe and reference wave packet. The angle brackets stand for statistical averages over multiple SPDC pump pulses. A unique feature of this definition is that the average value of ${\langle S_{COV} \rangle}$ is always zero when the target object is absent. Therefore ${\langle S_{COV} \rangle}$ is resilient to the fluctuation of environment noise power. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the target detection is quantified as the contrast of $S_{COV}$ (normalized by its standard deviation) when the target object is present or absent: $$\begin{gathered}
\text{SNR}_{COV} = \frac{{\langle S_{COV} \rangle}_{in}-{\langle S_{COV} \rangle}_{out}}{\sqrt{{\langle \Delta^2S_{COV} \rangle}_{in}+{\langle \Delta^2S_{COV} \rangle}_{out}}}\end{gathered}$$ where the subscript $in$ and $out$ stand for the presence and absence of the target object and ${\langle \Delta^2 S_{COV} \rangle}$ is the variance of $S_{COV}$. Note that ${\langle S_{COV} \rangle}_{out}$ is always zero. To show the performance advantage of the intensity correlation protocol, previous works [@Lopaeva:2013; @He:2018] considered a similar classical intensity correlation protocol that is based on a correlated thermal twin-beam source, which has been proven to be the optimal source for classical intensity correlation [@Lopaeva:2013]. The ratio of the performance (quantified as $SNR_{COV}$) of the intensity correlation protocol and the classical intensity correlation protocol is plotted in Fig. \[PowerSNR\], as a function of mean probe photon number per pulse for different background noise and loss condition. The detail of the experimental result could be found in [@He:2018]. As can be seen, the performance advantage of the intensity correlation protocol is limited to the low mean probe photon number per pulsed regime.\
![The performance advantages (quantified as the ratio of the $\text{SNR}_{COV}$) of the intensity correlation protocol as compared to the classical intensity correlation protocol. Blue (teal) line: with (without) the additional loss and noise in the target detection channel. The detail of the experimental result and analysis could be found in [@He:2018]. []{data-label="PowerSNR"}](fig3.pdf){width="0.6\columnwidth"}
A more straightforward definition of target detection signal for intensity correlation protocols is the rate of coincidence detections ($N_c = N_pN_r$), which is defined as the probability of detecting photons on both the probe and reference detectors in a pair of probe and reference wave packet [@england2019quantum]. The definition of the target detection signal is chosen in this manner since coincidence detections directly reflect the paired-generation nature of probe and reference photons. The target detection SNR is quantified as the contrast of $N_c$ when the target object is present or absent: $$\begin{gathered}
\text{SNR}_{NC} = \frac{{\langle N_c \rangle}_{in}-{\langle N_c \rangle}_{out}}{{\langle N_c \rangle}_{out}}\end{gathered}$$ where, as before, the subscript $in$ and $out$ stand for the presence and absence of the target object and the angle brackets stand for statistical averages. It could be shown that, under this figure of merit, the correlation enhancement of the intensity correlation protocol, as compared to the CI protocol with direct intensity detection only, is given by the second-order cross-correlation function $g^{(1,1)}$ of the probe and reference light [@england2019quantum]: $$\begin{gathered}
g^{(1,1)}= \frac{{\langle N_pN_r \rangle}}{{\langle N_p \rangle}{\langle N_r \rangle}}\end{gathered}$$ Since $g^{(1,1)}$ is inversely proportional to the number of probe and reference photons generated per pulse, it is clear that the correlation enhancement of the intensity correlation protocol is limited to the low mean probe photon number per pulse regime. This is in agreement with the previous analysis with the mutual information criterion.\
The Transmission Estimation (Fisher Information) Figure Of Merit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Although the previously mentioned definitions of target detection signal and figure of merit demonstrate the quantum enhancement of intensity correlation protocols compared to their classical counterparts, they are implementation-dependent and artificial to some extent. For example, the definition of SNR cannot be easily generalized for the QTC protocol. Therefore, to quantify and compare the performances of different correlation enhanced target detection protocols, a more general definition of target detection signal and figure of merit is needed. The solution to this problem to formulate target detection as a transmission estimation problem: from the experimentally measured photo-detection statistics, it is possible to obtain an estimation $\hat{\eta}_p$ of the total transmission $\eta_p$ of the probe light [^3]. The estimated transmission $\hat{\eta}_p$ is a natural choice of the ‘target detection signal’ since its average value is positive if and only if the target object is present. The variance of transmission estimation, on the other hand, characterizes the minimal value of transmission that could be distinguished from zero transmission, and therefore quantify the target detection sensitivity. According to the parameter estimation theory [@ly2017tutorial], the maximal likelihood estimation $\hat{\eta}_{p,MLE}$ could achieve the minimal estimation variance, which is given by the inverse of the corresponding Fisher information FI: $$\begin{gathered}
\hat{\eta}_{p,MLE} = \operatorname*{argmax}\limits_{0\le \eta_p\le 1} p_{\eta_p}(x) \\
\text{FI} = \sum\limits_{x'} p_{\eta_p}(x') ({\frac{d}{d\eta_p}}\text{log}p_{\eta_p}(x'))^2\end{gathered}$$ where $p_{\eta_p}(x')$ is the probability distribution function of the different experiment outcomes $x'$ and $x$ are the actual experiment outcome. The value of the Fisher information FI depends on many factors such as the environment loss, target object reflectivity, and the detection efficiency.\
The transmission estimation formalism could also be used for receiver operation characteristics (ROC) analysis, which is a widely adopted figure of merit for target detection. When the target object is present ($\mathbf{H_1}$) or absent ($\mathbf{H_0}$), the probe transmission estimation signal $\hat{\eta}_{p,MLE}$ could be modeled as: $$\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{H}_1&: \hat{\eta}_{p,MLE} =\eta_p+\mathbf{n}(\eta_p)\\ \nonumber
\mathbf{H}_0&: \hat{\eta}_{p,MLE} =\mathbf{n}(0)\end{aligned}$$ where $\mathbf{n}(\eta_p)$ is the estimation uncertainty as a function of the probe photon transmission $\eta_p$ ($\eta_p=0$ when the target object is absent). The presence or absence of the target object could be decided with certain detection probability $P_\text{d}$ and false alarm probability $P_{fa}$ [^4] by comparing $\hat{\eta}_{p,MLE}$ to a threshold value $V$. By varying the threshold $V$, the relationship between the detection rate $P_\text{d}$ and the false alarm rate $P_\text{fa}$ (widely known as the ROC curve) could be derived. By assuming that the estimation uncertainty $\mathbf{n}(\eta_p)$ is a Gaussian random variable with variance given by the inverse of the Fisher information (FI), the theoretical prediction of the ROC curve could be obtained [@trans].
The Performance Of The Temporal Correlation Enhanced Target Detection Protocol
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transmission estimation and Fisher information criterion are useful for characterizing the QTC protocol performance. For the QTC protocol, the detection section consists of time-resolved single-photon detectors (the probe and reference detector). Since the target detection channel could be considered as stationary, i.e. target not moving, the absolute time of each photon detection event is not informative. Therefore only time information that relates the time difference of different target detection events could be of interest. Such statistics must be the number of coincidence detections $N_c$, which is defined as detecting two photons on both the probe and reference detector, with the detection time difference less than a small coincidence window $T_c$. Two other photon detection statistics of interest are the number of photon detection events $N_p,N_r$ on the probe and reference detector that do not contribute to coincidence detections. It could be shown that $N_c,N_p,N_r$ each obeys an independent Poisson distribution. The Fisher information for transmission estimation could be calculated from the joint probability distribution of $N_p,N_c$ and $N_r$ [@liu2019enhancing]: $$\begin{gathered}
\text{FI} = (\frac{\eta_r^2\nu^2}{P_c}+\frac{(1-\eta_r)^2\nu^2}{P_p}+\frac{\eta_r^2\nu^2}{P_r})\tau\\
P_c = \eta_r\eta_p \nu+\eta_r\nu_b\nu T_c\\
P_r = \eta_r \nu - P_c\hspace{20pt}\\
P_p = \nu_b+ \eta_p\nu - P_c \label{eq1}\end{gathered}$$ The definitions of different variables are summarized in table \[TAB\]. The Fisher information $\text{FI}$ increases as the coincidence window $T_c$ decreases, suggesting that the performance of the QTC protocol is related to the temporal correlation. The minimal coincidence window is limited by the intrinsic temporal correlation $\Delta t$ of the twin beams as well as the detector temporal resolution [@liu2019enhancing]. It worth noting that the CI protocol, which only consists of intensity detection on the probe detector, could be considered as a special case of the QTC protocol where the transmission of the reference photon $\eta_r$ is set to zero.
$P_c$ coincidence detection rate (Hz)
---------- --------------------------------------------------
$P_r$ reference detector detection rate (Hz)
$P_p$ probe detector detection rate (Hz)
$\nu$ probe photon generation rate (Hz)
$\nu_b$ number of noise photons detected per second (Hz)
$\eta_p$ total transmission of the probe light
$\eta_r$ total transmission of the reference light
$T_c$ coincidence window
$\tau$ detection time (s)
: table list of variables
\[TAB\]
SYSTEM DEMONSTRATION
====================
To date, most of the prior work on quantum illumination and correlation enhanced target detection work has been using bulk optics. While notable in terms of demonstrating a certain type of quantum advantage, they employed intensity correlation. The correlation enhancement has been shown in terms of the ROC metric, which is fundamental in radar detection theory. However, for it to be of interest to radar practitioners, advantage has to be demonstrated in the regime where the $P_\text{fa}$ is of the order of $10^{-6}$. No prior work has demonstrated this in experimental investigations, be it optical or microwave. In this section, we provide an overview of the first such demonstration [@trans; @liu2019enhancing] based on the QTC protocol in a setup that lends itself to be a scalable solution.
Experimental Setup
------------------
As shown in the schematic plot Figure. \[SETUP\], the QTC experimental setup consists of three sections: the non-classical photon-pair source, the free-space transceiver, and the detection system. The photon pair source is a 5$\mu$m x 1mm semiconductor waveguide that is pumped by an external CW Ti-Sapphire laser at 783 nm. The broadband, CW probe (with horizontal polarization) and reference (with vertical polarization) light are separated by a polarization beam-splitter. The reference light is immediately sent to and detected by the reference detector in the detection section. The probe light is sent to the transceiver section and emitted through an optical collimator towards the target object. The back-scattered probe light from the target object is collected by a telescope and detected by the probe detector in the detection section. To simulate strong environmental noise, broadband CW noise light from a light-emitting diode shines towards the collection optics, leading to a large number of noise photons getting detected on the probe detector. The three sections of the setup are connected via single-mode fibers, which enables a flexible system deployment.
Semiconductor Sources Of Non-classical Photon Pairs
---------------------------------------------------
The semiconductor SPDC waveguide used is based on the AlGaAs material platform. The dimension of the waveguide is $\simeq 1$mm long and $\simeq 5\mu m$ wide as shown in Fig. \[SAMPLE\]. The ridge and the substrate of the waveguide are based on Bragg structure, which consists of alternating layers of AlGaAs alloy with different compositions ($Al_xGa_{1-x}As,0\le x \le1$). The semi-periodical structure provides simultaneous confinement of the 783nm pump light and the generated photon pairs around 1566 nm. In addition, the waveguide structure is also designed to satisfy the momentum matching condition that is required for the SPDC process to occur. The conversion efficiency is estimated to be 2.1$\times 10^{-8}$ [@Horn:2012] for a probe-reference photon pair to be generated by a 783nm pump photon.\
![Self pumped semiconductor sources for quantum light. (a)the structure of the laser. (b) the energy level diagram of the device elucidating the down conversion process. (c) the light, current, voltage curves of the pump laser. (d)A scanning electron micrograph of the waveguide cross-section.[]{data-label="SAMPLE"}](fig4_abc.pdf "fig:"){width="0.6\columnwidth"}\
![Self pumped semiconductor sources for quantum light. (a)the structure of the laser. (b) the energy level diagram of the device elucidating the down conversion process. (c) the light, current, voltage curves of the pump laser. (d)A scanning electron micrograph of the waveguide cross-section.[]{data-label="SAMPLE"}](fig4_d.pdf "fig:"){width="0.6\columnwidth"}
Measured Performance
--------------------
We experimentally demonstrated the QTC protocol to confirm its performance enhancement over its classical counterpart (the CI protocol). The target detection experiments of the QTC are carried out under different conditions (probe light flux and noise light flux). The experiment data for the CI protocol is obtained from the experiment data of the QTC protocol by neglecting the photon detection events on the reference detector (since CI could be treated as a special case of QTC with zero reference photon transmission). By doing so the experimental conditions of the QTC experiment and CI experiment are made sure identical. The variance of the transmission estimation as a function of varying probe light flux and noise light flux is shown in Fig. \[FI\_RESULT\]. The experimental result is in close agreement with the theoretical prediction of the Fisher information calculation. As can be seen, the performance enhancement of the QTC protocol is most pronounced in the high noise and low probe light flux regime, with the enhancement (defined as the ratio between the estimation variance for the QTC and CI protocol) as a function of noise, and probe light flux reaching up to 21.36 dB, 26.3 dB respectively. In the current implementation of the QTC protocol, one of the major performance limiting factor is the detector temporal resolution $\simeq 100$ps. The detector temporal resolution and the target detection performance can be (effectively) improved with better single-photon detection technology or novel photon detection techniques [@liu2019enhancing] as shown in Fig. \[FI\_RESULT\]. This is in contrast to the intensity correlation protocol where the correlation enhancement is solely determined by the mean probe photon number per pulse $\bar{n}$ and limited to the low $\bar{n}$ regime.\
![Error bars and solid curves: the experimentally measured and theoretical predicted variance of the transmission estimation with different environment loss (top) and noise (bottom) condition for both the QTC (orange) and the CI (black) protocol. Dashed curves: theoretically predicted estimation variance for the QTC protocol with different detector temporal resolution, which equals to half of the coincidence window $T_c$. Details about the experiment result could be found in [@liu2019enhancing] []{data-label="FI_RESULT"}](fig5_top.pdf "fig:"){width="0.4\columnwidth"}\[n\] ![Error bars and solid curves: the experimentally measured and theoretical predicted variance of the transmission estimation with different environment loss (top) and noise (bottom) condition for both the QTC (orange) and the CI (black) protocol. Dashed curves: theoretically predicted estimation variance for the QTC protocol with different detector temporal resolution, which equals to half of the coincidence window $T_c$. Details about the experiment result could be found in [@liu2019enhancing] []{data-label="FI_RESULT"}](fig5_bottom.pdf "fig:"){width="0.4\columnwidth"}\[p\]
![Top and middle:the experimentally measured and theoretically predicted ROC curves for the QTC and the CI protocol in linear and log scale. To reach the same detection rate $P_\text{d}$, with the false alarm rate $P_\text{fa}=10^{-6}$ and detection time $\tau=0.01s$, the CI protocol takes 56.75 more detection time. Bottom:the theoretically predicted ROC curve with improved reference channel efficiency and detector temporal resolution. The detection time is set to $\tau=0.005s$. Details of the experimental parameters could be found in [@trans]. []{data-label="ROC_FIG"}](fig6_top.pdf "fig:"){width="0.4\columnwidth"} ![Top and middle:the experimentally measured and theoretically predicted ROC curves for the QTC and the CI protocol in linear and log scale. To reach the same detection rate $P_\text{d}$, with the false alarm rate $P_\text{fa}=10^{-6}$ and detection time $\tau=0.01s$, the CI protocol takes 56.75 more detection time. Bottom:the theoretically predicted ROC curve with improved reference channel efficiency and detector temporal resolution. The detection time is set to $\tau=0.005s$. Details of the experimental parameters could be found in [@trans]. []{data-label="ROC_FIG"}](fig6_middle.pdf "fig:"){width="0.4\columnwidth"}\
![Top and middle:the experimentally measured and theoretically predicted ROC curves for the QTC and the CI protocol in linear and log scale. To reach the same detection rate $P_\text{d}$, with the false alarm rate $P_\text{fa}=10^{-6}$ and detection time $\tau=0.01s$, the CI protocol takes 56.75 more detection time. Bottom:the theoretically predicted ROC curve with improved reference channel efficiency and detector temporal resolution. The detection time is set to $\tau=0.005s$. Details of the experimental parameters could be found in [@trans]. []{data-label="ROC_FIG"}](fig6_bottom.pdf "fig:"){width="0.4\columnwidth"}
The experimentally determined and theoretically calculated ROC curves of the QTC and CI protocol with detection time $\tau=0.01s$ are shown in Fig. \[ROC\_FIG\]. As can be seen, under the condition of strong environment noise ($\simeq 20$dB stronger than the detected probe light power) and at the fixed false alarm rate of $1\times10^{-6}$, the QTC protocol takes $\simeq$ 57 times less time to reach the same detection probability $P_\text{d}$ as the CI protocol. Such detection time reduction suggests that the QTC protocol is capable of detecting the target object with a much higher speed.
Covert Ranging
--------------
In addition to noise resilient target detection, the ability to range with CW probe light is another important application of the QTC protocol. For classical target detection protocols to determine the distance of the target, pulsed electromagnetic radiation is typically used to probe the target. Then the target distance can be calculated from the time-of-flight of the probe light. However, the fact that pulsed light is distinguishable from the CW background noise will make the probe light visible to the unauthorized receivers and therefore vulnerable to active attacks. Ranging with classical time-invariant radiation is not possible since the time-invariant back-reflected signal does not contain much information about the target distance. On the other hand, ranging with the CW probe light is indeed possible for the QTC protocol. This is because each probe photon is temporally correlated with a reference photon, and the travel distance of the probe light can be calculated from the detection time difference of the probe and reference photon. Since each probe photon in the QTC detection protocol is generated at fundamentally random time and frequency, they are indistinguishable from the CW broadband environment noise. A preliminary covert ranging experiment result has been shown in Fig. \[RANGING\]. The maximal distance resolution is around $\simeq$5 cm, which is limited by the detector temporal resolution.
![Ranging result of the QTC protocol. Top: measured distance versus the physical distance. Bottom: the “radar signal” as a function of hypothetical target distance. The 5 panels from top to bottom correspond to physical target distance of 13, 32, 53, 68, 85cm. Details of the experimental parameters can be found in [@liu2019enhancing][]{data-label="RANGING"}](fig7_top.pdf "fig:"){width="0.4\columnwidth"}\[ranging1\] ![Ranging result of the QTC protocol. Top: measured distance versus the physical distance. Bottom: the “radar signal” as a function of hypothetical target distance. The 5 panels from top to bottom correspond to physical target distance of 13, 32, 53, 68, 85cm. Details of the experimental parameters can be found in [@liu2019enhancing][]{data-label="RANGING"}](fig7_bottom.pdf "fig:"){width="0.4\columnwidth"}\[ranging2\]
DISCUSSION
==========
Technological Possibilities
---------------------------
The experimental demonstration of the QTC protocol with a semiconductor waveguide source has shown that substantial correlation enhancement of target detection performance is possible, particularly in the low-SNR regime. The results were first presented and discussed in detail in [@liu2019enhancing; @trans]. No prior work has demonstrated the correlation enhancement in terms of the ROC metric, common in radar signal processing literature, and at the practically interesting regime of $P_{\text{fa}}=10^{-6}$. However, while this is interesting, the question is whether the demonstrated system is favorable in terms of practical implementations. After all, in principle, there are other possible routes to have CW pumped SPDC sources using bulk optics (a combination of lenses/mirrors, etc.) that could reproduce our experimental results. However, while interesting, such sources based on bulk optics are not practical, as they place several demanding requirements, such as optical alignment and difficulties in integration. In particular, the advantages of the semiconductor waveguide photon-pair source for target detection as compared to conventional SPDC sources based on bulk nonlinear crystals are many-fold:
- The current experimental demonstration has been using a single transmit module. For practical applications, this is clearly not useful, such as for long-range applications. However, the very small form factor (1mm x 5$\mu$m) of the semiconductor waveguide enables large scale integration of photon pairs sources, which is crucial for realistic target detection applications where a large flux of non-classical photon pairs is needed. For example, in the currently used sample, more than 50 waveguides are integrated on a 0.2mm x 1mm x 1cm semiconductor chip. The density of the sources could be further increased with two-dimensional integration.
- For each of the waveguides, the generation of the probe-reference photon pairs is also efficient because of the strong nonlinearity of the semiconductor material. The AlGaAs platform also allows the possibility of the active waveguide with electrically pumping (i.e. generating the correlated photon pairs by applying a voltage across the waveguide), which is also favorable in terms of large scale integration.
- With different designs of the waveguide structure, the temporal spectral property of the SPDC photon pairs could be engineered to improve the QTC protocol performance [@Abolghasem:2009]. For example, with an appropriately designed waveguide structure, the generated photon pairs could have an extremely strong intrinsic temporal correlation $\Delta t\simeq 20fs$ [@Abolghasem:2009], which translates to high noise resilience of the QTC protocol. Furthermore, the central frequency of the probe light could be shifted (from IR to THz) to suit the need in different target detection scenarios without shifting the central frequency of the reference photons.
Performance Limiting Factors
----------------------------
For the current implementation of the QTC protocol, an important performance-limiting factor is the transmission efficiency of the reference photons $\eta_r\simeq 20\%$, which could be due to the inefficient coupling of the reference photons from the waveguide to the single-mode fiber that is connected to the detector. Such inefficiency could be alleviated with improved optical setup. In the limit of perfect reference photon transmission ($\eta_r = 100\%$) the ROC curve of the QTC detection protocol is plotted in Figure \[ROC\_FIG\]. Another important limiting factor of the QTC protocol performance is the detector temporal resolution $\Delta t_{det}\simeq 121$ps, which limits the maximal amount of intrinsic temporal correlation $\Delta t$ of the photon pairs that could be utilized for target detection. Such a limit could be overcome with better single-photon detection technologies or with improved photon detection techniques[@liu2019enhancing]. Fig. \[ROC\_FIG\] also shows the ROC curve of the QTC detection protocol when the detector temporal resolution is improved to $\Delta t_{det}\simeq 12$ ps.\
Factors affecting both the QTC protocol and the CI protocol performances include the source power, background noise power and the probe photon transmission efficiency $\eta_p$. However, it is worth noting that the noise power does not affect the QTC and the CI detection protocols equally. The performance advantage of the QTC detection protocol over the CI detection protocol is most pronounced with a high level of background noise, suggesting that the QTC protocol is more favorable for target detection with a high noise background. The total probe transmission efficiency, $\eta_p$, impacts the performance of both the QTC detection protocol and the CI detection protocol. The total transmission $\eta_p$ is affected by many factors including the target distance and cross-section, the reflectivity of the target, propagation medium, and the probe photon collection efficiency.
Covert Operation Of The QTC Protocol
------------------------------------
The experimental result above shows the significant performance advantages of the QTC detection protocol over the CI detection protocol. However, it is important to note that for both the QTC and CI protocol, the background noise is assumed to be overlapping with the probe photon in both temporal and spectral domains, i.e., broadband and CW. Therefore it is not possible to reduce the in-band noise power through filtering. If narrowband or pulsed probe light is to be used for the CI protocol, it is indeed possible to increase its performance through spectral filtering or temporal gating to reduce the in-band noise power. However, it must also be noted that such noise reduction requires concentrated optical power in either temporal or spectral domain, which increases the visibility and vulnerability of the target detection channel. For example, if the adversary parties is able to distinguish the probe photons from the background noise by their different spectral-temporal property, then they could selectively jam the target detection channel with noise photons that are indistinguishable from the probe photons. Although there exist classical scrambling techniques such as frequency scrambling to increase the indistinguishability between the probe and noise photon, such indistinguishability is not guaranteed by fundamental physical principles. On the other hand, the QTC detection protocol provides unconditional indistinguishability between the probe and the noise photons. This is because each of the probe photons is generated at a fundamentally random time and frequency, albeit its strong intrinsic temporal correlation to the reference photon. When the environment noise power is high compared to the probe power, the probe photon will be almost invisible to the adversary, but the QTC detection protocol could still achieve nontrivial target detection performance, as shown in the results and analysis above.
CONCLUSION
==========
In this article, we discussed how one can exploit the correlations within non-classical light sources to enhance the target detection performance, in a promising approach. In particular, we showed how the QTC protocol can exploit the strong temporal correlation of non-classical photon pairs to substantially enhance the target detection performance in a noisy and lossy environment. The QTC protocol uses probe photons that are completely indistinguishable from the background noise for unauthorized receivers, and could be used for covert ranging and target detection. The semiconductor waveguide source that we used for the QTC protocol is suitable for practical implementation due to its potential for high density integration, high conversion efficiency, and tunable spectral properties.
figure captions {#figure-captions .unnumbered}
===============
Fig. 1: The schematic of general correlation enhanced target detection protocols. Left: the non-classical photon pair source; middle: the free-space transceiver of the probe photons; right: the detection of the probe and the reference photons and the data analysis.\
Fig. 2: Comparison between the normalized mutual information for target detection protocols enhanced by (blue) intensity correlation and (red,magenta and orange) temporal correlation. The pump pulse duration $\sigma_+$ for the temporal correlation protocol is set to 1 ns.\
Fig. 3: The performance advantages (quantified as the ratio of the $\text{SNR}_{COV}$) of the intensity correlation protocol as compared to the classical intensity correlation protocol. Blue (teal) line: with (without) the additional loss and noise in the target detection channel. The detail of the experimental result and analysis could be found in [@He:2018].\
Fig. 4: Self pumped semiconductor sources for quantum light. (a)the structure of the laser. (b) the energy level diagram of the device elucidating the down conversion process. (c) the light, current, voltage curves of the pump laser. (d)A scanning electron micrograph of the waveguide cross-section.\
Fig. 5: Error bars and solid curves: the experimentally measured and theoretical predicted variance of the transmission estimation with different environment loss (top) and noise (bottom) condition for both the QTC (orange) and the CI (black) protocol. Dashed curves: theoretically predicted estimation variance for the QTC protocol with different detector temporal resolution, which equals to half of the coincidence window $T_c$. Details about the experiment result could be found in [@liu2019enhancing]\
Fig. 6: Top and middle:the experimentally measured and theoretically predicted ROC curves for the QTC and the CI protocol in linear and log scale. To reach the same detection rate $P_\text{d}$, with the false alarm rate $P_\text{fa}=10^{-6}$ and detection time $\tau=0.01s$, the CI protocol takes 56.75 more detection time. Bottom:the theoretically predicted ROC curve with improved reference channel efficiency and detector temporal resolution. The detection time is set to $\tau=0.005s$. Details of the experimental parameters could be found in [@trans].\
Fig. 7: Ranging result of the QTC protocol. Top: measured distance versus the physical distance. Bottom: the “radar signal” as a function of hypothetical target distance. The 5 panels from top to bottom correspond to physical target distance of 13, 32, 53, 68, 85cm. Details of the experimental parameters can be found in [@liu2019enhancing]\
[^1]: Correlation means a degree of freedom of two particles always takes random but correlated values. Quantum entanglement between two particles means that the two particles are correlated in different degrees of freedoms in such a way that it is not possible to fully describe the state of the two particles individually.
[^2]: a joint measurement requires bringing the two photons to the same physical location at the same time.
[^3]: The total transmission of the probe light is defined as the ratio between the total number of probe photons (not including the noise photons) detected and the total number of probe photons generated.
[^4]: The detection rate is defined as the probability of successfully detecting the target object when the object is actually present. The false alarm rate is defined as the probability of falsely predicting the presence of the target object while the target object is actually absent.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- Massimo Mongillo
- Panayotis Spathis
- Georgios Katsaros
- Riccardo Rurali
- Xavier Cartoixà
- Pascal Gentile
- Silvano De Franceschi
title: 'Supplementary Material for : PtSi Clustering In Silicon Probed by Transport Spectroscopy'
---
![Stability diagram measurement (in units of $10^{-4} e^{2}/h $) spanning the largest gate-voltage range accessible without incurring in significant gate leakage. Due to the relatively small capacitive coupling between the PtSi cluster and the gate, only one charge-degeneracy point around 3V is found in this extended gate range. Nevertheless, a large portion of the Coulomb diamond on the left side of this charge-degeneracy point can be appreciated. The vertical size of this diamond provides an estimate of the associated charging energy ($\approx 50$ meV). Unfortunately, several charge-switching instabilities are observed on such a large gate voltage sweep. []{data-label="fig3"}](S1.eps){width="8.5cm"}
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The problem of rested and restless multi-armed bandits with constrained availability of arms is considered. The states of arms evolve in Markovian manner and the exact states are hidden from the decision maker. First, some structural results on value functions are claimed. Following these results, the optimal policy turns out to be a *threshold policy*. Further, *indexability* of rested bandits is established and index formula is derived. The performance of index policy is illustrated and compared with myopic policy using numerical examples.'
author:
- |
Varun Mehta, Rahul Meshram, Kesav Kaza and S. N. Merchant\
Department of Electrical Engineering,\
Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, India
bibliography:
- 'varun.bib'
title: 'Multi-armed Bandits with Constrained Arms and Hidden States [^1]'
---
Introduction
============
Multi-armed bandits are among commonly used models for solving sequential decision making problems, [@Gittins79; @Gittins11]. In the multi-armed bandit problem, there are $N$ arms and each arm can be in one of a finite set of states. The decision maker plays $M$ arms, $(M < N)$ at every time instant and collects rewards from the played arms. Reward from each played arm depends on the state of that arm. The state of an arm changes according to a stochastic process associated with that arm. The decision maker’s aim is to maximize the long-term expected discounted reward. The state evolution may be action dependent and based on that there are two types of bandits, rested and restless bandits. In a rested bandit, the state evolves only for the arm which is played while states of other arms do not change. For a restless bandit, the states of all arms evolve even when they are not played. In this setting, each arm can be considered as a Markov decision process (MDP) with finite states and two actions (play or not to play) in each state. As a model choice, states may assumed to be either observable by decision maker or hidden to it. Now, the multi-armed bandit problem can be looked as a set of MDPs coupled together with constraints.
A rested multi-armed bandit problem was first introduced in the seminal work of [@Gittins79], where the author proposed an index based policy. In such policies, state of each arm is mapped to an index, i.e., real valued number. At each time instant arms with the highest indices are played. This policy is known as Gittins index policy. Later, a generalization of the rested multi-armed bandit problem was devised in [@Whittle88], where a restless multi-armed bandit was introduced and again index based policy proposed. The index policy for restless bandits is now referred to as Whittle index policy.
Recently, restless bandits have been studied when state of the arms are not observable but feedback signal is observable. The decision maker estimates the state from this feedback. This is called the hidden Markov bandit. For a hidden Markov bandit, each arm can be modeled using partially observable Markov decision processes (POMDP). An index policy for hidden Markov rested multi-armed bandit is suggested in [@Krishnamurthy09]. Further, extension of this to hidden Markov restless bandit is analysed in work of [@Meshram16; @Meshram17; @Borkar17; @LiuZhao10].
To use index policy in rested and restless bandit, an approach is to first consider the single-armed bandit problem and show that the optimal policy is of a threshold type. Using this result one can show that arm is indexable and later index can be derived. While analyzing a single-armed bandit model, structural results of POMDP can be used for hidden Markov bandits. Some structural results for POMDP have been extensively studied in [@Lovejoy87; @Lovejoy87a; @Albright79; @White79].
All of the above works on bandits assume that every arm is available for decision maker at each time instant to play. The decision maker determines whether to play or not play the arms using index policy. But this may not be feasible in some scenarios. For example, in a machine-repair problem one may not able to schedule a task on some of the machines due to machine breakdown. Such consideration has been made in [@Dayanik02]. In queuing systems, the controller may not be able to schedule jobs to some servers due to server breakdown, [@Martin05; @Glazebrook07]. In these examples a machine or server is available to the decision maker intermittently. In this work, we consider rested and restless bandits with arm availability constraints where arms may not be available to play at some time instants and these are called as constrained bandits. It is a generalization of the classical rested and restless multi-armed bandit problems. Usually when arm is not available, we consider a substitute arm which yield low reward compare to the arm when it is available.
In constrained bandits [@Dayanik02; @Martin05; @Glazebrook07], each state is defined as a pair $(X(t),Y(t)),$ where $X(t)$ represents the state of arm and $Y(t)$ represents availability of an arm at time $t$. Time is discretized in [@Dayanik02] while it is continuous in the models of [@Martin05; @Glazebrook07]. The state $(X(t),Y(t))$ is assumed to be observable. Under some assumptions on model parameters the index policy is analyzed in [@Dayanik02; @Martin05; @Glazebrook07]. In this paper we consider a hidden Markov model, where state $X(t)$ of the arm is not observable but the availability of the arm is observable.
The paper is organized as follows. In next section, we describe the hidden Markov model for multi-armed bandit with constraints. We later consider single armed bandit problem in Section \[sec:sab\]. We analyze structural results for single-armed bandit in Section \[sec:struct-results\]. Section \[sec:sabindex\] we compute the index for hidden Markov rested bandit with availability constraints on arm. We also illustrate the performance of the index policy and compare it with that of myopic policy in Section \[sec:nume\_result\]. We finally conclude in Section \[disc\] and discuss some of open issues.
Preliminaries and Model Description
===================================
Consider a multi-armed bandit with $N$ independent arms. Each arm can be in one of two states, $0$ and $1,$. The system is time slotted and it is indexed by $t.$ Let $X_n(t)$ denote the state of arm $n$ at beginning of time slot $t,$ $X_n(t) \in \{0,1\}.$ Each arm has availability constraints i.e. it is intermittently available. Let $Y_n(t) \in \{ 0,1\}$ represent the availability of arm $n$ in time slot $t$ and $$\begin{aligned}
Y_n(t) =
\begin{cases}
1 & \mbox{if arm $n$ is available,} \\
0 & \mbox{if arm $n$ is not available.}
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$ When arm $n$ is not available in slot $t$ we will assume that , the arm $n$ is replaced by substitute arm which yield low reward after play. $A_n(t) \in \{0,1 \}$ is the action in slot $t$ with the following interpretation. $$\begin{aligned}
A_n(t) = \begin{cases}
1 & \mbox{if arm $n$ is played in slot $t$,}\\
0 & \mbox{otherwise.}
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$ Exactly one arm is to be played in each time slot. Arm $n$ changes state at the end of time slot $t$ according to transition probabilities that depend on $A_n(t),$ $Y_n(t)$ and it is defined as follows. [ ]{} In every slot $t,$ a binary signal $Z_n^{y}(t)$ is observed from the arm $n$ that is played. There is no observation from the arms that are not played. Thus $$Z_n^{y}(t) =
\begin{cases}
1 & \mbox{play of arm $n$ is successful} \\
0 & \mbox{otherwise.}
\end{cases}$$
Let $\rho_{n}(i,y)$ be the probability of success given that arm $n$ is played $A_n(t) =1,$ and $X_n(t) = i,$ $Y_n(t) = y$. We assume $
\rho_{n}(0,y) < \rho_{n}(1,y)$ for $y \in \{0,1\}.$ $$\Pr{\left(Z_n^{y}(t) = 1~|~X_n(t) = i, Y_n(t) = y, A_n(t) =1 \right) } = \rho_n(i,y).$$ Also, $R_n^{a}(i,y)$ is the reward obtained from playing arm $n$ given that, $X_n(t) = i,$ $Y_n(t) = y,$ $A_n(t) =a.$ Let $$\begin{aligned}
& R_n^{1}(i,1)=r_{n,i}, \hspace{0.2in} R_n^{1}(i,0) = \eta_{n,i} \\
& R_n^{0}(i,1) = 0, \hspace{0.2in} R_n^{0}(i,0) = 0.\end{aligned}$$ Further, we will suppose that $0 \leq \eta_{n,0} < r_{n,0} <
\eta_{n,1} < r_{n,1} \leq 1$ for all $n.$
- The observation variable $Z_n^y(t)$ may have different meanings in different applications. In communication systems, $Z_n^y(t)=1$ may mean an acknowledgement (ACK) of a successful transmission over a given link, [@Meshram16]. For a recommendation system, it may correspond to click or like by the user over a recommended item, see [@Meshram17].
- Notice that $\eta_{n,i} \neq 0$; this means there is a non-zero reward for playing an arm even when it is not available. This captures application scenarios where broken (not available) arms can be repaired by playing them and paying a penalty from the reward.
The decision maker cannot directly observe states of the arms, and hence it does not know the states at the beginning of each time slot. But decision maker knows the probability of availability $\theta_n^a(i,y)$ of arm $n$, at the beginning of next time slot $t+1$; it is as follows However, the decision maker maintains a belief $\pi_n(t)$ about the state of arm $n.$ It is the probability that the arm is in state $0$ given all past availability, actions, observations. This is given as follows. $$\begin{aligned}
\pi_n(t) = \Pr{\left( X_n(t) = 0~|~\left( Y_n(s) = y_s,A_{n}(s) ,Z_{n}^{y_s}(s) \right)_{s=1}^{t-1} \right)}.\end{aligned}$$ Let $H_t$ denote the history, $$\begin{aligned}
H_t := \left(Y_n(s) = y_s,A_{n}(s) ,Z_{n}^{y_s}(s) \right)_{1 \leq n \leq N, 1 \leq s < t}.\end{aligned}$$
We can describe the state of arm $n$ at time $t$ by $S_n(t) =
(\pi_n(t), Y_n(t)) \in [0,1] \times \{0,1\}.$ $(S_1(t), \cdots
S_N(t))$ is the state information of the arms at the beginning of time slot $t.$ Further, we can rewrite $\theta_n^a(i,y)$ as function of $\pi$ in following form. [ ]{} Hence the expected reward from playing arm $n$ at time $t$ given that $Y_n(t) = y$ is $$\widetilde{R}_n^{1}(\pi_n(t),y) = \pi_n(t) R_n^{1}(0,y) + (1-\pi_n(t) R_n^{1}(1,y).$$ In each slot, exactly one arm is to played. Let $\phi(t)$ is the policy by the decision maker such that $\phi(t): H_t \rightarrow
\{1, \cdots,N\}$ maps the history to one of the arm at slot $t.$ Let $$\begin{aligned}
A_n^{\phi}(t) =
\begin{cases}
1 & \mbox{if $\phi(t) = n,$ } \\
0 & \mbox{if $\phi(t) \neq n.$}
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$ We are now ready to define the infinite horizon discounted reward under policy $\phi$ for initial state information $(\underline{\pi},
\underline{y}),$ $\underline{\pi}=(\pi_1(1), \cdots, \pi_N(1))$ and $\underline{y} = (y_1(1), \cdots, y_N(1)).$ It is given by $$\begin{aligned}
V_{\phi}(\underline{\pi}, \underline{y}) =
\mathrm{E}^{\phi}\left({\sum_{t=1}^{\infty} \beta^{t-1}
\left[ \sum_{n=1}^{N}
A_n^{\phi}(t) \widetilde{R}_n^{1}(\pi_n(t), Y_n(t) )
\right]
}\right).
\label{eqn:opt1}\end{aligned}$$ Here, $\beta$ is discount parameter, $0<\beta < 1.$ The goal is to find a policy $\phi$ that maximizes $V_{\phi}(\underline{\pi},
\underline{y})$ for given $ \underline{\pi} \in [0,1]^N,$ $\underline{y} \in \{0,1\}^N.$ The optimization problem is a multi-armed bandit problem with availability constraints. This is generalized version of multi-armed bandits, where it has partially observable states and availability constraints. In general, this problem is known to be PSPACE-hard,[@Papadimitriou99]. Index based policies are developed in [@Gittins11; @Whittle88] for rested and restless multi-armed bandits. To study such index policies, a Lagrangian relaxed version of problem is analysed. In this relaxed problem, complexity of problem reduced as it separates the solving one multi-armed bandit problem to $N$ single-armed bandit problems. Thus it reduces to calculating the index for each arm separately. The arm with highest index is played in each time slot.
We next analyze the single-armed bandit problem in next section.
Single-armed bandit problem {#sec:sab}
===========================
For notational convenience, we will drop the subscript $n$, i.e., the sequence number of the arm. As a widely used method for solving the single arm bandit problem, a subsidy $w$ is assigned for not playing the arm [@Whittle88]. In that case, optimization problem can be rewritten as follows.
[ ]{} where action $A(t)$ under policy $\phi$ is $$\begin{aligned}
A^{\phi}(t) =
\begin{cases}
1 & \mbox{if $\phi(t) = 1,$ } \\
0 & \mbox{if $\phi(t) =0.$}
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$ The objective is to find a policy $\phi$ that maximizes $V_{\phi}(\pi,y).$
Recall that the state evolution of arms may be action dependent. Based on this, we can have two different types of bandits, rested and restless single-armed bandit. In rested single-armed bandit, state evolves for the arm that is played and state of other arms do not change. For restless bandit model, state of all arms changes at each time slot.
To simplify the model further, we assume that $P_{00}(y,a)= \mu _0$ and $P_{10}(y,a)= \mu _1$ for $a,y \in \{0,1\}.$[^2] We will also assume that $\rho(i,1) =
\rho(i,0) = r_i,$ $i \in \{0,1\}.$ Recall that $\pi (t)= \Pr (X(t)=0 |
H_t)$ and using Bayes rule, we can obtain the belief $\pi (t+1)$ as follows. Here,
1. If $A(t)=1,$ i.e., arm is played and $Y(t)=1, Z^1(t)=1$ then $$\gamma_{1,1}(\pi(t)) := \frac{\pi(t) r_0 \mu_0 + (1-\pi(t)) r_1
\mu_1}{\pi(t) r_0 + (1-\pi(t)) r_1}.$$
2. if $A(t)=1,$ i.e., arm is played and $Y(t)=1, Z^1(t)=0$ then $$\gamma_{0,1}(\pi(t)) := \frac{\pi(t) (1-r_0) \mu_0 + (1-\pi(t))
(1-r_1) \mu_1}{\pi(t) (1-r_0) + (1-\pi(t)) (1-r_1)}.$$
3. if $A(t)=1,$ i.e., arm is played and $Y(t)=0, Z^1(t)=1$ then $$\gamma_{1,0}(\pi(t)) :=
\begin{cases}
\pi(t) & \mbox{ for rested bandit,} \\
\gamma_{1,1}(\pi(t)) & \mbox{for restless bandit.}
\end{cases}$$
4. if $A(t)=1,$ i.e., arm is played and $Y(t)=0, Z^1(t)=0$ then $$\gamma_{0,0}(\pi(t)) :=
\begin{cases}
\pi(t) & \mbox{for rested bandit,} \\
\gamma_{0,1}(\pi(t)) & \mbox{for restless bandit.}
\end{cases}$$
5. if $A(t)=0,$ i.e., arm is not played and $Y(t)=1$ then
6. if $A(t)=0,$ i.e., arm is not played and $Y(t)=0$ then $$\Gamma_{0}(\pi(t)) := \pi(t).$$
From [@Bertsekas95a], we know that the $\pi(t)$ captures the information about the history $H_t$, and it is a sufficient statistic. It suggests that the optimal policies can be restricted to stationary Markov policies. In this, one can obtain the optimum value function by solving suitable dynamic program, it will be given in later part of this section.
Let us define the value function under initial action $A_1$ and availability $Y_1$ $$\begin{aligned}
V_S := {} & \mbox{value function under $A_1=1, Y_1=1$} \\
\widetilde{V}_S := {} & \mbox{value function under $A_1=1, Y_1=0$} \\
V_{NS} := {} & \mbox{value function under $A_1=0, Y_1=1$} \\
\widetilde{V}_{NS} := {} & \mbox{value function under $A_1=0, Y_1=0$}\end{aligned}$$ We can write the following. Here $\xi(\pi) = \pi \eta_0 + (1 - \pi )\eta_1, \rho (\pi) = \pi r_0 +
(1 - \pi )r_1.$ The optimal value function $V(\pi,y)$, is determined by solving the following dynamic program $$\begin{aligned}
V(\pi) = \max \{ {V_S}(\pi),{V_{NS}}(\pi)\}, \nonumber
\\ \widetilde{V}(\pi) = \max \{ {{\widetilde V}_S}(\pi),{{\widetilde
V}_{NS}}(\pi)\}.
\label{eq:dynamic-program-a}\end{aligned}$$ These are dynamic programs for single-armed rested as well as restless bandit problems. Now, we proceed to present the main results of this work.
Structural results {#sec:struct-results}
==================
We now begin with some of structural results on value functions, showing convexity and threshold type policy.
(Convexity of value function)
1. For fixed $w$, $V(\pi),V_S(\pi),V_{NS}(\pi), \widetilde{V}(\pi), \widetilde{V}_{T}(\pi )$ and $\widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi)$ are convex functions of $\pi.$
2. For a fixed $\pi$, $V(\pi),V_S(\pi),V_{NS}(\pi),
\widetilde{V}(\pi), \widetilde{V}_{T}(\pi)$ and $\widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi)$ are non decreasing and convex in $w.$
\[lemma:convex-pi-w\]
A sketch of the proof is in Appendix \[app:lemma-convex-pi-w\]. We first define a threshold or monotone policy for the single armed bandit problem and then prove that the optimal policy is of this kind under some restriction on model parameters.
(Threshold type policy) A policy is said to be threshold type, if one of the following is true.
1. The optimal action is to play the arm $\forall \pi.$
2. The optimal action is to not play the arm $\forall \pi.$
3. There exists a threshold $\pi^*$ such that $\forall \pi \leq \pi^*$ the optimal action is to play the arm and not to play the arm otherwise.
\[Def:threshold\]
Threshold structure of optimal policy (case $\mu_0 > \mu_1$) {#sec:Threshold-case1}
------------------------------------------------------------
The following lemma provides sufficient conditions for monotonicity of the optimal value function.
(Monotone value functions) If
1. $0 \leq \eta_{0} < r_{0} < \eta_{1} < r_{1} \leq 1,$
2. $\mu_0 > \mu_1,$
3. $\rho_1 > \rho_0,$
4. $\theta^a(\pi,1)>\theta^a(\pi,0),$ and $\theta^a(\pi,y)>\theta^a(\pi ',y),$ for $\pi' > \pi,$
then for $\pi' \geq \pi$ implies $V(\pi) \geq V(\pi ')$ and $\widetilde{V}(\pi) \geq \widetilde{V}(\pi ').$ \[lemma:monotone-valuef\]
A sketch of the proof is given in Appendix \[app:lemma-monotone-valuef\].
The lemma says that if the rewards, observation and transition probabilities follow certain order than the optimal value functions are monotone with belief $\pi.$ This result can be utilized to prove that optimal policy is a monotone policy. A monotone policy is one where the actions are monotone over state space.
To have monotone optimal policy, we first prove that the difference between the value functions $V_S(\pi)$ and $V_{NS}(\pi),$ is monotonic in $\pi.$ Similarly, we prove this for $\widetilde{V}_S(\pi)$ and $\widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi).$
(Isotone difference property) For fixed $w$ and conditions of Lemma \[lemma:monotone-valuef\]
1. $(V_S(\pi) - V_{NS}(\pi))$ is decreasing in $\pi,$
2. $(\widetilde{V}_S(\pi) - \widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi))$ is decreasing in $\pi,$
\[lemma:monotone-policy\]
We describe the proof in Appendix \[app:lemma-monotone-policy\].
Let $S_1:= [0,1] \times \{1\},$ $S_0:= [0,1] \times \{0\},$ $a^*(\pi):= \arg \max \{V_S(\pi),V_{NS}(\pi)\}$ and $\widetilde{a}^*(\pi):= \arg \max
\{\widetilde{V}_S(\pi),\widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi)\}.$ Then the following theorem gives monotone optimal policy on belief $\pi.$
(Monotone optimal policy)
1. If the value function $V:S_1 \times A \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ has isotone difference on $S_1\times A$ then there exists a non increasing optimal policy $a^*: S_1 \rightarrow A$ on belief $S_1.$
2. If the value function $\widetilde{V}:S_0 \times A \rightarrow
\mathbb{R}$ has isotone difference on $S_0\times A$ then there exists a non increasing optimal policy $\widetilde{a}^*: S_0
\rightarrow A$ on belief $S_0.$
From Lemma \[lemma:convex-pi-w\], the value functions $V(\pi),\widetilde{V}(\pi)$ are convex and monotone in $\pi.$ From Lemma \[lemma:monotone-valuef\], $V(\pi),\widetilde{V}(\pi)$ has isotone difference property. This implies, there exists $a^*(\pi) \in
\{0,1\}$ that is non increasing in $\pi.$ \[theorem:monotone-policy\]
Here, we observe that the optimal actions are ordered on belief space. This indeed is a threshold type policy by Definition \[Def:threshold\]. Note that a monotone policy is a threshold policy for two actions. Thus isotone difference property implies a threshold policy result.
Threshold structure of optimal policy (case $\mu_0 < \mu_1$) {#sec:Threshold-case2}
------------------------------------------------------------
For $\mu_0 < \mu_1,$ different proof technique is necessary to To claim a threshold type optimal policy. Here, we will assume $\theta^a(\pi, y) = \theta^a(y),$ i.e. independent of $\pi.$ We first argue that difference between the value functions $V_S(\pi)$ and $V_{NS}(\pi),$ is monotonic in $\pi$ for special cases. Similarly, difference between $\widetilde{V}_{S}(\pi)$ and $\widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi)$ is monotone in $\pi.$
For fixed $w$ and $\beta,$ and $0\leq \mu_1 - \mu_0 \leq \frac{1}{3},$
1. $(V_S(\pi) - V_{NS}(\pi))$ is decreasing in $\pi,$
2. $(\widetilde{V}_S(\pi) - \widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi))$ is decreasing in $\pi,$
\[lemma:monotone-valuef-2\]
We describe sketch of the proof in Appendix \[app:lemma-monotone-valuef-2\].
The proof of this Lemma is different from the earlier Lemma \[lemma:monotone-valuef\] because here we are not assuming monotonicity of value functions. Instead here we use the Lipschitz properties of value functions with respect to $\pi,$ i.e., the value functions, $V(\pi),\widetilde{V}(\pi)$ have following property $$\begin{aligned}
|V(\pi_1) - V(\pi_2)| &\leq& \kappa |r_1 - r_0| |\pi_1 - \pi_2|, \nonumber \\
|\widetilde{V}(\pi_1) - \widetilde{V}(\pi_2)| &\leq & \kappa |\eta_1 - \eta_0| |\pi_1 - \pi_2|,
\label{eqn:Lipschitz-property}\end{aligned}$$ where $\kappa = \frac{1}{1-\beta(\mu_1-\mu_0)}.$ It is true for $0<\mu_1 - \mu_0 \leq 1/3.$ The Lipschitz-property proof is given in [@Meshram16 Appendix, Lemma $5$].
For fixed $w$ and $\beta,$ and $0\leq \mu_1 - \mu_0 \leq \frac{1}{3},$
1. The optimal policy is threshold type for $V_{T}(\pi)$ and $V_{NS}(\pi).$ That is, either $V(\pi ) = V_S(\pi)$ for all $\pi \in
[0,1]$ or $V(\pi ) = V_{NS}(\pi)$ for all $\pi \in [0,1]$ or there exists $\pi^*$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
V(\pi) = \begin{cases}
V_S(\pi) & \mbox { for $\pi \leq \pi^*,$ } \\
V_{NS}(\pi) & \mbox { for $\pi \geq \pi^*.$ }
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$
2. The optimal policy is threshold type for $\widetilde{V}_{T}(\pi)$ and $\widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi).$ That is, either $\widetilde{V}(\pi ) = \widetilde{V}_S(\pi)$ for all $\pi
\in [0,1]$ or $\widetilde{V}(\pi ) = \widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi)$ for all $\pi \in [0,1]$ or there exists $\widetilde{\pi}$ such that $$\begin{aligned}
\widetilde{V}(\pi) = \begin{cases}
\widetilde{V}_S(\pi) & \mbox { for $\pi \leq \widetilde{\pi},$ } \\
\widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi) & \mbox { for $\pi \geq \widetilde{\pi}.$ }
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$
\[thm:threshold-policy2\]
- The proof of Theorem \[thm:threshold-policy2\] is analogous to the Theorem \[theorem:monotone-policy\].
- In Section \[sec:nume\_result\], we will present few numerical examples to illustarte a threshold-type policy for general case, where we do not make any restriction on $\theta$ and model parameters $\mu$s.
Index policy for single-armed bandit {#sec:sabindex}
====================================
Recall that our interest here is to seek an index-type policy. We now define indexability of an arm and then its index. Let $\mathcal{G}(w)$ be the subset of state space $S = [0,1] \times
\{0,1\}$ in which it is optimal to not play the arm with subsidy $w,$ it is given as follows. $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{G}(w) := & \{(\pi,y) \in [0,1] \times \{0,1\} :
\nonumber \\
&
V_S(\pi) \leq V_{NS}(\pi) ,
\widetilde{V}_S(\pi) \leq \widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi)\}.
\label{eq:G_w_set}\end{aligned}$$ Using set $\mathcal{G}(w),$ indexability and index are defined as follows.
An arm is indexable if $\mathcal{G}(w)$ is increasing in subsidy $w,$ i.e., $$w_2 \le w_1 \Rightarrow \mathcal{G}(w_2) \subseteq \mathcal{G}(w_1).$$
The index of an indexable arm is defined as $$w(\pi,y) := \inf \{w \in \mathbb{R}:(\pi,y) \in \mathcal{G}(w) , \forall (\pi,y) \in S\}.
\label{Index-def}$$
- Note that we can rewrite definition of set $\mathcal{G}(w)$ in the following way. $$\mathcal{G}(w) = \left\{ [\pi_L,1] \times \{1\}, [\widetilde{\pi}_L,1] \times \{0\}
\right\},$$ where $\pi_L:= \min \{ \pi \in [0,1] :V_S(\pi) = V_{NS}(\pi)\},$ and $\widetilde{\pi}_L:= \min \{ \pi \in [0,1] :\widetilde{V}_S(\pi) =
\widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi)\}.$
- If the optimal policy is of threshold type, then $\pi^* = \pi_L$ and $\widetilde{\pi} = \widetilde{\pi}_L.$
- To claim indexability, we require to show that as subsidy $w$ increases, $\pi_L(w)$ and $\widetilde{\pi}_L(w)$ are non-increasing in $w.$
- In general, it is difficult to show indexability and obtain index because there is difficulty in proving a threshold type policy.
We next show the indexability and compute the closed form expression for the index of a single-armed rested bandit. The proof of index computation is along the lines of [@Dayanik02].
Rested single-armed bandit
--------------------------
We further simplify the rested single-armed bandit problem and make following assumptions on transition probabilities. $$\begin{aligned}
P_{ij}(y,a)=
\begin{cases}
p_{ij} & \mbox{if $y=a=1,$ } \\
\delta _{ij} & \mbox{if $y=0$ or $a=0.$}
\end{cases}\end{aligned}$$ where $\delta _{ij}$ equals to 1 if $i=j$ and 0 otherwise. Also, $p_{00} = \mu_0,$ and $p_{10} = \mu_1.$ This indicates that state of the arm changes if arm is available and does not change when arm is unavailable. Further we assume $\theta^0(\pi,0)=0.$
We now present a few preliminary results which are used to derive the index. These results make use of the definition of set $\mathcal{G}(w)$ and obtain value function expressions.
1. For $(\pi,0) \in S,$ subsidy $w \in \mathbb{R},$ if $(\pi ,0)
\in \mathcal{G}(w)$ then $\widetilde{V}(\pi,w)= \frac{w}{{1 - \beta
}}$ with initial state $(\pi ,0).$
2. For $(\pi ,1) \in S,$ subsidy $w \in \mathbb{R}$, if $(\pi ,1)
\in \mathcal{G}(w)$ then
Here $E_{\pi,1}^{\phi_0}$ is the expectation under policy $\phi_0$ that plays the arm when it is unavailable and otherwise keeps it rested. \[lemnma:bound-V\]
1\. State of the arm does not change when arm is unavailable and not played. Therefore if $(\pi,0) \in \mathcal{G}(w),$ then it is always optimal to not play the arm and the expected total discounted reward starting in state $(\pi,0)$ is $\widetilde{V}(\pi,w)= \frac{w}{{1 -
\beta }}.$
2\. If $(\pi,1) \in \mathcal{G}(w),$ then, the arm may visit $(\pi,0)$ state if it goes unavailable in between. Therefore, the arm is in either $(\pi,1)$ or $(\pi,0)$ state. In this case, two optimal policies are possible (a) never play the arm, (b) do not play the arm when it is in state $(\pi,1)$ and play the arm when it is in $(\pi,0).$ The expected total discounted reward for policy (a) is $\frac{w}{{1 - \beta }}$ and for policy (b) is given in .
We now define $E_{\pi,1}^{\phi_1}$ as the expectation under policy $\phi_1$ that always plays the arm. Then we can evaluate the total expected discounted reward under $\phi_1$ for initial state $(\pi,1).$ It is $$\Psi(\pi,1) := E_{\pi,1}^{\phi_1} \left[ \sum_{t=1}^{\infty} \beta^{(t-1)}
R^1(\pi(t), y(t))\right].$$ We can derive lower bound on $\Psi(\pi,1)$ in terms of $\eta_0,$ $$\Psi(\pi,1) > \frac{R^1(\pi,0)}{1-\beta} = \frac{\pi \eta_0 + (1-\pi)\eta_1}{1-\beta} > \frac{\eta_0}{1-\beta}.
\label{eq:cond2}$$
If subsidy $w$ is smaller than $\eta_0,$ then set $\mathcal{G}(w) = \emptyset.$ \[lemma:G-emptyset\]
The proof is by contradiction. We first consider case for $y =0.$ Suppose that $(\pi,0) \in \mathcal{G}(w),$ hence, $\mathcal{G}(w) \neq
\emptyset.$ Then, from Lemma \[lemnma:bound-V\], we get $\widetilde{V}(\pi,w) = \frac{w}{1-\beta}.$ We also obtain $\widetilde{V}(\pi,w) > \frac{w}{1-\beta}$ because $w <\eta_0 <
R^{1}(\pi,0).$ This contradicts our assumption. Hence claim follows.
Now we consider case for $y =1.$ We assume that $(\pi,1) \in
\mathcal{G}(w).$ Then using Lemma \[lemnma:bound-V\], we have $V(\pi,w) < \frac{R^1(\pi,0)}{1-\beta}$ because $w<R^1(\pi,0).$ Further, we can derive lower bound $V(\pi,w)\geq
\frac{R^1(\pi,0)}{1-\beta}.$ This contradicts the upper bound and hence our assumption. Thus $\mathcal{G}(w) = \emptyset.$ This completes the proof.
If subsidy $w$ is higher than $\eta_0,$ then, set $\mathcal{G}(w)$ can be non-empty. We will provide sufficient condition on subsidy $w$ for $\mathcal{G}(w)$ to be non-empty. Also, if set $\mathcal{G}(w)$ is nonempty then we give lower bound on subsidy $w.$ This is given in the next Lemma.
$(\pi,y) \in \mathcal{G}(w)$ if and only if $$w \geq (1-\beta)\frac{E_{\pi,y}^{\phi _1}\left[\sum_{t=1}^{\tau
-1}\beta ^{(t-1)}
R^1(\pi(t),y(t))\right]}{1-E_{\pi,y}^{\phi_1}[\beta ^{\tau}]}
\label{eq:w-sub-lowerbd}$$ for $\tau > 0.$ \[lemma:G-nonempty\]
We first assume that $(\pi,y) \in \mathcal{G}(w).$ We want to prove Eqn. . We know from Lemma \[lemnma:bound-V\] that if $(\pi,0) \in \mathcal{G}(w),$ then $\widetilde{V}(\pi,w) = \frac{w}{1-\beta}$ and if $(\pi,1) \in
\mathcal{G}(w),$ then $V(\pi,w) = \frac{w}{1-\beta}.$ This is true for $w \geq R^1(\pi,0).$ This suggests that the optimal action is not to play the arm for all time slots. The optimization problem in \[eqn:opt2\] reduces to optimal stopping problem, where arm is played until stopping time $\tau-1$ and not played since $\tau.$ Thus the expected discounted reward is $$E_{\pi,y}^{\phi_1}\left[\sum_{t=1}^{\tau -1}\beta ^{(t-1)} R^1(\pi(t),y(t))
+ \sum_{t=\tau}^{\infty} \beta^{t}w \right]$$ This expected reward is upper bounded by $\frac{w}{1-\beta}$ because not playing arm is always optimal for $(\pi,y) \in \mathcal{G}(w)$ as shown earlier. Hence $$\frac{w}{1-\beta} \geq E_{\pi,y}^{\phi_1}\left[\sum_{t=1}^{\tau -1}\beta ^{(t-1)} R^1(\pi(t),y(t))
+ \sum_{t=\tau}^{\infty} \beta^{t}w \right].
\label{eq:w-bdd}$$
We assume that $w$ is lower bounded and Eqn. holds true. Then, it is easy to verify that $(\pi,y) \in
\mathcal{G}(w).$ To see this, make use of the optimal stopping time policy and Eqn. .
The arm is indexable and index $w(\pi,y)$ is $$\begin{aligned}
w(\pi,y) := (1-\beta) \sup_{\tau \in S} \frac{E_{\pi,y}^{\phi _1}\left[\sum_{t=1}^{\tau -1}\beta ^{(t-1)} R^1(\pi(t),y(t))\right]}{1-E_{\pi,y}^{\phi_1}[\beta ^{\tau}]}\end{aligned}$$ Here, $\tau$ is optimal stopping time, it is time until which arm is played.
Note that Eqn. is true for every stopping time $\tau >0.$ That implies not playing the arm is optimal. Further, the following is true. $$w \geq (1-\beta) \sup_{\tau \in S} \frac{E_{\pi,y}^{\phi _1}\left[\sum_{t=1}^{\tau -1}\beta ^{(t-1)} R^1(\pi(t),y(t))\right]}{1-E_{\pi,y}^{\phi_1}[\beta ^{\tau}]}.
\label{eq:index}$$ In order to show indexability, we need to prove that $\mathcal{G}(w)$ set is monotone in $w.$ From Lemma \[lemma:G-emptyset\], we know that there is $w$ for which set $\mathcal{G}(w)$ is empty. As $w$ increases this set becomes non-empty. This is clear from Lemma \[lemma:G-nonempty\]. As subsidy $w$ increases, Eqn. continues to hold for larger subset of $S=[0,1] \times \{0,1\}.$ Thus indexability holds true by definition and index can be computed using .
Numerical Results {#sec:nume_result}
=================
We first present few numerical examples to illustrate threshold type optimal policy for a restless single-armed bandit. We later demonstrate the performance of our index policy for rested multi-armed bandit.
Examples for a threshold type result
------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
![ In a) $V_S(\pi)$ and $V_{NS}(\pi)$ plotted as function of $\pi$ and b) $\widetilde{V}_S(\pi)$ and $\widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi)$ plotted as function of $\pi.$ This is plotted for a single-armed restless bandit.[]{data-label="fig:threshold-Y0-Y1"}](Th_y_1.eps "fig:") ![ In a) $V_S(\pi)$ and $V_{NS}(\pi)$ plotted as function of $\pi$ and b) $\widetilde{V}_S(\pi)$ and $\widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi)$ plotted as function of $\pi.$ This is plotted for a single-armed restless bandit.[]{data-label="fig:threshold-Y0-Y1"}](Th_y_0 "fig:")
a) b)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --
To demonstrate the threshold type result for a single-armed bandit, we use the following parameters. $\mu_0 = 0.1, \mu_1 = 0.9, r_0 = 0.4, \eta_0 =
0.1, r_1 = 0.95, \eta_1 = 0.65, \theta^a(\pi,y) = 0.5$ for any $\pi
\in [0,1],$ $a,y \in \{0,1\},$ and $\beta = 0.7.$
In Fig. \[fig:threshold-Y0-Y1\]-a), we plot $V_S(\pi)$ and $V_{NS}(\pi)$ as function of $\pi.$ Similarly, in Fig. \[fig:threshold-Y0-Y1\]-b), we plot value functions $\widetilde{V}_S(\pi)$ and $\widetilde{V}_{NS}(\pi).$ These plots suggest that the optimal policy is of a threshold type.
In this case, we have $\mu_1 - \mu_0 = 0.8.$ But to prove analytically a threshold policy result, we have assumed $0<\mu_1 - \mu_0 < 1/3,$ see Section \[sec:Threshold-case2\]. This is a limitation from analysis because it is very difficult to evaluate closed form expressions for value functions or introduce monotonicity of value functions.
Performance of index policy
---------------------------
We now present few numerical examples to illustrate the performance of index policy and compare this with that of myopic policy. This is done for rested single-armed bandit. Note that this is different from standard rested bandits because here arms are available probabilistically in each time slot. Recall that in an index policy, the arm with highest index is played in given time slot. In myopic policy, the arm with highest immediate expected reward is played at each time slot.
We consider number of arms, $N = 5$ and use the following set of parameters in all examples. $$\begin{aligned}
\mu_0 = [0.1,0.9,0.3,0.9,0.3],
\mu_1 = [0.9,0.1,0.9,0.3,0.9], \\
r_0 = [0.2,0.3,0.25,0.4,0.35],
r_1 = [0.9,0.95,0.8,0.9,0.6], \\
\eta_0 = [0.1,0.2,0.15,0.3,0.25],
\eta_1 = [0.6,0.65,0.5,0.6,0.3]. \end{aligned}$$ We also set $\rho_0 = r_0,$ $\rho_1 = r_1,$ initial belief and availability vector of arms is $$\pi(1) = [0.2,0.4,0.3,0.7,0.5] , y(1) = [1,1,1,1,1].$$
We further have two sets of examples, in first set of examples we assume that the probability of availability is identical for all the arms, i.e., $\theta_n^a(\pi,y) = \theta^a(\pi,y).$ In second set of examples, each arm has different probability of availability.
### Arms with identical probability of availability
Here, $\theta_n^a(\pi,y) = \theta^a(\pi,y).$ But we assumed different reward and transition probabilities. We consider four examples as given below.
1. $\theta^1(\pi,1) = 1, \theta^1(\pi,0) = 0$ and $\theta^0(\pi,1)
= 1$
2. $\theta^1(\pi,1) = 0.8, \theta^1(\pi,0) = 0$ and $\theta^0(\pi,1) = 0.7$
3. $\theta^1(\pi,1) = 0.8, \theta^1(\pi,0) = 0.4$ and $\theta^0(\pi,1) = 0.7.$
4. $\theta^1(\pi,1) = 0.35, \theta^1(\pi,0) = 0.75$ and $\theta^0(\pi,1) = 0.9.$
From value function equations –, we can observe the influence of $V(\pi)$ and $\widetilde{V}(\pi)$ on each other, that is based on different value of $\theta^a(\pi,y).$
\[table:1\]
The first example captures the scenario, where there is no influence of $V(\pi)$ and $\widetilde{V}(\pi)$ on each other. In Tables \[table:1\], we show a detailed comparison of discounted cumulative reward using index based policy and myopic policy. Also, we observe that the index policy performs better than myopic policy for large values of discount parameters $\beta,$ i.e., $\beta$ closer to $1.$ In this example, myopic policy gives better peformance over index policy for $\beta = 0.6.$
\[table:3\]
In our second example, we consider $\theta^1(\pi,0) = 0,$ i.e., no influence from $V(\pi)$ on $\widetilde{V}(\pi)$ but $\theta^1(\pi,1) =
0.8,$ and $\theta^0(\pi,1) = 0.7,$ i.e., there is influence from $\widetilde{V}(\pi)$ on $V(\pi),$ see Eqn. . The performance is given in Table \[table:3\]. It suggests that the index policy yields up to $20 \%$ gain in discounted cumulative reward compared to myopic policy. In this example, index policy gives better performance compared to myopic policy even for $\beta =0.6.$
\[table:4\]
In third example, we use $\theta^1(\pi,0) = 0.4,$ $\theta^1(\pi,1) =
0.8,$ and $\theta^0(\pi,1) = 0.7.$ The performance is illustrated in Table \[table:4\]. This example captures a scenario with some influence from $V(\pi)$ and $\widetilde{V}(\pi)$ on each other. We notice that index policy provides gain in cumulative discounted reward compared to myopic polic for $\beta =0.8, 0.95.$ The index policy yields up to $12\%$ gain in discounted reward over myopic policy for $\beta = 0.95.$ But it does not provide any gain for $\beta = 0.6.$
In above first $3$ examples we considered $\theta^1(\pi,1)>\theta^1(\pi,0),$ see Table \[table:1\]—\[table:4\]. This implies that the probability that the arm is available in next slot given that it is not available and played in current time slot is smaller that the probability of availability in next slot given the arm is available and played. On the other hand we consider example of $\theta^1(\pi,1)<\theta^1(\pi,0)$ in Table \[table:5\], which means playing an arm when it is not available leads to better chance of it being available in the next slot than playing when it is available. we observe similar performance to that of example $3$.
\[table:5\]
### Arms with non identical probability of availability
In next set of examples we have considered the scenario where arms have same rewards and transition probabilities but different probabilities of availability. The transition probabilities are, $\mu_0 = 0.9, \mu_1 = 0.3$ and rewards, $\eta_0 = 0.1, \eta_1 = 0.6$ and $r_0 = 0.2, r_1=0.9.$ The initial belief and availability vector for arms are $$\pi(1) = [0.2,0.4,0.3,0.7,0.5] , y(1) = [1,0,1,0,1].$$ Example illustrating two possible scenarios were considered with parameters shown in Table \[table:multiarm with diff theta\].
From Table \[table:Different availability Compare\] we can see that index policy performs better compared to myopic policy. The index policy gives upto $16$ to $18\%$ gain over myopic policy. The authors observed that, in both examples, myopic policy chose arms 1,3 and 5 in initial time slots and later on kept choosing arm 5. The index policy chose arm 5 from the beginning. This again suggests the “far-sightedness” of the index policy in accounting for future states and availability of arms.
\[table:Different availability Compare\]
Concluding remarks {#disc}
==================
In this paper we presented monotonicity results and showed that the optimal policy is of threshold type under some model restrictions. Though this is generally true, it is difficult to prove without any restriction on model parameters. We have demonstrated this via numerical examples. Hidden states and interdependence between $V(\pi)$ and $\widetilde{V}(\pi)$ makes it difficult to get closed form expression for the threshold.
For a rested single-armed bandit with availability constraints, we have shown that the arm is indexable and derived a formula for index. The index can also be calculated by the value iteration algorithm. From numerical examples, we observed that index policy performs better than myopic policy for some cases. This suggests that, index policy accounts for the future availability of arms and hence gives better performance. In future we seek to obtain some numerical scheme to compute the index for restless bandits with constrained arms.
Appendix {#appendix .unnumbered}
========
Proof of Lemma \[lemma:convex-pi-w\] {#app:lemma-convex-pi-w}
------------------------------------
1\. In this part, We prove $V(\pi)$ is convex by induction and use that to show other value functions are also convex.
Let $$\begin{aligned}
V_1(\pi) = \max \{\pi r_0 + (1-\pi)r_1 , w\}\end{aligned}$$
V\_[n+1,S]{}() = () +
V\_[n+1,NS]{}() = w +
$$\begin{aligned}
V_{n+1}(\pi) = \max \{V_{n+1,S}(\pi) , V_{n+1,NS}(\pi)\}
\label{eqn:max of Vs and Vns}\end{aligned}$$
Now define $$\begin{aligned}
b_0 := & [\pi {\mu _0}(1 - {r_0}) + (1 - \pi ){\mu _1}(1 - {r_1}), \\
& \pi (1 - {\mu _0})(1 - {r_0}) + (1 - \pi )(1 - {\mu _1})(1 - {r_1})]^T \\
b_1 := & [\pi {\mu _0}{r_0} + (1 - \pi ){\mu _1}{r_1}, \\
& \pi (1 - {\mu _0}){r_0} + (1 - \pi )(1 - {\mu _1}){r_1}]^T \\
\hat{b}_0 = & \theta^1(\pi,1)b_0 \\
\hat{b}_1 = & \theta^1(\pi,1)b_1 \end{aligned}$$ clearly, $V_1(\pi)$ is linear and hence convex. If $V_n(\pi),\widetilde{V}_n(\pi)$ is convex in $\pi$ then we can write
From [@Astrom69]\[Lemma $2$\], we can argue that $V_{n+1,S}(\pi)$ is convex in $\pi.$ Similarly, we can show this for other value functions. 2. In this part, We can rewrite , in form of $V_{n+1,S}(\pi,w)$ and $V_{n+1,NS}(\pi,w)$ as function of $w$. We can see that $V_1(\pi,w)$ is monotone non decreasing and convex in $w$. $V_{n+1,S}(\pi,w)$ is constant plus a convex sum of four non decreasing convex function of $w.$ $V_{n+1,NS}(\pi,w)$ is the sum of three non decreasing function of $w.$ The convexity is preserved under max operation so $V_{n+1}(\pi,w)$ is also non decreasing and convex in $w$ and using induction, all $V_n(\pi,w)$ follows the same. As $V_n(\pi,w) \rightarrow V(\pi,w)$ and this complete the proof for $V(\pi)$. Similarly, we can show this for other value functions.
Proof of Lemma \[lemma:monotone-valuef\] {#app:lemma-monotone-valuef}
----------------------------------------
The proof can be done via induction technique. The basic intuition behind ordering rewards, transition and observation probabilities on belief $\pi$ is to get monotone decreasing value functions over $\pi.$\
Assume that $V_n(\pi)$ and $\widetilde{V}_n(\pi)$ is non increasing in $\pi.$ Lets take $\pi' \geq \pi$ and playing an arm is optimal. Then induction step
V\_[n+1]{}() = () +
Here $\rho(\pi)$ is decresing in $\pi,$ i.e. $\rho(\pi')<\rho(\pi)$ for $\pi'>\pi.$ Hence
V\_[n+1]{}() (’) +
From our assumptions $\mu_0>\mu_1, \rho_1>\rho_0$ and $\theta^a(\pi,y)>\theta^a(\pi',y),$ we get stochastic ordering on obervation and availability probability, i.e., $[\rho(\pi), 1-\rho(\pi)]^T \leq_s [\rho(\pi'), 1-\rho(\pi')]^T$ and $[\theta^a(\pi,y), 1-\theta^a(\pi,y)]^T \leq_s [\theta^a(\pi',y), 1-\theta^a(\pi',y)]^T.$ Then
V\_[n+1]{}() (’) +
Now $\gamma _{1,1}(\pi),\gamma _{0,1}(\pi)$ are increasing in $\pi$ and $V_n(\pi),\widetilde{V}(\pi)$ are decreasing in $\pi,$ then we have
V\_[n+1]{}() (’) +
V\_[n+1]{}() V\_[n+1]{}(’).
Similarly we can show that $\widetilde{V}_{n+1}(\pi) \geq \widetilde{V}_{n+1}(\pi').$ This is true for every $n \geq 1.$ From Chapter $7$ of [@Bertsekas95a] and Proposition $2.1$ of Chapter $2$ of [@Bertsekas95b], $V_n(\pi) \rightarrow V(\pi),$ uniformly and similarly $\widetilde{V}_n(\pi) \rightarrow \widetilde{V}(\pi).$ Hence $V(\pi) \geq V(\pi')$ and $\widetilde{V}(\pi) \geq \widetilde{V}(\pi')$ for $\pi' \geq \pi.$
Proof of Lemma \[lemma:monotone-policy\] {#app:lemma-monotone-policy}
----------------------------------------
From Lemma \[lemma:monotone-valuef\] $V_S(\pi)$ is strictly decreasing in $\pi$ and $V_{NS}(\pi)$ is nonincreasing in $\pi.$
Let $f(\pi) = V_S(\pi) -V_{NS}(\pi)$ and $f(\pi)$ is decreasing in $\pi,$ i.e $f(\pi)<f(\pi')$ for $\pi>\pi'.$ This implies that we need to show
V\_[S]{}()-V\_[NS]{}() < V\_[S]{}(’)-V\_[NS]{}(’) \[eqn:submodular-I\]
Rearranging \[eqn:submodular-I\] we need to show
V\_[S]{}()-V\_[S]{}(’) < V\_[NS]{}()-V\_[NS]{}(’) \[eqn:submodular-II\]
Rested bandit: Right hand side of is $0.$ We know $V_S(\pi)$ is decreasing, hence our claim follows.\
Restless bandit: When $\rho_0=0,\rho_1=1$ similar argument holds and claim follows. But in other cases, the claim holds under some restrictions on $\beta$ and to prove this one required to use Lipschitz properties of value functions.
Proof of Lemma \[lemma:monotone-valuef-2\] {#app:lemma-monotone-valuef-2}
------------------------------------------
As before $f(\pi) = V_S(\pi)-V_{NS}(\pi).$ In order to prove that $f(\pi)$ is decreasing, we need to show that its partial derivative w.r.t. $\pi$ is negative.
Taking partial derivative of $f(\pi)$ w.r.t. $\pi,$ we obtain
= -
Next using Lipschitz property of value function \[eqn:Lipschitz-property\], we can obtain following upper bound on the sampling value function
(\_1-\_0) {-1+2(\_1-\_0)},
and lower bound on non sampling value function
-(\_1-\_0)|\_1-\_0| .
Hence
(\_1-\_0){-1+2(\_1-\_0) + |\_1-\_0|}
We want $\{-1+2\beta(\mu_1-\mu_0) + \beta|\mu_1-\mu_0|\} < 0$ for the derivative of $f(\pi)$ to be negative. This holds true when $0<\mu_1-\mu_0<\frac{1}{3}.$
It is possible that $V_S(\pi),V_{NS}(\pi)$ is not differential w.r.t $\pi.$ In that case right partial derivative should be taken. Such partial derivative exists because $V_S(\pi),V_{NS}(\pi)$ are convex and bounded.
[^1]: The work of Varun Mehta and Kesav Kaza was done in SPANN Lab at IIT Bombay. The work of Rahul Meshram was carried out in the Bharti Centre for Communications at IIT Bombay.
[^2]: But in general, transition probabilities for available and unavailable arms could be different.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
bibliography:
- 'auto\_generated.bib'
title: 'Search for pair-produced resonances decaying to quark pairs in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s) = 13 TeV'
---
=1
$HeadURL: svn+ssh://svn.cern.ch/reps/tdr2/papers/EXO-17-021/trunk/EXO-17-021.tex $ $Id: EXO-17-021.tex 478986 2018-10-23 15:36:22Z alverson $
Introduction
============
New particles that decay into quarks and gluons and produce fully hadronic signatures are predicted in many models of physics beyond the standard model (SM) [@Kilic:2008pm; @Hill:1991at; @Kribs:2007ac]. For instance, the violation of baryon number in certain supersymmetric (SUSY) models leads to colored superpartners producing fully hadronic final states [@Evans2012]. In this paper, we report on a generic search for pair-produced resonances decaying to two light quarks ([${\PQq}{\PQq}^{\prime}$]{}) or one light quark and one bottom quark ([$\cPqb\cPq^{\prime}$]{}).
Minimal SUSY models introduce $R$-parity, associated with a $\Z_2$ symmetry group called $R$ symmetry, to forbid terms in the SUSY potential that naturally lead to the violation of baryon or lepton numbers [@Barbier:2004ez]. After SUSY breaking, $R$-parity violating Yukawa interactions of the form
$$\lambda_{ijk} L_{i} L_{j} E^{c}_{k} , \quad \lambda^{\prime}_{ijk} L_{i} Q_{j} D^{c}_{k} , \quad {\ensuremath{\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{ijk}}\xspace}U^{c}_{i} D^{c}_{j} D^{c}_{k} ,\label{eq:RPV}$$
can appear in the Lagrangian, where $\lambda$, $\lambda^{\prime}$, $\lambda^{\prime \prime}$ are coupling constants, and $i,j,k$ are quark and lepton generation indices following the summation convention, while $c$ denotes charge conjugation. The $SU(2)$ doublet superfields of the lepton and quark are denoted by $L_{i}$ and $Q_{i}$, respectively, while the $E_{i}$, $U_{i}$ and, $D_{j}$ represent the $SU(2)$ singlet superfields of the lepton, up- and down-type quarks, respectively. The first and third terms in Eq. are antisymmetric in {$i,j$} and {$j,k$}, respectively. The trilinear couplings [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{ijk}$]{}permit vertices of sfermions interacting with two fermions, and in baryonic $R$-parity-violating (RPV) models, the only nonzero couplings in Eq. are [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{ijk}$]{}, which produce interactions of squarks with two quarks.
We consider pair production of top squarks () as a benchmark model, assuming the is the lightest of the colored SUSY partners and is allowed to decay via the baryonic RPV coupling to quarks. In this case ${\ensuremath{\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{ijk}}\xspace}= {\ensuremath{\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{\mathrm{3DD}}}\xspace}$ and each index reflects the squark or quark generation of the process, two of which are down-type quarks. Two possible choices of hadronic RPV coupling scenarios are studied: [$\PSQt\to\cPq\cPq^{\prime}$]{}through the coupling [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{312}}$]{}, and [$\PSQt\to\cPqb\cPq^{\prime}$]{}through the coupling [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{323}}$]{}. The couplings considered are assumed to be large enough such that the resulting decays are prompt. These two models are schematically depicted in Fig. \[fig:feynman\].
![Diagrams for the benchmark models used in this analysis: pair production of top squarks decaying into [${\PQq}{\PQq}^{\prime}$]{}via the RPV coupling [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{312}}$]{}(), and [$\cPqb\cPq^{\prime}$]{}via the RPV coupling [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{323}}$]{}().[]{data-label="fig:feynman"}](Figure_001-a.pdf "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"} ![Diagrams for the benchmark models used in this analysis: pair production of top squarks decaying into [${\PQq}{\PQq}^{\prime}$]{}via the RPV coupling [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{312}}$]{}(), and [$\cPqb\cPq^{\prime}$]{}via the RPV coupling [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{323}}$]{}().[]{data-label="fig:feynman"}](Figure_001-b.pdf "fig:"){width=".3\textwidth"}
Searches for [$\PSQt\to\cPq\cPq^{\prime}$]{}via RPV decays have been performed at CERN by the ALEPH experiment at LEP [@ALEPHPaper], which excluded ${\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}< 80\GeV$ at 95% confidence level (), and subsequently by the CDF experiment [@CDFPaper] at the Fermilab Tevatron, which extended the limit to ${\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}< 100 \GeV$. Similar searches have been performed at the CERN LHC by both the CMS and ATLAS experiments at center-of-mass energies $\sqrt{s}=7$, 8, and 13; CMS [@CMSRunIPaper] excluded $200 < {\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}< 350\GeV$ at $\sqrt{s}=8\TeV$, while the ATLAS exclusion [@ATLASLimits13TeV] is $100 < {\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}< 410\GeV$ at $\sqrt{s}=13\TeV$. For the [$\PSQt\to\cPqb\cPq^{\prime}$]{}scenario, mass exclusion limits at $\sqrt{s}=8\TeV$ have been reported by CMS [@CMSRunIPaper] of $200 < {\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}< 385\GeV$, and by ATLAS [@ATLASLimits8TeV] of $100 < {\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}< 310\GeV$, and at $\sqrt{s}=13\TeV$ ATLAS [@ATLASLimits13TeV] excluded $100 < {\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}< 470\GeV$ and $480 < {\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}< 610\GeV$.
=800 The analysis reported in this paper uses collision data at $\sqrt{s} = 13\TeV$ collected with the CMS detector [@Chatrchyan:2008aa] at the LHC in 2016, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 35.9 [@CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001]. The search is conducted in two mass ranges. The mass spectrum between 60 and 450is used to search for lighter resonances between 80 and 400, where the decay products of each of the resonances are sufficiently collimated to be reconstructed as a single jet (boosted search). The mass spectrum above 350is explored for the presence of heavier resonances above 400, where four jets are reconstructed in the final state (resolved search). Together they target resonance masses between 80 and 1500. When tagging requirements are applied to either of the searches, we refer to the selection as tagged, and interpret the results in the [$\PSQt\to\cPqb\cPq^{\prime}$]{}scenario. When no tagging is applied, we refer to the selection as inclusive, and interpret the results in the [$\PSQt\to\cPq\cPq^{\prime}$]{}scenario. In both searches, the selection criteria and analysis strategies are general, such that any pair produced diquark resonance with a narrow width and sufficient cross section would appear as a local enhancement in the mass spectra.
The low-mass boosted search exploits the internal structure of the jets to differentiate between signal jets (two-prong structure) and jets coming from quantum chromodynamics (QCD) multijet processes (predominantly with no internal structure). In this search, we use the average mass of the two jets with the highest transverse momentum (), after removing soft and wide-angle QCD multijet radiation, to look for evidence of a signal consistent with localized deviations from the estimated SM backgrounds. The primary SM background component—QCD multijet events—is estimated from data control samples. Subdominant SM processes, such as the single and double production of and bosons, and top quarks decaying hadronically, are taken into account with simulated samples. These backgrounds create resonances in the mass spectrum, and they are henceforth referred to as resonant backgrounds.
For the resolved search, the high-mass resonances are produced with insufficient boost for the decay products to be merged into single jets, and events with four individual high transverse momentum () jets are selected. The dijet mass spectrum in this search is also dominated by QCD multijet production. The mass spectrum is parameterized as a steeply falling smooth distribution that is explored for signal-like localized excesses.
The CMS detector
================
The central feature of the CMS apparatus is a superconducting solenoid of 6 internal diameter, providing a magnetic field of 3.8. Within the solenoid volume are a silicon pixel and a strip tracker, a lead tungstate crystal electromagnetic calorimeter (ECAL), and a brass and scintillator hadron calorimeter (HCAL), each composed of a barrel and two endcap sections. Forward calorimeters extend the pseudorapidity ($\eta$) coverage provided by the barrel and endcap detectors. Muons are detected in gas-ionization chambers embedded in the steel flux-return yoke outside the solenoid. Energy deposits from hadronic jets are measured using the ECAL and HCAL. Events of interest are selected using a two-tiered trigger system [@Khachatryan:2016bia]. A detailed description of the CMS detector, together with a definition of the coordinate system used and the relevant kinematic variables, can be found in Ref. [@Chatrchyan:2008aa].
Simulated event samples {#sec:dataset}
=======================
Top squark signal events are simulated using a combination of 8.212 [@Sjostrand:2014zea] and 2.2.2 [@madgraph]. The calculation of the production of a pair of top squarks with up to two additional initial-state radiation jets is performed at leading order (LO) with and MLM merging [@mlmmatch], while is used for the prompt decay of each top squark to either [$\PSQt\to\cPq\cPq^{\prime}$]{}or [$\PSQt\to\cPqb\cPq^{\prime}$]{}through the [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{\mathrm{3DD}}$]{}hadronic RPV couplings. For each of the coupling models considered, all other $\lambda^{\prime\prime}_{\mathrm{UDD}}$ couplings are set to zero so that the branching fraction to the desired channel is 100%. The simulation is also used for the parton showering and the fragmentation with the CUETP8M1 [@pythiaTune] underlying event tune. For each coupling, top squarks are generated with masses between 80 and 1500, in 20increments up to 300, in 50steps up to 1, and in 100increments thereafter. All other SUSY particle masses are set to higher values in order not to produce intermediate sparticles in the top squark production and decay. The natural width of the top squark is taken to be much smaller than the detector resolution.
Processes from QCD multijets are simulated at LO via using the CUETP8M1 tune [@pythiaTune]. The production of a hadronically decaying or boson accompanied by additional jets from initial- and final-state radiation ($\PW{\to}{\ensuremath{\PQq^{\prime}\PAQq}\xspace}{+}\text{jets}$ or $\cPZ{\to}\qqbar{+}\text{jets}$) [@mlmmatch], and diboson [@fxfxmatch] samples are generated with , at LO with MLM merging and at next-to-leading order (NLO) with FxFx merging [@fxfxmatch], respectively. processes are generated at LO with , and +jets and samples are generated at NLO with v2 [@Alioli:2011as; @Melia:2011gk]. For $\PW{\to}{\ensuremath{\PQq^{\prime}\PAQq}\xspace}{/}\cPZ{\to}\qqbar{+}\text{jets}$ events, higher-order -dependent electroweak NLO corrections are applied to improve the modeling of the kinematic distributions [@Kallweit:2015dum; @Kallweit:2015fta; @Lindert:2017olm; @Sirunyan:2017hci; @Kallweit:2014xda].
Additional interactions in the same or adjacent bunch crossings are referred to as pileup. A number of minimum bias interactions are added to the hard interaction of all simulated samples, and the events are weighted such that the distribution of the number of pileup interactions is the same as that in the data. is used for the parton showering and hadronization and the simulation of the CMS detector for all samples is handled by [@geant4]. All simulated samples are produced with the parton distribution functions (PDF) NNPDF3.0 [@Ball:2014uwa], with the precision (LO or NLO) set by the generator used.
Jet reconstruction and selection {#sec:object}
================================
The reconstructed vertex with the largest value of summed physics-object $\pt^2$ is taken to be the primary $\Pp\Pp$ interaction vertex. Here the physics objects are the jets, clustered using the anti-jet finding algorithm [@Cacciari:2008gp; @Cacciari:2011ma], with the tracks assigned to the vertex as inputs, and the associated missing transverse momentum, taken as the negative vector sum of those jets. Particle candidates in CMS are reconstructed using a particle-flow (PF) algorithm [@pflow], which identifies muons, electrons, photons, and neutral and charged hadrons through a combination of information from the various subdetectors. The PF candidates identified as originating from pileup are removed prior to the jet clustering [@Cacciari:2007fd; @Khachatryan:2016kdb]. Jets with a clustering distance parameter of 0.4 (AK4 jets) and 0.8 (AK8 jets) are used for the resolved and the boosted searches, respectively. Corrections are applied to jet energies as a function of $\eta$ and of the jet to account for the combined response function of the detector to reconstructed objects [@1748-0221-6-11-P11002; @Khachatryan:2016kdb].
For the boosted search, jet grooming techniques are used to eliminate soft, and wide-angle QCD radiation at the periphery of the jet. Grooming improves the jet mass resolution and reduces the pileup contributions to the jet mass. Two grooming algorithms are used: trimming [@Trimming] at the trigger stage and pruning [@Pruning] at the analysis stage. The trimming technique discriminates particles within the constituents of the jet based on a dynamic threshold. In pruning, the constituents of the original jet are reclustered with the same distant parameter but using a modified Cambridge–Aachen (CA) algorithm [@CAref1; @CAref2] with relative and angular requirements. To discriminate between jets originating from SM background processes from those from boosted hadronic resonances, $N$-subjetiness variables ([$\tau_{N}$]{}) [@nsubjetiness] are used, which quantify the number of $N$ prongs of energy inside a jet. In particular, ratios of $N$-subjetiness variables, ${\ensuremath{\tau_{MN}}\xspace} = {\ensuremath{\tau_{M}}\xspace}/{\ensuremath{\tau_{N}}\xspace}$, are found to provide better discrimination between signal and background. In this analysis, ${\ensuremath{\tau_{21}}\xspace} = {\ensuremath{\tau_{2}}\xspace}/ {\ensuremath{\tau_{1}}\xspace}$ is used to distinguish two-prong signal-like jets and one-prong background-like jets which arise from QCD multijets events at an overwhelming rate, and ${\ensuremath{\tau_{32}}\xspace} = {\ensuremath{\tau_{3}}\xspace}/ {\ensuremath{\tau_{2}}\xspace}$ to separate two-prong jets from three-prong jets from hadronically decaying top quarks.
Jets produced by the hadronization of bottom quarks are identified with a combined secondary vertex -tagging algorithm [@BTV-16-002]. This algorithm uses a multivariate discriminator with inputs from information related to the secondary vertex, and a track-based lifetime measurement to differentiate between jets from bottom quarks and from light-flavor quarks and gluons. The working point of the -tagging algorithm used in this analysis is referred to as loose, and gives an ${\approx}81\%$ tagging efficiency, a ${\approx}10\%$ misidentification rate for light-quark and gluon jets, and a ${\approx}40\%$ misidentification rate for charm quark jets [@BTV-16-002].
Boosted search {#sec:boosted}
==============
Event selection
---------------
Events are first selected with a trigger based on the total hadronic transverse momentum in the event (), defined as the scalar sum of AK4 jets ([$\HT^{\mathrm{AK4}}$]{}) with $\pt>30\GeV$ and $\abs{\eta}< 2.5$. The [$\HT^{\mathrm{AK4}}$]{}trigger threshold for the early data-taking period was set to 800, and raised to 900for the last 8of data to enable the trigger to handle the instantaneous luminosity delivered by the LHC. Additionally, we include a logical OR of two triggers based on AK8 jets: one trigger requires an AK8 jet with $\pt>360\GeV$ and trimmed mass above 30, the other requires ${\ensuremath{\HT^{\mathrm{AK8}}}\xspace}>750\GeV$ defined with AK8 jets with $\pt>150\GeV$, and a jet with trimmed mass above 50. The selection efficiency of the chosen triggers is determined relative to unbiased samples collected with muon based triggers. This is cross checked with other samples collected with jet based triggers, and are all found to give consistent results. The signal triggers are found to have an efficiency greater than 98% with respect to the analysis-level selection, for events satisfying ${\ensuremath{\HT^{\mathrm{AK8}}}\xspace}>900\GeV$. In addition to satisfying the trigger conditions, selected events are required to have at least two AK8 jets with $\pt> 150\GeV$, situated in the central region of the detector with $\abs{\eta}<2.5$, and ${\ensuremath{\HT^{\mathrm{AK8}}}\xspace}>900\GeV$.
The boosted search assumes that the decay products of the resonance would be fully contained in a very energetic AK8 jet, and therefore we select the two most energetic AK8 jets in the event. The pruning algorithm is used to compute the mass of each of these two jets ([$m_{\mathrm{j1}}$]{} and [$m_{\mathrm{j2}}$]{}). The spectrum of the average pruned jet mass of these two jets, ${\ensuremath{\overline{m}}\xspace}= (m_{\mathrm{j1}}+m_{\mathrm{j2}})/2$, is examined for the presence of new physics in the mass range 60–450.
The following selection criteria are applied to reduce SM background events. These criteria were optimized by maximizing the signal significance using $S/\sqrt{B}$ as the metric within a mass window centered at the generated [$m_{\PSQt}$]{}, where $S$ and $B$ are the number of signal and background events, respectively, from simulation. The number of events with large mass imbalance between the two signal jet candidates is reduced by selecting events with mass asymmetry, defined as $ {\ensuremath{m_{\text{asym}}}\xspace}= \abs{m_{\mathrm{j1}} - m_{\mathrm{j2}}}/(m_{\mathrm{j1}} + m_{\mathrm{j2}})$, below $0.1$. Both jets are required to satisfy ${\ensuremath{\tau_{21}}\xspace} < 0.45$ and ${\ensuremath{\tau_{32}}\xspace} > 0.57$, to reject backgrounds from QCD multijets events and those from hadronically decaying top quarks, respectively. Jets from the signal events would be predominantly produced with similar $\eta$, compared to the widely spread QCD multijet production, and thus we require events to have an absolute value of the difference in $\eta$ between the two jets: $ {\ensuremath{\Delta \eta}\xspace}= \abs{ \eta_{\mathrm{j1}} - \eta_{\mathrm{j2}} } < 1.5$. For the -tagged selection, both jets are required to satisfy the loose tagging criteria described in Section \[sec:object\]. All the selection criteria are summarized in Table \[tab:selection\] (second column), and are found to be optimal for the range of masses considered in this search. The discriminating power of each of these kinematic variables is illustrated in Fig. \[fig:boostedVar\] where normalized distributions between data, different simulated background components, and selected simulated signal samples are presented.
[lcc]{} Selection & Boosted search & Resolved search\
& $60 < {\ensuremath{\overline{m}}\xspace}< 450\GeV$ & ${\ensuremath{\overline{M}}\xspace}> 350\GeV$\
& ($80\leq{\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}<400\GeV$) & (${\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}\ge400\GeV$)\
Inclusive & AK8 jets & AK4 jets\
and & jet $\pt> 150\GeV$ & jet $\pt>80\GeV$\
-tagged & jet $\abs{\eta}<2.5$ & jet $\abs{\eta}<2.5$\
& Number of jets $\ge 2$ & Number of jets $\ge 4$\
& ${\ensuremath{\HT^{\mathrm{AK8}}}\xspace}>900\GeV $ & ${\ensuremath{\HT^{\mathrm{AK4}}}\xspace}>900\GeV $\
& ${\ensuremath{m_{\text{asym}}}\xspace}<0.1$ & ${\ensuremath{M_{\text{asym}}}\xspace}<0.1$\
& ${\ensuremath{\tau_{21}}\xspace}<0.45$ & ${\ensuremath{\Delta \eta_{\text{dijet}}}\xspace}<1.0$\
& ${\ensuremath{\tau_{32}}\xspace}>0.57$ & $\Delta>200\GeV$\
& ${\ensuremath{\Delta \eta}\xspace}<1.5$ &\
\[\] -tagged & two loose -tagged jets & two loose -tagged jets\
\[tab:selection\]
{width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"} {width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"} {width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"} {width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"} {width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"} {width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"}
Signal efficiency
-----------------
Figure \[fig:boostedSignal\] (left) shows the mass distributions for simulated signals after the inclusive selection. Similar signal mass shapes are found when applying the -tagged selection. Additionally, the signal efficiency for the boosted search is reported in Fig. \[fig:boostedSignal\] (right) for both the inclusive and -tagged selections. The fraction of [$\PSQt\to\cPq\cPq^{\prime}$]{}signal events remaining after applying the inclusive selection, relative to the total number of events generated, is 0.003% for ${\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}= 80\GeV$, increases to 0.106% for ${\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}= 180\GeV$, and drops again to 0.055% for ${\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}= 400\GeV$ because of the decrease in the production of top squarks with large Lorentz boosts at higher masses. Although the fraction of boosted resonances is higher for ${\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}\lesssim 170\GeV$, the and trigger requirements have a considerable impact on the event selection and are the main source of the signal efficiency loss. The low signal selection efficiencies for boosted resonances are compensated by the large signal cross sections for low-mass top squarks [@Borschensky:2014cia; @nllfast31]. The -tagged selection presents a similar pattern, where the fraction of remaining events for [$\PSQt\to\cPqb\cPq^{\prime}$]{}is 0.0009%, 0.0350%, and 0.0134% for the resonance masses ${\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}= 80$, $200$, and $400\GeV$, respectively.
{width="49.00000%"} {width="49.00000%"}
Background estimate
-------------------
After all the selection criteria are applied, the dominant remaining SM background is QCD multijet production. Subdominant resonant backgrounds are estimated from simulation and they include +jets, $\PW{\to}{\ensuremath{\PQq^{\prime}\PAQq}\xspace}{+}\text{jets}$, $\cPZ{\to}\qqbar{+}\text{jets}$, and diboson (, , ) production. The normalization of +jets, the largest resonant background, is assessed in a control region enriched in events by requiring ${\ensuremath{\tau_{32}}\xspace}<0.57$. This criterion aims to remove one- or two-prong jets, thus enriching the sample in . We then compare the [$\overline{m}$]{}spectrum between data and simulation and obtain a correction factor from a first-order polynomial fit subtracting all other backgrounds. This correction is found to be flat in [$\overline{m}$]{}and consistent with unity within 10%, and is used as an estimate of the systematic uncertainty associated with modeling the simulated SM events. In addition, the statistical uncertainty due to the limited number of simulated SM events in each bin is considered as a systematic uncertainty, affecting the shape of the [$\overline{m}$]{}distribution.
The background originating from QCD multijet events is estimated by extrapolating data in sideband regions to the signal region, using two uncorrelated variables and is referred to as the *ABCD* method. The variables [$m_{\text{asym}}$]{}and [$\Delta \eta$]{}are found to have a correlation in data and in simulation of less than 1%, therefore, these two variables are used to define four regions summarized in Table \[tab:ABCDdesc\]. Region $A$ is the signal region defined by the nominal inclusive selection criteria, while the other three regions are background dominated. Regions $B$ and $C$ are sideband regions where the event must pass one of the two selection criteria and fail the other is applied, and region $D$ is defined as the sideband region when both selection criteria fail.
[lcc]{} & ${\ensuremath{m_{\text{asym}}}\xspace}< 0.1$ & ${\ensuremath{m_{\text{asym}}}\xspace}> 0.1$\
${\ensuremath{\Delta \eta}\xspace}> 1.5$ & $B$ & $D$\
${\ensuremath{\Delta \eta}\xspace}< 1.5$ & $A$ & $C$\
\[tab:ABCDdesc\]
The yield and the shape of the [$\overline{m}$]{}spectrum for the QCD multijet background in the signal region ($A$) is determined using the mass spectra in sideband regions such that $A = B C / D$. The transfer factor is defined as the ratio $B/D$ and it is parameterized empirically as a function of [$\overline{m}$]{}using a sigmoid function of the form
$$f({\ensuremath{\overline{m}}\xspace}) = \frac{1}{p_0 + \exp( p_1 + p_2 {\ensuremath{\overline{m}}\xspace}^2 - p_3{\ensuremath{\overline{m}}\xspace}^3 )}\quad, \label{eq:tf}$$
where the coefficients $p_0$ to $p_3$ are free parameters of the function. Resonant background contributions estimated from simulation are subtracted from the data prior to the extrapolation. The fit of the transfer factor is found to give consistent results in data and simulation. The resulting fit in the data, shown in Fig. \[fig:ratioBD\], is applied to events in region $C$ to estimate the final [$\overline{m}$]{}distribution for QCD multijet events in region $A$ for the inclusive selection. The uncertainty in the fitted transfer factor and the statistical uncertainty in the [$\overline{m}$]{}distribution in region $C$ are treated as systematic uncertainties that affect the shape of the [$\overline{m}$]{}distribution.
For the -tagged selection, an equivalent procedure is performed. Once the tagging is applied, the data sample is found to be too small to obtain a transfer factor. Instead, the transfer factor from the inclusive selection is used, and applied to region $C$ where the tagging requirement is added. By comparing the fit parameters of the transfer factors obtained with the inclusive and the -tagged selections, an additional uncertainty is applied to cover the differences, as illustrated in the dark red band of Fig. \[fig:ratioBD\].
![Boosted search transfer factor $B/D$ as a function of [$\overline{m}$]{}for data (black points) with the inclusive selection applied, and corrected for the resonant background component. The fit to the data (black dotted line) with the sigmoid function described in Eq. is also displayed. Light gray and dark red bands represent the uncertainties of the fit for the inclusive and -tagged selection, respectively, and are treated as systematic uncertainties.[]{data-label="fig:ratioBD"}](Figure_004.pdf){width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"}
Systematic uncertainties
------------------------
The performance of the *ABCD* background estimate is tested on simulated QCD multijet events. In this test, the background prediction is compared to the mass spectrum in the signal region $A$. The level of agreement between these two distributions, or closure, is found to be within $\pm$10% over the entire [$\overline{m}$]{}spectrum. This is used as an estimate of the contribution from this source to the systematic uncertainty in the QCD multijet background for both the inclusive and -tagged selection.
The systematic uncertainties in the background estimates are summarized in Table \[tab:bkgsyst\].
[lclcc]{} Search & Background & Source of systematic uncertainty & Effect & Value\
Boosted & QCD & Closure & Yield & 10.0%\
& multijets & Transfer factor fit & Shape & 1.0–4.0%$^\ast$\
& & & & 3.0–8.0%$^\dagger$\
& & Event count in region $C$ & Shape & 1.0–23.0%$^\ast$\
& & & & 2.0–33.0%$^\dagger$\
\[\] & Resonant & Simulation modeling & Yield & 10.0%\
& & Statistical precision of simulation & Shape & 1.0–30.0%$^\ast$\
& & & & 8.0–57.0%$^\dagger$\
\
\[\] & QCD & Fit parameters & Shape & 3.0–28.0%$^\ast$\
& multijets & & and Yield & 2.0–38.0%$^\dagger$\
\[tab:bkgsyst\]
Systematic uncertainties affecting the expected signal yield arise from the integrated luminosity measurement (2.5%) [@CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001], the trigger efficiency (3.0%), the modeling of the pileup interactions (1.0%), the effect from the uncertainties in the PDF (1.0%) [@Rojo:2016ymp], and the measurement of the jet energy scale (1.2%) and jet resolution (1.8%) [@1748-0221-6-11-P11002; @Khachatryan:2016kdb]. For the -tagged selection, the uncertainty in the efficiency for identifying bottom quarks (1.0%) contributes to the overall uncertainty in the expected signal yield [@BTV-16-002].
Systematic uncertainties due to the jet energy scale and resolution measurements also affect the shape of the [$\overline{m}$]{}spectrum (independent of the yield). These uncertainties are determined using the reconstructed jet mass in hadronically decaying boosted bosons, where differences in scale (2.0%) and resolution (14.0%) between data and simulation have previously been observed [@Sirunyan:2017acf]. We take these differences as estimates of the associated systematic errors.
Previous studies [@Khachatryan:2014vla; @Sirunyan:2017acf] have shown disagreement in the pruned jet mass spectra between data and simulation when a [$\tau_{21}$]{} requirement is applied. The method used to quantify this discrepancy is described in Ref. [@Khachatryan:2014vla], and is based on measuring the efficiency of identifying boosted two-prong bosons in semileptonic events. For ${\ensuremath{\tau_{21}}\xspace}<0.45$, the ratio of the efficiencies in data and simulation, or scale factor, is measured to be $1.10 \pm 0.13$. Since this search requires two jets to satisfy the same [$\tau_{21}$]{} selection, the square of the scale factor is applied to the signal events in simulation, resulting in a total two-prong scale factor of $1.21 \pm 0.29$. A similar effect has been reported when applying the [$\tau_{32}$]{} requirement [@CMS-PAS-JME-16-003]. In this case, a tag-and-probe procedure is used to measure the efficiency of identifying boosted three-prong hadronic top quarks in semileptonic events. For ${\ensuremath{\tau_{32}}\xspace}<0.54$, the ratio of the efficiencies in data and simulation is $1.07\pm0.05$, and the efficiency for selecting misidentified boosted top quarks is 20%. However, in this search, we veto three-prong jets by requiring ${\ensuremath{\tau_{32}}\xspace}>0.54$, which results in an anti-three-prong scale factor of $0.99\pm0.01$ for one jet, and $0.96\pm0.02$ when two jets satisfy this [$\tau_{32}$]{} requirement. The uncertainties in the two-prong ([$\tau_{21}$]{}) and the anti-three-prong ([$\tau_{32}$]{}) scale factors are propagated as systematic uncertainty in the signal yield.
Finally, the uncertainties due to the limited numbers of simulated signal events also contribute to the systematic uncertainty affecting the shape of the [$\overline{m}$]{}distribution. A summary of the systematic uncertainties affecting the signal yield and shape are summarized in Table \[tab:signalsyst\].
[l l c r]{} Search & Source of systematic uncertainty & Effect & Value\
Boosted & Integrated luminosity & Yield & 2.5%\
and & Trigger & Yield & 3.0%\
resolved & Pileup & Yield & 1.0%\
& PDF & Yield & 1.0%\
& Jet energy scale & Yield & 1.2–1.5%\
& & Shape & 2.0%\
& Jet energy resolution & Yield & 1.8–6.0%\
& & Shape & 10.0–14.0%\
& Statistical precision of simulation & Shape & 3.0–37.0%$^\ast$\
& & & 6.0–55.0%$^\dagger$\
& tagging efficiency & Yield & 1.0%$^\dagger$\
\
\[\] Boosted & Two-prong scale factor & Yield & 23.0%\
& Anti-three-prong scale factor & Yield & 2.0%\
\[tab:signalsyst\]
Figure \[fig:finalBoosted\] illustrates the average pruned jet mass spectrum for data and the background predictions for the inclusive (left) and the -tagged (right) selections. The resonant backgrounds correspond to less than 8% of the total background prediction for the inclusive category, and less than 6% for the -tagged one, over the entire mass range. The data are found to agree with SM expectations.
{width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"} {width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"}
Resolved search
===============
Event selection
---------------
Events are selected using a logical OR of the [$\HT^{\mathrm{AK4}}$]{}trigger, described in Section \[sec:boosted\], and two additional triggers: one requiring at least four AK4 jets with $\pt>50\GeV$, $\abs{\eta}< 2.5$, and ${\ensuremath{\HT^{\mathrm{AK4}}}\xspace}>800$, and another requiring at least four jets with $\pt>70$, $\abs{\eta}< 2.5$, and ${\ensuremath{\HT^{\mathrm{AK4}}}\xspace}>750$. In addition to satisfying the trigger conditions, selected events are required to have at least four AK4 jets with $\pt> 80\GeV$, $\abs{\eta}<2.5$, and ${\ensuremath{\HT^{\mathrm{AK4}}}\xspace}>900\GeV$. The selection efficiency of the chosen triggers is determined relative to unbiased data samples selected with muon based triggers. The trigger efficiency for events that would satisfy the subsequent selection is measured to be greater than 98%.
In order to select the two best dijet systems compatible with the signal, the four leading jets ordered in are combined to create three unique combinations of dijet pairs per event. Out of the three combinations, the dijet configuration with the smallest [$\Delta R_{\text{dijet}}$]{}is chosen. This variable is defined as: ${\ensuremath{\Delta R_{\text{dijet}}}\xspace}= \sum_{\mathrm{i}=1,2}\abs{\Delta R^{\mathrm{i}} - 0.8}$, where $\Delta R^{\mathrm{i}}$ represents the separation between two jets in the $\mathrm{i}^{\mathrm{th}}$ dijet pair, $\Delta R = \sqrt{\smash[b]{(\Delta\eta)^2 + (\Delta\phi)^2}}$, and $\Delta\eta$ and $\Delta\phi$ are the differences in $\eta$ and azimuthal angle $\phi$ (in radians) between the two jets under consideration. This variable exploits the expectation that the decay products of the signal resonance will be closer together compared to particles from uncorrelated jets. An offset of 0.8 has been chosen in the definition of [$\Delta R_{\text{dijet}}$]{}to avoid overlaps between jets in the dijet systems, and to minimize the selection of dijet systems composed of jets from radiated gluons.
Once a configuration is selected, the average mass of the dijet system, ${\ensuremath{\overline{M}}\xspace}= ({\ensuremath{m_{\mathrm{jj1}}}\xspace}+{\ensuremath{m_{\mathrm{jj2}}}\xspace})/2$, is used to search for new resonances, where ${\ensuremath{m_{\mathrm{jji}}}\xspace}$ is the dijet mass of the $\mathrm{i}^{\mathrm{th}}$ dijet. To further reject backgrounds from QCD multijet events and incorrect pairings from signal events, two additional requirements are applied. As was described in Section \[sec:boosted\], the dijet systems in signal events are expected to be more centrally produced than those in QCD multijet events, therefore, the pseudorapidity difference between the two dijet systems is required to be ${\ensuremath{\Delta \eta_{\text{dijet}}}\xspace}= \abs{\eta_{\mathrm{jj1}} - \eta_{\mathrm{jj2}}} < 1.0$. In addition, further discrimination is achieved by requiring the mass asymmetry ([$M_{\text{asym}}$]{}) between the dijet pairs to be $<0.1$, where ${\ensuremath{M_{\text{asym}}}\xspace}= \abs{ {\ensuremath{m_{\mathrm{jj1}}}\xspace} - {\ensuremath{m_{\mathrm{jj2}}}\xspace} }/( {\ensuremath{m_{\mathrm{jj1}}}\xspace} + {\ensuremath{m_{\mathrm{jj2}}}\xspace})$. Figures \[fig:resolvedSelmasym\] and \[fig:resolvedSeldeta\] show the discriminating power of these two kinematic variables applied to data, QCD multijet simulation, and a selected simulated signal sample.
![Resolved search [$M_{\text{asym}}$]{}distribution normalized to unity for data (black dots), background (solid blue line), and a selected signal [$\PSQt\to\cPq\cPq^{\prime}$]{}with ${\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}= 500\GeV$ (dashed red line). All inclusive selection criteria are applied apart from that on the variable being presented. The region to the left of the black dashed line indicates the optimized region of selected [$M_{\text{asym}}$]{}values. []{data-label="fig:resolvedSelmasym"}](Figure_006.pdf){width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"}
![Resolved search distribution of $\eta_{\mathrm{jj2}}$ of the lower-dijet system in the selected pair as a function of the $\eta_{\mathrm{jj1}}$ of the higher-dijet system. The distribution is shown for simulated QCD multijet events () and a representative signal [$\PSQt\to\cPq\cPq^{\prime}$]{}with ${\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}= 500\GeV$ (). All inclusive selection criteria are applied apart from that on the variable being presented. The region between the two red dashed lines indicates the optimized region of selected ${\ensuremath{\Delta \eta_{\text{dijet}}}\xspace}$ values. []{data-label="fig:resolvedSeldeta"}](Figure_007-a.pdf "fig:"){width="49.00000%"} ![Resolved search distribution of $\eta_{\mathrm{jj2}}$ of the lower-dijet system in the selected pair as a function of the $\eta_{\mathrm{jj1}}$ of the higher-dijet system. The distribution is shown for simulated QCD multijet events () and a representative signal [$\PSQt\to\cPq\cPq^{\prime}$]{}with ${\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}= 500\GeV$ (). All inclusive selection criteria are applied apart from that on the variable being presented. The region between the two red dashed lines indicates the optimized region of selected ${\ensuremath{\Delta \eta_{\text{dijet}}}\xspace}$ values. []{data-label="fig:resolvedSeldeta"}](Figure_007-b.pdf "fig:"){width="49.00000%"}
![Resolved search distribution of $\Delta$ as a function of [$\overline{M}$]{}, shown for simulated QCD multijet events () and a representative signal [$\PSQt\to\cPq\cPq^{\prime}$]{}with ${\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}= 500\GeV$ (). All inclusive selection criteria are applied apart from that on the variable being presented. The region above the red dashed line indicates the optimized region of selected $\Delta$ values. []{data-label="fig:resolvedSeldelta"}](Figure_008-a.pdf "fig:"){width="49.00000%"} ![Resolved search distribution of $\Delta$ as a function of [$\overline{M}$]{}, shown for simulated QCD multijet events () and a representative signal [$\PSQt\to\cPq\cPq^{\prime}$]{}with ${\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}= 500\GeV$ (). All inclusive selection criteria are applied apart from that on the variable being presented. The region above the red dashed line indicates the optimized region of selected $\Delta$ values. []{data-label="fig:resolvedSeldelta"}](Figure_008-b.pdf "fig:"){width="49.00000%"}
An additional variable defined as $\Delta= \bigl(\sum_{\mathrm{i}=1,2}\abs{\pt^{\mathrm{i}}}\bigr) - {\ensuremath{\overline{M}}\xspace}$ is calculated for each dijet system, where the sum is over the two jets in the dijet configuration. The distributions of the $\Delta$ variable as a function of [$\overline{M}$]{}for a selected signal sample and QCD multijet simulation are illustrated in Fig. \[fig:resolvedSeldelta\]. This variable has been previously used in hadronic resonance searches at both the Tevatron and the LHC [@cdfmultijets; @cmsmultijets; @cmsmultijets2; @gluino2014; @CMSRunIPaper7; @CMSRunIPaper]. In addition to rejecting background events, setting a minimum value of $\Delta$ results in a lowering of the peak position of the [$\overline{M}$]{}distribution in SM QCD multijet events, and allows the search to be extend to lower resonance masses. Events are selected with $\Delta>200\GeV$. Finally, for the -tagged selection, a loose -tagged jet is required in each dijet pair candidate. The selection requirements for this search are summarized in Table \[tab:selection\] (third column), and are found to be optimal for the entire range of masses considered here.
Background estimate
-------------------
Events originating from QCD multijet processes dominate the [$\overline{M}$]{}spectrum and are modeled with the following function
$$\frac{{\rd}N}{{\rd}{\ensuremath{\overline{M}}\xspace}} = \frac{p_0 (1 - x)^{p_1}}{x^{p_2}}, \label{eq:P4}$$
where $x={\ensuremath{\overline{M}}\xspace}/ \sqrt{s}$, $\sqrt{s}$ is the center-of-mass energy, $N$ is the number of considered events, and $p_0$ through $p_2$ are parameters of the function. The functional form in Eq. successfully models the steeply falling dijet mass distribution of QCD multijet production, and comparable functions have been extensively used in similar previous dijet resonance searches [@Khachatryan:2015dcf; @Sirunyan:2017acf; @CMSRunIPaper].
Figure \[fig:finalResolved\] illustrates the fitted [$\overline{M}$]{}distributions in data using the inclusive (left) and the -tagged (right) selections for the resolved analysis. The parameterized fit is performed for [$\overline{M}$]{}$>$ 350for both selections. In this region the background is well modelled by the parameterization and the trigger has an efficiency greater than $98\%$ as a function of [$\overline{M}$]{}. Figure \[fig:finalResolved\] (lower panels) shows the bin-by-bin difference between the data and the fit divided by the statistical uncertainty. The data agree with SM expectations.
The potential bias introduced by the choice of the background parameterization was investigated by performing signal injection tests in pseudo-experiments. The pseudo-experiments were generated using the mass spectra from simulated signal events fitted with a Gaussian function, added to that of the QCD multijet simulation fitted with the function of Eq. . Each pseudo-experiment was then fitted with alternative parameterizations from different families of functions of varying orders, and the effect on the strength of the injected signal was estimated and found to be negligible.
{width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"} {width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"}
Signal efficiency and systematic uncertainties
----------------------------------------------
The [$\overline{M}$]{}distributions of the simulated signal samples are parameterized with Gaussian functions, and are shown for the inclusive selection in Fig. \[fig:resolvedSignal\] (left). Similar signal mass shapes are found in the -tagged analysis. The signal efficiency for the resolved search is illustrated in Fig. \[fig:resolvedSignal\] (right) for both the inclusive and the -tagged selections. The fraction of [$\PSQt\to\cPq\cPq^{\prime}$]{}signal events remaining in simulation after applying the inclusive selection, relative to the total number of events generated, is between 0.66 and 1.16% for [$m_{\PSQt}$]{}between 400 and 1500. In the -tagged selection, the fraction of remaining events in the [$\PSQt\to\cPqb\cPq^{\prime}$]{}simulation is between 0.12 and 0.42% for [$m_{\PSQt}$]{}between 400 and 1400.
The sources of systematic uncertainties affecting the normalization of the expected signal contribution are the integrated luminosity measurement (2.5%) [@CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001], the trigger efficiency (3.0%), the modeling of the pileup interactions (1.0%), and the choice of PDF set (1.0%) [@Rojo:2016ymp]. The uncertainties in the measurement of the jet energy scale (1.5%) and resolution (6.0%) [@1748-0221-6-11-P11002; @Khachatryan:2016kdb] introduce both a change in the yield and the shape of the [$\overline{M}$]{}spectrum. For the -tagged selection, the uncertainty in the efficiency for identifying bottom quarks (1.0%) contributes to the overall uncertainty in the expected signal yield [@BTV-16-002]. Finally, the statistical uncertainties associated with the simulated samples also contribute to the overall systematic uncertainty. The systematic uncertainties affecting the signal are summarized in Table \[tab:signalsyst\].
The uncertainties in the fitted parameters of Eq. are also taken into account as sources of systematic uncertainty affecting both the background yield and shape of the [$\overline{M}$]{}spectrum, and are summarized in Table \[tab:bkgsyst\].
{width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"} {width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"}
Results
=======
Figures \[fig:finalBoosted\] and \[fig:finalResolved\] present the mass spectra for the boosted and resolved analyses, respectively. They are in agreement with SM expectations. The mass spectra are used to set limits on the pair production cross section as a function of mass of resonances decaying into quark pairs, by considering the benchmark model of top squarks decaying via the RPV couplings [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{312}}$]{}and [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{323}}$]{}. The exclusion limits are computed using the modified frequentist approach for , with a binned profile likelihood as the test statistic [@clsTechnique2; @clsTechnique], using an asymptotic approximation [@Cowan:2010js].
Results for the boosted search are obtained from combined signal and background binned likelihood fits to the [$\overline{m}$]{}distribution in data. For each value of [$m_{\PSQt}$]{}considered, only bins of [$\overline{m}$]{}within two standard deviations of the mean of a Gaussian function fitted to the generated top squark mass are included in the likelihood. For each bin used in the likelihood, the individual background components and the signal are allowed to float within uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties affecting the yield and the shape, as summarized in Tables \[tab:bkgsyst\] and \[tab:signalsyst\], are assumed to be correlated among bins. These uncertainties are treated as nuisance parameters, which are profiled and modeled with log-normal priors, except for the uncertainty in the number of events in sideband region $C$, which is modeled with a $\Gamma$ function prior.
For the resolved search, the [$\overline{M}$]{}spectrum in data is compared to the background fit to search for localized deviations consistent with a resonance. For each value of [$m_{\PSQt}$]{}, a likelihood fit is used to compare the data to the shapes for the signal and background, within a mass window of two standard deviations around the true value of [$m_{\PSQt}$]{}. Here, all systematic uncertainties are modeled with log-normal priors.
Figure \[fig:Limits\] shows the observed and expected 95% upper limits on the top squark pair production of cross section as a function of [$m_{\PSQt}$]{}for the boosted and resolved analyses. The boosted analysis probes the mass range $80\leq{\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}<400\GeV$, while the resolved analysis covers the range ${\ensuremath{m_{\PSQt}}\xspace}\ge400\GeV$. Figure \[fig:Limits\] (left) presents the resulting limits using the inclusive selection for the [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{312}}$]{}coupling scenario, while Fig. \[fig:Limits\] (right) illustrates the limits using the -tagged selection assuming the [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{323}}$]{}coupling. The dashed pink line represents the theoretical prediction for the top squark pair production cross section at $\sqrt{s}=13\TeV$ evaluated at NLO with next-to-leading logarithmic (NLL) corrections [@Borschensky:2014cia; @nllfast31]. We exclude top squark masses from 80 to 520assuming the [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{312}}$]{}coupling. For the [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{323}}$]{}coupling, the boosted search excludes masses from 80 to 270 and from 285 to 340; and the resolved search excludes masses from 400 to 525. The corresponding expected mass limits obtained are 80 to 520for top squarks decaying via [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{312}}$]{}, and 80 to 270, 285 to 320, and 400 to 505for the [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{323}}$]{}coupling.
{width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"} {width="\cmsFigWidthTwo"}
Summary
=======
A search has been performed for the pair production of diquark resonances in two-jet events in a boosted jet topology and in four-jet events in a resolved jet topology. Data from proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13\TeV$ collected in 2016 with the CMS detector, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 35.9, have been analysed. In the boosted search, the distribution of the average mass of the selected two jets has been investigated for localized disagreements between data and the background estimate, consistent with the presence of a narrow resonance, while in the resolved analysis the average mass of the selected dijet pairs is utilized. The boosted search explores resonance masses between 80 and 400, while the resolved one covers masses above 400. We find agreement between the observation and standard model expectations. These results are interpreted in the framework of $R$-parity-violating supersymmetry with the pair production of top squarks decaying promptly to quarks via the [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{312}}$]{}or the [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{323}}$]{}couplings, assuming 100% branching fractions to [$\PSQt\to\cPq\cPq^{\prime}$]{}or [$\PSQt\to\cPqb\cPq^{\prime}$]{}, respectively. Upper limits are set at 95% confidence level on the pair production cross section of top squarks as a function of the top squark mass. We exclude top squark masses with the [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{312}}$]{}coupling from 80 to 520. For the [$\lambda^{\prime \prime}_{{323}}$]{}coupling, the boosted search excludes masses from 80 to 270 and from 285 to 340; and the resolved search excludes masses from 400 to 525. These results probe a wider range of masses than previously explored at the LHC, and extend the top squark mass limits in the [$\PSQt\to\cPq\cPq^{\prime}$]{}scenario.
We congratulate our colleagues in the CERN accelerator departments for the excellent performance of the LHC and thank the technical and administrative staffs at CERN and at other CMS institutes for their contributions to the success of the CMS effort. In addition, we gratefully acknowledge the computing centers and personnel of the Worldwide LHC Computing Grid for delivering so effectively the computing infrastructure essential to our analyses. Finally, we acknowledge the enduring support for the construction and operation of the LHC and the CMS detector provided by the following funding agencies: BMBWF and FWF (Austria); FNRS and FWO (Belgium); CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, FAPERGS, and FAPESP (Brazil); MES (Bulgaria); CERN; CAS, MoST, and NSFC (China); COLCIENCIAS (Colombia); MSES and CSF (Croatia); RPF (Cyprus); SENESCYT (Ecuador); MoER, ERC IUT, and ERDF (Estonia); Academy of Finland, MEC, and HIP (Finland); CEA and CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG, and HGF (Germany); GSRT (Greece); NKFIA (Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM (Iran); SFI (Ireland); INFN (Italy); MSIP and NRF (Republic of Korea); MES (Latvia); LAS (Lithuania); MOE and UM (Malaysia); BUAP, CINVESTAV, CONACYT, LNS, SEP, and UASLP-FAI (Mexico); MOS (Montenegro); MBIE (New Zealand); PAEC (Pakistan); MSHE and NSC (Poland); FCT (Portugal); JINR (Dubna); MON, RosAtom, RAS, RFBR, and NRC KI (Russia); MESTD (Serbia); SEIDI, CPAN, PCTI, and FEDER (Spain); MOSTR (Sri Lanka); Swiss Funding Agencies (Switzerland); MST (Taipei); ThEPCenter, IPST, STAR, and NSTDA (Thailand); TUBITAK and TAEK (Turkey); NASU and SFFR (Ukraine); STFC (United Kingdom); DOE and NSF (USA).
Individuals have received support from the Marie-Curie program and the European Research Council and Horizon 2020 Grant, contract No. 675440 (European Union); the Leventis Foundation; the A. P. Sloan Foundation; the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation; the Belgian Federal Science Policy Office; the Fonds pour la Formation à la Recherche dans l’Industrie et dans l’Agriculture (FRIA-Belgium); the Agentschap voor Innovatie door Wetenschap en Technologie (IWT-Belgium); the F.R.S.-FNRS and FWO (Belgium) under the “Excellence of Science - EOS" - be.h project n. 30820817; the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS) of the Czech Republic; the Lendület (“Momentum") Program and the János Bolyai Research Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the New National Excellence Program ÚNKP, the NKFIA research grants 123842, 123959, 124845, 124850 and 125105 (Hungary); the Council of Science and Industrial Research, India; the HOMING PLUS program of the Foundation for Polish Science, cofinanced from European Union, Regional Development Fund, the Mobility Plus program of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, the National Science Center (Poland), contracts Harmonia 2014/14/M/ST2/00428, Opus 2014/13/B/ST2/02543, 2014/15/B/ST2/03998, and 2015/19/B/ST2/02861, Sonata-bis 2012/07/E/ST2/01406; the National Priorities Research Program by Qatar National Research Fund; the Programa Estatal de Fomento de la Investigaci[ó]{}n Cient[í]{}fica y T[é]{}cnica de Excelencia María de Maeztu, grant MDM-2015-0509 and the Programa Severo Ochoa del Principado de Asturias; the Thalis and Aristeia programs cofinanced by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; the Rachadapisek Sompot Fund for Postdoctoral Fellowship, Chulalongkorn University and the Chulalongkorn Academic into Its 2nd Century Project Advancement Project (Thailand); the Welch Foundation, contract C-1845; and the Weston Havens Foundation (USA).
The CMS Collaboration \[app:collab\]
====================================
=5000=500=5000
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We prove that under suitable graded and local hypothesis, a formally unramified algebra over a field must be reduced. We detail examples, including one due to Gabber, to show that it is not possible to generalize these results further.'
author:
- 'Alapan Mukhopadhyay and Karen E. Smith'
date: July 2019
title: Reducedness of formally unramified algebras over fields
---
Introduction
============
Let $A$ be a commutative ring with multiplicative identity, and let $S$ be an $A$-algebra. Recall that $S$ is said to be *formally unramified* over $A$ if the module of Kähler differentials $\Omega_{S/A}$ is zero. It is well-known that a finitely generated formally unramified algebra over a field $k$ is finite product of separable field extensions of $k$ [@Eis Cor 16.16]. Since such an algebra is always reduced, this leads to the following natural question:
**Question:**\[a natural question\] Under what hypothesis is a formally unramified algebra over a field reduced?
It is easy to find non-reduced formally unramified algebras over an arbitrary field of characteristic $p$ (see ). However, the question is subtle when the ground field has characteristic zero. For example, Ofer Gabber proposed a construction of a non-reduced formally unramified algebra over an arbitrary field of characteristic zero, which we explain in .
The main purpose of this note is to prove that, in spite of Gabber’s example, formally unramified extensions of a perfect field are indeed often reduced. For example, we show that if $A$ is a local algebra separated in its $m$-adic topology and formally unramified over a perfect field, then $A$ is reduced (). As a corollary, we deduce that any Noetherian $k$-algebra formally unramified over a perfect field is reduced (), a fact we have not been able to find in the literature though we expect it may be known to experts. We include an example to show that formally unramified does not imply reducedness for Noetherian local $k$-algebras, however, without the assumption that $k$ is perfect (), quite unlike the finite type case.
We also get positive results in the graded case:
*Let $R$ be an $\mathbb{N}$-graded formally unramified algebra over a perfect field $k$. If the degree zero graded piece of $R$ is Noetherian, then $R$ is reduced*.
Note that it is [*not necessary*]{} to assume that the graded ring $R$ is finitely generated over $R_0$, nor that $k\subset R_0$. We prove this theorem, as well as some variants in which $R_0$ is not assumed to be Noetherian, in Section 3. See Theorem \[positive answer\] and Remarks \[general\], \[reduced\] and \[mixed\].
**Notations and conventions:** Every ring in this paper is assumed commutative and with multiplicative identity. Importantly, we [*do not*]{} assume that rings are Noetherian, unless we explicitly state so. A triple $(R,m,k)$ represents a (not necessarily Noetherian) local ring $R$, with maximal ideal $m$ and residue field $k$.
The set of non-negative integers is denoted by $\mathbb{N}$. The symbol $p$ denotes a positive prime integer.
The notation $\Omega_{S/A}$ denotes the module of Kähler differentials of an $A$-algebra $S$, and the symbol $d$ denotes the universal derivation $S\rightarrow \Omega_{S/A}$. We suppress the dependence on $S$ and $A$ in the notation for $d$ to make the notation less clumsy, so it is important to pay attention to the context (that is, the target module for $d$) when dealing with several algebras or different ground rings. See [@Stacks Tag00RM] for basics on Kähler differentials.
**Acknowledgements:** The authors thank Mel Hochster for kindly sharing his notes on Gabber’s example (). We are grateful to Shubhodip Mondal for bringing our attention to these issues, while relaying related questions that were posed in the Arizona Winter School 2019 (see Section 4).
Examples of non-reduced formally unramified algebras
====================================================
In this section, we discuss examples of non-reduced formally unramified algebras. We first recall that it is easy to find such examples in prime characteristic.
\[char p example\] Fix a field $k$ of positive characteristic $p.$ Let $k[X]$ be the polynomial ring in one variable over $k$, and denote by $L$ an algebraic closure of its fraction field. For $n\in \mathbb{N}$, let $X^{1/p^n} \in L$ be the $p^n$-th root of $X$. Consider the $k$-subalgebra $k[X^{1/p^{\infty}}]$ of $L$ generated by the $X^{1/p^n}$ as we range over all natural numbers $n$. Let $A$ be the quotient ring $\frac{k[X^{1/p^{\infty}}]}{(X)}$.
Denote the image of $X$ in $A$ by $x$. Observe that $d(x^{1/p^n})= d((x^{1/p^{n+1}})^p)=0$ for each $n \in \mathbb{N}$. Since the $d(x^{1/p^n})$ generate $\Omega_{A/k}$ as an $A$-module, we see that $\Omega_{A/k}$ is zero. But, of course, the algebra $A$ is non-reduced: for example $x^{1/p}$ in $A$ is one of many non-zero nilpotent elements.
We now describe an example of Ofer Gabber:
\[Gabber\] Fix any field $k$ of characteristic zero. There exists a formally unramified local $k$-algebra that is not reduced.
Gabber’s example in Theorem \[Gabber\] is necessarily non-Noetherian, as is Example \[char p example\]. As we soon prove, Noetherian local formally unramified algebras over a perfect field are always reduced; see Corollary \[structure of locally Noetherian formally unramified algebra over a perfect field\].
We will construct a direct limit of local $k$-algebras $$\label{sequence}
(R_0, m_0, k) \hookrightarrow (R_1, m_1, k) \hookrightarrow (R_2, m_2, k) \hookrightarrow
\dots$$ satisfying
1. $k\hookrightarrow R_0$ is a proper inclusion.
2. Each algebra $R_i$ is a finite dimensional local $k$-algebra, with the natural composition $k\hookrightarrow R \twoheadrightarrow R_i/m_i $ an isomorphism.
3. The local $k$-algebra inclusion $R_i \subseteq R_{i+1}$ induces the zero map $\Omega_{R_i/k}\rightarrow \Omega_{R_{i+1}/k}$ for each $i \in \mathbb{N}$.
Then to produce the local $k$-algebra satisfying the conclusion of Proposition \[Gabber\], we take the direct limit, setting $$R_{\infty}:= \underset{i \in \mathbb{N}}{\varinjlim}\, R_i, \, \, \, \, m_{\infty}:= \underset{i \in \mathbb{N}}{\varinjlim} \, m_i.$$ The $k$-algebra $R_{\infty}$ is a local ring with a non-zero maximal ideal $m_{\infty}$. Since the construction of modules of Kahler differentials commutes with taking direct limits [@Stacks Tag 00RM]), we have $\Omega_{R_{\infty}/k}= \underset{i \in \mathbb{N}} {\varinjlim}\, \Omega_{R_i/k}=0$. Furthermore, because each $R_i$ is finite dimensional, we know each $m_i$ is nilpotent, and so each element of $m_{\infty}$ is nilpotent. So $(R_{\infty}, m_{\infty}, k)$ serves as an example proving Theorem \[Gabber\].
To construct the sequence (\[sequence\]), we begin by taking $R_0$ to be $B$ as defined in the next lemma.
\[preparatory\] Fix a field $k$ of characteristic zero, and an integer $n\geq 5$. Let $F = X^2Y^2+X^n+Y^n$ in the power series ring $k[[X,Y]]$. Let $B$ denote the quotient ring $k[[X, Y]]/(\frac{\partial F}{\partial X}, \frac{\partial F}{\partial Y})$. Then,
1. $B$ is an Artinian local ring; that is, $\text{dim}_k({B})< \infty$
2. The image $f$ of $F$ in the quotient ring $B$ is not zero but its square is zero.
3. The element $df$ is zero in $\Omega_{B/k}$.
Before proving Lemma \[preparatory\], we point out how to use it to construct the sequence (\[sequence\]) of algebras $R_i$. Having set $R_0 = B$, we can then inductively produce $(R_i, m_i, k)$ from $(R_{i-1}, m_{i-1}, k)$ using Lemma \[killing differentials\] below.
\[killing differentials\] Fix a field $k$ of characteristic zero. Let $(R, m, k)$ be any local $k$-algebra of finite dimension over $k$ such that the composite map $k \hookrightarrow R \rightarrow R/m$ is an isomorphism. Then there exists a finite dimensional local $k$-algebra extension $(R, m, k)\hookrightarrow (\widetilde{R}, \widetilde{m}, k)$ (with $k \hookrightarrow \tilde{R} \rightarrow \tilde{R}/\tilde{m}$ also an isomorphism) such that the induced map $\Omega_{R/k} \rightarrow \Omega_{\widetilde {R}/k}$ is the zero map.
Thus Theorem \[Gabber\] is proved as soon as we prove the preceding two lemmas, which we now do in turn, using Lemma \[preparatory\] to establish Lemma \[killing differentials\].
For (i), we use the fact that $k[[X, Y]]$ is a two-dimensional UFD [@Aus]. Since $\frac{\partial F}{\partial X}, \frac{\partial F}{\partial Y}$ have no common factors, they form a regular sequence in the power series ring $k[[X, Y]]$. In particular, the ideal $(\frac{\partial F}{\partial X}, \frac{\partial F}{\partial Y})$ is primary to the maximal ideal, so that the quotient $B = k[[X, Y]]/(\frac{\partial F}{\partial X}, \frac{\partial F}{\partial Y}) $ is finite dimensional over $k$.
For (ii), we introduce some notation. Set $F_1= 2Y^2+nX^{n-2}$ and $F_2 = 2X^2+ nY^{n-2}$, so that $\frac{\partial F}{\partial X}= XF_1$ and $ \frac{\partial F}{\partial Y}= YF_2$. We also use lower case letters to indicate images in the quotient $B = k[[X, Y]]/(\frac{\partial F}{\partial X}, \frac{\partial F}{\partial Y})$.
Note that $$\label{feq}
F-\frac{1}{n}(X\frac{\partial F}{\partial X}+ Y\frac{\partial F}{\partial Y})=(1- \frac{4}{n})X^2Y^2,$$ so that $f = (1-\frac{4}{n})(xy)^2$ in $B$. To see that this element is non-zero, we argue by contradiction. Lifting to the power series ring, the statement that $f=0$ would mean that $$X^2Y^2 = G\frac{\partial F}{\partial X}+ H\frac{\partial F}{\partial Y} = GXF_1 + HYF_2$$ for some power series $G, H$. Using the unique factorization property, we see that $G = YG_1$ and $H=XH_1$ for some power series $G_1, H_1$. So, we get $XY= G_1F_1+ H_1F_2$. Comparing order two terms on both sides of the last equality, we get a contradiction. So $f\neq 0$ in $B$.
To show $f^2=0$ in $B$, we again invoke Equation (\[feq\]), observing that it is enough to show that $(x^2y^2)^4 = 0$ in $B$. In fact, we’ll show that $xy^3 = 0$ in $B$. Computing in the power series ring, we have $$F_1 - \frac{n}{2}X^{n-4}(F_2) = Y^2(2-\frac{n^2}{2}X^{n-4}Y^{n-2}) \in (F_1, F_2)$$ and since $2-\frac{n^2}{2}X^{n-4}Y^{n-2}$ is a unit in $k[[X, Y]]$, we have $Y^2 \in (F_1, F_2).$ Multiplying by $XY$, we conclude that $$XY^3 \in (XF_1, YF_2) = (\frac{\partial F}{\partial X}, \frac{\partial F}{\partial Y}),$$ whence $xy^3 = 0$ in $B$. In particular, $f^2 = x^4y^4 = 0$ in $B$.
\(iii) The universal derivation $B\rightarrow \Omega_{B/k}$ sends $f$ to $df =
\frac{\partial F}{\partial X} dx + \frac{\partial F}{\partial Y}dy = 0$, where abusing notation, the notation $\frac{\partial F}{\partial X} $ and $\frac{\partial F}{\partial Y} $ denotes the images in $B$. Since these coefficient are zero in $B$, we see that $df = 0$.
Fix a finite dimensional algebra $(R, m, k)$ as in the lemma. It suffices to show that, for a given non-zero $r \in m$, we can construct a finite dimensional local $k$-algebra $(R', m', k)$ (with composite $k \hookrightarrow R' \twoheadrightarrow R'/m'$ an isomorphism) and a local $k$-algebra injection $R \hookrightarrow R'$ such that the induced map $\Omega_{R/k} \rightarrow \Omega_{R'/k}$ sends $dr$ to zero. Indeed, first observe that our hypothesis implies that $\Omega_{R/k}$ is generated by elements $r$ where $r\in m$. So choosing a $k$-basis $e_1, e_2, \ldots, e_l$ for $m$, it is clear that we simply need to repeat the construction $l$ times (first for $r=e_1$ and then for $r$ the image of $e_2$ and so on), to get $(\tilde{R}, \tilde{m}, k)$ together with a local $k$-algebra injection $R \hookrightarrow \tilde{R}$ such that the induced map $\Omega_{R/k} \rightarrow \Omega_{\tilde{R}/k}$ sends each $de_i$ to zero. So $\tilde R$ can be taken to be the finite dimensional local $k$-algebra guaranteed by the lemma.
So fix non-zero $r \in m $. Let $t \in \mathbb{N}$ be such that $r^t=0$ but $r^{t-1}\neq 0$. Now, for $B$ as in , define $B_{t}$ to be the tensor product of $t-1$ copies of $B$ over $k$. For $1 \leq i \leq t-1$, let $g_i= 1 \otimes \ldots \otimes f \otimes \ldots 1 \in B_t$ (where $f$ is at the $i$-th spot), and set $g= \sum \limits_{i=1}^{t-1} g_i$. Define $R'= R \otimes_k B_t/(r\otimes 1- 1 \otimes g)$.
Observe that there is a canonical $k$-algebra map $\iota: R \rightarrow R'$, and that $R'$ is a finite dimensional local $k$-algebra with residue field $k$. It remains to show that the induced map $\Omega_{R/k} \rightarrow \Omega_{R'/k}$ sends $dr$ to zero and that $\iota$ is injective. To the first end, we invoke , which tells us that that $df =0$ in $\Omega_{B/k}$, so that each $dg_i$ is zero in $\Omega_{B_t/k}$, thus $dg$ is zero in $\Omega_{B_t/k}$ as well. Because $g$ and $r$ get identified in $R'$, it follows also that the natural image of $dr$ in $\Omega_{R'/k}$ is $dg =0$ as well. That is, the image of $dr $ under the natural map $ \Omega_{R/k} \rightarrow \Omega_{R'/k}
$ induced by $\iota$ is zero, as needed.
It remains only to show that $\iota: R \rightarrow R'$ is injective. For this, observe that in $B_t$, we have that $g_i^2= 0$ for all $i$, so that $g^t=0$; however, $g^{t-1}= (t-1)!f \otimes f \otimes \ldots \otimes f$ is not zero. Set $A_t = k[z]/z^t$. We have $k$-algebra injections $A_t \hookrightarrow R$ and $A_t \hookrightarrow B_t$ sending $z$ to $r$ and to $g$ respectively, so that we can consider both $R$ and $B_t$ as $A_t$-algebras. The natural map $R \otimes_k B_t \rightarrow R \otimes_{A_t}B_t$ kills $r\otimes1 - 1 \otimes g$, so it factors through $R'$. Thus to prove the injectivity of $\iota$, it suffices to show that the composite $R \overset{\iota}\longrightarrow R' \rightarrow R \otimes_{A_t}B_t$ is injective. For this, note that $A_t$ is finite dimensional Gorenstein algebra, and hence injective as an $A_t$ module [@Eis Prop 21.5], which means that the $A_t$-module map $A_t \hookrightarrow B_t$ splits. Tensoring with $R$, we see that the composition $R \rightarrow R \otimes_{A_t}B_t$, and hence $\iota,$ splits as well. So $\iota$ is injective.
Reducedness of Local and Graded Unramified algebras
===================================================
In this section, we establish affirmative answers to Question 1 about the reduced-ness of formally unramified algebras. We first point out a straightforward result in the local case under suitable finiteness conditions:
\[the local case\] Let $(R,m,k)$ be a local algebra over a field $L$. Assume that
1. $R$ is $m$-adically separated, meaning that $\underset{n \in \mathbb{N}}{\bigcap}m^n=0$; and
2. The field extension given by the composite $L \rightarrow R \rightarrow k$ is [*separable.*]{}[[^1]]{}
If $\Omega_{R/L}=0$, then $R$ is a field.
The separability assumption in is necessary, as the following example shows:
\[non-example in the Noetherian case\] Fix $L= \mathbb{F}_p(x)$, the function field in the variable $x$ over $\mathbb{F}_p$ and let $k= \mathbb{F}_p(x^{\frac{1}{p^{\infty}}})$ be the perfection of $L$. We will construct a Noetherian local $k$-algebra which is formally unramified over $L$ but which is not reduced.
For $f(x) \in L$, let $f'(x)$ denote the derivative of $f(x)$ with respect to $x$. Viewing $L$ as a subfield of $k$, we can also view $f'(x)$ as an element in $k$. Set $A= k[Z]/(Z^2)$, and let $z$ be the image of $Z \in k[Z]$ in $A$. Consider the additive map $\phi: L \rightarrow A$ given by $\phi(f(x))= f(x)+f'(x)z$. It is not hard to verify that $\phi$ is a ring homomorphism, using the fact that $z^2=0$. View $A$ as an $L$-algebra using this map (note: we are [*not*]{} using the “obvious" $L$ structure induced by the inclusions $L\subset k \subset A$). Clearly $A$ is a non-reduced Noetherian local $L$-algebra.
We now verify that $\Omega_{A/L}=0$. For this, it suffices to check that the differential $da$ is zero in $\Omega_{A/L}$ for each $a \in A.$ Since $k$ is perfect, we can write $a= g_1^p + g_2^pz$, for some $g_1, g_2 \in k$. So $da=g_2^pdz$. Now, $dz$ is zero since $dz= d((x^{1/p})^p+z)= d(\phi(x))$.
Before proving , we point out some consequences.
\[structure of locally Noetherian formally unramified algebra over a perfect field\] Fix a perfect[[^2]]{} ground field $k$.
1. Let $A$ be a $k$-algebra with the property that the localization at every maximal ideal is Noetherian. If $\Omega_{A/k}=0$, then $A$ is reduced.
2. Let $A$ be a Noetherian $k$-algebra. If $\Omega_{A/k}=0$, then $A$ is finite product of perfect fields.
For (i), observe that it is enough to show that the localization $A_m$ is reduced where $m$ is an arbitrary maximal ideal of $A$. Since the formation of module of Kähler differentials commutes with localization [@Eis Prop 16.9], we have $\Omega_{A_m/k}=0$. By Krull’s intersection theorem, we know $\underset{n \in \mathbb{N}}{\bigcap}m^nA_m=0$, whence implies that $A_m$ is reduced.
For (ii), note first that Theorem \[the local case\] implies immediately that the local ring of $A$ at a maximal ideal is a field. So every maximal ideal of $A$ is minimal. Since $A$ is Noetherian, $A$ has only finitely many minimal–and hence maximal– ideals, say $m_1, \ldots, m_r$. The Chinese Remainder Theorem tells us that the canonical map $$A \rightarrow \prod \limits_{i=1}^r A/{m_i}$$ is surjective with kernel equal to the nilradical of $A$. By part (i), $A$ is reduced, and hence this map is an isomorphism, and $A$ is a product of fields. It remains only to show that each $A/m_i$ is perfect. When $k$ has characteristic zero this is immediate. When $k$ has positive characteristic, observe that $\Omega_{A/k} = \bigoplus_{i=1}^r \Omega_{(A/m_i)/k}$, so that each $\Omega_{(\frac{A}{m_i})/k}=0$. But now we can invoke the following lemma to complete the argument: [*[ Let $k$ be a perfect field of characteristic $p>0$, and suppose $k \subseteq K$ is a field extension. For $x \in K$, $dx=0 \in \Omega_{K/k}$ if and only if $x$ has a $p$-th root in $K$]{}*]{} [@Stacks Tag 031U].
follows from the following special case:
\[some power of the maximal ideal is zero\] Let $(R,m,k)$ be a local algebra over a field $L$ such that the field extension given by the composite $L \rightarrow R \rightarrow k$ is (possibly non-algebraic) separable. If some power of $m$ is zero and $\Omega_{R/L}=0$, then $R$ is a field.
This is slightly subtle since we can not assume the extension $L\hookrightarrow k$ is algebraic. Because, some power of $m$ is zero, the local ring $(R,m)$ is complete. Following the proof of Cohen structure theorem [@Stacks Tag 0323], we can find an $L$-algebra map $k \rightarrow R$ such that the composite $k \rightarrow R \rightarrow R/m$ is an isomorphism. In this case, because $(R, m)$ contains a copy of its residue field $k$, we have an isomorphism (see [@Stacks Tag 0B2E]) $$\label{iso}
m/m^2 \rightarrow R/m \otimes_R \Omega_{R/k}.$$ Now, since $L\subseteq k \subseteq R$, our assumption that $\Omega_{R/L}=0$ implies also $\Omega_{R/k}=0$. So the isomorphim (\[iso\]) implies that $m=m^2$, and hence $m=m^n$ for all natural numbers $n$. Combined with the assumption that some power of $m$ is zero, we conclude that $m=0$. That is, $R$ is a field.
Let $R' = R/m^2$ and note that $R'$ satisfies the hypothesis of Lemma \[some power of the maximal ideal is zero\]. Since $R\rightarrow R'$ is surjective, also $\Omega_{R/L} \rightarrow \Omega_{R'/L}$ is surjective. So our hypothesis that $\Omega_{R/L} = 0$ implies that also $\Omega_{R'/L}=0$. Now using , we see that the maximal ideal of $R/m^2$ is zero. So $m=m^2$ in $R$, from which it follows that $\bigcap_{n\in\mathbb{N}}m^n = m$ in $R$. But now our hypothesis that $R$ is $m$-adically separated implies that $m=0$, completing the proof that $R$ is a field.
If an essentially finite type algebra over a field is formally unramified, then the algebra is integral over the field [@Stacks Tag 02G3]. One might wonder whether the same is true with out the essentially finite type hypothesis. Although in positive characteristic this need not be the case, in characteristic zero this turns out to be true (see [@AS]).
The graded case.
----------------
Fix a field $k$. By “$\mathbb N$-graded $k$-algebra" we mean a $k$-algebra $R$ whose underlying additive group admits a decomposition $\bigoplus_{n\in \mathbb N} R_n$ with the property that $R_n\cdot R_m \subset R_{m+n}$ for all $m, n\in \mathbb N$. Specifically, we do not make the common assumption $k\subset R_0$.
\[positive answer\] Fix a perfect ground field $k$. Let $R$ be an $\mathbb{N}$-graded $k$-algebra for which the subring $R_0$ is Noetherian. If $R$ is formally unramified over $k$, then $R=R_0$ and $R$ is reduced.
\[general\] Alternatively, as the proof will show, rather than assuming that $k$ is perfect and $R_0$ is Noetherian in Theorem \[positive answer\], we may instead assume $(R_0, m)$ is local and $m$-adically separated with residue field a separable extension of $k$ or other variants which imply that $R_0$ satisfies the hypotheses of Theorem \[the local case\].
For $t \in \mathbb{N}$, set $R_{\geq t}$ to be the ideal generated by homogeneous elements of degree $t$ or higher. Fix $t \geq 1$ and set $R'= R/R_{\geq t}$. Note that $R'$ is $\mathbb{N}$-graded and formally unramified over $k$, where the $k$-algebra structure on $R'$ comes via the composition $k \rightarrow R \rightarrow R/R_{\geq t}=R'$. In particular, since $k$ is perfect and $R_0$ is Noetherian, we can apply Corollary \[structure of locally Noetherian formally unramified algebra over a perfect field\] to the $t=1$ case to conclude that $R_0$ is a finite product of fields.
We now claim that the inclusion $R_0 \rightarrow R/R_{\geq t} = R'$ is an isomorphism. Once we have this for every $t \geq 1$, it is clear that $R=R_0$ and that $R_0$ is reduced.
To this end, fix $t$ and consider the graded $k$-algebra $R' = R/R_{\geq{t}}.$ To show that $R_0 \rightarrow R'$ is an isomorphism, it suffices to show that for every maximal ideal $m$ of $R'$, the ideal $I = R_1\oplus R_2\oplus \cdots \oplus R_{t-1}$ of $R'$ becomes zero after localization at $m$.
Fix an arbitrary maximal ideal $m$ of $R'$. Since the elements of $I$ are all nilpotent, $I$ is contained in every prime of $R'$ including $m$. Of course, $m_0 = R_0\cap m$ is also contained in $m$, and since $R_0$ is product of fields we know that $m_0$ is maximal in $R_0$. It follows that our arbitrary ideal $m$ has the form $ m_0 \oplus I = m_0\oplus R_1\cdots \oplus R_{t-1}.$
Now to show that the localization $I_m$ is zero, it suffices to show that that the localization $I_{m_0} = I \otimes_{R_0} (R_{0})_{m_0}$ is zero, since $I_m$ can be obtained from $I_{m_0}$ by further localization at the multiplicatively closed set $R\setminus m \supset R_0\setminus m_0$. For this, tensor over $R_0$ with the field $(R_0)_{m_0} = L_0$ to produce $$(R_0)_{m_0} \oplus (R_1)_{m_0}\oplus \ldots \oplus(R_{t-1})_{m_0}$$ which we denote by $R'_{m_0}$. Note that $R'_{m_0}$ is a local algebra over the perfect field $k $ with maximal ideal $ (R_1)_{m_0}\oplus \ldots \oplus(R_{t-1})_{m_0}= I_{m_0}. $ Furthermore, being a localization of the formally unramified $k$-algebra $R'$, we know also that $R'_{m_0}$ is formally unramified. Finally, because the $t$-th power of the maximal ideal $I_{m_0}$ is zero, we see that $R'_{m_0}$ satisfies the separation hypothesis of Theorem \[the local case\]. So invoking that theorem, $R_{m_0}'$ is a field, and its maximal ideal $I_{m_0}$ is zero. This completes the proof.
We wish to give another proof of Theorem \[positive answer\] in the case where $k\subset R_0$ using the following result about the kernel of the universal derivation for a graded ring.
\[kernel of the universal derivation\] Let $R$ be an $\mathbb{N}$-graded ring containing a field $k$.
1. If $k$ has characteristic zero, then the kernel of the universal derivation $d: R \rightarrow \Omega_{R/R_0}$ is $R_0$.
2. If $k$ has characteristic $p>0$, then the kernel of the universal derivation $d:R \rightarrow \Omega_{R/R_0}$ is contained in the $p$-th Veronese subring of $R$: $$\text{ker}(d: R \rightarrow \Omega_{R/R_0}) \,\,\subseteq \,\,\underset{j \in \mathbb{N}}{\bigoplus}R_{jp}.$$
Because $\Omega_{R/k} = 0$, we immediately know that $\Omega_{R/R_0} = 0$ as well. We claim that this implies that $R=R_0$. Indeed, in this case, the universal derivation $$R \overset{d}\longrightarrow \Omega_{R/R_0}$$ is zero. So using , we see that
1. In characteristic zero, $R_0 = R$, establishing the claim immediately; whereas
2. In characteristic $p>0$, any non-zero homogeneous element of $R$ has degree a multiple of $p$. But then we can re-grade $R$, setting its degree $j$-th piece to be $R_{jp}$. With this new grading, Theorem \[kernel of the universal derivation\] again implies that the non-zero homogeneous elements of $R$ have degree a multiple of $p$, which of course means their degrees are multiples of $p^2$ using the original grading. Again regrading and iterating this procedure, we see that any homogeneous element of $R$ must have degree a multiple of $p^e$ for all $e$. This forces $R=R_0$.
Finally, since $R=R_0$ is Noetherian and $k$ is perfect, Theorem \[positive answer\] follows immediately from Corollary \[structure of locally Noetherian formally unramified algebra over a perfect field\].
Even if $k$ is not assumed to be contained in $R_0$, Proposition \[kernel of the universal derivation\] can be adapted to prove Theorem \[positive answer\] in characteristic $p>0$ or in characteristic zero if we assume $k$ is algebraic over its prime field.
Indeed, because the multiplicative identity of $R$ must have degree zero, the prime field $\mathbb F$ of $k$ (which is $\mathbb F_p$ in characteristic $p>0$ or $\mathbb Q$ in characteristic zero) is contained in $R_0$. Our assumptions on $k$ imply that $\Omega_{k/\mathbb F}$ is zero [@Matsumura Thm 25.3] whereas our hypothesis that $R$ is formally unramfied over $k$ ensures that $\Omega_{R/k}$ is zero. So the exact sequence [@Eis Prop 16.2] $$R \otimes_k \Omega_{k/\mathbb F} \rightarrow \Omega_{R/\mathbb F} \rightarrow \Omega_{R/k} \rightarrow 0$$ guarantees that also $ \Omega_{R/\mathbb F} $ is zero. Since $\mathbb F \subset R_0$, arguing as in (1) and (2), we can conclude that $R$ is reduced and concentrated in degree zero from .
\[reduced\] We can use the line of argument sketched in points (1) and (2) above to prove the reducedness of a graded algebra, without any Noetherian assumptions, in the following context. *Suppose that $R$ is an $\mathbb{N}$-graded algebra. If $R$ is formally unramified over any field $k$ contained in $R_0$, then $R=R_0$. Thus if we further assume $R_0$ is reduced, we get $R$ is also reduced.* See also Remark \[mixed\] for a statement when $R$ does not contain a field.
It remains only to prove . For this, we make use of the [**Euler operator**]{}, suitably interpreted for a (possibly) infinitely generated polynomial ring over an arbitrary ground ring. The next lemma tells us that the Euler operator behaves especially well on homogeneous elements.
**\[Euler’s Homogeneous Function Theorem\]**\[Euler operator\] Let $P = A[\{X_{\alpha}\}]$ be a polynomial ring over an arbitrary ground ring $A$ in (possibly infinitely many) variables $X_{\alpha}$ indexed by the set $\Lambda$. Assume that $P$ is $\mathbb N$-graded, with each $X_{\alpha}$ homogeneous of non-zero degree and elements of the coefficient ring $A$ has degree zero. Then for any homogeneous $G \in P$, $$\label{Euler}
\underset{\alpha \in \Lambda}{\sum}\text{deg}(X_{\alpha})\cdot X_{\alpha}\cdot\frac{\partial{G}}{\partial{X_{\alpha}}}= \text{deg}(G)\cdot G.$$
First note that since $G$ involves only finitely many $X_{\alpha}$, the sum on the left side is finite. To verify Equation (\[Euler\]), it suffices to check the case when $G$ is a monomial in $X_{\alpha}$, where it follows from a direct calculation.
Fix an $\mathbb N$-graded algebra $R$. Note that, considered as a graded algebra over the subring $R_0$ of degree zero elements, $R$ can be generated by homogeneous elements, say $\{r_{\alpha}\}_{\alpha\in \Lambda},$ of positive degree (where $\Lambda$ is some arbitrary indexing set). We thus have a graded $R_0$-algebra presentation for $R$ $$P := R_0[\{X_{\alpha}\}]_{\alpha\in \Lambda} \,\, \overset{\pi}\twoheadrightarrow \,\, R$$ sending each variable $X_{\alpha}$ of the polynomial ring $P$ to the correspondingly-indexed element $r_{\alpha}$ in our generating set. This presentation preserves degree provided we grade $P$ so that $X_{\alpha}$ is assigned degree equal to the degree of $r_{\alpha}$. Of course $\pi$ induces an isomorphism $P/I\cong R$, so we can identify $R$ with $P/I$ as graded rings. For the remainder of the argument, we adopt the convention that upper case letters denote elements of $P$ and lower case letters are their corresponding images in $P/I=R$.
Let us now examine the universal derivation $d: R\rightarrow \Omega_{R/R_0}$. Since $\Omega_{R/R_0}$ carries an induced grading which makes $d$ degree preserving, the kernel of $d$ is generated by homogeneous elements. Let $f\in R = P/I$ be a homogeneous element in $\ker d$ and let $F$ be a homogeneous lift to the polynomial ring $P$.
Because $P$ is a polynomial ring over $R_0$, the module of Kähler differentials $\Omega_{P/R_0}$ is a free $P$-module on the generators $dX_{\alpha}$ (where $\alpha$ ranges through $\Lambda$). Using the the conormal exact sequence [@Eis Prop 16.3], $$R \otimes_P I \xrightarrow{1\otimes d} R \otimes_P \Omega_{P/R_0} \rightarrow \Omega_{R/R_0} \rightarrow 0,$$ we see that $df = 0$ in $ \Omega_{R/R_0}$ means that we can find homogeneous $G_1, \ldots, G_m \in I\subset P$ and $h_1, \ldots, h_m \in R$ and such that $$1 \otimes dF \, = \sum \limits_{i=1}^m h_i\otimes dG_i \, \in \, R \otimes_P \Omega_{P/R_0}\, \cong \, \bigoplus_{\alpha\in \Lambda} R \, dX_{\alpha}.$$ Explicitly, we unravel this by computing in the free module $R\otimes \Omega_{P/R_0}$ that $$\label{eq1}
\underset{\alpha \in \Lambda}{\sum}\frac{\partial{F}}{\partial {X_{\alpha}}}dX_{\alpha} \, = \, \sum \limits_{i=1}^{m}h_i(\underset{\alpha \in \Lambda}{\sum}\frac{\partial{G_i}}{\partial{X_{\alpha}}}dX_{\alpha}) \, \, \in \, \underset{\alpha \in \Lambda}{\bigoplus} R\, dX_{\alpha},$$ where the coefficients $\frac{\partial{F}}{\partial {X_{\alpha}}}$ and $\frac{\partial{G_i}}{\partial {X_{\alpha}}}$ should be understood as their natural images in $P/I = R$. Comparing the coefficients of the free generators $dX_{\alpha}$ on either side of Equation (\[eq1\]), we see that $$\frac{\partial{F}}{\partial{X_{\alpha}}}- \sum \limits_{i=1}^m H_i \frac{\partial{G_i}}{\partial{X_{\alpha}}} \in I$$ where each $H_i$ is a lift of $h_i$ to $P$. Multiplying by $X_{\alpha}$ and summing up to get the Euler operator, we have $$\underset{\alpha \in \Lambda}{\sum} \text{deg}(X_{\alpha})\cdot X_{\alpha}\cdot \frac{\partial{F}}{\partial{X_{\alpha}}} \,\,\, - \,\,\, \sum \limits_{i=1}^m H_i(\underset{\alpha \in \Lambda}{\sum} \text{deg}(X_{\alpha})\cdot X_{\alpha}\cdot \frac{\partial{G_i}}{\partial{X_{\alpha}}}) \,\, \in \, \, I$$ so that in light of , we have that $$\text{deg}(F)\cdot F -\sum \limits_{i=1}^m H_i\cdot (\text{deg}(G_i))\cdot G_i \,\, \in \,\, I.$$ In particular, since the $G_i\in I$, we see that $\text{deg}(F) F \in I,$ and we can conclude that $$\label{eq3}
\text{deg}(f) f = 0$$ in $R$.
The proof of the proposition now follows easily. In case (i), $\deg{f}$ is a unit in $R$ if it is non-zero. So no positive degree $f$ can be in the kernel of $d:R\rightarrow \Omega_{R/R_0}$. That is, $\text{ker}(d)= R_0$. In case (ii), any natural numbers coprime to $p$ are units. So we similarly conclude that if a non-zero homogeneous element of $R$ is in the kernel of $d$, then its degree must be a multiple of $p$. That is the kernel of the universal derivation $d:R\rightarrow \Omega_{R/R_0}$ is contained in the Veronese subring $\bigoplus_{j\in \mathbb N} R_{pj}.$ This completes the proof.
\[mixed\] Our proof gives the following (possibly) mixed-characteristic version of Proposition \[kernel of the universal derivation\]: [ *[Let $R$ be an $\mathbb{N}$-graded ring torsion free over $\mathbb Z$. Then the kernel of the universal derivation $d: R\rightarrow \Omega_{R/R_0}$ is $R_0$.]{}*]{} In particular, we can also deduce the following version of Theorem \[positive answer\]: [*[Let $R$ be an $\mathbb N$-graded ring without $\mathbb Z$-torsion. If $R$ is formally unramified over any subring contained in $R_0$, then $R=R_0$, so $R$ is reduced if $R_0$ is reduced.]{}*]{}
Some Related Questions
======================
We end this note by mentioning a related question. The module of Kahler differentials $\Omega_{A/k}$ is the zeroth cohomology of the cotangent complex $\mathbb{L}_{A/k}.$ So a stronger condition than assuming that $\Omega_{A/k}=0$ would be that the entire complex $\mathbb{L}_{A/k}$ is exact. The following question appears as Question C.3, (ii), in [@AWS], where it attributed to Bhargav Bhatt (also see [@Bhatt]).\
\
**Question 2:** Let $A$ be a $\mathbb{Q}$-algebra such that the cotangent complex $\mathbb{L}_{A/\mathbb{Q}}$ is quasi-isomorphic to the zero complex. Is $A$ reduced?
[100]{} Balwant Singh, [*Basic Commutative Algebra*]{}, World Scientific. David Eisenbud, [*Commutative Algebra with a View Toward Algebraic geometry*]{}, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer. M.Auslander and D.A.Buchsbaum, [*Unique factorization in regular local rings*]{}, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., vol. 45 (1959), pp. 733-734. Robin Hartshorne, [*Algebraic Geometry*]{}, First Indian Reprint 2005. The Stacks Project Authors, [*Stacks Project*]{}, [<https://stacks.math.columbia.edu>]{}. Matthew Morrow, [*Topological Hochschild homology in arithmetic geometry*]{}, [<http://swc.math.arizona.edu/aws/2019/2019MorrowNotes.pdf>]{}. Matsumura, H. [*Commutative Ring Theory*]{}, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics (1987) (M. Reid, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139171762 Alapan Mukhopadhyay, Shubhodip Mondal, [*Ind-étale vs Formally-étale*]{}, Preprint. Rankeya Dutta, Remy Van Dobben De Bruyn, [*Flat and Formally Unramified is not Formally étale*]{}, [<https://rankeya.people.uic.edu/formallyunramifiedetale.pdf>]{} Bhargav Bhatt, [*An Imperfect Ring With a Trivial Cotangent Complex*]{}, [<http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bhattb/math/trivial-cc.pdf>]{}
[^1]: Recall that [*algebraic*]{} field extension $L \subseteq k$ is **separable** if the minimal polynomial of any element of $k$ over $L$ has distinct roots in $\overline L$. An arbitrary field extension $L\subseteq k$ is **separable** if for every sub-extension $L \subseteq L' \subseteq k$ with $L'$ finitely generated over $L$, $L'$ admits a transcendence basis $\{X_1, \ldots, X_r\}$ over $L$, such that $L(X_1, \ldots, X_r) \subseteq L'$ is a separable algebraic extension.
[^2]: Recall that the field $k$ is **perfect** if every field extension is separable. Equivalently, $k$ is perfect if and only if either $k$ has characteristic zero or $k=k^p$, where $p>0$ is the characteristic of $k$; see [@Stacks Tag 05DU].
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'The Japanese infrared astronomical satellite [*AKARI*]{} performed $\sim 4000$ pointed observations for 16 months until the end of 2007 August, when the telescope and instruments were cooled by liquid Helium. Observation targets include solar system objects, Galactic objects, local galaxies, and galaxies at cosmological distances. We describe recent updates on calibration processes of near- and mid-infrared images taken by the Infrared Camera (IRC), which has nine photometric filters covering 2–27 $\mu$m continuously. Using the latest data reduction toolkit, we created calibrated and stacked images from each pointed observation. About 90% of the stacked images have a position accuracy better than $1.5''''$. Uncertainties in aperture photometry estimated from a typical standard sky deviation of stacked images are a factor of $\sim$ 2–4 smaller than those of AllWISE at similar wavelengths. The processed images together with documents such as process logs as well as the latest toolkit are available online.'
author:
- 'Fumi <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Egusa</span> Fumihiko <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Usui</span> Kazumi <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Murata</span> Takuji <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Yamashita</span> Issei <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Yamamura</span> and Takashi <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Onaka</span>'
bibliography:
- 'papers.bib'
title: ' Revised calibration for near- and mid-infrared images from $\sim 4000$ pointed observations with [*AKARI*]{}/IRC '
---
Introduction
============
[*AKARI*]{} is the Japanese infrared (IR) satellite [@AKARI] launched on 2006 February 21[^1] and operated until 2011 November 24. The [*AKARI*]{} mission consists of several different phases of observations: a commissioning period prior to scientific operation called “Performance Verification (PV)” phase, followed by Phase 1 and 2 for scientific observations, the second PV phase, and Phase 3 for only near-IR (NIR) observations. Phase 1 started on 2006 May 8 and lasted for half a year. Most of time during Phase 1 was devoted to the all-sky survey at mid- and far-IR wavelengths. Phase 2 started on 2006 November 10, and many pointed observations together with supplemental all-sky survey were performed during this phase until 2007 August 26, as the cryogenic liquid Helium boiled off. After the second PV phase to optimize the system performance under warmer environments, Phase 3 started on 2008 June 1 [@Ona10b]. Pointed observations only at NIR wavelengths were carried out until 2010 February 15. No science observations were performed between then and the end of the [*AKARI*]{} operation.
The Infrared Camera (IRC) is designed for observations at NIR and mid-IR (MIR) wavelengths [@IRC] while the Far-Infrared Surveyor (FIS) is for those at far-IR wavelengths [@FIS]. The IRC has three channels (NIR, MIR-S, and -L) and each channel has three photometric filters together with spectroscopic dispersers. These nine filters are named as N2, N3, N4, S7, S9W, S11, L15, L18W, and L24. The first letter indicates the channel, the numbers indicate its representative wavelength in $\mu$m, and “W” denotes wide band. They cover 2–27 $\mu$m continuously and are useful to detect various objects at various redshifts and/or at various conditions. For example, emission and absorption features due to interstellar dust at NIR and MIR wavelengths can be used to trace interstellar medium at different conditions (e.g. [@Sak07]; [@Mori12]) and star-forming galaxies at different redshifts (e.g. [@Pea10]; [@Taka10]). The filter response curve, i.e. the wavelength coverage, of each filter is presented in @IRC. As illustrated in Figure \[fig:FoVs\], the field of view (FoV) of NIR and MIR-S almost coincides, while that of MIR-L is $\sim 20'$ away, each FoV being $\gtrsim 10'$ on one side.
![The field of views of the three channels of [*AKARI*]{}/IRC, revised from @IRC. The x- and y-axis directions of images from each channel are indicated by arrows: blue dotted for NIR, green solid for MIR-S, and red solid for MIR-L. The scan direction is along the ecliptic meridian.[]{data-label="fig:FoVs"}](fig3_addxy.eps){width="\linewidth"}
[*AKARI*]{} pointed observations were carried out based on proposals classified as Large Survey, Mission Program, Open Time, and Director’s Time. Their targets span a wide range of objects such as asteroids in the solar system (e.g. [@HaseS08; @Mul14]), evolved stars in our Galaxy (e.g. [@Ita07; @Ari11a]), interstellar dust in local and nearby galaxies (e.g. [@Kane08; @Yama10; @Egu13]), and distant galaxies (e.g. [@Taka10; @Murata13]). Among them, the Large Magellanic Cloud (LMC) and the North Ecliptic Pole (NEP) regions were extensively observed as the Large Survey projects [@Ita08; @Kato12; @Shimo13; @NEPD; @NEPW].
Each pointed observation is identified with one ObsID, which is a combination of targetID (7-digit number) and subID (3-digit number), e.g. 1234567\_123. In most cases, subIDs are in the chronological order. There are a few exceptions due to observing conditions. One pointed observation ($\sim 10$ min excluding maneuvers) consists of nine or ten exposure cycles (as the term “exposure frames” used in @IRC) with filter changes and dithering between the cycles. The astronomical observation template (AOT) defines their combinations for different types of observations as summarized in Table \[tab:aot\]. One exposure cycle consists of short and long exposures and the number and duration of these exposures depend on the channels and AOTs. Short exposure frames are useful for observing extremely bright sources and for identifying saturated pixels in long exposure frames. For more detail about the IRC and AOTs, see @IRC. Long exposure durations in Table \[tab:aot\] are from @Tana08.
Along with the scientific outcome mentioned above, data processing techniques for IRC images have been improved. Artifacts and point spread function (PSF) shapes for MIR were examined and characterized by @Ari11. @Tsu11 investigated and modeled a short-time variation of NIR dark current. @Egu13 created a template for MIR dark current and for the earthshine light by combining images from neighbor observations. Temporal variations of MIR-S flat pattern were explored by @Murata13.
In principle, a user needs to reduce the raw data using the toolkit provided by the [*AKARI*]{} team, but the data reduction often requires experience and knowledge in IR observations. In order to promote using [*AKARI*]{}/IRC data by a wide range of researchers, we have recently included all of the abovementioned improvements into the toolkit and processed all the raw data sets from Phase 1&2 pointed observations except those of failed observations. In addition to the raw data sets, processed and calibrated images along with documents and the latest toolkit have been released on 2015 March 31. All of these products are available from the [*AKARI*]{} observers website[^2]. With the advantage of the continuous wavelength coverage, these newly released [*AKARI*]{}/IRC data sets will enable us to explore new science cases as well as the studies originally planned in the proposals.
In this paper, we describe major revisions in the toolkit in §\[sec:red\], present properties of processed and released data in §\[sec:results\], and discuss remaining issues in §\[sec:issues\].
Data reduction {#sec:red}
==============
The IRC imaging toolkit is based on the Image Reduction and Analysis Facility (IRAF[^3]) command language with additional tools written in C and Perl. Since the first release on 2007 January 4 (ver. 20070104, named after the release date), several major updates have been applied to the toolkit. The standard flow of the current pipeline processing (ver. 20150331) is outlined in Figure \[fig:toolkit\]. Several preparative or minor steps are not presented to simplify the flow. Among these processes, we here describe important steps that require a specific treatment due to the nature of [*AKARI*]{}/IRC images of pointed observations.
Data presented in this paper are mostly products processed with the default setting. For example, we apply a sub-pixel sampling, so that one original pixel is divided into $2\times 2$ pixels. Signal in a pixel becomes $1/4$ of that of the original pixel after this sub-pixel sampling. We stack long-exposure frames only and use short-exposure frames just for identifying saturated pixels. We apply flux conversion factors from @Tana08 to the stacked images. The unit of final pixel values is $\mu$Jy per pixel. Users can reprocess the raw data with different options, and skip and/or add some steps in order to obtain images best suited for their scientific aims. For more detail of the toolkit tasks and options, see the IRC data users manual available from the [*AKARI*]{} observers website.
![ Outline of the standard pipeline processing flow in the IRC imaging toolkit. Several preparative or minor steps are omitted for the sake of visibility. []{data-label="fig:toolkit"}](toolkitconfig-p5.eps){width="1.075\linewidth"}
Dark frames
-----------
During a pointed observation, dark frames were obtained before and after target observations, called pre- and post-dark frames, respectively. For Phase 1&2, we identify three types of temporal variation in IRC dark frames: (i) short-term (i.e. within one pointed observation or $\sim 10$ minutes), (ii) intermediate-term (i.e. over several pointed observations or a few hours), and (iii) long-term (i.e. over the entire observation period or more than a few months). For the short-term variation, we measure the average level of the masked area for spectroscopic observations on each frame during an observation. Since pixels in this area are masked during imaging observations, the average level of these pixels should correspond to the average dark current level. The average level of the same area of the dark frame is also measured and their difference between the object and dark frames (i.e. a constant) is subtracted or added accordingly when the dark frame is subtracted from an object frame. In the following, the latter two variations are described together with hot pixels in MIR frames.
The default setting of the toolkit is to use a model by @Tsu11 for NIR and neighbor dark frames for MIR long exposure frames. We use these default dark frames to calibrate images presented in this paper, i.e. the released data sets.
### Model for NIR dark frames
The intermediate-term variation of dark current has been thought to be due to a passage of South Atlantic Anomaly. @Tsu11 investigated this variation for NIR long-exposure frames and found that the variation cannot be fully calibrated by just adding or subtracting the constant. Using more than 4000 pre-dark frames taken in Phase 1&2, they created a model of this dark current variation for each pixel of the NIR array. An accuracy of the model was estimated to be $\sim 1$ ADU, which is about 10% of the typical dark current and corresponds to $\sim 0.3~\mu$Jy for NIR long-exposure frames [@Tana08].
### Neighbor dark frames for MIR
The long-term variation appears as an increase of hot pixels and is more evident at longer wavelengths. Combining pre-dark frames in each pointed observation (called self-dark) better calibrates this variation than super-dark, which was created by combining $\sim 100$ pre-dark frames taken in the early phase of the satellite operation. However, during a standard pointed observation, only three pre-dark frames were obtained for MIR long exposure, so that the signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio of self-dark is lower than that of super-dark.
In order to obtain a dark frame which represents the long-term variation with a high S/N, @Egu13 and @Murata13 combine pre-dark frames of neighbor pointed observations. Following this strategy, for each ObsID, we combine pre-dark frames from five observations before and after that observation (i.e. 11 observations in total) to create a neighbor dark frame of MIR-S and -L long exposure. The number of frames combined is 33 or more and a typical duration is about one day. By subtracting super or neighbor dark from pre-dark frames, we estimate uncertainties in the dark subtraction process. In Figure \[fig:comp\_dark\], histograms of these MIR dark residuals are presented for observations performed on 2006 May 31 (top) and 2007 July 16 (bottom), i.e. around the beginning and the end of Phase 1&2. While the main part of gaussian profiles peaking around zero does not change with time, residuals of the super-dark subtraction (thin black line) have a significant positive tail compared to the neighbor dark subtraction (thick red line) at the later stage of Phase 2 (bottom panels). This result indicates that many hot pixels are not fully corrected after subtracting the super dark. In the top panels, on the other hand, a tail of the black histogram appears on the negative side. It is most likely due to the fact that frames used to create the super dark include those taken after the observation shown in the top panels. Some pixels in the super dark may be affected by hot pixels appearing after this observation. As a result, such pixels are over-subtracted after the super-dark subtraction. Nevertheless, it is clear from this figure that neighbor dark frames are more appropriate than super dark frames for reducing the effect of hot pixels. We estimate the uncertainty of dark subtraction is $\sim 5$ and 4 ADU for MIR-S and -L, respectively, from the width of the main gaussian profiles. These uncertainties are about 10% of the typical dark current and correspond to $\sim 4$ and $10~\mu$Jy for MIR-S and -L long-exposure frames, respectively [@Tana08].
Observation date = 2006 May 31\
![ Dark residual \[ADU\] measured as pre-dark $-$ super-dark (thin black) or pre-dark $-$ neighbor-dark (thick red) frames. Left and right columns are for MIR-S and -L, respectively. Top and bottom rows are for observations performed around the beginning and the end of Phase 1&2, respectively. ObsIDs and channels are presented in the top of each plot. []{data-label="fig:comp_dark"}](comp_dark.2101680_001.MIR-S.eps "fig:"){width="0.475\linewidth"} ![ Dark residual \[ADU\] measured as pre-dark $-$ super-dark (thin black) or pre-dark $-$ neighbor-dark (thick red) frames. Left and right columns are for MIR-S and -L, respectively. Top and bottom rows are for observations performed around the beginning and the end of Phase 1&2, respectively. ObsIDs and channels are presented in the top of each plot. []{data-label="fig:comp_dark"}](comp_dark.2101680_001.MIR-L.eps "fig:"){width="0.475\linewidth"} Observation date = 2007 July 16\
![ Dark residual \[ADU\] measured as pre-dark $-$ super-dark (thin black) or pre-dark $-$ neighbor-dark (thick red) frames. Left and right columns are for MIR-S and -L, respectively. Top and bottom rows are for observations performed around the beginning and the end of Phase 1&2, respectively. ObsIDs and channels are presented in the top of each plot. []{data-label="fig:comp_dark"}](comp_dark.5121034_001.MIR-S.eps "fig:"){width="0.475\linewidth"} ![ Dark residual \[ADU\] measured as pre-dark $-$ super-dark (thin black) or pre-dark $-$ neighbor-dark (thick red) frames. Left and right columns are for MIR-S and -L, respectively. Top and bottom rows are for observations performed around the beginning and the end of Phase 1&2, respectively. ObsIDs and channels are presented in the top of each plot. []{data-label="fig:comp_dark"}](comp_dark.5121034_001.MIR-L.eps "fig:"){width="0.475\linewidth"}
### MIR hot pixels from neighbor dark frames
From these neighbor dark frames, hot pixels are defined as pixels whose values exceed a certain threshold. In the toolkit, the default threshold is $500.0$ ADU and users can adjust it if necessary. In order to determine this default value, we investigated a temporal variation of representative pixels in MIR-L neighbor dark frames, as shown in Figure \[fig:trace\_dark\]. We found that once a pixel value exceeds $\sim 500$ ADU (i.e. orange and red points in the figure) it stays at the same high level in most cases and its fluctuation becomes larger than the typical dark current, which is $\sim 50$ ADU for MIR. On the other hand, when a pixel value is $\lesssim 100$–$200$ (i.e. green points in the figure), its fluctuation is smaller or comparable to the typical dark current (Note that y-axis of this figure is logarithmic scale). We thus regard such a pixel can be calibrated by the dark subtraction and set the default threshold to be $500.0$ ADU. The number of hot pixels is plotted against observation dates in Figure \[fig:nhot\].
![ Pixel values \[ADU\] of four selected pixels in MIR-L neighbor dark frames indicated by different colors. The horizontal axis is observation dates in YYYYMM format. Two vertical dashed lines indicate the start of Phase 1 and 2. []{data-label="fig:trace_dark"}](trace_dark.eps){width="\linewidth"}
![The number of hot pixels identified in neighbor dark frames for MIR-S (black plus, multiplied by 5) and -L (red asterisk). The horizontal axis and the vertical lines are the same as Figure \[fig:trace\_dark\]. []{data-label="fig:nhot"}](plot_nhot.eps){width="\linewidth"}
Flat pattern
------------
The flat pattern is a distribution of pixel sensitivity on a detector. We create a flat frame for each filter by combining object frames (i.e. sky flat). The default setting of the toolkit is to subtract a constant sky after dividing by a flat frame. In the following part of this subsection, we explain special treatments needed in the flat correction.
### Extended ghosts in MIR-L {#sec:MIRflat}
@Ari11 investigated ghost patterns in MIR-S and -L arrays and successfully separated extended ghost (or artificial flat) patterns and “true” flat patterns for L15 and L24. Using these two “true” flat patterns for L15 and L24, @Murata13 created a “true” flat pattern for L18W. In the toolkit, a difference between observed and “true” flat patterns of each MIR-L filter is treated as an extended ghost pattern and is subtracted from object frames during the flat correction instead of subtracting a constant sky.
### The “soramame” pattern in NIR and MIR-S {#sec:soramame}
It has been known that in the bottom right corner of the MIR-S FoV a noticeable pattern was present until 2007 January 7. From its shape, this pattern is called “soramame” (broad bean in Japanese). As a faint but similar pattern was also seen in the bottom left corner of the NIR FoV, its cause is thought to be an obstacle in the light path before the beam splitter. The effect of “soramame” pattern is typically a few percent for NIR and up to 10 percent for MIR-S. In addition, the sky background is less bright in NIR, so that “soramame”-shaped artifact is more prominent in MIR-S.
@Murata13 investigated a temporal variation of the MIR-S “soramame” shape in detail and found five periods with different shapes. Since the shape was not stable even within one period, @Murata13 created a “soramame” pattern for each frame from neighbor frames. However, the number of neighbor frames is not always enough to create a neighbor flat for the entire period of Phase 1&2. We thus re-defined the five periods into p1, p23, p4, and p5, and created a flat frame for each MIR-S filter and each period. The period p23 is a combination of the second and third periods defined by @Murata13. We combined these two periods, since the variation during these periods was small and gradual and thus it was hard to draw a dividing line. It is consistent with the fact that typical patterns for these two periods presented by @Murata13 (“ii” and “iii” in their Figure 3 (a)) resemble each other. Furthermore, the earthshine light effect (described in §\[sec:EL\]) is significant during the first half of p23. Since we create a flat frame for each period by stacking object frames taken in that period, frames with artificial patterns fixed to the detector coordinates (such as the earthshine light) should not be used. We thus created a flat frame from data only in the latter half of p23 and the toolkit applies it to all the data in p23. The starting date of each period is listed in Table \[tab:periods\] and the last period, p6, corresponds to the period without “soramame”.
For NIR, the number of frames was smaller and the temporal variation in shape of the artifact was less clear. We thus created one flat frame for each filter for all the periods with “soramame” instead of splitting into four periods.
Flat frames with “soramame” are presented in Figures \[fig:N4flat\] and \[fig:S7flat\] for N4 and S7, respectively. The cyan dashed boxes in these two figures enclose the same area on the focal plane (see Figure \[fig:FoVs\] for the FoV alignment of NIR and MIR-S). A bright circle in the p1 S7 flat is a residual of an observed source. Since the p1 period was short, the number of frames is not enough to remove such residuals and thus the reliability and S/N of the flat for this period are low. We thus decided not to include flat frames for p1 in the toolkit and thus not to deliver the processed data from this period. Note that p1 is in the PV phase.
![A flat frame for N4 to demonstrate “soramame”-shaped artifact within the cyan dashed box, which encloses the same area as those in Figure \[fig:S7flat\] (Note that the bottom left corner in NIR corresponds to the bottom right corner in MIR-S. See Figure \[fig:FoVs\] for the FoV alignment and axis directions.). []{data-label="fig:N4flat"}](N4_wbox.ps){width="\linewidth"}
{width="\linewidth"}
Relative shift between frames {#sec:calcshift}
-----------------------------
The position of FoV on the sky is not always the same during one pointed observation due to an intentional dithering and/or unintentional jittering and drifting of the satellite’s attitude. For each filter, the shift values in x- and y- direction and the counter-clockwise rotation angle relative to the first frame of a pointed observation are calculated using bright sources within the FoV. The minimum number of the sources used in this calculation is set to seven. In other words, if only six or less sources are found in a frame, no calculation is performed and this frame is excluded from stacking.
For observations without dithering (AOT=IRC00 or IRC05), histograms of these shifts and angle calculated for MIR-S frames are presented in Figure \[fig:hshift\] to demonstrate the pointing stability. Histograms for those with dithering (AOT=IRC02 or IRC03) are presented in Appendix \[sec:stat\_0203\]. Note that the shift values are calculated after the sub-pixel sampling, so that two pixels in the plot correspond to one original pixel. We fit a gaussian profile to each histogram and find that the histogram for the shift in x-direction has significant wings. This result indicates that the drift was mostly along the x-axis direction of MIR-S images (see Figure \[fig:FoVs\] for the axis direction), which is consistent with the measured PSF sizes described in §\[sec:PSF\]. The drift issue is also discussed in §\[sec:drift\].
Upper and lower limits to the shift values are set to exclude false matching for MIR-S and -L frames. We manually determine these limits to include most of the wings of the histograms and to be at where the histogram profiles drop steeply. These limits are indicated by blue dashed lines in Figure \[fig:hshift\], and given in a constant parameter file of the toolkit. Meanwhile, no such limit is employed for NIR frames. We notice that some of the frames are excluded due to their large drifts rather than the false matching. However, the current toolkit cannot distinguish these two factors, since it only checks shift values of one frame against the corresponding limits. In some cases, the telescope was drifting gradually, so that relative shift values [*between adjacent frames*]{} are small although those [*with respect to the first frame*]{} exceed the limit. These frames can be identified and resurrected by checking difference in shift values between adjacent frames, but such a scheme is not established yet.
{width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"}
WCS matching
------------
The World Coordinate System (i.e. Right Ascension and Declination) information from the satellite telemetry was not accurate enough for scientific purposes because of the insufficient absolute accuracy of the attitude and orbit control system and the pointing stability. The toolkit determines the WCS of a stacked image by matching detected sources in the image and sources in the 2MASS [@2MASS] catalog for NIR or in the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE; [@WISE]) catalog for MIR-S and -L. We note that the toolkit performs this WCS matching process for each stacked image (i.e. each filter) due to the following reasons: (i) more sources are available in stacked images compared to individual frames (i.e. WCS matching to individual frames is more difficult), and (ii) the FoVs of NIR/MIR-S and MIR-L are $\sim 20'$ apart and their absolute roll angle is not confirmed to be stable enough (i.e. WCS information from MIR-S cannot be simply transferred to MIR-L or absolute positions for all the sources found in all the images for one pointed observation cannot be solved all at once). The matching tolerance is set to be $1.5''$ at all the wavelengths.
Typical uncertainties in this process are $0.4''$, $0.5''$, and $0.8''$, for NIR, MIR-S, and -L, respectively (See §\[sec:results\_wcs\] and Appendix \[sec:wcserr\] for more detail).
Results from all-data processing {#sec:results}
================================
In this section, we describe how the released data sets were created and their quality such as a position accuracy, image sensitivity, and PSF.
Process summary {#sec:procsum}
---------------
As already mentioned, the sub-pixel sampling is performed and only long exposure frames are stacked. The unit of pixel values is $\mu$Jy per pixel, with the pixel size of $0.723''$, $1.17''$, and $1.19''$, for NIR, MIR-S, and -L, respectively. The Right Ascension and Declination (J2000) of stacked images are available when the WCS matching is successful. The background sky is subtracted before stacking. All the options and parameter settings adopted to create the released data sets are recorded in a log file included in a package for each ObsID (See also Appendix \[sec:datasets\]). A sample of processed images for a pointed observation is presented in Figure \[fig:sample\].
{width="\linewidth"}
During the first PV and Phase 1&2, $\sim 4000$ pointed observations were performed with the IRC. When the FIS was the primary instrument to observe a target, the IRC was operated and observing at a field $\sim 20'$ away from that of the FIS. These observations are called parallel observations. The FIS was operated either in the slow-scan mode for imaging observations (AOT = FIS01 or FIS02) or in the staring mode for spectroscopic observations (AOT = FIS03). The parallel IRC observations of the latter (i.e. FIS03) are denoted as IRC05, and are included in the released data set. One exposure cycle with photometric filters taken as positional references in the spectroscopic observations (IRC04) is also included. On the other hand, p1 is excluded due to the low S/N of MIR-S flat frames as explained in §\[sec:soramame\]. We also exclude several observations without any valid data.
The number of observations (i.e. ObsIDs) for the standard observation modes (with each AOT and AOTparameter) is listed in Table \[tab:nIDs\]. The AOTparameter, N or L, denotes whether the main target is in the NIR and MIR-S FoVs or in the MIR-L FoV. Figure \[fig:allID\] illustrates the on-sky distribution of imaging (red) and spectroscopic (blue) observations during Phase 1&2. It is clearly seen that many observations are made toward the Galactic plane ($b\sim 0^\circ$), NEP ($l\sim 100^\circ$, $b\sim 30^\circ$), and LMC ($l\sim 280^\circ$, $b\sim -30^\circ$). The number of observations for each proposal is presented in Appendix \[sec:datasets\].
to6pt Observational settings for each AOT are summarized in Table \[tab:aot\].\
to6pt N and L are the AOT parameter specifying a target in NIR/MIR-S and -L FoVs, respectively. See §\[sec:procsum\] for detail.
![All the pointed observations during Phase 1&2 in the galactic coordinates. Red and blue dots indicate imaging and spectroscopic observations, respectively.[]{data-label="fig:allID"}](plot_allID3.eps){width="\linewidth"}
Since the exposure cycle is the same for MIR-S and -L, the relative shift values for MIR-S and -L should also be the same. Meanwhile, the shift calculation for MIR-L is generally more difficult as the number of bright sources at longer wavelengths is smaller. For imaging data, we also created stacked images by using the “coaddLusingS” scheme, in which shift values calculated for MIR-S frames are used to stack MIR-L frames. Among these two stacked images for one MIR-L filter, we selected the better one to be released based on the number of frames used for stacking and the results of WCS matching. In the released data sets, the fraction of stacked images by the “coaddLusingS” scheme is 56%, 70%, and 78% for L15, L18W, and L24, respectively. These fractions are consistent with the general picture mentioned above (i.e. more sources brighter at shorter wavelengths) but not 100%. We deduce that this is due to the different FoVs for MIR-S and -L – when a target is in the MIR-L FoV, the number of bright sources can be larger for MIR-L, resulting in a better result with the original MIR-L shift values.
Position accuracy {#sec:results_wcs}
-----------------
Stacked images with successful WCS matching are defined as “Matched Images”. Typical uncertainties in the WCS matching are $0.4''$, $0.5''$, and $0.8''$ for NIR, MIR-S, and MIR-L, respectively. See Appendix \[sec:wcserr\] for more detail. We examined all of the Matched Images visually and rejected an image if most of the sources in that image were displaced $>5''$ from catalogued sources. We did not take into account elongated PSFs (see §\[sec:PSF\] and also §\[sec:drift\]) for rejection. Rejected images amount to $\sim 1$% of the Matched Images, and are re-classified as “Failed Images” together with unsuccessful WCS matching. The numbers of Matched and Failed Images for each filter are summarized in Table \[tab:wcsrate\]. The success rates are calculated as Matched/(Matched+Failed) and $\sim 98$% for NIR and $> 90$% for MIR-S. The rate generally decreases with wavelength and is $\sim 50$% for L24. The average success rate for all the stacked images is 87%.
Sensitivity {#sec:sen}
-----------
A standard deviation of a background sky signal in stacked images is estimated using data sets from the NEP observations performed during 2006 August and 2007 April, when the earthshine effect (discussed in §\[sec:EL\]) was not significant. A temporal variation for the whole Phase 1&2 is presented in Appendix \[sec:sigma\_var\]. For each stacked image, we create a histogram of pixel values and fit a gaussian profile. A typical value of the gaussian profile width, $\sigma$, is adopted as the standard sky deviation. Table \[tab:skyrms\] lists this value for each filter and AOT in units of $\mu$Jy/pixel. Values for IRC02 are not listed as this AOT was not used for the NEP observations, but they should be in between those of IRC03 and IRC05.
Measured in stacked images created with sub-pixel sampling.
Note that these values are for the stacked images, i.e. after the sub-pixel sampling, aspect ratio correction, and shift-and-add processes, all of which affect the noise distribution. Especially, the sub-pixel sampling has a significant effect as it divides one pixel into four pixels, resulting in signal in a pixel and thus $\sigma$ of its distribution to be $1/4$ of the original values. We should also note here that this $\sigma$ corresponds to the standard deviation and differs from an uncertainty of the sky level in one image, which should be estimated by the standard error. Taking into account this sub-pixel sampling effect[^4], we estimate the $5\sigma$ sensitivity in aperture photometry. Values for the apertures used in @Tana08 are listed in Table \[tab:5sig\_aper\] in units of mJy.
We compare this sensitivity for IRC05 with that of WISE, whose four filters at 3.4, 4.6, 12, and 22 $\mu$m can be compared to N3, N4, S11, and L24, respectively. While WISE sensitivities depend on a position on the sky, the $5\sigma$ values for the COSMOS field [@Sco07] in the AllWISE Data Release[^5] are 0.054, 0.071, 0.73, and 5.0 mJy, respectively. These values are $\sim 2$–4 larger than those for IRC05.
PSF {#sec:PSF}
---
The shape and size of the PSF in a stacked image depends on the instrumental PSF, the pointing stability, and the accuracy of relative shift calculations. While PSFs differ from the gaussian profile especially for MIR-L images [@Ari11], we here provide information on PSF sizes by fitting a two-dimensional (2D) gaussian profile.
We measure PSF sizes on stacked images from NEP observations performed during 2006 October and 2006 December. Histograms of measured sizes (major and minor axis lengths in FWHM of the fitted 2D gaussian) are created for each filter and each AOT (see Appendix \[sec:psf\]). Typical PSF sizes are estimated from the peak of these histograms and listed in Table \[tab:PSF\]. From this table, it is clear that NIR PSFs are more elongated than those of MIR. We attribute these NIR elongated PSFs to a larger amount of the jitter and/or drift during longer exposure times compared to MIR. As summarized in Table \[tab:aot\], the exposure time of one NIR long exposure frame for IRC03 and IRC05 is 44.4 sec and 65.5 sec, respectively, while that for one MIR long exposure frame is 16.4 sec for all AOTs (see also [@Tana08]). On the other hand, the number of frames used for stacking is typically a factor of two or more smaller for IRC03 than for IRC05. If errors in shift calculations have a significant effect, PSF sizes of IRC05 should be larger than those of IRC03. Although the NIR PSF sizes of IRC05 are slightly larger than those of IRC03, the difference is only comparable to the width of their histograms and no such trend is seen in the PSF sizes for MIR (Table \[tab:PSF\]). We thus conclude that the pointing uncertainty due to the jitter and/or drift during an exposure has a dominant effect on the PSF shape rather than the uncertainty of relative shift calculations. In addition, we find that major axes of PSFs are roughly along the y-axis for NIR images and x-axis for MIR images. These PSF elongation directions both correspond to the cross-scan direction of the satellite (see Figure \[fig:FoVs\]). This result indicates that the drift was more significant in that direction. (See Appendix \[sec:psf\] for more detail.)
Confusion
---------
Using the typical PSF sizes measured above and NEP observations performed with IRC05 and during 2006 August and 2007 April, we examine if stacked images are limited by the source confusion. We should note here that the source confusion condition (i.e. the local source density) depends primarily on the Galactic latitude. Since the NEP field is not close to the Galactic plane ($b\sim 30^\circ$), the confusion limit can be higher for observations toward lower Galactic latitudes.
For a stacked image, we identify sources brighter than $5\sigma$ and perform aperture photometry. The aperture radius for a source and sky is the same as @Tana08. Following the procedures adopted by @WadaT08, the source number density per beam is calculated, where the beam area is given by $\pi ({\rm PSF_{maj}~[FWHM]}/2.35)\times ({\rm PSF_{min}~[FWHM]}/2.35)$ and ${\rm PSF_{maj}}$ and ${\rm PSF_{min}}$ are major and minor axis length of PSF listed in Table \[tab:PSF\], respectively. If this density exceeds $1/30$, we regard the image is confusion limited and derive the confusion limit flux (c.f. [@Con74]; [@Hogg01]).
Among 161 pointed observations toward the NEP region, $\sim 50$–60 stacked images are available for each filter. We find that none of the images are confusion limited except for one N2 and one N3 images that have severe artificial noises. Meanwhile, @WadaT08 create a large mosaic of the NEP field combining $\sim 200$ [*AKARI*]{}/IRC pointed observations. For NIR, they estimate the $5\sigma$ sensitivity to be $\sim 10~\mu$Jy and find that the source number densities are close to the limit (i.e. $1/30$). Since our sensitivities for aperture photometry at NIR are about twice their values, our conclusion above is consistent with their results.
Flux calibration stability
--------------------------
Following @Tana08, we use photometric standard stars to check the flux calibration factors and their stability during Phase 1&2. The flux calibration factor is defined as the ratio of the flux predicted by models [@Coh96; @Coh99; @Coh03a; @Coh03b; @Coh03z] to the observed flux, which is measured by aperture photometry on frames after the aspect ratio correction. We find that the calibration factor was stable within $\sim$10%, noting that the error includes uncertainties of the standard star models. No significant dependence on time is found, as already reported by @Tana08.
Remaining artifacts and issues {#sec:issues}
==============================
In this section, we describe artifacts and issues still remaining in the processed images. All of them are also explained in more detail in the IRC data users manual.
NIR detector anomalies
----------------------
NIR detector anomalies such as column pulldown and muxbleed are not removed. Both of them appear when a bright source falls into the detector FoV. The former is a decrease of the signal of pixels in the same column with the source, resulting in a negative vertical stripe. The latter is a cyclic pattern in the signal of pixels in the same row as the source, resulting in short stripes aligned horizontally. Note that these artifacts cannot be removed by dithering as they move with the source. @Murata13 masked out columns and rows with an object brighter than a certain limit before stacking, which worked well for their NEP data sets since the field was observed many times with different rotation angles. During one pointed observation, a rotation angle does not vary significantly (Figure \[fig:hshift\]), so that these anomalies still remain in stacked images.
Ghost patterns
--------------
The ghost is an artifact due to reflections between optical elements. As described in §\[sec:MIRflat\], the extended ghost pattern for the background sky in MIR-L is removed during the flat calibration. Other ghost patterns due to bright compact objects still remain in the processed images. @Ari11 identified small-scale ghosts that appear close ($\sim 1'$) to a bright object in MIR frames. It is also known that similar ghosts appear in NIR frames [@Murata13]. In addition to these close ghosts, a large-scale arc-like ghost pattern is found at $\sim 1^\circ$ from a bright object. The shape of this pattern appears to be different in different channels, but has not fully been investigated yet.
Memory effect
-------------
The memory effect is a temporal decrease of the pixel sensitivity after observing a bright object. This effect appears as dark spots, is most evident in MIR-S and sometimes in MIR-L, and lasts for several hours. The shape represents how the bright object was observed as presented in Figure \[fig:memory\]. When a bright source was observed in a pointed observation, a negative area resembling the shape of the source appears in the following observations (Figure \[fig:memory\], left). Vertical stripes are seen (Figure \[fig:memory\], right) when a bright source was observed in the all-sky survey, as the telescope scanned the sky along the y-axis of MIR frames and the source was observed in several scans. An arc-like pattern and a partial stripe (Figure \[fig:memory\], right) represent how a bright source was observed in the slow-scan mode (i.e. during the parallel observations). The duration of memory effect is likely dependent on the source brightness and observing mode, but the number of data is not enough to establish the relationship. The amount of decrease is also not characterized, so that the affected pixels should be masked out. In some cases, saturation masks for the bright object are useful to mask the affected pixels out. Tasks for copying and applying these masks are available in the toolkit.
![S11 frames after flat correction as an example of memory effects. Left: a negative (dark) area at the center due to a bright star in a previous pointed observation. Right: negative stripes due to one in the all-sky survey together with an arc-like pattern due to one in an FIS slow-scan observation.[]{data-label="fig:memory"}](CRL618.ps "fig:"){width="0.45\linewidth"} ![S11 frames after flat correction as an example of memory effects. Left: a negative (dark) area at the center due to a bright star in a previous pointed observation. Right: negative stripes due to one in the all-sky survey together with an arc-like pattern due to one in an FIS slow-scan observation.[]{data-label="fig:memory"}](memS11.ps "fig:"){width="0.45\linewidth"}
Earthshine light {#sec:EL}
----------------
When the angle between the satellite and the earth became smaller, stray light from the earth appeared in object frames. This is called earthshine light (EL) and is most notable when observing an object around the NEP during summer. The problem is that it is extended but not uniform and that its strength depends on the angular separation of the satellite and the earth limb. When the background sky level changes significantly during one pointed observation, it is most likely due to the EL. Assuming that the EL pattern shape does not change during a pointed observation, @Egu13 created a template and successfully removed it from images with a nearby galaxy, i.e. extended object. Tasks for creating and subtracting an EL template are available in the toolkit.
Drift {#sec:drift}
-----
The satellite pointing was controlled by two optical telescopes called star trackers installed on the satellite wall. In some observations large drifting took place during an exposure. Although the cause of such large drift is not fully understood yet, we deduce that two possibilities are too few reference stars in the star tracker FoVs and thermal distortion between the telescope axis and the reference frame of the attitude sensors. The PSFs of NIR long exposure frames become very elongated in these cases, since the exposure time is longer than that of MIR. In some extreme cases, the toolkit fails to identify sources used for stacking. While MIR PSFs are not so elongated compared to NIR, the shift values of some frames deviate from the nominal values, and thus such frames are excluded from stacking (§\[sec:calcshift\]). As already mentioned, this drift mostly occurred in the cross-scan direction.
Stacking for multiple pointed observations
------------------------------------------
The current toolkit does not support stacking frames of multiple pointed observations. A user can use the toolkit to produce processed frames before stacking for each pointed observation and then use his/her own code to stack all the processed frames from multiple observations. Note that the central coordinates and rotation angle may differ between observations with the same targetID, i.e. even when the same object was observed with the same AOT.
Saturation
----------
Bright objects become saturated in long-exposure frames. Such saturated pixels are masked out during the pipeline processing but may be recovered by using the short-exposure frames. However, such a technique has not been established nor implemented in the toolkit.
Summary
=======
[*AKARI*]{} is the Japanese infrared astronomical satellite, which performed an all-sky survey and pointed observations with the IRC and the FIS. The IRC is equipped with nine photometric filters covering 2–27 $\mu$m continuously. In this paper, we describe the latest calibration processes for IRC images from pointed observations in Phase 1&2, when the telescope was cooled with liquid Helium. Especially, dark frames, flat frames, calculation schemes of relative shift values, and WCS matching have been improved.
We use the latest toolkit for data reduction to process IRC images from $\sim 4000$ pointed observations during Phase 1&2. Target objects include a wide range of sources from asteroids to distant galaxies. Through the pipeline processing, one stacked image for each filter used in one pointed observation is created. About 90% of the stacked images have a position accuracy better than $1.5''$, while this percentage generally decreases with wavelength. Typical sensitivities are estimated to be a factor of $\sim 2$–4 better than AllWISE at similar wavelengths. Remaining artifacts and issues in the processed images are also described.
All of the products including the latest toolkit, processed images, process logs, and Data Users Manual are available via the [*AKARI*]{} Observers website.
The authors fully appreciate a referee’s careful reading of the manuscript and a number of helpful comments and suggestions to improve it.
This work is based on observations with [*AKARI*]{}, a JAXA project with the participation of ESA. The authors greatly appreciate Dr. T. Nakamura for his work on the WCS matching code. The authors also thank Dr. T. Koga, Mr. K. Sano, Mr. S. Koyama, Mr. S. Baba, and Mr. Y. Matsuki for checking the WCS coordinates of stacked images visually. Dr. S. Takita kindly provided the web interface for searching the released data sets.
This research has made use of the VizieR catalogue access tool, CDS, Strasbourg, France. 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 the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Science Foundation, and also 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.
Details of released data sets {#sec:datasets}
=============================
The processed data together with documents and the latest toolkit was released on 2015 March 31, with a minor update to data on 2015 April 30. All of the products are available via the [*AKARI*]{} observers website. In Table \[tab:obslist\], we list a proposal title, 5-digit proposal code, proposal type, and the number of ObsIDs included in this release.
The data package for one ObsID contains neighbor dark frames, a Readme, a log of pipeline processing, and stacked images. The full options adopted during the process are recorded in the log. The Readme file provides a summary for the observation and for the pipeline processing such as the number of frames used for stacking and uncertainties in the WCS matching.
A summary file for all the released ObsIDs is also available. This file lists a summary of information in the Readme for one ObsID per line. Users can overview the whole observations in Phase 1&2 and select ObsIDs that satisfy certain criteria. In addition to a web interface for searching the data sets by object names and coordinates, we provide a list of observations based on the on-sky positions on proposals. The list of proposals is also available online.
[lllc]{} Title & Code & Type$^\dagger$ & \# of ObsIDs\
North Ecliptic Pole Survey & LSNEP & LS & 718\
Large Magellanic Cloud Survey & LSLMC & LS & 598\
Evolution of Cluster of Galaxies & CLEVL & MP & 278\
Interstellar dust and gas in various environments of our Galaxy and nearby galaxies & ISMGN & MP & 260\
ASTRO-F Studies on Star formation and Star forming regions & AFSAS & MP & 237\
DT for IRC & DTIRC & DT & 224\
Debris Disks Around Main Sequence Stars and Extra-solar Zodiacal Emissions & VEGAD & MP & 197\
Origin and Evolution of Solar System Objects & SOSOS & MP & 157\
Unbiased Slit-Less Spectroscopic Survey of Galaxies & SPICY & MP & 140\
Astro-F Ultra-Deep Imaging/Spectroscopy of the Spitzer/IRAC Dark Field & EGAMI & OT & 87\
Mass loss and stellar evolution in the AGB phase & AGBGA & MP & 81\
Evolution of ULIRGs and AGNs & AGNUL & MP & 65\
Understanding the Dust Properties of Elliptical Galaxies & EGALS & OT & 52\
FUHYU - SPITZER WELL STUDIED FIELD MISSION PROGRAM & FUHYU & MP & 50\
Making AGN come of age as cosmological probes & 6AND7 & OT & 50\
The Nature of New ULIRGs at intermediate redshift & NULIZ & OT & 48\
NIR–MIR Spectroscopic Survey of Selected Areas in the Galactic Plane & SPECS & OT & 47\
The spatial distribution of ices in Spitzer-selected molecular cores & IMAPE & OT & 46\
PV for IRC & PVIRC & DT & 43\
Astro-F Spectroscopic Observation of $z = 6$ QSOs & HZQSO & OT & 43\
Search for Giant Planets around White Dwarfs & SGPWD & OT & 41\
Deep IR Imaging of the Unique NEP Cluster at $z=0.813$ & CLNEP & OT & 38\
15 Micron Imaging of Extended Groth Strip & GROTH & OT & 31\
Formation and Evolution of Interstellar Ice & ISICE & OT & 30\
Dust, PAHs and molecules in molecular clouds & CERN2 & OT & 28\
UV-selected Lyman Break Galaxies at $0.6<z<1.3$ in the Spitzer FLS & Z1LBG & OT & 27\
Mid-Infrared Imaging of the ASTRO-F Deep SEP Field & IRSEP & OT & 26\
Mapping the Spectral Energy Distributions of Sub-mm Bright QSOs & SUBMM & OT & 22\
Extreme Colors: The smoking Gun of Dust Aggregation and Fragmentation & COLVN & OT & 21\
An ultra-deep survey through a well-constrained lensing cluster & A2218 & OT & 19\
IRC NIR Spectroscopy of High-Redshift Quasars & NSPHQ & OT & 16\
Cool Dust in the Environments of Evolved Massive Stars & WRENV & OT & 15\
Near Infrared Spectroscopy of L and T Dwarfs & NIRLT & MP & 15\
DT for FIS & DTFIS & DT & 13\
Triggered massive-star formation in the Galaxy & AZTSF & OT & 13\
The role of pulsation in mass loss along the Asymptotic Giant Branch & SMCPM & OT & 12\
Dust and gas properties in AGB and post-AGB objects & CERN1 & OT & 12\
Evolution of dust and gas in Photodissociation Regions & DGPDR & OT & 11\
Activity of Small Solar System Bodies far from the Sun & ADAMB & OT & 11\
Deep Extinction Maps of Dense Cores & DEMDC & OT & 10\
Stars departing from the Asymptotic Giant Branch & DEAGB & OT & 10\
Probing molecular tori n Obscured AGN through CO Absorption & COABS & OT & 10\
A Search for Very Low Luminosity Objects in Dense Molecular Cores & VELLO & OT & 9\
Search for Emission Outside the Disks of Edge-on Galaxies & HALOS & OT & 9\
Accretion and protoplanetary disks in brown dwarfs & DISKB & OT & 8\
The hidden evolution from AGB stars to PNe as seen by ASTRO-F/IRC & AGBPN & OT & 8\
ASTRO-F/IRC Slit-less Spectroscopy of Hickson Compact Groups & SHARP & OT & 7\
Far-infrared Emission from the Coma Cluster of Galaxies & FIREC & OT & 7\
Far-Infrared Spectroscopic Observation of Eta Carinae & ETASP & OT & 7\
Excavating Mass Loss History in Extended Dust Shells of Evolved Stars & MLHES & MP & 5\
Calibrating mid-IR dust attenuation tracers for LBGs with ASTRO-F & IRLBG & OT & 5\
Dusty Star-Formation History of the Universe & GALEV & MP & 5\
Spectroscopic Search for Atmosphere of an Extra-Solar Planet & EXOSP & OT & 4\
The stellar mass and the obscured star formation harboured by EROs & EROMU & OT & 4\
15 Micron Imaging of the $z=2.38$ Filament & BLOBS & OT & 4\
FIR Spectroscopy of Super Nova Remnants & SNRBS & OT & 3\
Star Formation and Environment in the COSMOS Field & COSMS & OT & 3\
Near-Infrared Spectroscopy of the Atmospheres of Uranus and Neptune & UNIRC & OT & 2\
The Nature of the Dusty Medium in Dwarf Elliptical Galaxies & DUDES & OT & 2\
\
Details of the all-data processing {#sec:moredetail}
==================================
Relative shift between frames {#sec:stat_0203}
-----------------------------
Histograms of relative shift in the x- and y-direction for each dithering cycle in the case of IRC02 and IRC03 are presented in Figure \[fig:stat\_xy0203\]. For the rotation angle, a histogram is created using the data from all dithering cycles (Figure \[fig:stat\_a0203\]). As with the case for IRC00 and IRC05 (Figure \[fig:hshift\]), shift values are for MIR-S frames after the sub-pixel sampling and the lower and upper limits adopted in the toolkit are indicated by blue dashed lines. The wings in histograms of the x-direction shift found in the IRC00 and IRC05 cases are also seen in Figure \[fig:stat\_xy0203\].
{width="0.45\linewidth"} {width="0.45\linewidth"}
{width="\linewidth"}
Accuracy of WCS matching {#sec:wcserr}
------------------------
The residual of WCS matching is recorded as a FITS header parameter ‘WCSERROR’. This is a root-mean-square of positional offsets between matched WCS and catalogued WCS for sources in a stacked image. A histogram of this value for each filter is presented in Figure \[fig:hwcserr\]. Since the tolerance for WCS matching is set to be $1.5''$, the residual is smaller than this limit. If the residual becomes larger than this limit, that WCS matching is considered as being failed.
{width="0.32\linewidth"} {width="0.32\linewidth"} {width="0.32\linewidth"}
Sensitivity variation {#sec:sigma_var}
---------------------
As explained in §\[sec:sen\], we measure the sky standard deviation $\sigma$ of stacked images from pointed observations toward the NEP region. For each month, AOT, and filter, we pick one pointed observation that has the largest number of stacked frames and measure $\sigma$. In Figure \[fig:sigma\_NEP\], the temporal variation of $\sigma$ values is presented for the whole Phase 1&2. We here note again that these values are measured in stacked images with sub-pixel sampling. Large $\sigma$ values during May and July at longer wavelengths are primarily due to the Earthshine light (§\[sec:EL\]). Therefore, we measure [*typical*]{} values of $\sigma$ (listed in Table \[tab:skyrms\]) from data taken between 2006 August and 2007 April.
{width="0.32\linewidth"} {width="0.32\linewidth"} {width="0.32\linewidth"}\
{width="0.32\linewidth"} {width="0.32\linewidth"} {width="0.32\linewidth"}\
{width="0.32\linewidth"} {width="0.32\linewidth"} {width="0.32\linewidth"}\
Typical PSF sizes {#sec:psf}
-----------------
In order to estimate PSF sizes of processed images, we performed a 2D gaussian fit to sources found in stacked images of NEP observations taken during 2006 October and 2006 December. Histograms of measured sizes (major and minor axis lengths in FWHM of the fitted 2D gaussian) were created for each filter and each AOT (Figure \[fig:psf\]). Then a gaussian profile was fitted to each histogram and its peak position is adopted as a typical PSF size (Table \[tab:PSF\]). During the fit, we manually set the lower limit of PSF sizes in order to exclude histogram peaks due to noises (especially in NIR of IRC03) and sub-peaks of PSFs (especially in L24). Widths of histograms and thus of fitted gaussian vary, but are typically $0.2''$–$0.5''$.
{width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"}\
{width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"}\
{width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"} {width="0.3\linewidth"}
In Figure \[fig:psf\], the black line corresponds to the length of axis closer to the x-axis of stacked images, while the red line corresponds to the one closer to the y-axis. For NIR, the peak of red histograms (i.e. the PSF size roughly along the y-axis) is always at larger values compared to that of black histograms. For MIR, the trend is reversed, i.e. that of black histograms is at larger values, although the difference is smaller than in the NIR cases. In summary, the NIR PSF is more elongated along the y-axis while the MIR PSF is slightly elongated along the x-axis. Considering the FoV alignment (Figure \[fig:FoVs\]), both of these axes correspond to the cross-scan direction, which indicates that the effect of drift is more significant in this direction. This is consistent with the wings seen in histograms of relative shift values in the x-axis direction of MIR-S images (Figures \[fig:hshift\] and \[fig:stat\_xy0203\]).
[^1]: All the dates in this paper are in UT.
[^2]: http://www.ir.isas.jaxa.jp/AKARI/Observation/
[^3]: IRAF is distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observatory, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation.
[^4]: The $\sigma$ of an image after sub-pixel sampling is $\sigma{\rm (pix)}=0.25\sigma{\rm (pix)}_{\rm org}$ and the number of pixels used for aperture photometry is $N{\rm (pix)}=4N{\rm (pix)}_{\rm org}$, while the subscript “org” denotes those of an image before sub-pixel sampling. The uncertainty in the aperture photometry is $\sigma{\rm (aper)}=\sqrt{N{\rm (pix)}_{\rm org}}\times \sigma{\rm (pix)}_{\rm org}
=2\sqrt{N{\rm (pix)}}\times \sigma{\rm (pix)}$.
[^5]: http://wise2.ipac.caltech.edu/docs/release/allwise/
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- Taha A Malik
- 'Rafael Lopez-Mobilia'
bibliography:
- 'references.bib'
date: 'Received: date / Revised version: date'
title: A new phenomenological definition of entropy and application to black holes
---
[leer.eps]{} gsave 72 31 moveto 72 342 lineto 601 342 lineto 601 31 lineto 72 31 lineto showpage grestore
Introduction
============
Classically, the laws of black hole mechanics closely resemble the laws of thermodynamics [@10.2307/79210; @10.1007/BF01645742]. In particular, the surface area of a black hole is always non-decreasing, analogous to the 2nd law of thermodynamics which states that entropy is always non decreasing. When quantum effects are included, the laws of black hole mechanics are interpreted as being true thermodynamics properties [@PhysRevLett.26.1344]. A black hole is found to have entropy $S=\frac{A}{4}$ in Planck units where $A$ is the surface area of the black hole [@PhysRevD.7.2333]. After this identification, there is mounting evidence that the generalized second law of thermodynamics holds at least semi-classically [@PhysRevD.85.104049; @PhysRevD.82.124019].
However, there is no widely accepted interpretation of what or even where the degrees of freedom of a black hole’s entropy are. Perhaps a quantum theory of gravity will be required to resolve this question and a deeper understanding of the notion of entropy itself. Motivated by this, we take the second law of thermodynamics to be the most fundamental property of entropy and use it as a guide to construct a new measure of entropy, the time relative entropy.
The time relative entropy is a measure of the irreversibility of a process relative to another process and, to first approximation, we show that the time relative entropy agrees with the usual methods of calculating entropy and can be readily applied to the case of a black hole in the semiclassical regime. We hope that the time relative entropy may lead to a better understanding of some of the above issues. Perhaps more fundamentally, entropy has more do to with irreversibility and the arrow of time than the microstates themselves.
Semi-classical dynamics
=======================
We describe a dynamical system with a state $p$ being a vector describing a probability distribution over a set $A$ where $A$ is interpreted as a set of accessible cells of the system. For a fixed time step $\delta t$, we describe the dynamics of the state with a probability transition matrix (PTM), $D(\delta t)$ . In this way we model the dynamics of a system using a Markov chain so $p(k\delta t)=D^k(\delta t)p(0)$. The above can be viewed as a discretized version of dynamics on some phase space.
For example, in this paper, we will be considering a semi-classical system. To obtain our semi-classical system using the model above, we start with a classical system with $N$ particles defined by a time independent Hamiltonian on some phase space at fixed energy $E$. We set $A(E)$ to be the accessible phase space of the system at fixed energy $E$ partitioned by cells of size $(\hbar/2)^{3N}$. Semi-classically, these cells represent with maximum certainty the momenta and positions of the $N$ particles. We will assume that $A$ is finite. Since we can not precisely calculate trajectories of these $N$ particles due to quantum fluctuations, we use a probability distribution $p$ over $A$ rather than a point in phase space and describe the state with dynamics described with a PTM. We describe how to construct the PTM in section \[003.SD\].
Time relative entropy
---------------------
With the above system, define $K$ to be a subsystem if $K \subset A$ and $K \neq \emptyset$
Let $K_x$ and $K_y$ be two subsystems such that $K_x \cap K_y = \emptyset$. we define the time relative entropy of $K_x$ with respect to $K_y$ as $$\label{003.RE}
S(K_x|K_y) = \text{log}\left(\frac{\tau(K_x \rightarrow K_y)}{\tau(K_y \rightarrow K_x)}\right),$$ where $\tau(K_x \rightarrow K_y)$ is the expected time for the system initially in a cell in $K_x$ to evolve into a cell in $K_y$, averaged over all the cells in $K_x$.
Note that if $S(K_x|K_y)>0 $, then it takes longer for the system to go from a cell $K_x$ to $K_y$ than it does from a cell in $K_y$ to $K_x$ on average. In this case we say that the process of evolving from $K_x$ to $K_y$ is more irreversible than the process of evolving from $K_y$ to $K_x$.
Ideal gas heuristic example
===========================
Consider the microcanonical ensemble of an ideal gas in a box with volume $V$ and $N$ particles at fixed energy $E$. Let $A$ be the accessible phase space partitioned into cells of size $(\hbar/2)^{3N}$. From the uncertainty principle, these cells represents the possible points the system could be in phase space with maximum precision semi-classically.
- Let $K_y$ be the subsystem corresponding to the collection of cells where the $N$ particles are all on one side of the box, contained within volume $V'<V$.
- Let $K_x=A \backslash K_y$, which is approximately the whole phase space provided $|K_x|>>|K_y|$. This will be the case for ‘generic’ choices of $V'$.
Since below we give only a heuristic calculation for a time relative entropy as an example, ‘generic’ and be though of as a reasonable choice.
As a rough estimate for the ratio of the expected times, we discretize time by the characteristic time step $\Delta t$ defined as the minimum time required for a particle to move from one side of the box to the other at its average velocity, so $$\Delta t \propto \frac{V^\frac{1}{3}}{<velocity>}.$$ After this time, we expect the system to be approximately in any cell in $A$ with equal probability since the particles have had enough time to transverse anywhere within the box. We make the following estimations: $$\label{003.T1}
\tau(K_y \rightarrow K_x) \approx \Delta t$$ since $|K_x|$ is much larger than $|K_y|$ and so similar to the diffusion of a gas, we expect this process to be quick and take only one time step. Another way to see this is to view $\tau(K_y \rightarrow K_x)$ as the expected time it takes at least one particle to leave the volume $V'$. $$\label{003.T2}
\tau(K_x \rightarrow K_y) \approx \Delta t\frac{|K_x|}{|K_y|}=\Delta t \left(\frac{V}{V'}\right)^N$$ since after $|A|$ time steps, we expect the to system transverses every cell once. In this time, the system is in $K_x$ for $|K_x|$ time steps and $K_y$ for $|K_y|$ time steps. Hence $$\label{003.TRE}
S(K_x|K_y) = log\left(\left(\frac{V}{V'}\right)^N\right)$$ It agrees with the usual formula for the differences of entropies of two microcanonical ensembles with different volumes[^1], so Eq. (\[003.TRE\]) can be interpreted a relative entropy. Explicitly $$S(K_x|K_y) \propto (S(E,V,N)-S(E,V',N)),$$ where $S(E,V,N)$ is the entropy of an ideal gas in the microcanonical ensemble. At least at this heuristic level, the time relative entropy agrees with the usual formula for entropy. This correspondence extends to the canonical ensemble since the canonical ensemble can be obtained by placing the system in a large heat bath, with the heat bath modeled using the microcanonical ensemble.
One may wonder why the logic that applied Eq. to (\[003.T2\]) can not be applied to Eq. (\[003.T1\]). Notice that if we applied the same logic, then we would have a time step which is smaller than the discretized time step. Below we outline how to handle more general time steps.
Dynamics {#003.SD}
========
Without loss of generality, given a semi-classical system as described above, let the cells in $A$ be labelled so that $A=\{c_1,...,c_\Omega\}$ where $\Omega=|A|$. Then $p=p(t_0)$ becomes a $\Omega$-dimensional vector such that each entry, $i$, is the probability that the system is in cell $C=c_i$ at some time $t_0$ ($p(t_0)_i=P(C=c_i)$). After an arbitrary small choice for the time step, $\delta t$, we define the probability transition matrix (PTM) $D=D(\delta t)$ as $$D(\delta t)_{ij} = P(C=c_i,t_0+\delta t|C=c_j, t_0)$$ and after applying the law of total probabilities we have $$D(\delta t)p(t_0)=p(t_0+\delta t),$$ $$D(\delta t)^kp(t_0)=p(t_0+k\delta t),$$ where we have assumed that the state $p(t_0+\delta t)$ only depends on the state $p(t_0)$ and so the dynamics can be modeled using a Markov chain[^2].
Using the classical system from which we arrive at our semi-classical system, we can define $P(C=c_i,t_0+\delta t|C=c_j, t_0)$ by calculating how much of the flow, generated by classical Hamiltonian, from cell $c_j$ at time $t_0$ enters the cell $c_i$ after time $\delta t$ in phase space (Fig. (\[003.fig:H\])).
Given a classical system defined by a Hamiltonian on a phase space and after fixing a time step $\delta t$, define $D(\delta t)$ via $P(C=c_i,t_0+\delta t|C=c_j, t_0)$ as $$\begin{aligned}
D(\delta t)_{ij}=P(C=c_i,t_0+\delta & t|C=c_j, t_0)=\int_{c{_j}}\rho_i\circ\gamma_{\delta t}(z)dz \nonumber \\
&=\frac{1}{(\hbar/2)^{3N}}\int_{c{_j}\cap\gamma_{\delta t}(c{_i})}dz,
\end{aligned}$$ where $\rho_i(z)=\{\frac{1}{(\hbar/2)^{3N}} : z\in c_i , 0 : otherwise\}$, $\gamma_t(z_0)$ is the flow generated in phase space by $H$ with initial condition $z_0=(x_0,p_0)$ at time $t=t_0$ and $dz=dx^ndp^n$ is the volume element in phase space $P$.
This procedure allows us to take a classical system and define its dynamics semi-classically.
$D(\delta t)$ converges
See known Markov chain result in the literature[@J.R.Norris:1998aa].
$\gamma_{-t}\circ\gamma_t(z_0)=z_0$
$\gamma_t=P\circ\gamma_{-t}\circ P$ such that $P(x,p)=(x,-p)$
$D(\delta t)_{ij}=D(\delta t)_{j'i'}$, where $i'$ is the label for cell $P(c_i):=c_{i'}$.
\
We show that $\int_{c{_j}}\rho_i\circ\gamma_{\delta t}(z)dz=\int_{c{_{i'}}}\rho_{j'}\circ\gamma_{\delta t}(z)dz$\
$\int_{c{_j}}\rho_i\circ\gamma_{\delta t}(z)dz=\frac{1}{(\hbar/2)^{3N}}\int_{c{_j}\cap\gamma_{\delta t}(c{_i})}dz$\
$=\frac{1}{(\hbar/2)^{3N}}\int_{\gamma_{-\delta t}(c{_j})\cap c{_i}}dz$
$=\frac{1}{(\hbar/2)^{3N}}\int_{P\circ \gamma_{\delta t}(P(c{_j}))\cap c{_i}}dz$
$=\frac{1}{(\hbar/2)^{3N}}\int_{\gamma_{\delta t}(P(c{_j}))\cap P(c{_i})}dz=\int_{c{_{i'}}}\rho_{j'}\circ\gamma_{\delta t}(z)dz$.\
where we use that $\gamma_t$ and $P$ are volume preserving maps in phase space.
\[003.v\] $\boldsymbol{1}=[1,1,...,1]^T$ is an eigenvector of $D=D(\delta t)$ with eigenvalue 1
Since $D$ is a PTM, $\sum_{ij}D_{ij}p_j=1$ for all probability distributions $p_j$ (Sums of probabilities must equal 1 and both $p_j$ and $\sum_{ij}D_{ij}p_j$ are probability distributions). In particular, for $p_j=\delta_{jk}$
$1=\sum_{ij}D_{ij}p_j=\sum_iD_{ik}$ so the sum of any column of $D$ equals 1. Therefore, $1=\sum_iD_{ik}=\sum_iD_{k'i'}=\sum_{i'}D_{k'i'}=\sum_iD_{k'i}$ so sum of any row of $D$ equals 1.\
Hence $\sum_jD_{ij}\boldsymbol{1}_j=\sum_jD_{ij}=1$ or $D\boldsymbol{1}=\boldsymbol{1}$.\
Similarly, $\boldsymbol{1}^TD=\boldsymbol{1}^T$.
We will assume that the system is ergodic so the eigenvalue 1 is not degenerate.
$Lim_{r\longrightarrow \infty}(D(\delta t)^r)=\frac{1}{\Omega}M$, where $M$ is a matrix such that all its entries are 1
See known Markov chain result in the literature[@J.R.Norris:1998aa].
Entropy of microcanonical ensemble
==================================
Suppose we have a Hamiltonian system with $N$ particles with fixed total energy $E$, which we wish to model semi-classically. Let $K_1 \subset A$ be the subsystem of one (arbitrary) cell and let $K_{all} \subset A=A \backslash K_1$ be the subsystem of all the other cells. Without loss of generality label the arbitrary cell as the last label. Then $$S(K_{all}|K_1) = \text{log}\left(\frac{\tau(K_{all} \rightarrow K_1)}{\tau(K_1 \rightarrow K_{all})}\right),$$ where
$\tau(K_{all} \rightarrow K_1)=$
$\delta t[v_1^TD(\delta t)p_{all}+2(v_{all}^TD(\delta t)p_{all})(v_1^TD(\delta t)^2p_{all})$
$+3(v_{all}^TD(\delta t)p_{all})(v_{all}^TD(\delta t)^2p_{all})(v_1^TD(\delta t)^3p_{all})$
$+...] $
$$=\delta t \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}n\Pi_{k=0}^{n-1}\left(v_{all}^TD(\delta t)^kp_{all}\right)(v_1^TD(\delta t)^np_{all})$$ with
$p_{all}^T=\frac{1}{\Omega-1}[1,1,1,...,0]$, $p_1^T=[0,0,0,...,1]$,
$v_{all}^T=[1,1,1,...,0]$, $v_1^T=[0,0,0,...,1]$.
A similar expression can be given for $\tau(K_{1} \rightarrow K_{all})$ by swapping the (all) and (1) index[^3] . Hence $$\begin{aligned}
&S(K_{all}|K_1)=\nonumber \\
&\text{log}\left(
\frac{\delta t \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}n\Pi_{k=0}^{n-1}\left(v_{all}^TD(\delta t)^kp_{all}\right)(v_1^TD(\delta t)^np_{all})}{\delta t \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}n\Pi_{k=0}^{n-1}\left(v_{1}^TD(\delta t)^kp_{1}\right)(v_{all}^TD(\delta t)^np_{1})}\right).\end{aligned}$$
$(v_i^TD(\delta t)^rp_j)$ is the probability of being in a cell in $K_i$ after $r$ steps with the state initially uniformly distributed on $K_j$.
Calculation of $S(K_{all}|K_1)$
===============================
Note that any term of the form $v^T_iD^kp_j$ can be rewritten in terms of $v^T_1D^kp_1$ using corollary (\[003.v\]) so the entropy above can be written as [^4] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{003.RE2}
& S(K_{all}|K_1)= \nonumber \\
&\text{log}\left(
\frac{\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}n\Pi_{k=0}^{n-1}\left[1-\frac{1}{\Omega -1}(1-f(k))\right](1-f(n))\frac{1}{\Omega-1}}{\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}n\Pi_{k=0}^{n-1}\left[f(k)\right](1-f(n))}\right),\end{aligned}$$ where $f(k)=v_1D^k(\delta t)p_1$, which is the probability that the system remains in cell $K_1$ after $k$ time steps.
Test functions for $f$
----------------------
To understand Eq. (\[003.RE2\]), we first calculate the expression using a test function for $f$. We choose $f$ to be $$f(k)=(1-\frac{1}{\lambda}k) : k \leq k' \\
, f(k)=\frac{1}{\Omega} : k \geq k',$$ where $k'$ is defined such that $1-\frac{1}{\lambda}k'=\frac{1}{\Omega}$ so $k' \approx \lambda$. Without loss of generality we will assume that $\lambda$ is an integer. If we assume that $1<\lambda<<\Omega$ then the numerator in Eq. (\[003.RE2\]) becomes
$$\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}n\Pi_{k=0}^{n-1}\left[1-\frac{1}{\Omega -1}(1-f(k))\right](1-f(n))\frac{1}{\Omega-1}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
&\approx\frac{1}{\Omega}\sum_{n=1}^{k'}n\Pi_{k=0}^{n-1}\left[1-\frac{1}{\Omega}\left(\frac{k}{\lambda}\right)\right]\left(\frac{n}{\lambda}\right)\nonumber \\
&+\frac{1}{\Omega}\sum_{n=k'+1}^{\infty}n\Pi_{k=0}^{k'}\left[1-\frac{1}{\Omega}\left(\frac{k}{\lambda}\right)\right]\Pi_{k=k'}^{n-1}\left[1-\frac{1}{\Omega}\right]\end{aligned}$$
$$\begin{aligned}
\label{003.16}
&=\frac{1}{\Omega}\sum_{n=1}^{k'}\frac{n^2}{\lambda}\left(\frac{1}{\Omega \lambda}\right)^n \frac{\Gamma(\Omega \lambda+1)}{\Gamma(\Omega \lambda-n+1)} \nonumber \\
&+\frac{1}{\Omega}\sum_{n=k'+1}^{\infty}n\left(\frac{1}{\Omega \lambda}\right)^{k'} \frac{\Gamma(\Omega \lambda+1)}{\Gamma(\Omega \lambda-k'+1)}\left(1-\frac{1}{\Omega}\right)^{n-k'}.\end{aligned}$$
Similarly, the denominator is approximately given by $$\sum_{n=1}^{k'}\frac{n^2}{\lambda}\left(\frac{1}{\lambda}\right)^n \frac{\Gamma(\lambda+1)}{\Gamma(\lambda-n+1)} +\frac{1}{\Omega}\sum_{n=k'+1}^{\infty}n\left(\frac{1}{\lambda}\right)^{k'} \lambda ! \left({\frac{1}{\Omega}}\right)^{n-k'}.$$ Our assumption implies that $\lambda << \Omega < \Omega \lambda << \Omega^2$ so that $\frac{\Gamma(\Omega \lambda+1)}{\Gamma(\Omega \lambda-z+1)} \approx (\Omega \lambda)^z$ for any $z$ between $1$ and $\lambda$ and Eq. (\[003.16\]) becomes $$\frac{1}{\Omega}\sum_{n=1}^{k'}\frac{n^2}{\lambda}+\frac{1}{\Omega}\sum_{n=k'+1}^{\infty}n\left(1-\frac{1}{\Omega}\right)^{n-k'}.$$ Hence $$\begin{aligned}
&S(K_{all}|K_1)\approx \nonumber \\
&\frac{\frac{1}{\Omega}\sum_{n=1}^{k'}\frac{n^2}{\lambda}+\frac{1}{\Omega}\sum_{n=k'+1}^{\infty}n\left(1-\frac{1}{\Omega}\right)^{n-k'}}{\sum_{n=1}^{k'}\frac{n^2}{\lambda}\left(\frac{1}{\lambda}\right)^n \frac{\Gamma(\lambda+1)}{\Gamma(\lambda-n+1)} +\frac{1}{\Omega}\sum_{n=k'+1}^{\infty}n\left(\frac{1}{\lambda}\right)^{k'} \lambda ! \left({\frac{1}{\Omega}}\right)^{n-k'}} \label{003.19} \\
&\approx \frac{\frac{1}{\lambda}[\frac{1}{6}k'(k'+1)(2k'+1)]+(\frac{1}{\Omega}k'+1)\Omega^2}{\Omega h(k') + (1+k'-\frac{1}{\Omega}k')\frac{k'!}{{k'^{k'}}}} \label{003.20} \nonumber \\
& \approx \left(\frac{\frac{1}{\Omega}k'+1}{h(k')}\right)\Omega+\frac{1}{3}\frac{1}{h(k') \Omega}k'^2+O(k'),\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\label{003.21}
h(k')=\sum_{n=1}^{k'}\frac{n^2}{\lambda}&\left(\frac{1}{\lambda}\right)^n \frac{\Gamma(\lambda+1)}{\Gamma(\lambda-n+1)} \nonumber \\
& \approx\sum_{n=1}^{k'}\frac{n^2}{k'}\left(\frac{1}{k'}\right)^n \frac{k' !}{(k'-n)!}.\end{aligned}$$ Note that in Eq. (\[003.19\]), (\[003.20\]) and (\[003.21\]), we used that $\lambda \approx k'$
$\frac{n^2}{k'}\left(\frac{1}{k'}\right)^n\frac{k'!}{(k'-n)!}\leq 1$ for integer $n\in[0,k']$.
We have not found a proof for this conjecture. However, we have analyzed it numerically and it seems to hold. We leave the proof of this conjecture for future work.
$h(k')\in(\frac{1}{k'},k')$.
Even if the lemma is not true, we find that
$\frac{n^2}{k'}\left(\frac{1}{k'}\right)^n\frac{k'!}{(k'-n)!}$ to be of order of at most unity and to be less than one for almost all values of $n$. Thus we still expect the corollary to hold.
Hence for $1<\lambda <<\Omega$, we obtain using the corollary,
$$\Omega h(k') >>(1+k')/k' > (1+k'-\frac{1}{\Omega}k')/k'\times\frac{k'!}{k'^{k'-1}}$$ so the term $(1+k'-\frac{1}{\Omega}k')\frac{k'!}{k'^{k'}}$ can be ignored in Eq. (\[003.20\]). Hence $$\begin{aligned}
\label{003.A}
&\frac{\frac{1}{\lambda}[\frac{1}{6}k'(k'+1)(2k'+1)]+(\frac{1}{\Omega}k'+1)\Omega^2}{\Omega h(k') + (1+k'-\frac{1}{\Omega}k')\frac{k'!}{{k'^{k'}}}}\nonumber \\
& \approx \left(\frac{\frac{1}{\Omega}k'+1}{h(k')}\right)\Omega+\frac{1}{3}\frac{1}{h(k') \Omega}(k'^2+\ldots),\end{aligned}$$ where $\ldots$ contain lower order terms in $k'$
Now, $\frac{k'^2}{\Omega}<<\frac{\Omega^2}{\Omega}=\Omega$ and so $$\left(\frac{\frac{1}{\Omega}k'+1}{h(k')}\right)\Omega \approx \frac{\Omega}{h(k')} >> \frac{1}{3}\frac{1}{h(k')\Omega} k'^2.$$ This means the $\frac{1}{3}\frac{1}{h(k')\Omega} k'^2$ term can be ignored in Eq. (\[003.A\]) and so finally, $$\begin{aligned}
&S(K_{all}|K_1)\approx \text{log}\left(\left(\frac{\frac{1}{\Omega}k'+1}{h(k')}\right)\Omega \right) \approx \text{log}(\frac{\Omega}{h(k')}) \nonumber \\
&= \text{log}(\Omega)-\text{log}(h(k')) \approx \text{log}(\Omega).\end{aligned}$$
This by using the time relative entropy, we have recovered the standard entropy for the microcanonical ensemble. We will use Eq. (\[003.RE2\]) to define the total entropy for the microcanonical ensemble. However, it may seem that the above result holds only for special choices for $f$. We show below that for any choice of $f$ which decays fast enough, the above results still holds.
If $\Omega$ is very large and $f$ satisfies the following conditions
1. $f(0)=1$ (Automatically satisfied from the definition of $f$),
2. $lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}f(n) \rightarrow \frac{1}{\Omega}$ (Automatically satisfied from the definition of $f$),
3. $0>f'>-\infty$ ,
4. $\frac{1}{|f'|}<<\Omega$ while $\frac{1}{f}<<\Omega$,
5. $f''>0$ or f’ increasing,
then $$S(K_{all}|K_1)\approx \text{log}(\Omega)$$
Write $f$ as
$f(k)=1-g(k)$ for $1\leq k<k'$
$f(k)\approx \frac{1}{\Omega}$ for $k>k'$
where $k'$ is defined so that $$1-g(k')\approx \frac{1}{\Omega} \implies g(k')\approx 1.$$ Since $\frac{1}{|f'|}<<\Omega$ we have that $k'<<\Omega$. And with condition 5, we have that $$1-g(k) \leq 1-\frac{k}{k'}$$ for $k<k'$. The total entropy can be approximately written as $$\text{log}\left(\frac{A+B(\frac{1}{\Omega}k'+1)\Omega^2}{\Omega C+D(1+k'-\frac{1}{\Omega}k')}\right),$$ where
$$A=\sum_{n=1}^{k'}n\Pi_{k=0}^{n-1}\left[1-\frac{1}{\Omega}(g(k))\right](g(n)),$$
$$B=\Pi_{k=0}^{k'-1}\left[1-\frac{1}{\Omega}(g(k))\right],$$
$$C=\sum_{n=1}^{k'}n\Pi_{k=0}^{n-1}\left[f(k)\right]g(n),$$
$$D=\Pi_{k=0}^{k'-1}\left[f(k)\right].$$
Assume for now that $\Omega C>>D(1+k'-\frac{1}{\Omega}k')$. Then the total entropy can be approximated by
$$\text{log}\left(\frac{A+B(\frac{1}{\Omega}k'+1)\Omega^2}{\Omega C}\right).$$
We have that $$\begin{aligned}
C&\leq\sum_{n=1}^{k'}n\Pi_{k=0}^{n-1}\left(1-\frac{k}{k'}\right)=\sum_{n=1}^{k'}n\left(\frac{1}{k'}\right)^n\frac{k'!}{(k'-n)!} \nonumber \\
&\leq \sum k' \leq k'^2\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
C\geq\sum_{n=1}^{k'}n\Pi_{k=0}^{n-1}\left(\frac{1}{\Omega}\right)\left(\frac{n}{k'}\right)=\sum\frac{n^2}{k'}\left(\frac{1}{\Omega}\right)^{n-1}= O \frac{1}{k'},\end{aligned}$$ where $O\approx 1$. Similarly, find that have that $A\leq \frac{1}{2}(k'^2+k')$ and $B\approx 1$. Hence $$S=\text{log}\left(\frac{A}{\Omega C}+B\frac{\frac{1}{\Omega}k' +1}{C}\Omega \right) \approx \text{log}(\Omega).$$ Finally, to show that $\Omega C>>D(1+k'-\frac{1}{\Omega}k')$, we have that $$D(1+k'-\frac{1}{\Omega}k')\leq k'!\left(\frac{1}{k'}\right)^{k'}(1+k')\leq 2 << C\Omega.$$
This proof should not be considered as completely rigorous. In particular, $k'$ may not be so sharply defined. We leave a rigorous proof of this for future work.
One may criticize that since $f$ depends on the choice of $\delta t$, by making $\delta t$ small enough one can also make $f$ decay arbitrarily slowly and break condition 4. However, if $\delta t$ is chosen too small, then the semi-classical approximation breaks down as only the flow at the boundary of the cells (Fig. (\[003.fig:H\])) contributes to $D$.
For the semi-classical approximation to remain valid, one must allow the flow to ‘well mix’ within a cell, which we will take to be the minimum time required for the flow to transverse from one side of the cell to the other side. $\delta t_{LB} = \frac{\Delta x}{v}$ gives a lower bound for $\delta t$, where $\Delta x$ is the spacial dimensions/size of the cell and $v$ is the average speed of the particles.
By the uncertainty relation, we have $\Delta x \Delta p\geq \hbar/2$. Using the relation $P^2=2mE$ for non relativistic system, we find that $$\delta t_{LB}=\frac{\hbar/2}{\Delta E}>>\frac{\hbar}{E}$$ which is simply the time energy uncertainly relation. For a choice of $\delta t \geq \delta t_{LB}$, we expect that $f$ decays fast enough to satisfy the conditions of the theorem. It would be interesting to further investigate this with computer simulations and other analysis.
Canonical and Grand Canonical ensemble {#003.CE}
======================================
The usual expression for entropy can also be recovered for the canonical and grand canonical ensemble via the microcanonical ensemble by putting the system in a large heat bath. However, one needs to be careful since single celled subsystems can have different time relative entropies with respect to each other, and there is no natural choice for picking out a such a preferred subsystem.
For subsystem 2 in a heat bath as shown in Fig. (\[003.fig:CE\]), the total number of cells in this subsystem at fixed energy $E_0$ is approximately given by the following expression $$\label{003.O}
\sum_r\Omega_1(E^0-E_r)\Omega_2(E_r),$$ where $\Omega_i(E)$ is the number of cells in subsystem $i$ at fixed energy $E$ and $r$ runs over all the energies subsystem $2$ could have. If the heat bath is large, then $\frac{E_r}{E_0}<<1$ and so we can approximate Eq. (\[003.O\]) as $$\begin{aligned}
&\sum_r\Omega_1(E^0-E_r)\Omega_2(E_r) \nonumber \\
&\approx \sum_r\Omega_2(E_r)\left(\Omega_1(E^0)+\frac{d\Omega_1}{dE}(E^0-E_r)\right) \end{aligned}$$ $$\label{003.O2}
\approx \sum_r\Omega_2(E_r)\left(Ae^{-\beta E_r}\right)=\sum_s\left(Ae^{-\beta E_s}\right) = AZ,$$ where $A$ is some constant, $s$ runs over all the cells in subsystem $2$ and $Z$ is the partition function.
We can now find the time relative entropy of system in the canonical ensemble with respect to a single celled subsystem by noticing that this subsystem is really contained in a microcanonical ensemble with the single celled subsystem really being a multiple celled subsystem of size $Ae^{- \beta E_s}$. Using the correspondence between our time relative entropy and microcanonical ensemble (with a slight generalization), we find that $$S(K_{all}|K_s)=\text{log}\left(\frac{ZA}{Ae^{- \beta E_s}}\right)=\text{log}(Z)+\beta E_s.$$ After averaging over all cells in subsystem 2, we obtain $$<S(K_{all}|K_s)>=\text{log}(Z)+\beta<E>,$$ where $<\ldots>$ denotes the average over all cells. This corresponds to the usual expression for entropy in the canonical ensemble. Similar results hold for the grand canonical ensemble. To generalize the result from the microcanonical case, we define the total entropy of the system using the time relative entropy as $$S=<S(K_{all}|K_s)>.$$ Additionally we find that the time relative entropy with respect to subsystems with different volumes is approximately, $$S(K_{V}|K_{V'})=\text{log}(Z(V))-\text{log}(Z(V')),$$ where $Z(V)$ is the partition function of a subsystem with volume $V$.
Application to Black holes
==========================
We do a heuristic consistency check to see if one can use the time relative entropy to find the entropy of a black hole. To do this, we compare the entropy of two black holes of similar size.
In Fig. (\[003.fig:BH\]), the system is a black hole enclosed in a reflective cavity just larger than the black hole, so that any radiation that escapes from the black hole does not escape to infinity. $K_1$ is the subsystem of the non-evaporated black hole and $K_I$ is the subsystem of the evaporated black hole with the radiation at temperature equal to the Hawking radiation. $K_2$ is the subsystem of the evaporated black but with the radiation in a fixed configuration, so that it is a single cell subsystem ($K_2$ is a subset of $K_I$). We define a small change in the black hole energy as $$\label{003.BH2}
\delta S_{BH}=S(K_1|K_2).$$
When all the radiation is within a Planck length away from the black hole, we will treat the radiation as being part of the non-evaporated black hole subsystem. In other words, $K_1$ can be view as a subset of $K_I$ and we take our system to be a grand canonical ensemble contained between the reflective cavity and the black hole.
To be precise, since we need all the subsets to be disjoint, we need to remove $K_1$ and $K_2$ from $K_I$.
To estimate the ratios of the expected times, note that since $K_I$ is much larger $K_1$ and $K_2$ the system will almost certainly evolve from $K_1$ to $K_2$ via $K_I$, so we can estimate Eq. (\[003.BH2\]) as
$$S(K_1|K_2)\approx \text{log}\left(\frac{\tau(K_1 \rightarrow K_I)+\tau(K_I \rightarrow K_2)}{\tau(K_2 \rightarrow K_I)+\tau(K_I \rightarrow K_1)}\right)\approx$$
$$\text{log}\left(\frac{\tau(K_I \rightarrow K_2)}{\tau(K_I \rightarrow K_1)}\right)\approx \text{log}\left(\frac{\tau(K_I \rightarrow K_2)\tau(K_1 \rightarrow K_I)}{\tau(K_I \rightarrow K_1)\tau(K_2 \rightarrow K_I)}\right)=$$
$$-\text{log}\left(\frac{\tau(K_I\rightarrow K_1)}{\tau(K_1\rightarrow K_I)}\right)+\text{log}\left(\frac{\tau(K_I\rightarrow K_2)}{\tau(K_2\rightarrow K_I)}\right),$$
where we made the following approximations\
$\tau(K_I\rightarrow K_i) >> \tau(K_i\rightarrow K_I)$ for $i=1,2$
$\frac{\tau(K_1\rightarrow K_I)}{\tau(K_2\rightarrow K_I)}$ is order of unity.\
Based on correspondence between the time relative entropy and grand canonical ensemble, we find that
$$\label{003.40}
\text{log}\left(\frac{\tau(K_I\rightarrow K_2)}{\tau(K_2\rightarrow K_I)}\right)=S_{photons}$$
$$\text{log}\left(\frac{\tau(K_I\rightarrow K_1)}{\tau(K_1\rightarrow K_I)}\right)=\text{log}(Z_V)-\text{log}(Z_V')\approx \frac{1}{4}S_{photons}$$
Note: $Z_V$ is the grand canonical partition of radiation in the cavity and $Z_V'$ is the grand canonical partition of the radiation with volume within one Planck length away from black hole. We used that $\text{log}(Z_V)>>\text{log}(Z_V')$ and that $\text{log}(Z_V)=\frac{1}{4}S_{photons}$, derived from the known properties of $Z_V$ for photons .
We have implicitly averaged over all cells on the left-hand side of Eq. (\[003.40\]) (see section \[003.CE\]) .
Hence $$\delta S_{BH}\approx \frac{3}{4}S_{photons}=\frac{U}{T}=\frac{\delta M}{T},$$ where $U$ is the internal energy of the photon radiation and $M$ is the mass of the black hole. The internal energy of the photon radiation is the mass of the black hole lost in evaporation.
By integrating this expression and using the expression for $T$ [@10.1007/BF02345020] (temperature of Hawking radiation), we find in natural units that $$S_{BH}=\frac{A}{4},$$ where we have set the arbitrary constant to 0.
The above analysis is reminiscent of calculations of black hole entropy using its thermal atmosphere [@tHooft:1984kcu].
Summary
=======
Motivated by some of the interpretational issues with black hole entropy, we define a new way to calculate the entropy of a system by determining how irreversible a process is relative to another process rather than counting microstates. This new entropy, the time relative entropy, gives a reasonable value for various situations and can be used at least to first approximation to recover the usual entropy of systems in the microcanonical, canonical and grand canonical ensemble. We used the time relative entropy to recover the entropy of a black hole, although the relationship between the mass and temperature of a black hole was needed.
It would be interesting to investigate Eq. (\[003.RE2\]) for different functions $f$ with computer simulations or to calculate the ratio of the expected times for simple systems.
As an extension, it would be interesting to see if the time reversible entropy can be generalized from semi-classical to fully quantum systems.
[^1]: We set Boltzmann constant equal to 1 ($k=1$)
[^2]: If $H$ does not explicitly depend on time, then $D$ also does not explicitly depend on time. And since the flow after time $\delta t$ only depends on the initial conditions $z_0$ and not on the entire history of the flow, we find that the dynamics can be modeled as a Markov chain.
[^3]: In words,
$\tau(K_{all} \rightarrow K_1)=$
$\delta t \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}n\Pi_{k=0}^{n-1}((\text{Prob of system in }K_{all}\text{ after k steps})$
$\times(\text{Prob of system in }K_{1}\text{ after n steps}))$
[^4]: Example: $v^T_{all}D^kp_1=(\boldsymbol{1}^T-v_1^T)D^kp_1=1-v_1^TD^kp_1$
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
author:
- 'Wen-Jie Xie'
- 'Ming-Xia Li'
- 'Hai-Chuan Xu'
- Wei Chen
- 'Wei-Xing Zhou[^1]'
- 'H. Eugene Stanley'
title: 'Quantifying immediate price impact of trades based on the $k$-shell decomposition of stock trading networks'
---
Introduction
============
The availability of large-scale data on economic and financial activities provides great challenges and new opportunities for us to gain a deeper understanding of the dynamics of complex economic and financial systems [@Einav-Levin-2014-Science; @Bouchaud-2008-Nature], in which the structure and evolutionary dynamics of complex economic and financial networks play an essential role [@Schweitzer-Fagiolo-Sornette-VegaRedondo-Vespignani-White-2009-Science; @Pukthuanthong-Roll-2009-JFE; @Schiavo-Reyes-Fagiolo-2010-QF; @Battiston-Farmer-Flache-Garlaschelli-Haldane-Heesterbeek-Hommes-Jaeger-May-Scheffer-2016-Science]. In financial and economic networks, the nodes represent financial or economic agents, such as economies, companies, financial institutions, traders, et al., while the links represent interactions between two nodes, such as investment, trade, lending, economic cooperation, and so on [@Boss-Elsinger-Summer-Thurner-2004-QF; @Garlaschelli-Loffredo-2004-PRL; @Hochberg-Ljungqvist-Lu-2007-JF; @Kogut-Urso-Wakler-2007-MS; @Fagiolo-Reyes-Schiavo-2009-PRE].
The buy-sell interactions among traders in economic systems can be described by trading networks, in which the nodes represent the traders and the edges stand for the trading relationships. The main statistical properties of several trading networks have been investigated, such as the Austrian money flow trading network [@Kyriakopoulos-Thurner-Puhr-Schmitz-2009-EPJB], the trading network in a web-based experimental prediction market [@Tseng-Li-Wang-2010-EPJB; @Tseng-Lin-Lin-Wang-Li-2010-PA], the daily trading networks in the Shenzhen stock market [@Jiang-Zhou-2010-PA], and the trading networks in the Shanghai Futures Market [@Wang-Zhou-Guan-2011-PA]. Usually, these trading networks are scale-free with power-law degree distributions and disassortative.
The statistical properties of trading networks can be utilized to track and detect abnormal trades implemented by price manipulators in financial markets. Kyriakopoulos et al. performed random matrix analysis to identify accounts with financial misconduct [@Kyriakopoulos-Thurner-Puhr-Schmitz-2009-EPJB], Tumminello et al. identified trader clusters with a very high degree of synchronization in trading which implies to some extent the presence of price manipulation [@Tumminello-Lillo-Piilo-Mantegna-2012-NJP], Sun et al. found significant differences in the topological properties between manipulated and non-manipulated stocks [@Sun-Cheng-Shen-Wang-2011-PA; @Sun-Shen-Cheng-Wang-2012-PLoS1], and Jiang et al. studied the behavior and implications of abnormal trading motifs (self-loop, two-node loop, and two-node multiple arcs) [@Jiang-Xie-Xiong-Zhang-Zhang-Zhou-2013-QFL]. There are also studies on the correlations between structural properties of trading networks and financial variables of markets [@Adamic-Brunetti-Harris-Kirilenko-2012-SSRN; @Li-Jiang-Xie-Xiong-Zhang-Zhou-2015-PA]. It is also reported that trading networks have predictive power over stock price movements at the daily level [@Sun-Shen-Cheng-2014-SR] and traders’ returns are correlated with their positions occupied in the trading networks [@Cohen-Cole-Kirilenko-Patacchini-2011-SSRN].
In this Letter, we investigate the immediate price impact of institutional and individual trades at different positions of trading networks. The immediate price impact was extensively studied, which is composed of the positive correlations between trading volume and volatility. These relations are robust at various time scales [@Wood-McInish-Ord-1985-JF; @Gallant-Rossi-Tauchen-1992-RFS; @Richardson-Sefcik-Thompson-1986-JFE], even at the transaction level [@Chan-Fong-2000-JFE; @Lillo-Farmer-Mantegna-2003-Nature; @Lim-Coggins-2005-QF; @Zhou-2012-QF]. Using the same order book data [@Mu-Zhou-Chen-Kertesz-2010-NJP; @Zhou-Mu-Kertesz-2012-NJP], it is found that filled and partially filled limit orders have very different price impacts [@Zhou-2012-QF]. The price impact of trades from partially filled orders is constant when the volume is not too large, while that of filled orders shows a power-law behaviour $r=\omega^{\alpha}$ with $\alpha\approx2/3$. Zhou also found that large trade sizes, wide bid-ask spreads, high liquidity at the same side and low liquidity at the opposite side will cause a large price impact [@Zhou-2012-NJP]. Using the $k$-shell decomposition method, we extend the analysis of immediate price impact by considering the positions of trades at trading networks.
Construction of stock trading networks from transaction data
============================================================
We will continue to investigate immediate price impact of institutional and individual trades by using the order book data in the Shenzhen Stock Exchange (SZSE). The data sets in this paper include the order book data of 32 A-shares and 11 B-shares in the SZSE. The A-share market and The B-share market both are composed of common stocks which are issued by mainland Chinese companies. The A-share market is opened only to domestic investors, and traded in CNY. But the B-share market is traded in Hong Kong dollar (HKD) and was restricted to foreign investors before February 19, 2001, and since then it has been opened to Chinese investors as well. A transaction is triggered by an incoming market order matched with the limit orders waiting on the opposite order book and accomplished by transferring shares from seller to buyer and cashes from buyer to seller. It provides an opportunity to trace the order execution procedure from a complex network perspective.
We use the same approach as presented in Refs. [@Jiang-Zhou-2010-PA; @Jiang-Xie-Xiong-Zhang-Zhang-Zhou-2013-QFL; @Li-Jiang-Xie-Xiong-Zhang-Zhou-2015-PA] to construct stock trading networks. Firstly we reconstruct the limit order book based on the trading rules and extract the detailed information of each transaction. A node represents a trader who bought or sold the stock. An undirected link is formed between two traders if they had transactions between them. Then we present the trades between pairwise traders into an symmetrical adjacent matrix $A_{n\times n}$ whose element $a_{ij}$ equal to 1 or 0. Its entry $a_{ij}=1$ means that trader $i$ has traded with trader $j$. When a trader places an effective market order, it is possible that the order is executed by several orders which are submitted by different traders on the limit order book. In this case, the local network structure is a star-like graph.
![(color online) Topological structure of a stock trading network. Each shell is labelled by a single index $k$ with the nodes colored uniquely. The nodes in the core are red. The size of a node is proportional to its degree. For better visualization, we plot 5% of the edges and the nodes with $k\geq 5$.[]{data-label="Fig:STN_Kshell"}](Fig1.eps){width="8cm"}
Trader classification based on $k$-shell decomposition
======================================================
Analyzing the undirected unweighted stock trading networks, we classify traders into $k$ shells using the $k$-shell decomposition method. The 1-shell denotes the peripheral shell of the trading network and the $k_{\rm{max}}$-shell denotes the traders in the core of the trading network. Fig. \[Fig:STN\_Kshell\] shows the $k$-shells of one stock trading network with the LaNet-vi visualization [@Beiro-Alvarez-Hamelin-Busch-2008-NJP], which provides a method to extract information on the original graph and a way to compare different structures of trading networks. The algorithm provides a direct way to distinguish their different hierarchies and structural organization. Each shell is labeled by a single shell index with the nodes colored uniquely. The nodes in the core are drawn in red. The size of a node is proportional to its original degree. The visualization used a logarithmic scale for the sizes in Fig. \[Fig:STN\_Kshell\]. The maximum degree is 1261 in the core of the trading network. For clarity, we randomly select 5% of edges and draw the nodes with the shell index $k\geq 5$ in Fig. \[Fig:STN\_Kshell\].
Basic statistics of immediate price impact and trade size at the transaction level
==================================================================================
{width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"} {width="4.3cm"}
The immediate price impact can be calculated as the percentage of mid-price change caused by a trade at time $t$ $$r(t+1)=[p(t+1)-p(t)]/p(t)~,
\label{Eq:rt}$$ where $p(t)$ and $p(t+1)$ are the mid-prices of the best bid and ask right before and after the transaction at time $t$. The data set allows us to compare a closed national market (A-shares) with an international market (B-shares), individuals and institutions, partially filled and filled trades, buyer-initiated and seller-initiated trades. In this Letter, the two types of traders are individuals (superscript ‘0’) and institutions (superscript ‘1’). The trades are divided into four types according to their directions and aggressiveness [@Biais-Hillion-Spatt-1995-JF; @Zhou-2012-QF]: buyer-initiated partially filled (PB) trades resulting from partially filled buy orders, seller-initiated partially filled (PS) trades resulting from partially filled sell orders, buyer-initiated filled (FB) trades resulting from filled buy orders, and seller-initiated filled (FS) trades resulting from filled sell orders. As an example, $\omega_{\rm{FS}}^{0}$ stands for the transaction size of seller-initiated filled trades of individuals. The average return $\langle r\rangle$ and average transaction size $\langle \omega\rangle$ corresponding to the four types of trades are shown in the fist row of Fig. \[Fig:IPI:omega:Stat\].
We classify the trades according to their positions in the trading networks by using the $k$-shell algorithm, which divides traders into $k_{\rm{max}}$ shells. For each stock trading network, the position of each trader in the network is denoted by the shell index $k\in \{1,2,...,k_{\rm{max}}\}$. The $k_{\rm{max}}$-shell is the core of trading network. The position of trades, initiated by traders in position $k$, is denoted by the corresponding shell index $k$. We sort the trades in ascending order depending on the value of the trades’ position $k$ and divide trades into three equal parts, termed periphery, intermediate, and kernel. The periphery trades are initiated by traders in the peripheral shell and kernel trades are initiated by traders in the $k_{\max}$-core. We investigate whether traders at different network positions (periphery, intermediate and kernel) have different behaviors. The average return $\langle r\rangle$ and average transaction size $\langle \omega\rangle$ corresponding to the four types of trades at different network positions are shown in the second, third and fourth rows of Fig. \[Fig:IPI:omega:Stat\].
According to the first and second columns of Fig. \[Fig:IPI:omega:Stat\], the most intriguing feature is that the immediate price impact of partially filled trades is about 10 times of that of the filled trades [@Zhou-2012-QF]. The absolute immediate price impact of partially filled trades has an order of $10^{-3}$, while that of filled trades has an order of $10^{-4}$. Moreover, according to Fig. \[Fig:IPI:omega:Stat\], there is no evident difference in the average sizes and the price impacts between buyer-initiated trades and seller-initiated trades.
{width="8cm"} {width="8cm"} {width="8cm"} {width="8cm"}
We find that the average trade size of each type (PB, PS, FB, and FS) submitted by individual traders in the B-share market is larger than that in the A-share market, thus the absolute price impact is also larger for B-share trades. In contrast, the average size of B-share trades is smaller than A-share trades for institutions. It is reasonable that the absolute price impact of filled A-share trades submitted by institutions is larger than filled B-share trades, but partially filled A-share trades have smaller absolute price impact than partially filled B-share trades. This abnormal phenomenon cannot be explained by the price gaps in the two markets [@Zhou-2012-QF; @Zhou-2012-NJP; @Gu-Xiong-Zhang-Chen-Zhang-Zhou-2016-CSF].
We observe, for each of the four types of trades (PB, PS, FB, and FS), institutional traders have larger immediate price impacts than individual traders do: $$\langle{r}^1_{\rm{PB,FB}}\rangle > \langle{r}^0_{\rm{PB,FB}}\rangle ~~{\rm{and}}~~
-\langle{r}^1_{\rm{PS,FS}}\rangle > -\langle{r}^0_{\rm{PS,FS}}\rangle,
\label{Eq:r1:r0}$$ which is mainly caused by the fact that institutional traders submit larger orders than individual traders: $$\langle{\omega}^1_{\rm{PB,PS,FB,FS}}\rangle > \langle{\omega}^0_{\rm{PB,PS,FB,FS}}\rangle.
\label{Eq:w1:w0}$$ This phenomenon is particularly evident for A-share stocks and is marginal for B-share stocks.
In most cases, we find that trades closer to the kernel have larger sizes and high immediate price impacts: $$\left\{
\begin{array}{lll}
\begin{aligned}
& \langle{r}_{\rm{K}}\rangle > \langle{r}_{\rm{I}}\rangle > \langle{r}_{\rm{P}}\rangle\\
& \langle{\omega}_{\rm{K}}\rangle > \langle{\omega}_{\rm{I}}\rangle > \langle{\omega}_{\rm{P}}\rangle
\end{aligned}
\end{array}
\right..
\label{Eq:r:w:P:I:K}$$ This observation simply indicates that large trades are more likely to be executed with more other trades and incur larger price impacts.
Relationship between immediate price impact and trade size at different network positions
=========================================================================================
We normalize $r$ and $\omega$ for each type of trades in both A-share and B-share markets by their averages $\langle{r}\rangle$ and $\langle\omega\rangle$ [@Zhou-2012-QF]. For partially filled trades in Fig. \[Fig:BestBidAsk\_Impact01\] (A) and (B), when $\omega$ is smaller than the average $\langle\omega\rangle$, the price impact $r(\omega)$ is not sensitive to trade size $\omega$, and the normalized price impact of individuals is slightly larger than that of institutions in each position. Furthermore, the normalized price impact is slightly larger for traders with small $k$. When $\omega>\langle\omega\rangle$, $r(\omega)$ exhibits a significant upward trend, the normalized price impact of individuals is smaller than that of institutions in each position, and $r(\omega)/\langle{r}\rangle$ is larger for traders with large $k$.
For filled trades in Fig. \[Fig:BestBidAsk\_Impact01\] (C) and (D), we can observe power-law scaling behaviours between the normalize $r$ and $\omega$ for different types of trades in different positions: $$\label{Eq:r:w}
r(\omega)/\langle{r}\rangle \sim (\omega/\langle\omega\rangle)^\alpha,$$ where $\alpha$ is the power-law scaling exponent. The power-law scaling range spans about three orders of magnitude from $10^{-1}$ to $10^{2}$. These two plots extend precious results for which the power-law dependence of the price impact on the trade size holds for FB and FS trades [@Zhou-2012-QF], such that this law holds for individuals and institutions in different positions of trading networks.
Market Type Pos. Individual Institution
--------- ------ ------ --------------- --------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
A & B FB P $0.52\pm0.02$ $0.46\pm0.03$
FB I $0.58\pm0.02$ $0.52\pm0.02$
FB K $0.62\pm0.01$ $0.58\pm0.02$
FS P $0.55\pm0.01$ $0.51\pm0.01$
FS I $0.64\pm0.01$ $0.57\pm0.02$
FS K $0.69\pm0.01$ $0.62\pm0.02$
A-share FB P $0.52\pm0.02$ $0.39\pm0.03$
FB I $0.58\pm0.02$ $0.46\pm0.03$
FB K $0.62\pm0.01$ $0.52\pm0.01$
FS P $0.55\pm0.01$ $0.43\pm0.02$
FS I $0.64\pm0.01$ $0.53\pm0.02$
FS K $0.69\pm0.00$ $0.53\pm0.03$
B-share FB P $0.52\pm0.02$ $0.58\pm0.03$
FB I $0.65\pm0.02$ $0.63\pm0.02$
FB K $0.62\pm0.03$ $0.69\pm0.02$
FS P $0.62\pm0.01$ $0.58\pm0.03$
FS I $0.71\pm0.02$ $0.59\pm0.04$
FS K $0.70\pm0.03$ $0.73\pm0.03$
: \[Tb:alphas\] Exponent $\alpha$ of power-law behaviour $r\sim\omega^{\alpha}$ for buyer-initiated filled trades and seller-initiated filled trades. The analysis is conducted respectively for all stocks, A-shares and B-shares. Due to their positions in the trading network, we divide the traders into 3 types for individuals and institutions, including periphery (P), intermediate (I) and kernel (K).
The power-law scaling exponents $\alpha$ are obtained by linear regressions of $\ln[r(\omega)/\langle{r}\rangle]$ against $\ln[\omega/\langle\omega\rangle]$, which are presented in table \[Tb:alphas\]. A comparison of individual and institutional trades in the same position shows that $$\alpha^{0}>\alpha^{1}.
\label{Eq:alpha:0:1}$$ It means that the price impact of filled trades of individuals is much more sensitive to the trade size than that of institutions. Generally, institutions are more professional than individuals in financial markets. To reduce transaction costs and risks, institutional traders use certain trading strategies to reduce their price impact. In contrast, most of individual traders place orders with worse strategies [@Zhou-Mu-Chen-Sornette-2011-PLoS1; @Zhou-Mu-Kertesz-2012-NJP]. A comparison of trades in different positions shows that the power-law exponents $\alpha$ for trades in different positions of the trading networks have the following relationship: $$\alpha_{\rm{P}}<\alpha_{\rm{I}}<\alpha_{\rm{K}}.
\label{Eq:alpha:P:I:K}$$ The price impact of filled kernel trades is more sensitive to the trade size than the trades outer shells. Moreover, we observe certain asymmetry between buy trades and sell trades such that $$\alpha^{\rm{FS}}>\alpha^{\rm{FB}}.
\label{Eq:alpha:FS:FB}$$ This buy/sell asymmetry was not observed when one did not look into trade positions [@Zhou-2012-QF].
We perform the same analysis on A-share stocks and B-share stocks separately. Nice power-law dependence of the price impact on the trade size is also observed. The power-law scaling exponents are presented in table \[Tb:alphas\]. We find that the relationships in Eq. (\[Eq:alpha:P:I:K\]) and Eq. (\[Eq:alpha:FS:FB\]) also hold for both individuals and institutions. The relationship in Eq. (\[Eq:alpha:0:1\]) holds for A-share stocks, but not for B-share stocks. Comparing the results of A-share stocks and B-share stocks, we find that $$\alpha^{\rm{B}}>\alpha^{\rm{A}},
\label{Eq:alpha:A:B}$$ where $\alpha^{\rm{A}}$ and $\alpha^{\rm{B}}$ stand respectively for the power-law exponents of A-share stocks and B-share stocks.
Summary
=======
In this Letter, we have analyzed a large data set of order flows recorded in the Shenzhen Stock Exchange, focusing on the immediate price impact of institutional and individual trades in different positions of stock trading networks. We perform a statistical analysis of immediate price impact of all the traders trading 32 A-share stocks and 11 B-share stocks in 2003. The data offer a unique opportunity to compare a closed national market (A-shares) with an international market (B-shares), individuals and institutions, partially filled and filled trades, buyer-initiated and seller-initiated trades, and trades at different positions (periphery, intermediate and kernel) of trading networks.
We constructed the stock trading networks based on limit order book data and classified the traders into $k$ shells using the $k$-shell decomposition algorithm. Based on PB, PS, FB, and FS trades, we investigate different trading behaviors of individuals and institutions at different positions of trading network. Individual traders’ filled trades are found to be more aggressive than institutional traders’ filled trades. From periphery to intermediate to kernel, the immediate price impact of institutional and individual trades increases. The analysis has also been conducted separately for A-shares and B-shares and shows that trades in the B-shares market are more aggressive than in the A-shares market.
For filled trades, we confirmed the presence of power-law price impacts, which holds for trades with directions and aggressiveness, trades submitted by individuals and institutions, and trades at different positions of stock trading networks. Our findings thus extend previous results [@Zhou-2012-QF]. The main contribution of this Letter stems from the fact that we considered the topological structure of trading networks and used the information extracted from network positions, which has not been studies in the literature [@Kraus-Stoll-1972-JF; @Dufour-Engle-2000-JF; @Saar-2001-RFS; @Lillo-Farmer-Mantegna-2003-Nature; @Chiyachantana-Jain-Jiang-Wood-2004-JF; @Lim-Coggins-2005-QF; @Zhou-2012-QF]. Our findings shed new lights on interdisciplinary network analysis about topological structure and price impacts in complex trading networks.
This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (71571121, 71501072, 71131007), the Postdoctoral Science Foundation of China (2015M571502, 2015M570342), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.
[10]{} url\#1[`#1`]{}
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(2010). <http://ssrn.com/abstract=1361184>
.
.
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1597738 (2011).
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
[^1]: e-mail: [email protected]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Rectified activation units (rectifiers) are essential for state-of-the-art neural networks. In this work, we study rectifier neural networks for image classification from two aspects. First, we propose a Parametric Rectified Linear Unit (PReLU) that generalizes the traditional rectified unit. PReLU improves model fitting with nearly zero extra computational cost and little overfitting risk. Second, we derive a robust initialization method that particularly considers the rectifier nonlinearities. This method enables us to train extremely deep rectified models directly from scratch and to investigate deeper or wider network architectures. Based on our PReLU networks (PReLU-nets), we achieve **4.94%** top-5 test error on the ImageNet 2012 classification dataset. This is a 26% relative improvement over the ILSVRC 2014 winner (GoogLeNet, 6.66% [@Szegedy2014]). To our knowledge, our result is the first to surpass human-level performance (5.1%, [@Russakovsky2014]) on this visual recognition challenge.'
author:
- |
Kaiming He Xiangyu Zhang Shaoqing Ren Jian Sun\
Microsoft Research\
{kahe, v-xiangz, v-shren, jiansun}@microsoft.com
bibliography:
- 'prelu.bib'
title: |
Delving Deep into Rectifiers:\
Surpassing Human-Level Performance on ImageNet Classification
---
Introduction
============
Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) [@LeCun1989; @Krizhevsky2012] have demonstrated recognition accuracy better than or comparable to humans in several visual recognition tasks, including recognizing traffic signs [@Ciresan2012], faces [@Taigman2014; @Sun2014], and hand-written digits [@Ciresan2012; @Wan2013]. In this work, we present a result that surpasses human-level performance on a more generic and challenging recognition task - the classification task in the 1000-class ImageNet dataset [@Russakovsky2014].
In the last few years, we have witnessed tremendous improvements in recognition performance, mainly due to advances in two technical directions: building more powerful models, and designing effective strategies against overfitting. On one hand, neural networks are becoming more capable of fitting training data, because of increased complexity (, increased depth [@Simonyan2014; @Szegedy2014], enlarged width [@Zeiler2014; @Sermanet2014], and the use of smaller strides [@Zeiler2014; @Sermanet2014; @Chatfield2014; @Simonyan2014]), new nonlinear activations [@Nair2010; @Maas2013; @Zeiler2013; @Lin2013; @Srivastava2013; @Goodfellow2013], and sophisticated layer designs [@Szegedy2014; @He2014]. On the other hand, better generalization is achieved by effective regularization techniques [@Hinton2012; @Srivastava2014; @Goodfellow2013; @Wan2013], aggressive data augmentation [@Krizhevsky2012; @Howard2013; @Simonyan2014; @Szegedy2014], and large-scale data [@Deng2009; @Russakovsky2014].
Among these advances, the rectifier neuron [@Nair2010; @Glorot2011; @Maas2013; @Zeiler2013], , Rectified Linear Unit (ReLU), is one of several keys to the recent success of deep networks [@Krizhevsky2012]. It expedites convergence of the training procedure [@Krizhevsky2012] and leads to better solutions [@Nair2010; @Glorot2011; @Maas2013; @Zeiler2013] than conventional sigmoid-like units. Despite the prevalence of rectifier networks, recent improvements of models [@Zeiler2014; @Sermanet2014; @He2014; @Simonyan2014; @Szegedy2014] and theoretical guidelines for training them [@Glorot2010; @Saxe2013] have rarely focused on the properties of the rectifiers.
In this paper, we investigate neural networks from two aspects particularly driven by the rectifiers. First, we propose a new generalization of ReLU, which we call *Parametric Rectified Linear Unit* (PReLU). This activation function adaptively learns the parameters of the rectifiers, and improves accuracy at negligible extra computational cost. Second, we study the difficulty of training rectified models that are very deep. By explicitly modeling the nonlinearity of rectifiers (ReLU/PReLU), we derive a theoretically sound initialization method, which helps with convergence of very deep models (, with 30 weight layers) trained directly from scratch. This gives us more flexibility to explore more powerful network architectures.
On the 1000-class ImageNet 2012 dataset, our PReLU network (PReLU-net) leads to a single-model result of 5.71% top-5 error, which surpasses all existing multi-model results. Further, our multi-model result achieves **4.94%** top-5 error on the test set, which is a 26% relative improvement over the ILSVRC 2014 winner (GoogLeNet, 6.66% [@Szegedy2014]). To the best of our knowledge, our result surpasses for the first time the reported human-level performance (5.1% in [@Russakovsky2014]) on this visual recognition challenge.
Approach
========
In this section, we first present the PReLU activation function (Sec. \[sec:prelu\]). Then we derive our initialization method for deep rectifier networks (Sec. \[sec:init\]). Lastly we discuss our architecture designs (Sec. \[sec:arch\]).
Parametric Rectifiers
---------------------
We show that replacing the parameter-free ReLU activation by a learned parametric activation unit improves classification accuracy[^1].
![ReLU vs. PReLU. For PReLU, the coefficient of the negative part is not constant and is adaptively learned.[]{data-label="fig:prelu"}](eps/prelu){width="0.85\linewidth"}
### Definition {#sec:prelu .unnumbered}
Formally, we consider an activation function defined as: $$\label{eq:prelu}
f(y_i) = \begin{cases} y_i, & \mbox{if } y_i > 0 \\ a_i y_i, & \mbox{if } y_i \leq 0 \end{cases}.$$ Here $y_i$ is the input of the nonlinear activation $f$ on the $i$th channel, and $a_i$ is a coefficient controlling the slope of the negative part. The subscript $i$ in $a_i$ indicates that we allow the nonlinear activation to vary on different channels. When $a_i = 0$, it becomes ReLU; when $a_i$ is a learnable parameter, we refer to Eqn.(\[eq:prelu\]) as *Parametric ReLU* (PReLU). Figure \[fig:prelu\] shows the shapes of ReLU and PReLU. Eqn.(\[eq:prelu\]) is equivalent to $f(y_i) = \max(0, y_i)+a_i\min(0, y_i)$.
If $a_i$ is a small and fixed value, PReLU becomes the Leaky ReLU (LReLU) in [@Maas2013] ($a_i=0.01$). The motivation of LReLU is to avoid zero gradients. Experiments in [@Maas2013] show that LReLU has negligible impact on accuracy compared with ReLU. On the contrary, our method adaptively learns the PReLU parameters jointly with the whole model. We hope for end-to-end training that will lead to more specialized activations.
PReLU introduces a very small number of extra parameters. The number of extra parameters is equal to the total number of channels, which is negligible when considering the total number of weights. So we expect no extra risk of overfitting. We also consider a channel-shared variant: $f(y_i) = \max(0, y_i) + a \min(0, y_i)$ where the coefficient is shared by all channels of one layer. This variant only introduces a single extra parameter into each layer.
### Optimization {#optimization .unnumbered}
PReLU can be trained using backpropagation [@LeCun1989] and optimized simultaneously with other layers. The update formulations of $\{a_i\}$ are simply derived from the chain rule. The gradient of $a_i$ for one layer is: $$\label{eq:grad}
\frac{\partial \mathcal{E}}{\partial a_i} = \sum_{y_i} \frac{\partial \mathcal{E}}{\partial f(y_i)}\frac{\partial f(y_i)}{\partial a_i},$$ where $\mathcal{E}$ represents the objective function. The term $\frac{\partial \mathcal{E}}{\partial f(y_i)}$ is the gradient propagated from the deeper layer. The gradient of the activation is given by: $$\frac{\partial f(y_i)}{\partial a_i} = \begin{cases} 0, & \mbox{if } y_i > 0 \\ y_i, & \mbox{if } y_i \leq 0 \end{cases}.$$ The summation $\sum_{y_i}$ runs over all positions of the feature map. For the channel-shared variant, the gradient of $a$ is $\frac{\partial \mathcal{E}}{\partial a} = \sum_i\sum_{y_i} \frac{\partial \mathcal{E}}{\partial f(y_i)}\frac{\partial f(y_i)}{\partial a}$, where $\sum_i$ sums over all channels of the layer. The time complexity due to PReLU is negligible for both forward and backward propagation.
We adopt the momentum method when updating $a_i$: $$\label{eq:update}
\Delta a_i := \mu \Delta a_i + \epsilon \frac{\partial \mathcal{E}}{\partial a_i}.$$ Here $\mu$ is the momentum and $\epsilon$ is the learning rate. It is worth noticing that we do not use weight decay ($l_2$ regularization) when updating $a_i$. A weight decay tends to push $a_i$ to zero, and thus biases PReLU toward ReLU. Even without regularization, the learned coefficients rarely have a magnitude larger than 1 in our experiments. Further, we do not constrain the range of $a_i$ so that the activation function may be non-monotonic. We use $a_i=0.25$ as the initialization throughout this paper.
### Comparison Experiments {#comparison-experiments .unnumbered}
We conducted comparisons on a deep but efficient model with 14 weight layers. The model was studied in [@He2014a] (model E of [@He2014a]) and its architecture is described in Table \[tab:s14\]. We choose this model because it is sufficient for representing a category of very deep models, as well as to make the experiments feasible.
As a baseline, we train this model with ReLU applied in the convolutional (conv) layers and the first two fully-connected (fc) layers. The training implementation follows [@He2014a]. The top-1 and top-5 errors are 33.82% and 13.34% on ImageNet 2012, using 10-view testing (Table \[tab:s14\_ablated\]).
------------- ------------------------- ------- -------
conv1 7$\times$7, 64, $_{/2}$ 0.681 0.596
pool1 3$\times$3, $_{/3}$
conv2$_{1}$ 2$\times$2, 128 0.103 0.321
conv2$_{2}$ 2$\times$2, 128 0.099 0.204
conv2$_{3}$ 2$\times$2, 128 0.228 0.294
conv2$_{4}$ 2$\times$2, 128 0.561 0.464
pool2 2$\times$2, $_{/2}$
conv3$_{1}$ 2$\times$2, 256 0.126 0.196
conv3$_{2}$ 2$\times$2, 256 0.089 0.152
conv3$_{3}$ 2$\times$2, 256 0.124 0.145
conv3$_{4}$ 2$\times$2, 256 0.062 0.124
conv3$_{5}$ 2$\times$2, 256 0.008 0.134
conv3$_{6}$ 2$\times$2, 256 0.210 0.198
spp $\{6,3,2,1\}$
fc$_{1}$ 4096 0.063 0.074
fc$_{2}$ 4096 0.031 0.075
fc$_{3}$ 1000
------------- ------------------------- ------- -------
: A small but deep 14-layer model [@He2014a]. The filter size and filter number of each layer is listed. The number [/$s$]{} indicates the stride $s$ that is used. The learned coefficients of PReLU are also shown. For the channel-wise case, the average of $\{a_i\}$ over the channels is shown for each layer.[]{data-label="tab:s14"}
Then we train the same architecture from scratch, with all ReLUs replaced by PReLUs (Table \[tab:s14\_ablated\]). The top-1 error is reduced to 32.64%. This is a **1.2%** gain over the ReLU baseline. Table \[tab:s14\_ablated\] also shows that channel-wise/channel-shared PReLUs perform comparably. For the channel-shared version, PReLU only introduces 13 extra free parameters compared with the ReLU counterpart. But this small number of free parameters play critical roles as evidenced by the 1.1% gain over the baseline. This implies the importance of adaptively learning the shapes of activation functions.
top-1 top-5
----------------------- ----------- -----------
ReLU 33.82 13.34
PReLU, channel-shared 32.71 12.87
PReLU, channel-wise **32.64** **12.75**
: Comparisons between ReLU and PReLU on the small model. The error rates are for ImageNet 2012 using 10-view testing. The images are resized so that the shorter side is 256, during both training and testing. Each view is 224$\times$224. All models are trained using 75 epochs.[]{data-label="tab:s14_ablated"}
Table \[tab:s14\] also shows the learned coefficients of PReLUs for each layer. There are two interesting phenomena in Table \[tab:s14\]. First, the first conv layer (conv1) has coefficients (0.681 and 0.596) significantly greater than 0. As the filters of conv1 are mostly Gabor-like filters such as edge or texture detectors, the learned results show that both positive and negative responses of the filters are respected. We believe that this is a more economical way of exploiting low-level information, given the limited number of filters (, 64). Second, for the channel-wise version, the deeper conv layers in general have smaller coefficients. This implies that the activations gradually become “more nonlinear” at increasing depths. In other words, the learned model tends to keep more information in earlier stages and becomes more discriminative in deeper stages.
Initialization of Filter Weights for Rectifiers {#sec:init}
-----------------------------------------------
Rectifier networks are easier to train [@Glorot2011; @Krizhevsky2012; @Zeiler2013] compared with traditional sigmoid-like activation networks. But a bad initialization can still hamper the learning of a highly non-linear system. In this subsection, we propose a robust initialization method that removes an obstacle of training extremely deep rectifier networks.
Recent deep CNNs are mostly initialized by random weights drawn from Gaussian distributions [@Krizhevsky2012]. With fixed standard deviations (, 0.01 in [@Krizhevsky2012]), very deep models (, $>$8 conv layers) have difficulties to converge, as reported by the VGG team [@Simonyan2014] and also observed in our experiments. To address this issue, in [@Simonyan2014] they pre-train a model with 8 conv layers to initialize deeper models. But this strategy requires more training time, and may also lead to a poorer local optimum. In [@Szegedy2014; @Lee2014], auxiliary classifiers are added to intermediate layers to help with convergence.
Glorot and Bengio [@Glorot2010] proposed to adopt a properly scaled uniform distribution for initialization. This is called “*Xavier*” initialization in [@Jia2014]. Its derivation is based on the assumption that the activations are linear. This assumption is invalid for ReLU and PReLU.
In the following, we derive a theoretically more sound initialization by taking ReLU/PReLU into account. In our experiments, our initialization method allows for extremely deep models (, 30 conv/fc layers) to converge, while the “*Xavier*” method [@Glorot2010] cannot.
### Forward Propagation Case {#forward-propagation-case .unnumbered}
Our derivation mainly follows [@Glorot2010]. The central idea is to investigate the variance of the responses in each layer.
For a conv layer, a response is: $$\label{eq:forward}
{\mathbf{y}}_l={\mathrm{W}}_l{\mathbf{x}}_l + {\mathbf{b}}_l.$$ Here, ${\mathbf{x}}$ is a $k^2c$-by-1 vector that represents co-located $k$$\times$$k$ pixels in $c$ input channels. $k$ is the spatial filter size of the layer. With $n=k^2c$ denoting the number of connections of a response, ${\mathrm{W}}$ is a $d$-by-$n$ matrix, where $d$ is the number of filters and each row of ${\mathrm{W}}$ represents the weights of a filter. ${\mathbf{b}}$ is a vector of biases, and ${\mathbf{y}}$ is the response at a pixel of the output map. We use $l$ to index a layer. We have ${\mathbf{x}}_{l}=f({\mathbf{y}}_{l-1})$ where $f$ is the activation. We also have $c_l = d_{l-1}$.
We let the initialized elements in ${\mathrm{W}}_{l}$ be mutually independent and share the same distribution. As in [@Glorot2010], we assume that the elements in ${\mathbf{x}}_l$ are also mutually independent and share the same distribution, and ${\mathbf{x}}_l$ and ${\mathrm{W}}_{l}$ are independent of each other. Then we have: $${\emph{Var}}[y_{l}]=n_l{\emph{Var}}[w_{l}x_l],$$ where now $y_{l}$, $x_{l}$, and $w_{l}$ represent the random variables of each element in ${\mathbf{y}}_l$, ${\mathrm{W}}_l$, and ${\mathbf{x}}_l$ respectively. We let $w_{l}$ have zero mean. Then the variance of the product of independent variables gives us: $$\label{eq:y1}
{\emph{Var}}[y_{l}]=n_l{\emph{Var}}[w_{l}]E[x^2_{l}].$$ Here $E[x^2_{l}]$ is the expectation of the square of $x_l$. It is worth noticing that $E[x^2_{l}]\neq {\emph{Var}}[x_l]$ unless $x_l$ has zero mean. For the ReLU activation, $x_{l}=max(0, y_{l-1})$ and thus it does not have zero mean. This will lead to a conclusion different from [@Glorot2010].
If we let $w_{l-1}$ have a symmetric distribution around zero and $b_{l-1}=0$, then $y_{l-1}$ has zero mean and has a symmetric distribution around zero. This leads to $E[x^2_{l}]=\frac{1}{2}{\emph{Var}}[y_{l-1}]$ when $f$ is ReLU. Putting this into Eqn.(\[eq:y1\]), we obtain: $$\label{eq:y2}
{\emph{Var}}[y_{l}]=\frac{1}{2}n_l{\emph{Var}}[w_{l}]{\emph{Var}}[y_{l-1}].$$ With $L$ layers put together, we have: $$\label{eq:prod_fw}
{\emph{Var}}[y_{L}]={\emph{Var}}[y_{1}]\left(\prod_{l=2}^{L}\frac{1}{2}n_l{\emph{Var}}[w_{l}]\right).$$ This product is the key to the initialization design. A proper initialization method should avoid reducing or magnifying the magnitudes of input signals exponentially. So we expect the above product to take a proper scalar (, 1). A sufficient condition is: $$\label{eq:init_fw}
\frac{1}{2}n_l{\emph{Var}}[w_{l}]=1, \quad \forall l.$$ This leads to a zero-mean Gaussian distribution whose standard deviation (std) is $\sqrt{2/{n_l}}$. This is our way of initialization. We also initialize ${\mathbf{b}}=0$.
For the first layer ($l=1$), we should have $n_1{\emph{Var}}[w_{1}]=1$ because there is no ReLU applied on the input signal. But the factor $1/2$ does not matter if it just exists on one layer. So we also adopt Eqn.(\[eq:init\_fw\]) in the first layer for simplicity.
### Backward Propagation Case {#backward-propagation-case .unnumbered}
For back-propagation, the gradient of a conv layer is computed by: $$\label{eq:backward}
\Delta {\mathbf{x}}_l = {\mathrm{\hat{W}}}_l \Delta {\mathbf{y}}_l.$$ Here we use $\Delta {\mathbf{x}}$ and $\Delta {\mathbf{y}}$ to denote gradients ($\frac{\partial\mathcal{E}}{\partial{\mathbf{x}}}$ and $\frac{\partial\mathcal{E}}{\partial{\mathbf{y}}}$) for simplicity. $\Delta {\mathbf{y}}$ represents $k$-by-$k$ pixels in $d$ channels, and is reshaped into a $k^2d$-by-1 vector. We denote $\hat{n}=k^2d$. Note that $\hat{n}\neq n=k^2c$. ${\mathrm{\hat{W}}}$ is a $c$-by-$\hat{n}$ matrix where the filters are rearranged in the way of back-propagation. Note that ${\mathrm{W}}$ and ${\mathrm{\hat{W}}}$ can be reshaped from each other. $\Delta {\mathbf{x}}$ is a $c$-by-1 vector representing the gradient at a pixel of this layer. As above, we assume that $w_l$ and $\Delta y_l$ are independent of each other, then $\Delta x_l$ has zero mean for all $l$, when $w_l$ is initialized by a symmetric distribution around zero.
In back-propagation we also have $\Delta y_{l} = f'(y_l)\Delta x_{l+1}$ where $f'$ is the derivative of $f$. For the ReLU case, $f'(y_l)$ is zero or one, and their probabilities are equal. We assume that $f'(y_l)$ and $\Delta x_{l+1}$ are independent of each other. Thus we have $E[\Delta y_l]=E[\Delta x_{l+1}]/2=0$, and also $E[(\Delta y_l)^2]={\emph{Var}}[\Delta y_l]=\frac{1}{2}{\emph{Var}}[\Delta x_{l+1}]$. Then we compute the variance of the gradient in Eqn.(\[eq:backward\]): $$\begin{aligned}
{\emph{Var}}[\Delta x_l] &=& \hat{n}_l{\emph{Var}}[w_l]{\emph{Var}}[\Delta y_l]\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}\hat{n}_l{\emph{Var}}[w_l]{\emph{Var}}[\Delta x_{l+1}].\label{eq:dx2}\end{aligned}$$ The scalar $1/2$ in both Eqn.(\[eq:dx2\]) and Eqn.(\[eq:y2\]) is the result of ReLU, though the derivations are different. With $L$ layers put together, we have: $$\label{eq:prod_bw}
{\emph{Var}}[\Delta x_2] = {\emph{Var}}[\Delta x_{L+1}]\left(\prod_{l=2}^{L}\frac{1}{2}\hat{n}_{l}{\emph{Var}}[w_{l}]\right).$$ We consider a sufficient condition that the gradient is not exponentially large/small: $$\label{eq:init_bw}
\frac{1}{2}\hat{n}_l{\emph{Var}}[w_{l}]=1, \quad \forall l.$$ The only difference between this equation and Eqn.(\[eq:init\_fw\]) is that $\hat{n}_l=k_l^2d_l$ while $n_l=k_l^2c_l=k_l^2d_{l-1}$. Eqn.(\[eq:init\_bw\]) results in a zero-mean Gaussian distribution whose std is $\sqrt{2/{\hat{n}_l}}$.
For the first layer ($l=1$), we need not compute $\Delta x_1$ because it represents the image domain. But we can still adopt Eqn.(\[eq:init\_bw\]) in the first layer, for the same reason as in the forward propagation case - the factor of a single layer does not make the overall product exponentially large/small.
We note that it is sufficient to use either Eqn.(\[eq:init\_bw\]) or Eqn.(\[eq:init\_fw\]) alone. For example, if we use Eqn.(\[eq:init\_bw\]), then in Eqn.(\[eq:prod\_bw\]) the product $\prod_{l=2}^{L}\frac{1}{2}\hat{n}_{l}{\emph{Var}}[w_{l}]=1$, and in Eqn.(\[eq:prod\_fw\]) the product $\prod_{l=2}^{L}\frac{1}{2}n_l{\emph{Var}}[w_{l}]=\prod_{l=2}^{L}n_l/\hat{n}_{l}=c_{2}/d_{L}$, which is not a diminishing number in common network designs. This means that if the initialization properly scales the backward signal, then this is also the case for the forward signal; and vice versa. For all models in this paper, both forms can make them converge.
![The convergence of a **30-layer** small model (see the main text). We use ReLU as the activation for both cases. Our initialization (red) is able to make it converge. But “*Xavier*” (blue) [@Glorot2010] completely stalls - we also verify that its gradients are all diminishing. It does not converge even given more epochs.[]{data-label="fig:converge_30layers"}](eps/converge_22layers){width="0.8\linewidth"}
![The convergence of a **30-layer** small model (see the main text). We use ReLU as the activation for both cases. Our initialization (red) is able to make it converge. But “*Xavier*” (blue) [@Glorot2010] completely stalls - we also verify that its gradients are all diminishing. It does not converge even given more epochs.[]{data-label="fig:converge_30layers"}](eps/converge_30layers){width="0.8\linewidth"}
### Discussions {#discussions .unnumbered}
If the forward/backward signal is inappropriately scaled by a factor $\beta$ in each layer, then the final propagated signal will be rescaled by a factor of $\beta^L$ after $L$ layers, where $L$ can represent some or all layers. When $L$ is large, if $\beta>1$, this leads to extremely amplified signals and an algorithm output of infinity; if $\beta<1$, this leads to diminishing signals[^2]. In either case, the algorithm does not converge - it diverges in the former case, and stalls in the latter.
Our derivation also explains why the constant standard deviation of 0.01 makes some deeper networks stall [@Simonyan2014]. We take “model B” in the VGG team’s paper [@Simonyan2014] as an example. This model has 10 conv layers all with 3$\times$3 filters. The filter numbers ($d_l$) are 64 for the 1st and 2nd layers, 128 for the 3rd and 4th layers, 256 for the 5th and 6th layers, and 512 for the rest. The std computed by Eqn.(\[eq:init\_bw\]) ($\sqrt{2/{\hat{n}_l}}$) is 0.059, 0.042, 0.029, and 0.021 when the filter numbers are 64, 128, 256, and 512 respectively. If the std is initialized as 0.01, the std of the gradient propagated from conv10 to conv2 is $1/(5.9\times4.2^2\times2.9^2\times2.1^4)=1/(1.7\times10^4)$ of what we derive. This number may explain why diminishing gradients were observed in experiments.
It is also worth noticing that the variance of the input signal can be roughly preserved from the first layer to the last. In cases when the input signal is not normalized (, it is in the range of $[-128, 128]$), its magnitude can be so large that the softmax operator will overflow. A solution is to normalize the input signal, but this may impact other hyper-parameters. Another solution is to include a small factor on the weights among all or some layers, , $\sqrt[L]{1/128}$ on $L$ layers. In practice, we use a std of 0.01 for the first two fc layers and 0.001 for the last. These numbers are smaller than they should be (, $\sqrt{2/4096}$) and will address the normalization issue of images whose range is about $[-128, 128]$.
For the initialization in the PReLU case, it is easy to show that Eqn.(\[eq:init\_fw\]) becomes: $$\label{eq:init_fw_prelu}
\frac{1}{2}(1+a^2)n_l{\emph{Var}}[w_{l}]=1, \quad \forall l,$$ where $a$ is the initialized value of the coefficients. If $a=0$, it becomes the ReLU case; if $a=1$, it becomes the linear case (the same as [@Glorot2010]). Similarly, Eqn.(\[eq:init\_bw\]) becomes $\frac{1}{2}(1+a^2)\hat{n}_l{\emph{Var}}[w_{l}]=1$.
### Comparisons with “*Xavier*” Initialization [@Glorot2010] {#comparisons-with-xavier-initialization .unnumbered}
The main difference between our derivation and the “*Xavier*” initialization [@Glorot2010] is that we address the rectifier nonlinearities[^3]. The derivation in [@Glorot2010] only considers the linear case, and its result is given by $n_l{\emph{Var}}[w_{l}]=1$ (the forward case), which can be implemented as a zero-mean Gaussian distribution whose std is $\sqrt{1/{n_l}}$. When there are $L$ layers, the std will be ${1}/{\sqrt{2}^L}$ of our derived std. This number, however, is not small enough to completely stall the convergence of the models actually used in our paper (Table \[tab:arch\], up to 22 layers) as shown by experiments. Figure \[fig:converge\_22layers\] compares the convergence of a 22-layer model. Both methods are able to make them converge. But ours starts reducing error earlier. We also investigate the possible impact on accuracy. For the model in Table \[tab:s14\_ablated\] (using ReLU), the “*Xavier*” initialization method leads to 33.90/13.44 top-1/top-5 error, and ours leads to 33.82/13.34. We have not observed clear superiority of one to the other on accuracy.
Next, we compare the two methods on extremely deep models with up to 30 layers (27 conv and 3 fc). We add up to sixteen conv layers with 256 2$\times$2 filters in the model in Table \[tab:s14\]. Figure \[fig:converge\_30layers\] shows the convergence of the 30-layer model. Our initialization is able to make the extremely deep model converge. On the contrary, the “*Xavier*” method completely stalls the learning, and the gradients are diminishing as monitored in the experiments.
These studies demonstrate that we are ready to investigate extremely deep, rectified models by using a more principled initialization method. But in our current experiments on ImageNet, we have not observed the benefit from training extremely deep models. For example, the aforementioned 30-layer model has 38.56/16.59 top-1/top-5 error, which is clearly worse than the error of the 14-layer model in Table \[tab:s14\_ablated\] (33.82/13.34). Accuracy saturation or degradation was also observed in the study of small models [@He2014a], VGG’s large models [@Simonyan2014], and in speech recognition [@Zeiler2013]. This is perhaps because the method of increasing depth is not appropriate, or the recognition task is not enough complex.
Though our attempts of extremely deep models have not shown benefits, our initialization method paves a foundation for further study on increasing depth. We hope this will be helpful in other more complex tasks.
input size VGG-19 [@Simonyan2014] model A model B model C
------------------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------ ------------------------ ------------------------
3$\times$3, 64 7$\times$7, 96, /2 7$\times$7, 96, /2 7$\times$7, 96, /2
3$\times$3, 64
2$\times$2 maxpool, /2
3$\times$3, 128
3$\times$3, 128
2$\times$2 maxpool, /2 2$\times$2 maxpool, /2 2$\times$2 maxpool, /2 2$\times$2 maxpool, /2
3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 384
3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 384
3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 384
3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 384
3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 384
3$\times$3, 256 3$\times$3, 384
2$\times$2 maxpool, /2 2$\times$2 maxpool, /2 2$\times$2 maxpool, /2 2$\times$2 maxpool, /2
3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 768
3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 768
3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 768
3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 768
3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 768
3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 768
2$\times$2 maxpool, /2 2$\times$2 maxpool, /2 2$\times$2 maxpool, /2 2$\times$2 maxpool, /2
3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 896
3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 896
3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 896
3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 896
3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 896
3$\times$3, 512 3$\times$3, 896
2$\times$2 maxpool, /2 spp, $\{7,3,2,1\}$ spp, $\{7,3,2,1\}$ spp, $\{7,3,2,1\}$
fc$_{1}$
fc$_{2}$
fc$_{3}$
depth (conv+fc) 19 19 22 22
complexity (ops., $\times 10^{10}$) 1.96 1.90 2.32 5.30
Architectures {#sec:arch}
-------------
The above investigations provide guidelines of designing our architectures, introduced as follows.
Our baseline is the 19-layer model (A) in Table \[tab:arch\]. For a better comparison, we also list the VGG-19 model [@Simonyan2014]. Our model A has the following modifications on VGG-19: (i) in the first layer, we use a filter size of 7$\times$7 and a stride of 2; (ii) we move the other three conv layers on the two largest feature maps (224, 112) to the smaller feature maps (56, 28, 14). The time complexity (Table \[tab:arch\], last row) is roughly unchanged because the deeper layers have more filters; (iii) we use spatial pyramid pooling (SPP) [@He2014] before the first fc layer. The pyramid has 4 levels - the numbers of bins are 7$\times$7, 3$\times$3, 2$\times$2, and 1$\times$1, for a total of 63 bins.
It is worth noticing that we have no evidence that our model A is a better *architecture* than VGG-19, though our model A has better results than VGG-19’s result reported by [@Simonyan2014]. In our earlier experiments with less scale augmentation, we observed that our model A and our reproduced VGG-19 (with SPP and our initialization) are comparable. The main purpose of using model A is for faster running speed. The actual running time of the conv layers on larger feature maps is slower than those on smaller feature maps, when their time complexity is the same. In our four-GPU implementation, our model A takes 2.6s per mini-batch (128), and our reproduced VGG-19 takes 3.0s, evaluated on four Nvidia K20 GPUs.
In Table \[tab:arch\], our model B is a deeper version of A. It has three extra conv layers. Our model C is a wider (with more filters) version of B. The width substantially increases the complexity, and its time complexity is about 2.3$\times$ of B (Table \[tab:arch\], last row). Training A/B on four K20 GPUs, or training C on eight K40 GPUs, takes about 3-4 weeks.
We choose to increase the model width instead of depth, because deeper models have only diminishing improvement or even degradation on accuracy. In recent experiments on small models [@He2014a], it has been found that aggressively increasing the depth leads to saturated or degraded accuracy. In the VGG paper [@Simonyan2014], the 16-layer and 19-layer models perform comparably. In the speech recognition research of [@Zeiler2013], the deep models degrade when using more than 8 hidden layers (all being fc). We conjecture that similar degradation may also happen on larger models for ImageNet. We have monitored the training procedures of some extremely deep models (with 3 to 9 layers added on B in Table \[tab:arch\]), and found both training and testing error rates degraded in the first 20 epochs (but we did not run to the end due to limited time budget, so there is not yet solid evidence that these large and overly deep models will ultimately degrade). Because of the possible degradation, we choose not to further increase the depth of these large models.
On the other hand, the recent research [@Eigen2013] on small datasets suggests that the accuracy should improve from the increased number of parameters in conv layers. This number depends on the depth and width. So we choose to increase the width of the conv layers to obtain a higher-capacity model.
While all models in Table \[tab:arch\] are very large, we have not observed severe overfitting. We attribute this to the aggressive data augmentation used throughout the whole training procedure, as introduced below.
Implementation Details
======================
### Training {#training .unnumbered}
Our training algorithm mostly follows [@Krizhevsky2012; @Howard2013; @Chatfield2014; @He2014; @Simonyan2014]. From a resized image whose shorter side is $s$, a 224$\times$224 crop is randomly sampled, with the per-pixel mean subtracted. The scale $s$ is randomly jittered in the range of $[256, 512]$, following [@Simonyan2014]. One half of the random samples are flipped horizontally [@Krizhevsky2012]. Random color altering [@Krizhevsky2012] is also used.
Unlike [@Simonyan2014] that applies scale jittering only during fine-tuning, we apply it from the beginning of training. Further, unlike [@Simonyan2014] that initializes a deeper model using a shallower one, we directly train the very deep model using our initialization described in Sec. \[sec:init\] (we use Eqn.(\[eq:init\_bw\])). Our end-to-end training may help improve accuracy, because it may avoid poorer local optima.
Other hyper-parameters that might be important are as follows. The weight decay is 0.0005, and momentum is 0.9. Dropout (50%) is used in the first two fc layers. The mini-batch size is fixed as 128. The learning rate is 1e-2, 1e-3, and 1e-4, and is switched when the error plateaus. The total number of epochs is about 80 for each model.
### Testing {#testing .unnumbered}
We adopt the strategy of “multi-view testing on feature maps” used in the SPP-net paper [@He2014]. We further improve this strategy using the dense sliding window method in [@Sermanet2014; @Simonyan2014].
We first apply the convolutional layers on the resized full image and obtain the last convolutional feature map. In the feature map, each 14$\times$14 window is pooled using the SPP layer [@He2014]. The fc layers are then applied on the pooled features to compute the scores. This is also done on the horizontally flipped images. The scores of all dense sliding windows are averaged [@Sermanet2014; @Simonyan2014]. We further combine the results at multiple scales as in [@He2014].
### Multi-GPU Implementation {#multi-gpu-implementation .unnumbered}
We adopt a simple variant of Krizhevsky’s method [@Krizhevsky2014] for parallel training on multiple GPUs. We adopt “data parallelism” [@Krizhevsky2014] on the conv layers. The GPUs are synchronized before the first fc layer. Then the forward/backward propagations of the fc layers are performed on a single GPU - this means that we do not parallelize the computation of the fc layers. The time cost of the fc layers is low, so it is not necessary to parallelize them. This leads to a simpler implementation than the “model parallelism” in [@Krizhevsky2014]. Besides, model parallelism introduces some overhead due to the communication of filter responses, and is not faster than computing the fc layers on just a single GPU.
We implement the above algorithm on our modification of the Caffe library [@Jia2014]. We do not increase the mini-batch size (128) because the accuracy may be decreased [@Krizhevsky2014]. For the large models in this paper, we have observed a 3.8x speedup using 4 GPUs, and a 6.0x speedup using 8 GPUs.
Experiments on ImageNet
=======================
We perform the experiments on the 1000-class ImageNet 2012 dataset [@Russakovsky2014] which contains about 1.2 million training images, 50,000 validation images, and 100,000 test images (with no published labels). The results are measured by top-1/top-5 error rates [@Russakovsky2014]. We only use the provided data for training. All results are evaluated on the validation set, except for the final results in Table \[tab:ensemble\], which are evaluated on the test set. The top-5 error rate is the metric officially used to rank the methods in the classification challenge [@Russakovsky2014].
model A
------------- ------- ------- ----------- ----------
scale $s$ top-1 top-5 top-1 top-5
256 26.25 8.25 **25.81** **8.08**
384 24.77 7.26 **24.20** **7.03**
480 25.46 7.63 **24.83** **7.39**
multi-scale 24.02 6.51 **22.97** **6.28**
: Comparisons between ReLU/PReLU on model A in ImageNet 2012 using dense testing.[]{data-label="tab:model_a"}
### Comparisons between ReLU and PReLU {#comparisons-between-relu-and-prelu .unnumbered}
In Table \[tab:model\_a\], we compare ReLU and PReLU on the large model A. We use the channel-wise version of PReLU. For fair comparisons, both ReLU/PReLU models are trained using the same total number of epochs, and the learning rates are also switched after running the same number of epochs.
Table \[tab:model\_a\] shows the results at three scales and the multi-scale combination. The best single scale is 384, possibly because it is in the middle of the jittering range $[256, 512]$. For the multi-scale combination, PReLU reduces the top-1 error by 1.05% and the top-5 error by 0.23% compared with ReLU. The results in Table \[tab:s14\_ablated\] and Table \[tab:model\_a\] consistently show that PReLU improves both small and large models. This improvement is obtained with almost no computational cost.
### Comparisons of Single-model Results {#comparisons-of-single-model-results .unnumbered}
Next we compare single-model results. We first show 10-view testing results [@Krizhevsky2012] in Table \[tab:10view\]. Here, each view is a 224-crop. The 10-view results of VGG-16 are based on our testing using the publicly released model [@Simonyan2014] as it is not reported in [@Simonyan2014]. Our best 10-view result is 7.38% (Table \[tab:10view\]). Our other models also outperform the existing results.
Table \[tab:single\] shows the comparisons of single-model results, which are all obtained using multi-scale and multi-view (or dense) test. Our results are denoted as MSRA. Our baseline model (A+ReLU, 6.51%) is already substantially better than the best existing single-model result of 7.1% reported for VGG-19 in the latest update of [@Simonyan2014] (arXiv v5). We believe that this gain is mainly due to our end-to-end training, without the need of pre-training shallow models.
Moreover, our best single model (C, PReLU) has **5.71%** top-5 error. This result is even better than all previous multi-model results (Table \[tab:ensemble\]). Comparing A+PReLU with B+PReLU, we see that the 19-layer model and the 22-layer model perform comparably. On the other hand, increasing the width (C B, Table \[tab:single\]) can still improve accuracy. This indicates that when the models are deep enough, the width becomes an essential factor for accuracy.
model top-1 top-5
-------------------------- ---------------- ---------------
MSRA [@He2014] 29.68 10.95
VGG-16 [@Simonyan2014] 28.07$^{\dag}$ 9.33$^{\dag}$
GoogLeNet [@Szegedy2014] - 9.15
A, ReLU 26.48 8.59
A, PReLU 25.59 8.23
B, PReLU 25.53 8.13
C, PReLU **24.27** **7.38**
team top-1 top-5
-- -------------------------------- ----------- ---------------
MSRA [@He2014] 27.86 9.08$^{\dag}$
VGG [@Simonyan2014] - 8.43$^{\dag}$
GoogLeNet [@Szegedy2014] - 7.89
VGG [@Simonyan2014] (arXiv v2) 24.8 7.5
VGG [@Simonyan2014] (arXiv v5) 24.4 7.1
Baidu [@Wu2015] 24.88 7.42
MSRA (A, ReLU) 24.02 6.51
MSRA (A, PReLU) 22.97 6.28
MSRA (B, PReLU) 22.85 6.27
MSRA (C, PReLU) **21.59** **5.71**
team top-5 (**test**)
-- -------------------------------- ------------------
MSRA, SPP-nets [@He2014] 8.06
VGG [@Simonyan2014] 7.32
GoogLeNet [@Szegedy2014] 6.66
VGG [@Simonyan2014] (arXiv v5) 6.8
Baidu [@Wu2015] 5.98
**MSRA, PReLU-nets** **4.94**
### Comparisons of Multi-model Results {#comparisons-of-multi-model-results .unnumbered}
We combine six models including those in Table \[tab:single\]. For the time being we have trained only one model with architecture C. The other models have accuracy inferior to C by considerable margins. We conjecture that we can obtain better results by using fewer stronger models.
The multi-model results are in Table \[tab:ensemble\]. Our result is **4.94%** top-5 error on the test set. This number is evaluated by the ILSVRC server, because the labels of the test set are not published. Our result is 1.7% better than the ILSVRC 2014 winner (GoogLeNet, 6.66% [@Szegedy2014]), which represents a $\sim$26% relative improvement. This is also a $\sim$17% relative improvement over the latest result (Baidu, 5.98% [@Wu2015]).
![Example validation images successfully classified by our method. For each image, the ground-truth label and the top-5 labels predicted by our method are listed.[]{data-label="fig:good_cases"}](eps/good_cases){width="1.0\linewidth"}
### Analysis of Results {#analysis-of-results .unnumbered}
Figure \[fig:good\_cases\] shows some example validation images successfully classified by our method. Besides the correctly predicted labels, we also pay attention to the other four predictions in the top-5 results. Some of these four labels are other objects in the multi-object images, , the “horse-cart” image (Figure \[fig:good\_cases\], row 1, col 1) contains a “mini-bus” and it is also recognized by the algorithm. Some of these four labels are due to the uncertainty among similar classes, , the “coucal” image (Figure \[fig:good\_cases\], row 2, col 1) has predicted labels of other bird species.
Figure \[fig:error\] shows the per-class top-5 error of our result (average of 4.94%) on the test set, displayed in ascending order. Our result has zero top-5 error in 113 classes - the images in these classes are all correctly classified. The three classes with the highest top-5 error are “letter opener” (49%), “spotlight” (38%), and “restaurant” (36%). The error is due to the existence of multiple objects, small objects, or large intra-class variance. Figure \[fig:bad\_cases\] shows some example images misclassified by our method in these three classes. Some of the predicted labels still make some sense.
In Figure \[fig:error\_reduce\], we show the per-class difference of top-5 error rates between our result (average of 4.94%) and our team’s in-competition result in ILSVRC 2014 (average of 8.06%). The error rates are reduced in 824 classes, unchanged in 127 classes, and increased in 49 classes.
![Example validation images incorrectly classified by our method, in the three classes with the highest top-5 test error. Top: “letter opener” (49% top-5 test error). Middle: “spotlight” (38%). Bottom: “restaurant” (36%). For each image, the ground-truth label and the top-5 labels predicted by our method are listed.[]{data-label="fig:bad_cases"}](eps/bad_cases){width="1.0\linewidth"}
### Comparisons with Human Performance from [@Russakovsky2014] {#comparisons-with-human-performance-from .unnumbered}
Russakovsky [@Russakovsky2014] recently reported that human performance yields a 5.1% top-5 error on the ImageNet dataset. This number is achieved by a human annotator who is well trained on the validation images to be better aware of the existence of relevant classes. When annotating the test images, the human annotator is given a special interface, where each class title is accompanied by a row of 13 example training images. The reported human performance is estimated on a random subset of 1500 test images.
Our result (4.94%) exceeds the reported human-level performance. To our knowledge, our result is the first published instance of surpassing humans on this visual recognition challenge. The analysis in [@Russakovsky2014] reveals that the two major types of human errors come from fine-grained recognition and class unawareness. The investigation in [@Russakovsky2014] suggests that algorithms can do a better job on fine-grained recognition (, 120 species of dogs in the dataset). The second row of Figure \[fig:good\_cases\] shows some example fine-grained objects successfully recognized by our method - “coucal”, “komondor”, and “yellow lady’s slipper”. While humans can easily recognize these objects as a bird, a dog, and a flower, it is nontrivial for most humans to tell their species. On the negative side, our algorithm still makes mistakes in cases that are not difficult for humans, especially for those requiring context understanding or high-level knowledge (, the “spotlight” images in Figure \[fig:bad\_cases\]).
While our algorithm produces a superior result on this particular dataset, this does not indicate that machine vision outperforms human vision on object recognition in general. On recognizing elementary object categories (, common objects or concepts in daily lives) such as the Pascal VOC task [@Everingham2010], machines still have obvious errors in cases that are trivial for humans. Nevertheless, we believe that our results show the tremendous potential of machine algorithms to match human-level performance on visual recognition.
![The difference of top-5 error rates between our result (average of 4.94%) and our team’s in-competition result for ILSVRC 2014 (average of 8.06%) on the test set, displayed in ascending order. A positive number indicates a reduced error rate.[]{data-label="fig:error_reduce"}](eps/error){width=".96\linewidth"}
![The difference of top-5 error rates between our result (average of 4.94%) and our team’s in-competition result for ILSVRC 2014 (average of 8.06%) on the test set, displayed in ascending order. A positive number indicates a reduced error rate.[]{data-label="fig:error_reduce"}](eps/error_reduce){width=".96\linewidth"}
[^1]: Concurrent with our work, Agostinelli [@Agostinelli2014] also investigated learning activation functions and showed improvement on other tasks.
[^2]: In the presence of weight decay (l$_2$ regularization of weights), when the gradient contributed by the logistic loss function is diminishing, the total gradient is not diminishing because of the weight decay. A way of diagnosing diminishing gradients is to check whether the gradient is modulated only by weight decay.
[^3]: There are other minor differences. In [@Glorot2010], the derived variance is adopted for uniform distributions, and the forward and backward cases are averaged. But it is straightforward to adopt their conclusion for Gaussian distributions and for the forward or backward case only.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We consider an electric charge, minimally coupled to the Maxwell field, rotating around a Schwarzschild black hole. We investigate how much of the radiation emitted from the swirling charge is absorbed by the black hole and show that most of the photons escape to infinity. For this purpose we use the Gupta-Bleuler quantization of the electromagnetic field in the modified Feynman gauge developed in the context of quantum field theory in Schwarzschild spacetime. We obtain that the two photon polarizations contribute quite differently to the emitted power. In addition, we discuss the accurateness of the results obtained in a full general relativistic approach in comparison with the ones obtained when the electric charge is assumed to be orbiting a massive object due to a Newtonian force.'
author:
- Jorge Castiñeiras
- 'Luís C. B. Crispino'
- 'George E. A. Matsas'
- Rodrigo Murta
title: Semiclassical approach to black hole absorption of electromagnetic radiation emitted by a rotating charge
---
Introduction {#sec:Introduction}
============
Much effort has been devoted to confirm the presence of black holes in X-ray binary systems [@evid1] as well as in galactic centers [@evid2]. The analysis of the radiation emitted from accretion disks swirling around black hole candidates may play a crucial role in the experimental confirmation of the existence of event horizons (see, e.g., Ref. [@accdisks]). It is interesting, thus, to compute the amount of the emitted radiation which is able to reach asymptotic observers rather than be absorbed by the hole. In a recent work, Higuchi and two of the authors analyzed the radiation emitted by a scalar source rotating around a Schwarzschild black hole [@CHM2CQG]. In the present work we study the more realistic case where the [*scalar source*]{} is replaced by an [*electric charge*]{}. In order to capture the full influence of the spacetime curvature on the emitted radiation, we work in the context of quantum field theory in Schwarzschild spacetime (for a comprehensive account on quantum field theory in curved spacetimes see, e.g., Ref. [@BD]). Because of the difficulty to express the solution of some differential equations which we deal with in terms of known special functions (see e.g. Ref. [@Candetal] for a discussion on this issue) our computations are performed (i) numerically but without further approximations and (ii) analytically but restricted to the low-frequency regime (in which case the radial part of the normal modes can be written in terms of Legendre functions [@GR]).
We organize the paper as follows. In Section \[sec:Quantization\] we review the Gupta-Bleuler quantization of the electromagnetic field in a modified Feynman gauge in the spacetime of a static chargeless black hole [@CHM3PRD]. We compute the radiated power from an electric charge swirling around a Schwarzschild black hole in Section \[sec:Rotating\]. In Section \[sec:Comparison\] we compare this result with the one obtained considering the charge as orbiting a Newtonian object in flat spacetime. Finally we use the previous results to compute in Section \[sec:Absorption\] what is the amount of the emitted radiation which is able to reach asymptotic observers. Our final remarks are made in Section \[sec:Final\]. We assume natural units $\hbar = c = G = 1$ and metric signature $(+ - - -)$.
Quantization of the electromagnetic field in Schwarzschild spacetime {#sec:Quantization}
====================================================================
In this section we review the quantization of the massless vector field in Schwarzschild spacetime following closely Ref. [@CHM3PRD]. We write the line element of a static chargeless black hole as $$ds^{2} = f\left( r\right) dt^{2}-f\left( r\right)
^{-1}dr^{2}-r^{2}d\theta^{2}-r^{2}\sin^{2}\theta d\phi^{2} \,,
\label{Schwliel}%$$ where $f\left( r\right) =1-2M/r$.
We then consider a massless vector field in this geometry with classical action given by $$S=\int d^{4}x
\mathcal{L} \, ,$$ where the Lagrangian density in the modified Feynman gauge is $$\mathcal{L}
=\sqrt{-g}\left[ -\dfrac{1}{4}F_{\mu\nu}F^{\mu\nu}-\dfrac{1}{2}G^{2}\right]
\label{Lagdens}%$$ with $g=r^2 \sin \theta$, $G\equiv\nabla^{\mu}A_{\mu}+K^{\mu}A_{\mu}$ and $$K^{\mu}=\left( 0,{df}/{dr},0,0\right) \text{.}%
\nonumber
\label{K}$$ The corresponding Euler-Lagrange equations are, thus, $$\nabla_{\nu}F^{\mu\nu}+\nabla^{\mu}G-K^{\mu}G=0\text{,}
\label{eqmo}%$$ which can be cast in the form $$\begin{aligned}
& & \dfrac{1}{f}\partial_{t}^{2}A_{t}-\dfrac{f}{r^{2}}\partial_{r}\left(
r^{2}\partial_{r}A_{t}\right) +\dfrac{1}{r^{2}}\tilde{\nabla}^{2}%
A_{t}~=0 \,,
\label{eqt} \\
& & \dfrac{1}{f}\partial_{t}^{2}A_{r}-\dfrac{1}{f}\partial_{r}\left[
\dfrac{f^{2}}{r^{2}}\partial_{r}\left( r^{2}A_{r}\right) \right] +\dfrac
{1}{r^{2}}\tilde{\nabla}^{2}A_{r}
\nonumber \\
& & +\dfrac{1}{f}\partial_{r}\left( \dfrac
{f}{r^{2}}\right) \tilde{\nabla}^{a}A_{a}=0\,,
\label{eqr} \\
& & \dfrac{1}{f}\partial_{t}^{2}A_{a}-\partial_{r}\left( f~\partial_{r}%
A_{a}\right) +\dfrac{1}{r^{2}}\left[ \tilde{\nabla}^{b}\left( \tilde
{\nabla}_{b}A_{a}-\tilde{\nabla}_{a}A_{b}\right) \right.
\nonumber \\
& & \left. +\partial_{a}\tilde{\nabla}^{b}A_{b}\right]
+r^{2}\partial_{r}\left( \dfrac{f}{r^{2}}\right)
\partial_{a}A_{r}=0\,.
\label{eqang}\end{aligned}$$ Here $a$ and $b$ denote angular variables on the unit $2$-sphere $S^2$ with metric $\tilde{\eta}_{ab}$ and inverse metric $\tilde{\eta}^{ab}$ \[with signature $(- -)]$, $\tilde{\nabla}_a$ is the associated covariant derivative on $S^2$, $\tilde{\nabla}^a \equiv \tilde{\eta}^{ab}\tilde{\nabla}_b$ and $\tilde{\nabla}^2 \equiv \tilde{\eta}_{ab} \tilde\nabla^a\tilde\nabla^b$.
We write the complete set of positive-frequency solutions of Eq. (\[eqmo\]) with respect to the Killing field $\partial_t$ in the form $$A^{(\varepsilon n \omega l m)}_{\mu} =
\zeta^{\varepsilon n \omega l m}_{\mu}(r, \theta, \phi)
e^{-i\omega t}, \,\,\,\,\, \omega>0.
\label{KillSol}$$ The index $\varepsilon$ stands for the four different polarizations. The pure gauge modes, $\varepsilon = {\rm G}$, are the ones which satisfy the gauge condition $G=0$ and can be written as $A^{({\rm G} n \omega l m)}_{\mu} = \nabla_{\mu} \Lambda$, where $\Lambda$ is a scalar field. The physical modes, $\varepsilon = {\rm I}, {\rm II}$, satisfy the gauge condition and are not pure gauge. The nonphysical modes, $\varepsilon = {\rm NP}$, do not satisfy the gauge condition. The modes incoming from the past null infinity ${\cal J}^-$ are denoted by $n = \leftarrow$ and the modes incoming from the past event horizon $H^{-}$ are denoted by $n = \rightarrow$. The $l$ and $m$ are the angular momentum quantum numbers.
The physical modes can be written as
$$A_{\mu}^{({\rm I}n\omega lm)}=\left( 0\,,\,
\dfrac{{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{{\rm I}n}\left( r\right)}{r} ~Y_{lm},\dfrac
{f}{l\left( l+1\right) }\dfrac{d}{dr}\left[ r{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{{\rm I}n}\left(
r\right) \right]
\partial_{\theta}Y_{lm},
\dfrac{f}{l\left( l+1\right) }\dfrac{d}{dr}\left[ r{\varphi}_{\omega l}%
^{{\rm I}n}\left( r\right) \right] \partial_{\phi}Y_{lm} \right)e^{-i\omega t}%
\label{modo I}$$
and $$A_{\mu}^{({\rm II}n\omega lm)}=\left( 0,0,r{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{{\rm II}n}\left( r\right) Y_{\theta
}^{lm},r{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{{\rm II}n}\left( r\right) Y_{\phi}^{lm}\right) e^{-i\omega
t} \label{modo II}%$$
with $l\geqslant1$ (since the gauge condition $G=0$ is not satisfied for $l=0$). The radial part of the physical modes satisfies the differential equation $$\left( \omega^{2}-V_{S}\right) \left[ r{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{\lambda n}\left( r\right)\right]
+f\dfrac{d}{dr}\left( f\dfrac{d}{dr}\left[ r{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{\lambda n}\left(
r\right)\right] \right) =0\text{,} \label{equacao em q}%$$ where $\lambda = {\rm I}, {\rm II}$ and $$V_{S}=\left( 1-\dfrac{2M}{r}\right) \dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{r^{2}%
}
\label{potencial em S}%$$ is the Schwarzschild scattering potential (see solid line in Fig. \[figure1\]). $Y_{lm}$ and $Y_a^{lm}$ are scalar and vector spherical harmonics [@AHCQG], respectively. The remaining modes can be written as $$A_{\mu}^{({\rm NP} n\omega lm)}=\left( {\varphi}_{\omega l}^{{\rm NP} n}\left( r\right) Y_{lm}%
,0,0,0\right) e^{-i\omega t}
\label{modo NP }%$$ and $$A_{\mu}^{({\rm G} n\omega lm)}=\nabla_{\mu}\Lambda^{\omega nlm} \label{modo G}%$$ with $l\geqslant0$, where $$\Lambda^{\omega nlm}=\dfrac{i}{\omega}{\varphi}_{\omega l}%
^{{\rm NP} n}\left( r\right) Y_{lm}e^{-i\omega t}$$ and ${\varphi}_{\omega l}^{{\rm NP} n}$ satisfies $$\left( \omega^{2}-V_{S}\right) {\varphi}_{\omega l}^{{\rm NP} n}\left( r\right)
+\dfrac{f^{2}}{r^{2}}\dfrac{d}{dr}\left( r^{2}\dfrac{d}{dr}{\varphi}_{\omega l}%
^{{\rm NP} n}\left( r\right) \right) =0\text{.} \label{equacao RNP }%$$
The conjugate momenta associated with the field modes are defined by $$\begin{aligned}
\Pi^{(i)\mu\nu} & \equiv & \left.\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{-g}}\dfrac{\partial
\mathcal{L}}{\partial\left[ \nabla_{\mu}A_{\nu}\right] }
\right| _ {A_\mu = A^{(i)}_{ \mu}}
\nonumber
\\
& = & -\left.\left[ F^{\mu\nu}+g^{\mu\nu
}G\right]\right| _ {A_\mu = A^{(i)}_{ \mu}} \text{,}
\label{momento S}\end{aligned}$$ where $(i)$ represents $(\varepsilon, n, \omega, l, m)$. By writing the conserved current $$W^{\mu}\left[ A^{(i)},A^{(j)}\right] \equiv i\left[ \overline{A_{\nu}^{(i)}}
\Pi^{(j)\mu\nu}-\overline{\Pi^{(i)\mu\nu}}A_{\nu}^{(j)}\right] \,,
\label{corrente W}$$ where the overline denotes complex conjugation, we normalize the field modes through the generalized Klein-Gordon inner product [@CHM] defined by $$\left( A^{(i)},A^{(j)}\right) \equiv\int_{\Sigma}
d\Sigma_{\mu}^{\left( 3\right) }W^{\mu}\left[ A^{(i)},A^{(j)}\right] \text{.}
\label{produto interno de KG generalizado}$$ Here $d\Sigma_{\mu}^{\left( 3\right) }\equiv d\Sigma^{\left( 3\right)
}~n_{\mu}$, where $d\Sigma^{\left( 3\right) }$ is the invariant 3-volume element of the Cauchy surface $\Sigma$ and $n^{\mu}$ is the future pointing unit vector orthogonal to $\Sigma$. The modes are then normalized such that $$\left( A^{(\varepsilon n \omega lm)},
A^{(\varepsilon^{\prime} n^{\prime}\omega^{\prime
}l^{\prime}m^{\prime})}\right) =M^{\varepsilon\varepsilon^{\prime}}%
\delta_{nn^{\prime}}\delta_{ll^{\prime}}\delta_{mm^{\prime}}\delta\left(
\omega-\omega^{\prime}\right) \text{,}%$$ where the matrix $M^{\varepsilon\varepsilon^{\prime}}$ is given by $$M^{\varepsilon\varepsilon^{\prime}}=\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{cccc}%
1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & -1\\
0 & 0 & -1 & -1
\end{array}
\right)
\label{matriz}$$ with $\varepsilon = ({\rm I} ,{\rm II}, {\rm G}, {\rm NP})$.
-2 truecm -2 truecm
In order to quantize the electromagnetic field, we demand the equal time commutation relations $$\left[ \hat{A}_{\mu}\left( \mathbf{x},t\right) ,\hat{A}_{\nu}\left(
\mathbf{x}^{\prime},t\right) \right] =\left[ \hat{\Pi}_{\mu t}\left(
\mathbf{x},t\right) ,\hat{\Pi}_{\nu t}\left( \mathbf{x}^{\prime},t\right)
\right] =0\text{,} \label{comutador I}%$$ $$\left[ \hat{A}_{\mu}\left( \mathbf{x},t\right) ,\hat{\Pi}^{t\nu}\left(
\mathbf{x}^{\prime},t\right) \right] =\dfrac{i\delta_{\mu}^{\nu}}{\sqrt{-g}%
}\delta^{3}\left( \mathbf{x}-\mathbf{x}^{\prime}\right) \text{.}
\label{comutador II}%$$ The electromagnetic field operator can be expanded in terms of the normal modes as $$\hat{A}_{\mu}=\sum_{\varepsilon, n, l, m}\int_{0}^{\infty}d\omega\left[
\hat{a}_{( i) } A_{\mu}^{ (i) }
+\hat{a}_{{ (i) } }^{\dagger}\overline{A_{\mu}^{ (i) }}\right] \,,
\label{expansao dos modos S}%$$ where $\hat{a}_{( i) }$ and $\hat{a}_{{ (i) } }^{\dagger}$ are the annihilation and creation operators, respectively, satisfying $$\left[ \hat{a}_{(\varepsilon n \omega lm)},
\hat{a}^{\dagger}_{(\varepsilon^{\prime} n^{\prime}\omega^{\prime
}l^{\prime}m^{\prime})}\right]\!\!
= \! (M^{-1})_{\varepsilon\varepsilon^{\prime}}%
\delta_{nn^{\prime}}\delta_{ll^{\prime}}\delta_{mm^{\prime}}\delta\left(
\omega-\omega^{\prime}\right).$$ The Fock space of the physical states $\left\vert {\rm PS}\right\rangle$ is obtained by imposing the Gupta-Bleuler condition [@IZ]. In our case, this corresponds to impose $$\hat{G}^{\left( +\right) }\left\vert {\rm PS}\right\rangle =0\text{,}
\label{GB}%$$ where $\hat{G}^{\left( +\right)}$ is the positive-frequency part of the operator $\hat{G}=\nabla^{\mu}\hat{A}_{\mu}+K^{\mu}\hat{A}_{\mu}$. Condition (\[GB\]) corresponds to $$\hat{a}_{\left( {\rm NP} \omega nlm\right) }\left\vert {\rm PS}\right\rangle =0\text{.}
\label{operador no estado S}%$$ The physical states are obtained by applying any number of creation operators $\hat{a}^{\dagger}_{({\rm I} n \omega lm)}$, $\hat{a}^{\dagger}_{({\rm II} n \omega lm)}$ and $\hat{a}^{\dagger}_{({\rm NP} n \omega lm)}$ to the Boulware vacuum $\left\vert 0\right\rangle$ [@Boul] defined by $$\hat{a}_{\left( \varepsilon n\omega lm\right) }
\left\vert 0\right\rangle =0\text{.}
\label{BoVa}%$$ The creation operators associated with pure gauge modes take physical states into nonphysical ones. Moreover physical states of the form $\hat{a}^{\dagger}_{({\rm NP} n \omega lm)}
\left\vert {\rm PS}\right\rangle$ have zero norm. Therefore we can take as the representative elements of the Fock space those states obtained by applying the creation operators associated with the two physical modes to the Boulware vacuum. For this reason we will be concerned only with the two physical modes, $\lambda = {\rm I}, {\rm II}$, in the rest of the paper. (A more detailed discussion of the Gupta-Bleuler quantization of the electromagnetic field in spherically symmetric and static spacetimes can be found in Ref. [@CHM3PRD].)
The solutions of Eq. (\[equacao em q\]) are functions whose properties are not well known. (See Ref. [@Candetal] for some properties.) We can, however, obtain their analytic form (i) in the asymptotic regions for any frequency and (ii) everywhere if we keep restricted to the low-frequency regime. In order to study the asymptotic behavior of the physical modes we use the Wheeler coordinate $x=\allowbreak r+2M\ln\left( {r}/{2M}-1\right) $ and rewrite Eq. (\[equacao em q\]) as $$\left( \omega^{2}-V_{S}\right) [r{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{\lambda n}\left( x\right)]
+\dfrac{d^{2}}{dx^{2}}\left[ r{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{\lambda n}\left( x\right) \right]
=0\text{.} \label{eq tipo Schrodinger}%$$ Since the Schwarzschild potential (\[potencial em S\]) vanishes for $r=2M$ and decreases as $1/r^2$ for $r \gg 2M$ (see Fig. \[figure1\]), the solutions of Eq. (\[eq tipo Schrodinger\]) can be approximated in the asymptotic regions by $$r{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{\lambda\rightarrow}\left( r\right) \approx\left\{
\begin{array}
[c]{c}
B_{\omega l}^{\lambda\rightarrow}\left( e^{i\omega x}+R_{\omega l}
^{\lambda\rightarrow}e^{-i\omega x}\right) \\
B_{\omega l}^{\lambda\rightarrow}T_{\omega l}^{\lambda\rightarrow}
i^{l+1}\omega xh_{l}^{\left( 1\right) }\left( \omega x\right)
\end{array}
\right.
\begin{array}
[c]{c}
\left( x\ll -1\right) \text{,}\\
\left( x\gg 1\right) \text{,}
\end{array}
\label{solucao assintotica vai}$$ and $$r{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{\lambda\leftarrow}\left( r\right) \approx\left\{
\begin{array}
[c]{c}
B_{\omega l}^{\lambda\leftarrow}T_{\omega l}^{\lambda\leftarrow}e^{-i\omega
x}\\
B_{\omega l}^{\lambda\leftarrow}\left( \left( -i\right) ^{l+1}\omega
xh_{l}^{\left( 1\right) \ast}\left( \omega x\right)
\right.
\\
\left.
+ R_{\omega l}
^{\lambda\leftarrow}i^{l+1}\omega xh_{l}^{\left( 1\right) }\left( \omega
x\right) \right)
\end{array}
\right.
\begin{array}
[c]{c}
\left( x\ll -1\right) \text{,}\\
\, \\
\, \\
\left( x\gg 1\right) \text{,}
\end{array}
\label{solucao assintotica vem}$$ where $r{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{\lambda\rightarrow}\left( r\right)$ and $r{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{\lambda\leftarrow}\left( r\right)$ are solutions incoming from $H^{-}$ and ${\cal J}^-$, respectively. Here $h_{l}^{\left( 1\right) }(x)$ is a spherical Bessel function of the third kind [@Abramo], $B_{\omega l}^{\lambda n}$ are normalization constants, and $
\left\vert R_{\omega l}^{\lambda n}\right\vert ^{2}~\text{and }\left\vert
T_{\omega l}^{\lambda n}\right\vert ^{2}
$ are the reflexion and transmission coefficients, respectively, satisfying the usual probability conservation equation $\left\vert R_{\omega l}^{\lambda n}\right\vert ^{2} +
\left\vert T_{\omega l}^{\lambda n}\right\vert ^{2}= 1$. Using the generalized Klein-Gordon inner product defined above we obtain $$\left\vert B_{\omega l}^{{\rm I}n}\right\vert
= \sqrt{\dfrac{l\left( l+1\right)}{4\pi}}
\,\omega^{-3/2}
\label{BI}$$ and $$\left\vert B_{\omega l}^{{\rm II}n}\right\vert
= \dfrac{1}{\sqrt{4\pi}}\,\omega^{-1/2}\,\,\text{.}
\label{BII}$$
Let us now find the analytic expressions of the physical modes in the low-frequency approximation. For this purpose we rewrite Eq. (\[equacao em q\]) as $$\begin{aligned}
& & \dfrac{d}{dz}\left[ \left( 1-z^{2}\right) \dfrac{d{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{\lambda
n}\left( z\right) }{dz}\right]
\label{qz}
%\nonumber
\\
& & +\left[ l\left( l+1\right) -\dfrac
{2}{z+1}-\omega^{2}M^{2}\dfrac{\left( z+1\right) ^{3}}{z-1}\right]
{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{\lambda n}\left( z\right) =0\text{,}%
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $z\equiv {r}/{M}-1$. In the low frequency regime, we write the two independent solutions of Eq. (\[qz\]) for $l\geqslant1$ as $${\varphi}_{\omega l}^{\lambda\rightarrow}\left( z\right) \approx C_{\omega
l}^{\lambda\rightarrow}\left[ Q_{l}\left( z\right) -\dfrac{\left(
z-1\right) }{l\left( l+1\right) }\dfrac{dQ_{l}\left( z\right) }%
{dz}\right]
\label{q Q}$$ and $${\varphi}_{\omega l}^{\lambda\leftarrow}\left( z\right) \approx C_{\omega
l}^{\lambda\leftarrow}\left[ P_{l}\left( z\right) -\dfrac{\left(
z-1\right) }{l\left( l+1\right) }\dfrac{dP_{l}\left( z\right) }%
{dz}\right] \text{,}
\label{q P}$$ where $P_{l}\left( z\right) $ and $Q_{l}\left( z\right) $ are Legendre functions of the first and second kind [@GR], respectively, and $C_{\omega l}^{\lambda n}$ are normalization constants. We note that since $P_{l}\left( z\right) ~\approx~z^{l}$ and $Q_{l}\left( z\right) ~\approx~z^{-l-1}$ for $z\gg 1$ and $P_{l}\left( z\right) \approx1$ and $Q_{l}\left( z\right) \approx-\log\sqrt{z-1}$ for $z\approx1$, we obtain from Eqs. (\[q Q\]) and (\[q P\]) that ${\varphi}_{\omega l}^{\lambda\rightarrow}$ diverges in $H^{-}$ and remains finite in ${\cal J}^-$, whereas ${\varphi}_{\omega l}
^{\lambda\leftarrow}$ diverges in ${\cal J}^-$ and remains finite in $H^{-}$. This is the reason why we have associated $Q_{l}\left( z\right) ~$ and $P_{l}\left( z\right) $ with modes incoming from $H^{-}$ and ${\cal J}^-$, respectively.
Now, by fitting asymptotically Eqs. (\[q Q\]) and (\[q P\]) with Eqs. (\[solucao assintotica vai\]) and (\[solucao assintotica vem\]), respectively, we obtain that the normalization constants are (up to arbitrary phases) $$C_{\omega l}^{{\rm I}\rightarrow}=
2\,{\sqrt{\dfrac{l(l+1)}{\pi}}}\,\omega^{-1/2}\,\,,
\label{ctt I vai}$$ $$C_{\omega l}^{{\rm II}\rightarrow}=
\dfrac{2}{{\sqrt{\pi}}}\,\omega^{1/2}\,\,,
\label{ctt II vai}$$ $$C_{\omega l}^{{\rm I}\leftarrow}=\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{\pi l(l+1)}}\,
\dfrac{2^l \left( (l+1)!\right)^{2} M^{l}}
{\left(2l\right)!\left( 2l+1\right)!!}\,
\omega^{l-1/2}
\label{ctt I vem}$$ and $$C_{\omega l}^{{\rm II}\leftarrow}=\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{\pi}}\,
\dfrac{2^l \left(l+1\right)\left(l!\right)^{2} M^{l}}
{l\left(2l\right)!\left( 2l+1\right)!!}\,
\omega^{l+1/2}\,\, \text{.}
\label{ctt II vem}$$
Rotating charge in Schwarzschild spacetime {#sec:Rotating}
==========================================
Now let us consider an electric charge with $\theta=\pi/2$, $r=R_{S}$ and angular velocity $\Omega\equiv d\phi/dt= {\rm const} >0$ (as defined by asymptotic static observers), in uniform circular motion around a Schwarzschild black hole, described by the current density $$j_{S}^{\mu}\left( x^{\nu}\right) =\dfrac{q}{\sqrt{-g}u^{0}}\delta\left(
r-R_{S}\right) \delta\left( \theta-\pi/2\right) \delta\left(
\varphi-\Omega t\right) u^{\mu}\text{.}
\label{jS}%$$ Here $q$ is the coupling constant and $$u^{\mu}\left( \Omega,R_{S}\right) =
\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{f\left(
R_{S}\right) -R_{S}^{2}\Omega^{2}}}\,
\left( 1 ,0,0,\Omega\right)
\label{uS}%$$ is the charge’s 4-velocity. We note that $j_S^{\mu}$ is conserved, $\nabla_\mu j_S^\mu = 0$, and thus $
\int_\Sigma d\Sigma_{\mu}^{\left( 3\right) } j_S^{\mu}\left( x^{\nu}\right)=q
$ for any Cauchy surface $\Sigma$.
Next let us minimally couple the charge to the field through the action $$\hat{S}_{I}=
{\displaystyle\int}
d^{4}x\,\,\sqrt{-g}~j_S^{\mu} \hat{A}_{\mu} \text{.}
\label{acaoint}%$$ Then the emission amplitude at the tree level of one photon with polarization $\varepsilon$ and quantum numbers $(n,\omega ,l,m)$ into the Boulware vacuum is given by $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{A}^{\varepsilon n \omega lm}
& = & \left\langle \varepsilon n \omega lm \right\vert
i \hat{S}_{I}
\left\vert 0\right\rangle
\nonumber
\\
& = & i {\displaystyle\int}
d^{4}x\,\,\sqrt{-g}~j_S^{\mu}
\overline{A_{\mu}^{(\varepsilon n \omega lm)}} \text{.} \label{emissao}%\end{aligned}$$ It can be shown that $\mathcal{A}^{\varepsilon n \omega lm}
\propto \delta \left( \omega - m\Omega\right)$. This implies that only photons with frequency $\omega_0 = m\Omega$ are emitted once the charge has some fixed $\Omega = {\rm const}$. One can also verify that the pure gauge and nonphysical modes have vanishing emission amplitudes. This is so for the pure gauge modes because $\nabla_{\mu}j_S^{\mu}=0$ and for the nonphysical modes because they have zero norm.
The total emitted power is $$W_{S}=\sum_{\lambda={\rm I},{\rm II}}\sum_{n=\leftarrow,\rightarrow}\sum_{l=1}^{\infty
}\sum_{m=1}^{l}\int_{0}^{+\infty}
d\omega~ \omega~\left\vert
\mathcal{A}^{\lambda n \omega lm}\right\vert ^{2}/T \text{,}
\label{pot S}%$$ where $T=2\pi\delta\left( 0\right)$ is the total time as measured by the asymptotic static observers. Using now Eqs. (\[modo I\])-(\[modo II\]) and (\[jS\])-(\[uS\]) we rewrite Eq. (\[pot S\]) as $$W_{S}=\sum_{n=\leftarrow,\rightarrow}
\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\sum_{m=1}^{l}
\left[ W_{S}^{{\rm I} n\omega_{0} lm}+W_{S}^{{\rm II} n\omega_{0} lm} \right]
\label{pot Sch}$$ with $$\begin{aligned}
& & W_{S}^{{\rm I} n\omega_{0} lm}=
\dfrac{2\pi q^{2}m^3\Omega^3}
{\left[ l\left( l+1\right) \right] ^{2}}
\left( 1-\dfrac{2M}{R_{S}}\right) ^{2}
\nonumber
\\
& & \times\left[ \dfrac{d}{dR_{S}}\left[ R_{S}~{\varphi}_{\omega_{0} l}^{{\rm I}n}\left(
R_{S}\right) \right] \right] ^{2}\left\vert Y_{lm}\left( \pi/2,0\right)
\right\vert ^{2}
\label{potencia IS}\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
& & W_{S}^{{\rm II} n\omega_{0} lm}=
2\pi q^2 m\Omega^3 \left[ R_{S}~{\varphi}_{\omega_{0} l}
^{{\rm II}n}\left( R_{S}\right) \right] ^{2}
\nonumber
\\
& & \times \left\vert Y^{lm}_\phi \left( \pi/2,0\right)
\right\vert ^{2}\text{.}
\label{potencia IIS}%\end{aligned}$$
-2 truecm -2 truecm
Let us now relate the radial coordinate $R_S$ of the rotating charge with its angular velocity $\Omega$. According to General Relativity for a stable circular orbit around a Schwarzschild black hole we have [@Wald] $$R_{S}=\left( {M}/{\Omega^{2}}\right) ^{1/3} \text{.}
\label{RSW}%$$ We use this relation to compute numerically the emitted power given by Eqs. (\[pot Sch\])-(\[potencia IIS\]) as a function of $\Omega$. The numerical method used here is analogous to the one described in Ref. [@CHM2CQG]. The result is plotted as the solid line in Fig. \[figure2\]. The main contribution to the emitted power comes from modes with angular momentum $l=m=1$. The larger the $l$, the less is the contribution to the total radiated power. For a fixed value of $l$, the dominant contribution comes from $m=l$. Performing the summation up to $l=6$ in Eq. (\[pot Sch\]), modes with $l=m=1$ give almost all the contribution in the asymptotic region, while they contribute with about 65% at $R_S =6M$ (the innermost stable circular orbit according to General Relativity). In this case, the modes with $l=6$ contribute with less than 0.3% of the total radiated power for any position of the rotating charge.
-2 truecm -2 truecm
It is interesting to note that the magnitude of the total radiated power in the electromagnetic case is approximately twice the numerical result found previously for a scalar source coupled to a massless Klein-Gordon field [@CHM2CQG]. In principle, this is not surprising because of the fact that photons have two physical polarizations. Notwithstanding, it should be emphasized that the two polarizations contribute quite differently to the emitted power. For our rotating charge, the contribution from mode $\lambda= {\rm II}$ is negligible when compared with the one from mode $\lambda= {\rm I}$ for every choice of $(n, \omega, l, m)$. Considering angular momentum contributions up to $l=6$, the ratio between the emitted power associated with modes $\lambda= {\rm II}$ and $\lambda= {\rm I}$ is always less than 0.1%.
Next, we use our low-frequency expressions for the physical modes, Eqs. (\[q Q\])-(\[ctt II vem\]), \[and Eq. (\[RSW\])\] in Eqs. (\[pot Sch\])-(\[potencia IIS\]) to obtain an analytic approximation for the emitted power. The result is plotted as the dashed line in Fig. \[figure2\]. We see from it that the numerical and analytical results differ sensibly as the charge approaches the black hole but coincide asymptotically, since far away from the hole only low frequency modes contribute to the emitted power.
-2 truecm -2 truecm
Comparison with flat spacetime results {#sec:Comparison}
======================================
In order to exhibit how better a full curved spacetime calculation can be in comparison with a flat spacetime one, let us show how the results found in the previous session differ from the ones obtained in Minkowski spacetime. In the latter case, the rotating charge is represented by the conserved current density $$\begin{aligned}
j_M^{\mu}\left( x^{\nu}\right) & = & \dfrac{q}{R_{M}^{2}}\delta\left(
r-R_{M}\right) \delta\left( \theta-\pi/2\right) \delta\left( \phi-\Omega
t\right)
\nonumber
\\
& \times & \left( 1,0,0,\Omega\right) \text{.} \label{corrente}%\end{aligned}$$ This is formally identical to Eq. (\[jS\]) but it is important to keep in mind that $R_S$ and $R_M$ are associated with Schwarzschild and Minkowski radial coordinates, respectively, which cannot be identified. The charge is regarded now as moving in a circular orbit due to a Newtonian gravitational force around a central object with the same mass $M$ as the black hole. In order to relate the radial coordinate $R_{M}$ with the angular velocity $\Omega$ (which is assumed to be measured by the same asymptotic static observers as before), we use the Keplerian relation: $R_{M} = M^{1/3}\Omega^{-2/3}$.
The quantization of the electromagnetic field can be performed analogously to the procedure exhibited in Section \[sec:Quantization\] by making $f = 1$. As a consequence, the scattering potential $V_S$ in Eq. (\[potencial em S\]) is replaced by $V_M = {l(l+1)}/{r^2}$. In Fig. \[figure1\] we plot the Minkowski scattering potential for $l=1$ (see dashed line).
Assuming the same minimal coupling between the charge and the electromagnetic field as before, we obtain that the emitted power at the tree level is given by
$$\begin{aligned}
W_{M} &=& \frac{9 q^2 \Omega^{16/3} }{2} \sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\sum_{m=1}^{l}
\dfrac{m^{2} }{l(l+1)}
\left[ \dfrac{d}{d\Omega}\left[
\Omega^{-2/3} ~j_{l}\left( m\left( \Omega
M\right) ^{1/3}\right) \right] \right] ^{2}\left\vert Y_{lm}\left(
\pi/2,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}
\nonumber \\
&+&
2 q^2 \Omega^{8/3} M^{2/3}
\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\sum_{m=1}^{l}
m^{2} \left[
j_{l}\left( m\left( \Omega M\right) ^{1/3}\right) \right] ^{2}\left\vert
Y_{\phi}^{lm}\left( \pi/2,0\right) \right\vert ^{2}
\,.
\label{potencia final M}%\end{aligned}$$
The modes responsible for the dominant contributions to the radiated power follow the same pattern as in the Schwarzschild case. In particular, the contribution from the physical modes $\lambda= {\rm II}$ is negligible when compared with the contribution from the physical modes $\lambda= {\rm I}$.
As a consistency check for the flat spacetime results, we compare our quantum-oriented calculations with classical-oriented ones which lead to the Larmor formula for the total emitted power. Applying it to the case of a Keplerian circular orbit, we obtain $$W_{C}=\dfrac{q^{2}M^{2/3}\Omega^{8/3}\gamma_{M}^{4}}
{6\pi}
\label{pot green}%$$ with $
\gamma_{M}=(1- {M}^{2/3}\Omega^{2/3})^{-1/2}\text{.}
$ In Fig. \[figure3\] we plot the ratios between $W_{M}$ and $W_{C}$, where the summations in Eq. (\[potencia final M\]) are performed up to increasing values of $l=l_{\rm max}$. We see that for $l_{max}=6$ the difference between $W_{M}$ and $W_{C}$ is less than 0.1% for $R_M>6M$. This is in agreement with the fact that the contributions associated with higher values of $l$ are negligible to the emitted power.
Next we compare our curved and flat spacetime results using our previous expressions for $W_S$ and $W_M$ as functions of the physical observables $M$ and $\Omega$ as measured by asymptotic static observers. We plot the ratio between $W_S$ and $W_M$ in Fig. \[figure4\] obtained from our numerical computations (solid line) and from our low-frequency analytic approximation (dashed line). In both cases the ratio tends to the unity as the charge rotates far away from the attractive center, as a consequence of the fact that the Schwarzschild spacetime is asymptotically flat. As the rotating charge approaches the central object, curved and flat spacetime results differ more significantly. In the innermost relativistic stable circular orbit, the numerical computation gives that $W_S$ is 30% smaller than $W_M$. We emphasize that this is not a simple consequence of the red-shift effect, since the mode functions representing the quanta of the emitted radiation are quite different in curved and flat spacetimes.
Absorption of the electromagnetic radiation by the black hole {#sec:Absorption}
=============================================================
Now, this is interesting to use our quantum field theory in Schwarzschild spacetime approach to compute what is the amount of emitted radiation which can be asymptotically observed. This is given by $$\begin{aligned}
W_{S}^{obs}=\sum_{\lambda={\rm I},{\rm II}}
\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\sum_{m=1}^{l}
\left[ \vert T_{\omega_0 l}^{\lambda\rightarrow} \vert^2
W_{S}^{\lambda \rightarrow \omega_{0} lm}\right.
\nonumber
\\
\left. + \vert R_{\omega_0 l}^{\lambda\leftarrow} \vert^2
W_{S}^{\lambda \leftarrow \omega_{0} lm} \right]\,.
\label{pot Obs}%\end{aligned}$$ Our numerical result is shown as the solid line in Fig. \[figure5\]. In order to compute $W_{S}^{obs}$ in the low-frequency approximation (see dashed line in Fig. \[figure5\]) we calculate the expressions for the transmission and reflection coefficients. For this purpose we use $$Q_{l}\approx\dfrac{2^{l}\left( l!\right) ^{2}}{\left( 2l+1\right)
!}z^{-l-1}\,\,\,\,\,\left(z\gg 1\right)
\label{Qsmallz}$$ in Eq. (\[q Q\]) to write $$r{\varphi}_{\omega l}^{\lambda\rightarrow} \approx C_{\omega
l}^{\lambda\rightarrow}\,\dfrac{2^{l}\left( l+1\right) \left( l!\right)
^{2}M^{l+1}}{l\left( 2l+1\right) !}\,x^{-l}
\,\,\,\,\,\left(x\gg 1\right)\,\,\text{.}%
\label{rqsmallz}$$ Comparing the above expression with Eq. (\[solucao assintotica vai\]) and using that $h_{l}^{\left( 1\right) }\left( x\right) \approx\eta_{l}\left(
x\right) \approx\dfrac{-\left( 2l\right) !}{2^{l}l!}x^{-l-1}$ for $x\gg 1$, we obtain $$\vert T_{\omega l}^{\lambda\rightarrow} \vert =
\dfrac{\vert C_{\omega l}^{\lambda\rightarrow}\vert}{\vert B_{\omega l}
^{\lambda\rightarrow}\vert}\,
\dfrac{2^{2l}\left( l+1\right)\left( l!\right)^{3}
M^{l+1}\omega^{l}}{l\left( 2l\right)!\left(
2l+1\right) !}
\label{Tsmallz}$$ with the normalization constants given by Eqs. (\[BI\]), (\[BII\]), (\[ctt I vai\]) and (\[ctt II vai\]). The reflexion coefficients are determined using that $\left\vert R_{\omega l}^{\lambda\leftarrow}\right\vert
^{2}=\left\vert R_{\omega l}^{\lambda\rightarrow}\right\vert ^{2}=1-\left\vert
T_{\omega l}^{\lambda\rightarrow}\right\vert ^{2}$.
-2 truecm -2 truecm
We see from Fig. \[figure5\] that the black hole absorbs only a small amount of the emitted radiation. Even for the innermost stable circular orbit the black hole absorbs only $3\%$ of the total radiated power. These results are consistent with the fact that the absorption cross section of a Schwarzschild black hole is proportional to $\omega^2$ for small frequency photons (see, e.g., [@Page]).
Final Remarks {#sec:Final}
=============
In this paper we have considered the radiation emitted by an electric charge rotating around a chargeless static black hole in the context of quantum field theory in curved spacetimes. We have obtained that the two physical photon polarizations give very different contributions to the total emitted power. Indeed, the contribution of one of the physical modes is negligible as compared with the other one. As a consistency check of our procedure we have computed, using a similar approach, the emitted power from a charge in Minkowski spacetime rotating around a massive object due to a Newtonian force and showed that this is in agreement with Larmor’s classical result. Then we compared the radiation emitted (as measured by asymptotic static observers) considering the attractive central object with mass $M$ as (i) a Schwarzschild black hole and (ii) a Newtonian massive object in flat spacetime. We have obtained that curved and flat spacetime results coincide when the charge orbits far away from the massive object but differ considerably when the charge orbits close to it. The difference reaches 30% for the innermost stable circular orbit. This result corroborates the importance of considering the curvature of the spacetime in astrophysical phenomena occurring in the vicinity of black holes when they involve particles with wavelengths of the order of the event horizon radius. Finally, we have computed the amount of the emitted radiation which is absorbed by the black hole. We have shown that most of the emitted radiation can be asymptotically observed. For the case of the innermost stable circular orbit at $R_S=6M$, about 97% of the emitted power can be in principle detected at infinity.
The authors are grateful to Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) for partial financial support. R. M. and G. M. would like to acknowledge also partial financial support from Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP), respectively.
[9]{}
J. van Paradijs and J. E. McClintock, in [*X–Ray Binaries*]{}, eds. W. H. G. Lewin, J. van Paradijs and E. P. J. van den Heuvel (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995).
M. J. Rees, in [*Black holes and relativistic stars*]{}, ed. R. M. Wald (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1998).
R. Genzel [*et al*]{}, Nature [**425**]{}, 934 (2003); B. C. Bromley, W. A. Miller and V. I. Pariev, Nature [**391**]{}, 54 (1998); Y. Tanaka [*et al*]{}, Nature [**375**]{}, 659 (1995); R. Narayan, I. Yi and R. Mahadevan, Nature [**374**]{}, 623 (1995); M. J. Rees [*et al*]{}, Nature [**295**]{}, 17 (1982).
L. C. B. Crispino, A. Higuchi and G. E. A. Matsas, Class. Quant. Grav. [**17**]{}, 19 (2000).
N. D. Birrell and P. C. W. Davies, [*Quantum fields in curved space*]{} (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1982).
B. P. Jensen and P. Candelas, Phys. Rev. D [**33**]{}, 1590 (1986); [**35**]{}, 4041(E) (1987).
I. S. Gradshteyn and I. M. Ryzhik, [*Tables of Integrals, Series, and Products*]{} (Academic Press, New York, 1980).
L. C. B. Crispino, A. Higuchi and G. E. A. Matsas, Phys. Rev. D [**63**]{}, 124008 (2001).
A. Higuchi, Class. Quant. Grav. [**4**]{}, 721 (1987).
L. C. B. Crispino, A. Higuchi and G. E. A. Matsas, Phys. Rev. D [**58**]{}, 084027 (1998).
C. Itzykson and J. -B. Zuber, [*Quantum Field Theory*]{} (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980).
D. G. Boulware, Phys. Rev. D [**11**]{}, 1404 (1975); [**12**]{}, 350 (1975).
M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, [*Handbook of Mathematical Functions*]{} (Dover Publications, New York, 1965).
R. M. Wald, [*General Relativity*]{} (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1984).
D. N. Page, Phys. Rev. D [**13**]{}, 198 (1976).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'For the prediction with experts’ advice setting we construct forecasting algorithms that suffer loss not much more than any expert in the pool. In contrast to the standard approach, we investigate the case of long-term forecasting of time series and consider two scenarios. In the first one, at each step $t$ the learner has to combine the point forecasts of the experts issued for the time interval $[t+1, t+d]$ ahead. Our approach implies that at each time step experts issue point forecasts for arbitrary many steps ahead and then the learner (algorithm) combines these forecasts and the forecasts made earlier into one vector forecast for steps $[t+1,t+d]$. By combining past and the current long-term forecasts we obtain a smoothing mechanism that protects our algorithm from temporary trend changes, noise and outliers. In the second scenario, at each step $t$ experts issue a prediction function, and the learner has to combine these functions into the single one, which will be used for long-term time-series prediction. For each scenario we develop an algorithm for combining experts forecasts and prove $O(\ln T)$ adversarial regret upper bound for both algorithms.'
address: Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology
author:
- Alexander Korotin
- 'Vladimir V’yugin'
- Evgeny Burnaev
title: |
Long-Term Online Smoothing Prediction\
Using Expert Advice
---
long-term online smoothing forecasting ,prediction with expert advice ,online smoothing regression
Introduction
============
The problem of long-term forecasting of time series is of high practical importance. For example, nowadays nearly everybody uses long-term weather forecasts [@richardson2007weather; @lorenc1986analysis] (24 hour, 7 days, etc.) provided by local weather forecasting platforms. Road traffic and jams forecasts [@de2015grenoble; @herrera2010evaluation; @myr2002real] are being actively used in many modern navigating systems. Forecasts of energy consumption and costs [@gaillard2015forecasting], web traffic [@oliveira2016computer] and stock prices [@ding2015deep; @pai2005hybrid] are also widely used in practice.
Many state-of-the-art (e.g. ARIMA [@box2015time]) and modern (e.g. Facebook Prophet[^1] [@taylor2018forecasting]) time series forecasting approaches produce a model that is capable of predicting arbitrarily many steps ahead. The advantage of such models is that when building the final forecast at each step $t$ for interval ${[t+1, t+d]}$ ahead, one may use forecasts made earlier at the steps ${\tau<t}$. Forecasts of each step ${\tau<t}$ are made using less of the observed data. Nevertheless, they can be more robust to noise, outliers and novelty of the time interval ${[\tau+1, t]}$. Thus, the usage of such outdated forecasts may prove useful, especially if time series is stationary.
In general, we consider the game-theoretic on-line learning model in which a master (aggregating) algorithm has to combine predictions from a set of experts. The problem setting we investigate can be considered as the part of Decision-Theoretic Online Learning (DTOL) or Prediction with Expert Advice (PEA) framework (see e.g. [@LiW94; @FrS97; @Vov90; @VoV98; @cesa-bianchi; @korotin2018aggregating] among others). In this framework the learner is usually called the aggregating algorithm. The aggregating algorithm combines the predictions from a set of experts in the online mode during time steps $t=1,2,\dots,T$.
In practice for time series prediction the square loss function is widely used. The square loss function is mixable [@VoV98]. For mixable loss functions Vovk’s aggregating algorithm (AA) [@VoV98; @VoV2001] is the most appropriate, since it has theoretically best performance among all known algorithms. We use the aggregating algorithm as the base and modify it for the long-term forecasting.
The long-term forecasting considered in this paper is a case of the forecasting with a delayed feedback. As far as we know, the problem of the delayed feedback forecasting was first considered by [@WeO2002].
In this paper we consider the two scenarios of the long-term forecasting. In the first one, at each step $t$ the learner has to combine the point forecasts of the experts issued for the time interval $[t+1, t+d]$ ahead. In the second scenario, at each step $t$ experts issue prediction functions, and the learner has to combine these functions into the single one, that will be used for long-term time-series prediction.
The first theoretical problem we investigate in the paper is the effective usage of the outdated forecasts. Formally, the learner is given $N$ basic forecasting models. Each model ${n=1,2,\dots,N}$ at every step $t$ produces infinite forecast for the steps ${t+1, t+2,\dots}$ ahead. The goal of the learner at each step $t$ is to combine the current models’ forecasts and the forecasts made earlier into one aggregated long-term forecast for the time interval $[t+1, t+d]$ ahead. We develop an algorithm to efficiently combine these forecasts.
Our main idea is to replicate any expert $n$ in an infinite sequence of auxiliary experts $(n,\tau)$, where $\tau=1,2,\dots$. Each expert $(n,\tau)$ issues at time moment $\tau$ an infinite sequence of forecasts for time moments $\tau+1,\tau+2,\dots$. Only a finite number of the experts are available at any time moment. The setting presented in this paper is valid also in case where only one expert ($N=1$) is given. At any time moment $t$ the AA uses predictions of each expert $(n,\tau)$ for the time interval $[t+1, t+d]$ (made by expert $n$ at time $\tau\leq t$). In our case, the performance of the AA on the step $t$ is measured by the regret $r_{t}$ which is the difference between the average loss of the aggregating algorithm suffered on time interval $[d+1,T]$ and the average loss of the best auxiliary expert $(n,\tau)$ suffered on the same time interval. Note that the recent related work is [@Kaln2017] where an algorithm with tight upper bound for predicting vector valued outcomes was presented.
In the second part of our paper we consider the online supervised learning scenario. The data is represented by pairs $(x,y)$ of predictor-response variables. Instead of point or interval predictions, the experts and the learner present predictions in the form of functions $F(x)$ from signals $x$. Signals $x_t$ appear gradually over time $t$ and allow to calculate forecasts as the values $F(x_t)$ of these functions. For this problem we present method for smoothing regression using expert advice.
The article is structured as follows. In Section \[prel-1\] we give some preliminary notions. In Section \[v-s-1\] we present the algorithm for combining long-term forecasts of the experts. Theorem \[main-3fa\] presents a performance bound $O(\log (NT))$ for the regret of the corresponding algorithms.
In Section \[regr-1\] we apply PEA approach for a case of the online supervised learning and develop an algorithm for online smoothing regression. Also, we provide experiments conducted on synthetic data and show the effectiveness of the proposed method. In \[vector-pred-1\] some auxiliary results are presented.
Preliminaries {#prel-1}
=============
In this section we recall the main ideas of prediction with expert advice theory. Let a pool of $N$ experts be given. Suppose that elements $y_1,y_2,\dots$ of a time series are revealed online – step by step. Learning proceeds in trials $t = 1,\ldots, T$. At each time moment $t$ experts $i\in\{1,\dots ,N\}$ present their predictions $c^i_t$ and the aggregating algorithm presents its own forecast $\gamma_t$. When the corresponding outcome(s) are revealed, all the experts suffer their losses using a loss function: $l^i_t=\lambda(y_t,c^i_t)$, $i=1,\dots ,N$. Let $h_t=\lambda(y_t,\gamma_t)$ be the loss of the aggregating algorithm. The cumulative loss suffered by any expert $i$ and by AA during $T$ steps are defined as $$\begin{aligned}
L_T^i = \sum\limits_{t=1}^T l_t^i\mbox{ and } H_T = \sum\limits_{t=1}^T h_t.\end{aligned}$$ The performance of the algorithm w.r.t. an expert $i$ can be measured by the regret $R^i_T=H_T-L^i_T$.
The goal of the aggregating algorithm is to minimize the regret with respect to each expert. In order to achieve this goal, at each time moment $t$, the aggregating algorithm evaluates performance of the experts in the form of a vector of experts’ weights $\w_t=(w_{1,t},\dots ,w_{N,t})$, where $\|\w_{t}\|_{1}=1$ and $w_{i,t}\ge 0$ for all $i$. The weight $w_{i,t}$ of an expert $i$ is an estimate of the quality of the expert’s predictions at step $t$. In classical setting (see [@FrS97], [@Vov90] among others), the process of expert $i$ weights updating is based on the method of exponential weighting with a learning rate $\eta>0$: $$\begin{aligned}
w^\mu_{i,t}=\frac{w_{i,t}e^{-\eta l_t^i}}{\sum\limits_{j=1}^N w_{j,t}e^{-\eta l_t^j}},
\label{weight-update-1}\end{aligned}$$ where $\w_1$ is some weight vector, for example, ${\w_1=(\frac{1}{N},\dots ,\frac{1}{N})}$. In classical setting, we prepare weights $\w_{t+1}=\w^\mu_t$ for using at the next step or, in a more general case of the $d$-th outcome ahead prediction, we define ${\w_{t+d}=\w^\mu_t}$, where $d\ge 1$.
The Vovk’s aggregating algorithm (AA) ([@Vov90], [@VoV98]) is the base algorithm in our study. Let us explain the main ideas of learning with AA.
We consider the learning with a mixable loss function $\lambda(y, \gamma)$. Here $y$ is an element of some set of outcomes $y$, and $\gamma$ is an element of some set of forecasts $\Gamma$. The experts $1\le i\le N$ present the forecasts $c_i\in\Gamma$.
In this case the main tool is a superprediction function $$\begin{aligned}
g(y)=-\frac{1}{\eta}\ln\sum\limits_{i=1}^N e^{-\eta\lambda(y,c_i)}p_i,
%\label{superpred-1}\end{aligned}$$ where $\p=(p_1,\dots ,p_N)$ is a probability distribution on the set of all experts and $\c=(c_1,\dots , c_N)$ is a vector of the experts predictions.
The loss function $\lambda$ is mixable if for any probability distribution $\p$ on the set of experts and for any set of experts predictions $\c$ a value of $\gamma$ exists such that $$\begin{aligned}
\lambda(y,\gamma)\le g(y)
\label{subst-1}\end{aligned}$$ for all $y$.
We fix some rule $\gamma=\subst(\c,\p)$ for computing a forecast satisfying (\[subst-1\]). $\subst$ is called a substitution function.
It will be proved in Section \[vector-pred-1\] that using the rules (\[weight-update-1\]) and (\[subst-1\]) for defining weights and the forecasts in the online mode we obtain $$H_T\le\min_{1\le i\le N} L^i_T+\frac{\ln N}{\eta}$$ for all $T$.
A loss function $\lambda(y,\gamma)$ is $\eta$-exponential concave if for any $y$ the function $e^{-\eta\lambda(y,\gamma)}$ is concave w.r.t. $\gamma$. By definition any $\eta$-exponential concave function is $\eta$-mixable. The square loss function $\lambda(y,\gamma)=(y-\gamma)^2$ is $\eta$-mixable for any $\eta$ such that $0<\eta\le\frac{1}{2B^2}$, where $y$ and $\gamma$ are a real numbers and $y\in [-B,B]$ for some $B>0$, see [@Vov90; @VoV98].
By [@VoV98] and [@VoV2001], for the square loss function, the corresponding forecast can be defined as $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma=\subst(\c,\p)=\frac{1}{4B}(g(-B)-g(B))=
\frac{1}{4\eta B}\ln\frac{\sum\limits_{i=1}^N p_i e^{-\eta (B-c_i)^2}}
{\sum\limits_{i=1}^N p_i e^{-\eta (B+c_i)^2}}.
\label{subst-1a}\end{aligned}$$ For the $\eta$-exponential concave loss function we can also use a more straightforward expression for the substitution function: $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma=\subst(\c,\p)=\sum_{i=1}^N c_i p_i.
\label{subst-2a}\end{aligned}$$ The inequality (\[subst-1\]) also holds for all $y$.
The square loss function is $\eta$-exponential concave for $0<\eta\le\frac{1}{8B^2}$. However, the definition (\[subst-2a\]) results in four times more regret (see [@KiW99] and Section \[vector-pred-1\]).
Algorithm for Combining Long-term Forecasts of Experts. {#v-s-1}
=======================================================
In this section we consider an extended setting. At each time moment $t$ each expert $n\in\{1,\dots ,N\}$ presents an infinite sequence $\c^n_t=(c^n_{t,1},c^n_{t,2},\dots)$ of forecasts for the time moments $t+1,t+2,t+3,\dots$. A sequence of the corresponding confidence levels $\p^n_t=(p^n_{t,1},p^n_{t,2},\dots)$ also can be presented at time moment $t$. Each element of this sequence is a number between 0 and 1. If $p^n_{t,i}<1$, then it means that we use the forecast $p^n_{t,i}$ only partially (e.g. it may become obsolete with time). If $p^n_{t,i}=0$ then the corresponding forecast is not taken into account at all.[^2] Confidence levels can be set by the expert itself or by the learner.[^3]
At each time moment $t$ we observe sequences $\c^n_{\tau}$, $\p^n_{\tau}$ issued by the experts $1\le n\le N$ at the time moments $\tau\le t$. To aggregate the forecasts of all experts, we convert any “real” expert $n$ into the infinite sequence of the auxiliary experts $(n,\tau)$, where $1\le\tau<\infty$.
At each time moment $t$ expert $(n,\tau)$ presents his forecast which is the segment of the sequence $\c^n_\tau$ of length $d$ starting at its $(t-\tau+1)$th element. More precisely, the forecast of the auxiliary expert $(n,\tau)$ is a vector $$\c^{(n,\tau)}_t=(c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,1},\dots,c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,d}),$$ where for ${1\le s\le d}$ we set $c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=c^n_{\tau,t-\tau+s}$.
We also denote the corresponding segments of confidence levels by $${\p^{(n,\tau)}_t=(p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,1},\dots,p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,d})},$$ where $p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=p^n_{\tau,t-\tau+s}$ for $1\le\tau\le t$ and $p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=0$ for $\tau>t$.
Using the losses suffered by the experts $(n,\tau)$ (for ${\tau\le t}$) on the time interval $[t-d+1,t]$, the aggregating algorithm updates the weights $w_{(n,\tau),t}$ of all the experts $(n,\tau)$ by the rule (\[weight-update-1\]). We denote these weights by $w_{(n,\tau),t+d}$ and use them for computing the aggregated interval forecast for $d$ time moments $t+1,\dots ,t+d$ ahead $$\gamma_t=(\gamma_{t,1},\dots ,\gamma_{t,d}).$$ We use the fixed point method by [@ChV2009]. Define the virtual forecasts of the experts $(n,\tau)$: $$\tilde c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}\mbox{ with probability } p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s},
\\
\gamma_{t,s} \mbox{ with probability } 1-p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}.
\end{array}
\right.$$ where $1\le n\le N$ and $1\le\tau<\infty$.
We consider any confidence level $p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}$ as a probability distribution $\p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=(p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}, 1-p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s})$ on a two element set.
First, we provide a justification of the algorithm presented below. Our goal is to define the forecast $\gamma_t=(\gamma_{t,1},\dots,\gamma_{t,d})$ such that for $s=1,\dots ,d$ $$\begin{aligned}
e^{-\eta\lambda(y,\gamma_{t,s})}\ge\sum_{n=1}^N\sum_{\tau=1}^\infty
E_{\p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}}[e^{-\eta\lambda(y,\tilde c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s})}]
w_{(n,\tau),t+d}
\label{for-1b-1}\end{aligned}$$ for each outcome $y$. Here $E_{\p_{(n,\tau),s}}$ is the mathematical expectation with respect to the probability distribution $\p_{(n,\tau),s}$. Also, $w_{(n,\tau),t+d}$ is the weight of the auxiliary expert $(n,\tau)$ accumulated at the end of step $t$. We rewrite inequality (\[for-1b-1\]) in a more detailed form: for any $1\le s\le d$, $$\begin{aligned}
e^{-\eta\lambda(y,\gamma_{t,s})}\ge
\nonumber
\\
\sum_{n=1}^N\sum_{\tau=1}^\infty
E_{\p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}}[e^{-\eta\lambda(y,\tilde c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s})}]
w_{(n,\tau),t+d}=
\label{cond-1}
\\
\sum_{n=1}^N\sum_{\tau=1}^t p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}w_{(n,\tau),t+d}
e^{-\eta\lambda(y,c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s})}+
\nonumber
\\
e^{-\eta\lambda(y,\gamma_{t,s})}
\left(1-\sum_{n=1}^N\sum_{\tau=1}^t p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}w_{(n,\tau),t+d}\right)
\label{cond-2}\end{aligned}$$ for all $y$. Therefore, the inequality (\[for-1b-1\]) is equivalent to the inequality $$\begin{aligned}
e^{-\eta\lambda(\gamma_{t,s},y)}\ge\sum_{n=1}^N\sum_{\tau=1}^t
w^{*,s}_{(n,\tau),t}e^{-\eta\lambda(y,c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s})},
\label{for-1ba}\end{aligned}$$ where $$\begin{aligned}
\label{for-1bb}
w^{*,s}_{(n,\tau),t}=\frac{p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s} w_{(n,\tau),t+d}}{\sum_{n'=1}^N
\sum_{\tau'=1}^t p^{(n',\tau')}_{t,s} w_{(n',\tau'),t+d}}.\end{aligned}$$ According to the aggregating algorithm rule we can define $\gamma_{t,s}=\subst(\c_{s,t},\w^{*,s}_t)$ for $1\le s\le d$ such that (\[for-1ba\]) and its equivalent (\[for-1b-1\]) are valid. Here $\subst$ is the substitution function and $$\w^{*,s}_t=(w^{*,s}_{(n,\tau),t}: 1\le n\le N,1\le\tau\le t),$$ $$\c_{t,s}=(c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}: 1\le n\le N,1\le\tau\le t).$$
The outcomes $y_{t+1},\dots ,y_{t+d}$ will be fully revealed only at the time moment $t+d$. The inequality (\[for-1b-1\]) holds for $y=y_{t+s}$ and for the forecasts $\gamma_{t,s}$ for all $1\le s\le d$. By convexity of the exponent the inequality (\[for-1b-1\]) implies that $$\begin{aligned}
e^{-\eta\lambda(y_{t+s},\gamma_{t,s})}\ge
%\nonumber
%\\
\sum_{n=1}^N\sum_{\tau=1}^\infty e^{-\eta E_{\p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}}
[\lambda(y_{t+s},\tilde c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s})]}w_{(n,\tau),t+d}.
\label{for-1b-2}\end{aligned}$$ holds for all $1\le s\le d$. We use the generalized Hölder inequality and obtain $$\begin{aligned}
e^{-\eta\frac{1}{d}\sum\limits_{s=1}^d\lambda(y_{t+s},\gamma_{t,s})}\ge
%\nonumber
%\\
\sum_{n=1}^N\sum_{\tau=1}^\infty e^{-\eta \frac{1}{d}\sum\limits_{s=1}^d
E_{\p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}}[\lambda(y_{t+s},\tilde c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s})]}
w_{(n,\tau),t+d}.
\label{for-1b-2a}\end{aligned}$$ For more details of the Hölder inequality see \[vector-pred-1\]. The inequality (\[for-1b-2a\]) can be rewritten as $$\begin{aligned}
e^{-\eta h_{t+d}}\ge
\sum_{n=1}^N\sum_{\tau=1}^\infty e^{-\eta \hat l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}}
w_{(n,\tau),t+d},
\label{for-1b-2ab}\end{aligned}$$ where $$h_{t+d}=\frac{1}{d}\sum_{s=1}^d\lambda(y_{t+s},\gamma_{t,s})$$ is the (averaged) loss of the aggregating algorithm suffered on the time interval $[t+1,t+d]$ and $$\hat l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=\frac{1}{d}\sum\limits_{s=1}^d
E_{\p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}}[\lambda(y_{t+s},\tilde c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s})]$$ is the (averaged) mean loss of the expert $(n,\tau)$.
The protocol of algorithm for aggregating forecasts of experts $(n,\tau)$ is shown below.
[**Algorithm 1**]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Set $w_{(n,\tau),1}=\frac{1}{N}\nu(\tau)$, where $\nu(\tau)=\frac{1}{\tau (\tau+1)}$, ${n=1,\dots , N}$, ${\tau=1,2,\dots}$.
[**FOR**]{} $t=1,\dots ,T$
$t\le d$ [**THEN**]{} put $l^{(n,\tau)}_t=h_t=0$ for all $n$ and $\tau$.
1. Observe the outcomes ${y_{t-d+1},\dots, y_t}$ and predictions ${\gamma_{t-d}=(\gamma_{t-d,1},\dots ,\gamma_{t-d,d})}$ of the learner issued at the time moment $t-d$.
2. Compute the loss ${h_t=\frac{1}{d}\sum_{s=1}^d h_{t,s}}$ of the learner on the time segment $[t-d+1,t]$, where ${h_{t,s}=\lambda(y_{t-d+s},\gamma_{t-d,s})}$.
3. Compute the losses ${l^{(n, \tau)}_t=\frac{1}{d}\sum_{s=1}^d l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}}$ of the experts ${(n,\tau)}$ for ${1\le n\le N}$, where for ${1\le s\le d}$ we set ${l^{(n, \tau)}_{t,s}=\lambda(y_{t-d+s},c^n_{\tau,t-d-\tau+s})}$ if ${1\le\tau\le t-d}$ and ${l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=\lambda(y_{t-d+s},\gamma_{t-d,s})}$ if $\tau>t-d$.
<!-- -->
4. Update weights: $$\begin{aligned}
w^\mu_{(n,\tau),t}=\frac{w_{(n,\tau),t}e^{-\eta l^{(n,\tau)}_t}}
{\sum_{n'=1}^N\sum_{\tau'=1}^\infty w_{(n',\tau'),t}e^{-\eta l^{(n',\tau')}_t}}
\label{wei-1}\end{aligned}$$ for $1\le n\le N$, $1\le\tau<\infty$.[^4]
5. Prepare the weights: $w_{(n,\tau),t+d}=w^\mu_{(n,\tau),t}$ for $1\le n\le N$ and $1\le\tau<\infty$.
6. Receive predictions $\c^n_\tau$ issued by the experts $1\le n\le N$ at the time moments $\tau\le t$ and their confidence levels $\p^n_\tau$ .
7. Extract the segments of forecasts $\c^{(n,\tau)}_t=(c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,1},\dots ,c^{(n, \tau)}_{t,d})$ of the the auxiliary experts $(n,\tau)$, where $c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=c^n_{\tau,t-\tau+s}$ for $1\le\tau\le t$, and the segments of the corresponding confidences $\p^{(n,\tau)}_t=(p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,1},\dots , p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,d})$, where $p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=p^n_{\tau,t-\tau+s}$.[^5]
8. Compute long-term forecast $\gamma_t=(\gamma_{t,1},\dots ,\gamma_{t,d})$ of the learner, where $$\begin{aligned}
\gamma_{t,s}=\subst(\c_{s,t},\w^{*,s}_{t,s}),
\nonumber
\\
\w^*_{t,s}=(w^{*,s}_{(n,\tau),t}: 1\le n\le N,1\le\tau\le t),
\nonumber
\\
w^{*}_{(n,\tau),t}=\frac{p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s} w_{(n,\tau),t+d}}{\sum_{n'=1}^N
\sum_{\tau'=1}^t p^{(n',\tau')}_{t,s} w_{(n',\tau'),t+d}},
\label{w-u-3}
\\
{\c_{t,s}=(c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}: 1\le n\le N,1\le\tau\le t)}
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ for $1\le s\le d$.[^6]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Denote for $t>d$ $$l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=\lambda(y_{t-d+s},c^{(n,\tau)}_{t-d,s}),$$ $$\tilde l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=\lambda(y_{t-d+s},\tilde c^{(n,\tau)}_{t-d,s}),$$ $$\hat l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=E_{\p^{(n,\tau)}_{t-d,s}}[\tilde l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}],$$ $$h_{t,s}=\lambda(y_{t-d+s},\gamma_{t-d,s}).$$ We put these quantities to be 0 for $1\le t\le d$. Also, $\hat l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=h_{t,s}$ for ${\tau>t}$. Since by definition $$\hat l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=
p^{(n,\tau)}_{t-d,s}l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}+(1-p^{(n,\tau)}_{t-d,s})h_{t,s},$$ we have $$h_{t,s}-\hat l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}=p^{(n,\tau)}_{t-d,s}(h_{t,s}-l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}).$$
Recall that $h_t=\frac{1}{d}\sum\limits_{s=1}^d h_{t,s}$ be the algorithm (average) loss and $\hat l^{(n,\tau)}_t=\frac{1}{d}\sum\limits_{s=1}^d \hat l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}$ be the (average) loss of the auxiliary expert $(n,\tau)$.
Define the discounted (average) excess loss with respect to an expert $(n,\tau)$ at a time moment $t>d$ by $$\begin{aligned}
r^{(n,\tau)}_t=h_t-\hat l^{(n,\tau)}_t.
\label{excess-1}\end{aligned}$$ By definition of $\hat l^{(n,\tau)}_t$ we can represent the discounted excess loss (\[excess-1\]) as $$\begin{aligned}
r^{(n,\tau)}_t=\frac{1}{d}\sum\limits_{s=1}^d
p^{(n,\tau)}_{t-d,s}(h_{t,s}-l^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s})=
\nonumber
\\
\frac{1}{d}\sum\limits_{s=1}^d p^{(n,\tau)}_{t-d,s}(\lambda(y_{t-d+s},\gamma_{t-d,s})-
\lambda(y_{t-d+s},c^{(n,\tau)}_{t-d,s})).\end{aligned}$$ We measure the performance of our algorithm by the cumulative discounted (average) excess loss with respect to any expert $(n,\tau)$.
\[main-3fa\] For any ${T\ge d+1}$ and ${1\le n\le N}$, the following upper bound for the cumulative excess loss holds true: $$\begin{aligned}
\sup_{\tau\le T-d}\sum\limits_{t=\tau+d}^T r^{(n,\tau)}_t\le\frac{d}{\eta}\left(\ln N+2\ln (T-d+1)\right).
\label{mTT-1afaa}\end{aligned}$$
[*Proof*]{}. Let $m_t=-\frac{1}{\eta}\ln\sum_{n=1}^N\sum_{\tau=1}^{T-d}
w_{(n,\tau),t}e^{-\eta\hat l^{(n,\tau)}_t}$. Let us apply Corollary \[prop-1\] from Section \[vector-pred-1\] for the case where $(n,\tau)$ are experts for $1\le n\le N$ and $1\le\tau\le T-d$, so, $M=N(T-d)$. Also, set $$\l_t=\hat\l_t=(\hat l^{(n,\tau)}_t: 1\le n\le N, 1\le\tau\le T-d)$$ and $\q$ be unit vector of length $N(T-d)$ whose $(n,\tau)$th coordinate is 1. By (\[for-1b-2ab\]) $h_t\le m_t$. Then by (\[iineq-1\]) $$\begin{aligned}
\sum\limits_{t=1}^T h_t-\sum\limits_{t=1}^T\hat l^{(n,\tau)}_t\le
\frac{d}{\eta}\ln (N(T-d)(T-d+1))
\label{inn-1}\end{aligned}$$ for each expert $(n,\tau)$ such that $1\le n\le N$ and $\tau\le T-d$.
Since $\hat l^{(n,\tau)}_t=h_t$ for $t<\tau+d$, using (\[excess-1\]), we obtain (\[mTT-1afaa\]). $\triangle$
Online Smoothing Regression {#regr-1}
===========================
In this section we consider the online learning scenario within the supervised setting (that is, data are pairs $(x,y)$ of predictor-response variables). A forecaster presents a regression function $F$ defined on a set $X$ of objects, which are called signals. After a pair $(x,y)$ be revealed the forecaster suffers a loss $\lambda(y,F(x))$, where $\lambda(y,\gamma)$ is some loss function. We assume that $y\in {\cal R}$ and that the loss function is $\eta$-mixable for some $\eta>0$.
An example is a linear regression, where $X\subseteq {\cal R}^k$ is a set of $k$-dimensional vectors and a regression function is a linear function $F(\x)=(\w\cdot\x)$, where $\w\in {\cal R}^k$ is a weight vector and $\lambda(y,F(\x))=((\w\cdot\x)-y)^2$ is the square loss.
In the online mode, at any step $t$, to define the forecast for step $t+1$ – a regression function $F_{t+1}(x)$, we use the prediction with expert advice approach. A feature of this approach is that we aggregate the regression functions $F^1_\tau (x)$ for $1<\tau\le t+1$, each of which depends on the segment $(x_1,y_1),\dots ,(x_{\tau-1},y_{\tau-1})$ of the sample. At the end of step $t$ we define (initialize) the next regression function $F^1_{t+1}(x)$ by the sample $(x_1,y_1),\dots ,(x_t,y_t)$.
Since the forecast $F_{t+1}(x)$ can potentially be applied to any future input value $x$, we consider this method as a kind of long-term forecasting.
We briefly describe below the changes made in Algorithm 1. We introduce signals in the protocol from Section \[v-s-1\].
[**Algorithm 2**]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Set initial weights $w_{\tau,1}$ as in Algorithm 1.
[**FOR**]{} $t=1,\dots ,T$
1. Observe the pair $(x_t,y_t)$ and compute the losses suffered by the learner $h_t=\lambda(y_t,F_t(x_t))$ and by the expert regression functions: $l^\tau_t=\lambda(y_t,F^1_\tau(x_t))$ if $1\le\tau\le t$ and $l^{\tau}_t=\lambda(y_t,F_t(x_t))$ otherwise.
2. Update weights: $$\begin{aligned}
w_{\tau,t+1}=w^\mu_{\tau,t}=\frac{w_{\tau,t}e^{-\eta l^{\tau}_t}}
{\sum_{\tau'=1}^\infty w_{\tau',t}e^{-\eta l^{\tau'}_t}}
\label{wei-1a}\end{aligned}$$ for $1\le\tau<\infty$. See also footnote to (\[wei-1\]).
3. Initialize the next regression function $F^1_{t+1}(x)$ using the sample $(x_1,y_1),\dots ,(x_t,y_t)$ and define the forecast of the learner for step $t+1$ $$\begin{aligned}
F_{t+1}(x)=\subst(\F_t(x),\w^*_t) \mbox{ for any } x\in X,
\label{gen-for-1a}\end{aligned}$$ where $\F_t(x)=(F^1_\tau (x): 1\le\tau\le t+1)$, $\w^*_t=(w^*_{\tau,t+1}: 1\le\tau\le t+1)$, and $w^*_{\tau,t+1}=\frac{w_{\tau,t+1}}{\sum_{\tau'=1}^{t+1} w_{\tau',t+1}}$ for $1\le\tau\le t+1$.[^7]
[**ENDFOR**]{}
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the square loss $\lambda(y,\gamma)=(y-\gamma)^2$, where $y\in [-B,B]$, by (\[subst-1a\]) the regression function (\[gen-for-1a\]) can be defined in the closed form: $$\begin{aligned}
F_{t+1}(x)=
%\frac{1}{4B}(g_t(-B)-g_t(B))=
\frac{1}{4\eta B}\ln\frac{\sum\limits_{\tau=1}^{t+1} w_{\tau,t+1}
e^{-\eta (B-F^1_\tau(x))^2}}
{\sum\limits_{\tau=1}^{t+1} w_{\tau,t+1} e^{-\eta (B+F^1_\tau(x))^2}}
\label{subst-1abc}\end{aligned}$$ for each $x$ or by the rule (\[subst-2a\]).[^8]
Let us analyze the performance of Algorithm 2 as a forecaster on $d$ steps ahead.
For any time moment $t\ge d$ a sequence $(x_{t-d+1},x_{t-d+1}),\dots ,(x_t,y_t)$ is revealed. Denote by $h_t=\frac{1}{d}\sum\limits_{s=1}^d\lambda(y_{t-s+1},F_\tau(x_{t-s+1}))$ the average loss of the learner on time interval $[t-d+1,t]$ and by $l^\tau_t=\frac{1}{d}\sum\limits_{s=1}^d\lambda(y_{t-s+1},F^1_\tau(x_{t-s+1}))$ the average loss of any auxiliary expert $\tau\le t$.
The regret bound of Algorithm 2 does not depend on $d$:
\[regression-th-1\] For any $T$, $$\begin{aligned}
\sup_{1\le\tau\le T-1}\sum\limits_{t=\tau+1}^T h_t-l^{\tau}_t\le\frac{2}{\eta}\ln T.
\label{mTT-1afaas}\end{aligned}$$
[*Proof.*]{} The analysis of the performance of Algorithm 2 for the case of prediction on $d$ steps ahead is similar to that of Algorithm 1 for $d=1$. Let $T$ and $d\le\tau<T$ be given. Using the technics of Section \[vector-pred-1\], we obtain for any $1\le s\le d$, $$\sum\limits_{t=\tau+1}^T \lambda(y_{t-s+1},F_\tau(x_{t-s+1}))-
\lambda(y_{t-s+1},F^1_\tau(x_{t-s+1}))\le\frac{1}{\eta}\ln (T(T-1)).$$ Summing this inequality by $s=1,\dots ,d$ and dividing by $d$, we obtain (\[mTT-1afaas\]). $\triangle$
In particular, Theorem \[regression-th-1\] implies that the total loss of Algorithm 2 at any time interval $[1,T]$ is no more (up to logarithmic regret) than the loss of the best regression algorithm constructed in the past.
[**Online regression with a sliding window.**]{} Some time series show a strong dependence on the latest information instead of all the data. In this case, it is useful to apply regression with a sliding window. In this regard, we consider the application of Algorithm 2 for the case of online regression with a sliding window. The corresponding expert represents some type of dependence between input and output data. If this relationship is relatively regular the corresponding experts based on past data can successfully compete with experts based on the latest data. Therefore, it may be useful to aggregate the predictions of all the auxiliary experts based on past data.
Let $F^1_t(\x)=(\w_t\cdot\x)$ be the ridge regression function, where for $t>h$, $\w_t=\left(\sigma I+X'_t X_t\right)^{-1} X_t'\y_t$. Here $X_t$ is the matrix in which rows are formed by vectors $\x_{t-h},\dots , \x_{t-1}\in {R}^k$ ($X'_t$ is the transposed matrix $X_t$), $I$ is a unit matrix, $\sigma>0$ is a parameter, and $\y_t=(y_{t-h},\dots , y_{t-1})$. For $t\le h$ we set $\w_t$ equal to some fixed value.
We use the square loss function and assume that $y_t\in [-B,B]$ for all $t$. For each $t$ we define the aggregating regression function $F_{t+1}$ (the learner forecast) by (\[subst-1abc\]) using the regression functions $F^1_\tau$ (the expert strategies) for $h<\tau\le t+1$, where each such a function is defined using a learning sample (a window) $(\x_{\tau-h},y_{\tau-h}),\dots , (\x_{\tau-1},y_{\tau-1})$.[^9]
[**Experiments.**]{} Let us present the results of experiments which were performed on synthetic data. The initial data was obtained as a result of sampling from a data generative model.
We start from a sequence $\x_1,\dots ,\x_T$ of $20$-dimensional signals sampled i.i.d from the multidimensional normal distribution. The signals are revealed online and $T=3000$.
The target variable $y$ is generated as follows. First, three random linear dependencies are generated, i.e. three weights vectors $\w_1,\w_2,\w_3$ are generated (so $y_t=(\w_\tau\cdot \x_t)$ for $\tau=1,2,3$ on the corresponding time intervals). The time scale $[1,T]$ is divided into $K=7$ random consecutive parts. On each interval data is generated based on one of these three random regressions $y_t=(w_\tau\cdot x_t)+\epsilon$, where $\tau=1,2$ or $3$ and $\epsilon$ is a low noise. That is, the dependence of $y$ on $x$ is switched $7$ times.
Each expert $F^1_\tau(\x)$ corresponds to a linear regression trained in a sliding data window $(\x_ {\tau-h}, y_ {\tau-h}), ..., (\x_\tau, y_\tau)$ of length $h=40$. There are a total of $T-h+1$ experts.
Figure \[fig-1\] shows the results of the random experiment, where the graphs of $H_t-L^\tau_t$ present the regret of Algorithm 2 with respect to the experts starting at several time moments $\tau$.
The regret with respect to the simple linear regression performed on all data interval is also presented. We see that Algorithm 2 efficiently adapts to data and also outperforms linear regression on the entire dataset. The theoretical upper bound for the regret is also plotted (it is clear that all lines are below it).
![[The graphs of the regret $R^\tau_t=H_t-L^\tau_t$ for the experts starting at $\tau=319,1052,1167,2363,2909$ time moments. The theoretical upper bound for the regret is represented by the line located above all the lines in the graph. The regret with respect to the simple linear regression is presented by the dotted line ]{}[]{data-label="fig-1"}](regret1.eps){width="99.00000%"}
Conclusion
==========
In the paper we have developed the aggregating algorithm for long-term interval forecasting which is capable of combining current predictions of the experts with the outdated ones (made earlier). Combining past and current long-term forecasts allows to protects the algorithm from temporary changes in the trend of the time series, noise and outliers. Our mechanism can be applied to the time series forecasting models that are capable of predicting for the infinitely many time moments ahead, e.g. widespread ARMA-like models. For the developed algorithm we proved the sublinear $O(\ln T)$ regret bound.
We have applied PEA approach for the case of online supervised learning, where instead of point predictions, the experts and the learner present predictions in the form of regression functions. The method for smoothing regression using expert advice was presented. We consider this method of regression as a kind of long-term forecasting. Experiments conducted on synthetic data show the effectiveness of the proposed method.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
The research was partially supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research grant 16-29-09649 ofi m.
Auxiliary results {#vector-pred-1}
=================
[**Vector-valued forecasts**]{}. In this paper we aggregate the vector forecasts. To do this, following [@Kaln2017], we apply the aggregation rule to each coordinate separately. Since the loss function is $\eta$-mixable, for any time moment $t$ for each $1\le s\le d$ a prediction $\gamma_{t,s}$ exists such that the inequality (\[cond-1\]) is valid.
Let $y_{t+1},\dots ,y_{t+d}$ be a sequence of outcomes. Multiplying the inequalities (\[for-1b-2\]) for $s=1,\dots , d$ we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
e^{-\eta\sum_{s=1}^d\lambda(y_{t+s},\gamma_{t,s})}\ge
%\nonumber
%\\
\prod_{s=1}^d\sum_{n=1}^N\sum_{\tau=1}^\infty e^{-\eta E_{\p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}}
[\lambda(y_{t+s},\tilde c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s})]}w_{(n,\tau),t+d}.
\label{aggr-rule-1fuapp}\end{aligned}$$
The generalized Hölder inequality says that $$\|f_1f_2\cdots f_d\|_r\le\|f_1\|_{q_1}\|f_2\|_{q_2}\cdots\|f_d\|_{q_d},$$ where $\frac{1}{q_1}+\dots +\frac{1}{q_d}=\frac{1}{r}$, $q_s\in (0,+\infty)$ and $f_s\in L^{q_s}$ for $1\le s\le d$. Let $q_s=1$ for all $1\le s\le d$, then $r=1/d$. Let $$f_s=e^{-\eta E_{\p^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s}}
[\lambda(y_{t+s},\tilde c^{(n,\tau)}_{t,s})]}$$ for $s=1,\dots ,d$ and $\|f\|_1=E_{\w}(f)$, where $$\w=(w_{(n,\tau),t+d}: 1\le n\le N, \tau\ge 1).$$ Then by Hölder inequality we obtain (\[for-1b-2a\]).
[**Regret analysis**]{}. We use relative entropy as the basic tool for the regret analysis. Let $D(\p\|\q)=\sum\limits_{i=1}^N p_i\ln\frac{p_i}{q_i}$ be the relative entropy, where $\p=(p_1,\dots ,p_N)$ and $\q=(q_1,\dots ,q_N)$ are probability vectors.[^10] We also define $0\ln 0=0$.
Let $\l_t=(l^1_t,\dots ,l^N_t)$ be the losses of the experts at step $t$, where $1\le i\le N$ and $l^i_t=0$ for $1\le t\le d$. Let also, the evolution of the weights $\w^\mu_t$ of the experts be defined by the rule (\[weight-update-1\]) and ${\w_{t+d}=\w^\mu_t}$. Denote the dot product of two vectors by $(\q\cdot\l_t)$. Let also, $m_t=-\frac{1}{\eta}\ln\sum\limits_{i=1}^N w_{i,t} e^{-\eta l^i_t}$ for $t>d$.
\[Kul-L-ineq-3\] (see [@BoW2002]) For any $t>d$, and for a comparison probability vector $\q$, $$\begin{aligned}
m_t=(\q\cdot\l_t)+\frac{1}{\eta}(D(\q\|\w_t)-D(\q\|\w^\mu_t)).
\label{MPP-bound-1}\end{aligned}$$
[*Proof*]{}. By method (\[weight-update-1\]) of the weights updating, the equality (\[MPP-bound-1\]) is obtained as follows: $$\begin{aligned}
m_t-\sum\limits_{i=1}^N q_i l^i_t=\sum\limits_{i=1}^N q_i
\left(\frac{1}{\eta}\ln e^{-\eta l^i_t}+m_t\right)=
\\
\frac{1}{\eta}\sum\limits_{i=1}^N q_i\left(\ln e^{-\eta l^i_t}-
\ln\sum\limits_{j=1}^N w_{j,t}e^{-\eta l^j_t}\right)=
\\
\frac{1}{\eta}\sum\limits_{i=1}^N q_i\ln\frac{e^{-\eta l^i_t}}
{\sum\limits_{j=1}^N w_{j,t}e^{-\eta l^j_t}}=
\\
\frac{1}{\eta}\sum\limits_{i=1}^N q_i\ln\frac{w^\mu_{i,t}}{w_{i,t}} =
\frac{1}{\eta}(D(\q\|w_t)-D(\q\|w^\mu_t)).\end{aligned}$$
\[prop-1\] Let $T$ be a forecasting horizon and $N$ be a number of the experts. Consider the case of $d$-steps ahead prediction for $d\ge 1$. Then for any comparison vector $\q$, $$\begin{aligned}
\sum\limits_{t=1}^T m_t-\sum\limits_{t=1}^T (\q\cdot\l_t)\le\frac{1}{\eta}d
\max_{1\le i\le N, 1\le t\le d}\ln\frac{1}{w^\mu_{i,t}}.
\label{iineq-1}\end{aligned}$$
[*Proof*]{}. Summing (\[MPP-bound-1\]) for $d+1\le t\le T$, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\sum\limits_{t=d+1}^T m_t-\sum\limits_{t=d+1}^T (\q\cdot\l_t)=
\nonumber
\\
\frac{1}{\eta}\sum\limits_{t=d+1}^T(D(\q\|\w_t)-D(\q\|\w^\mu_t))=
\label{enequa-2}
\\
\frac{1}{\eta}\sum\limits_{t=d+1}^T(D(\q\|\w^\mu_{t-d})-D(\q\|\w^\mu_t))=
\label{enequa-3}
\\
\frac{1}{\eta}\sum\limits_{t=1}^d D(\q\|\w^\mu_t)\le
\frac{1}{\eta}d\max_{1\le j\le N, 1\le t\le d}\ln\frac{1}{w^\mu_{j,t}}.
\label{enequa-4}\end{aligned}$$ In transition from (\[enequa-2\]) to (\[enequa-3\]) we use equality $\w_t=\w^\mu_{t-d}$ for $d<t\le T$. In transition from (\[enequa-3\]) to (\[enequa-4\]) the positive and corresponding negative terms telescope and only first $d$ positive terms remain. Also, we have used the inequality $$\begin{aligned}
D(\q\|\p)=\sum\limits_{i=1}^N q_i\ln\frac{q_i}{p_i}=
%\nonumber
%\\
\sum\limits_{i=1}^N q_i\ln q_i+\sum\limits_{i=1}^N q_i\ln\frac{1}{p_i}\le
%\nonumber
%\\
\max_{1\le i\le N}\ln\frac{1}{p_i}
\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ for all probability vectors $\q$ and $\p$.
Since $m_t=l^i_t=0$ for all $1\le t\le d$ and $1\le i\le N$, (\[iineq-1\]) follows. $\triangle$
[^1]: <https://github.com/facebook/prophet>
[^2]: For example, in applications, it is convenient for some $d$ to set $p^n_{t,i}=0$ for all $i>d$, since too far predictions become obsolete.
[^3]: The setting of prediction with experts that report their confidences as a number in the interval $[0,1]$ was first studied by [@BlM2007] and further developed by [@CBMS2007].
[^4]: These weights can be computed efficiently, since the divisor in (\[wei-1\]) can be represented $$\begin{aligned}
\sum_{n'=1}^N\sum_{\tau'=1}^\infty w_{(n',\tau'),t}e^{-\eta l^{(n',\tau')}_t}=
\nonumber
\\
\sum_{n'=1}^N\sum_{\tau'=1}^{t-d} w_{(n',\tau'),t}e^{-\eta l^{(n',\tau')}_t}+
e^{-\eta\lambda(y_{t-d+s},\gamma_{t-d,s})}
\left(1-\sum_{n'=1}^N\sum_{\tau'=1}^{t-d} w_{(n',\tau'),t}\right).
\label{up-w-2}\end{aligned}$$
[^5]: Here $c^n_{\tau,t-\tau+s}$ is a forecast of the real expert $n$ for the time moment $t+s$ issued at the time moment $\tau$ and $1\le s\le d$.
[^6]: For computation the values of the function $\subst$, we can use the rules (\[subst-1a\]) or (\[subst-2a\]) from Section \[prel-1\].
[^7]: We extend the rules (\[subst-1a\]) and (\[subst-2a\]) to functional forecasts in a natural way, see (\[subst-1abc\]) below. See also, the footnote for item 8 of Algorithm 1
[^8]: The most appropriate choices of $\eta$ are $\eta=\frac{1}{2B^2}$ for the rule (\[subst-1a\]) and $\eta=\frac{1}{8B^2}$ for (\[subst-2a\]). The more straightforward definition (\[subst-2a\]) results in four times more regret but easier for computation.
[^9]: The computationally efficient algorithm for recalculating matrices during the transition from $X_t$ to $X_{t+1}$ for some special type of online regression with a sliding window was presented by [@arce2012online]. Similar effective options for regression using Algorithm 2 can also be developed.
[^10]: That is, $p_i\ge 0$, $q_i\ge 0$ for all $i$ and $\sum\limits_{i=1}^N p_i=1$ and $\sum\limits_{i=1}^N q_i=1$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'This paper consists of two results dealing with balanced metrics (in S. Donaldson terminology) on nonconpact complex manifolds. In the first one we describe all balanced metrics on Cartan domains. In the second one we show that the only Cartan–Hartogs domain which admits a balanced metric is the complex hyperbolic space. By combining these results with those obtained in [@articwall] we also provide the first example of complete, [Kähler]{}-Einstein and projectively induced metric $g$ such that $\alpha g$ is not balanced for all $\alpha >0$.'
address: 'Dipartimento di Matematica e Informatica, Università di Cagliari, Via Ospedale 72, 09124 Cagliari, Italy'
author:
- 'Andrea Loi, Michela Zedda'
title: 'Balanced metrics on Cartan and Cartan–Hartogs domains'
---
[^1]
Introduction
============
Let $\Omega\subset {\mathbb{C}}^d$ be a Cartan domain, i.e. an irreducible bounded symmetric domain, of complex dimension $d$ and genus $\gamma$. For all positive real numbers $\mu$ consider the family of *Cartan-Hartogs* domains $$\label{defm}
M_{\Omega}(\mu)=\left\{(z,w)\in \Omega\times{\mathbb{C}},\ |w|^2<N_\Omega^\mu(z,z)\right\},$$ where $N_\Omega(z,z)$ is the [*generic norm*]{} of $\Omega$, i.e. $$\label{genericnorm}
N_{\Omega}(z, z)=(V(\Omega)K(z, z))^{-\frac{1}{\gamma}},$$ where $V(\Omega)$ is the total volume of $\Omega$ with respect to the Euclidean measure of the ambient complex Euclidean space and $K(z, z)$ is its Bergman kernel.
The domain $\Omega$ is called the [*base*]{} of the Cartan–Hartogs domain $M_{\Omega}(\mu)$ (one also says that $M_{\Omega}(\mu)$ is based on $\Omega$). Consider on $M_{\Omega}(\mu)$ the metric $g(\mu)$ whose associated Kähler form $\omega(\mu)$ can be described by the (globally defined) Kähler potential centered at the origin $$\label{diastM}
\Phi(z,w)=-\log(N_{\Omega}^\mu(z,z)-|w|^2).$$ These domains have been considered by several authors (see e.g. [@roos] and references therein). In [@articwall] the authors of the present paper study when $\left(M_{\Omega}(\mu),\alpha\,g(\mu)\right)$, for a positive constant $\alpha$, admits a holomorphic and isometric (from now on *[Kähler]{}*) immersion $f$ into the infinite dimensional complex projective space ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^\infty$, i.e. $f^*g_{FS}=\alpha\,g(\mu)$, where $g_{FS}$ denotes the Fubini–Study metric on ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^\infty$ (when such a Kähler immersion exists, we say also that the metric is *projectively induced*). Recall that given homogeneous coordinates $[Z_0,\dots, Z_j,\dots]$ on ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^\infty$, $g_{FS}$ is the Kähler metric whose associated Kähler form $\omega_{FS}$ can be described in the open set $U_0=\{Z_0\neq 0\}$ by $\omega_{FS}=\frac{i}{2}{\partial}\bar {\partial}\Phi_{FS}$, where $\Phi_{FS}= \log(1+\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}|z_j|^2)$ for $z_j=\frac{Z_j}{Z_0}$, $j=1,\dots$, affine coordinates on $U_0$. The main results obtained in [@articwall] can be summarized in the following theorem (see also next section for a more detailed description of the Wallach set $W(\Omega)$ and for the definition of the integer $a$ appearing in (c)).
0.3cm
[**Theorem LZ**]{}\[wallach\]
*Let $\Omega\subset {\mathbb{C}}^d$ be a Cartan domain of rank $r$, genus $\gamma$ and dimension $d$ and let $g_B$ be its Bergman metric. Then the following results hold true:*
- $(\Omega,\beta g_B)$, $\beta >0$, admits a equivariant Kähler immersion into ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^\infty$ if and only if $\beta \gamma$ belongs to $W(\Omega)\setminus \{0\}$;
- the metric $\alpha g(\mu)$, $\alpha >0$, on the Cartan–Hartogs domain $M_{\Omega}(\mu)$ is projectively induced if and only if $(\alpha +m)\frac{\mu}{\gamma}g_B$ is projectively induced for every integer $m\geq 0$;
- Let $\mu_0=\gamma/(d+1)$ and $\Omega\neq{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{H}}^d$. Then the metric $\alpha g(\mu_0)$ on $M_\Omega(\mu_0)$ is [Kähler]{}-Einstein, complete, nonhomogeneous and projectively induced for all positive real number $\alpha\geq \frac{(r-1)(d+1)a}{2\gamma}$.
In this paper we study balanced metrics (in S. Donaldson’s terminology) on Cartan and Cartan–Hartogs domains. The main results are the following two theorems. In the first one we describe all balanced metrics on Cartan’s domains, while the second one can be viewed as a characterization of the complex hyperbolic space among Cartan–Hartogs domains, in terms of balanced metrics (cfr. Example \[exhyp\] below).
\[cartanbalanced\] Let $\Omega$ be a Cartan domain of genus $\gamma$ equipped with its Bergman metric $g_B$. The metric $\beta g_B$, $\beta >0$, is balanced if and only if $\beta>\frac{\gamma-1}{\gamma}$.
\[cartanhartogs\] Let $M_\Omega(\mu)$ be a Cartan-Hartogs domain based on the Cartan domain $\Omega\subset {\mathbb{C}}^d$. The metric $\alpha g(\mu)$ on $M_\Omega(\mu)$ is balanced if and only if $\alpha>d+1$ and $M_\Omega(\mu)$ is holomorphically isometric to the complex hyperbolic space ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{H}}^{d+1}$, namely $\Omega ={\mathbb{C}\mathrm{H}}^d$ and $\mu=1$.
By combining these results with (c) in Theorem LZ we also obtain the first example of [*complete, [Kähler]{}-Einstein and projectively induced metric $g$ such that $\alpha g$ is not balanced for $\alpha$ varying in a continuous subset of the real numbers*]{}. This is expressed by the following corollary.
Let $\Omega\subset {\mathbb{C}}^d$ be a Cartan domain of genus $\gamma$ equipped with its Bergman metric $g_B$. Let $\mu_0=\gamma/(d+1)$ and $\Omega\neq{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{H}}^d$. Then the metric $\alpha g(\mu_0)$ on $M_\Omega(\mu_0)$ is complete, [Kähler]{}-Einstein projectively induced and not balanced for all $\alpha\geq \frac{(r-1)(d+1)a}{2\gamma}$.
The paper consists in other three sections. In Section \[balancedmetrics\] we recall the definition of balanced metrics. In Section \[balancedcartan\] we describe all balanced metrics on Cartan domains and prove Theorem \[cartanbalanced\]. Finally Section \[balancedcartanhartogs\] is dedicated to the proof of Theorem \[cartanhartogs\].
Balanced metrics {#balancedmetrics}
================
Let $M$ be a $n$-dimensional complex manifold endowed with a Kähler metric $g$ and let $\omega$ be the [Kähler]{} form associated to $g$, i.e. $\omega (\cdot ,\cdot )=g(J\cdot, \cdot)$. Assume that the metric $g$ can be described by a strictly plurisubharmonic real valued function $\Phi :M\rightarrow{\mathbb{R}}$, called a [*Kähler potential*]{} for $g$, i.e. $\omega=\frac{i}{2}{\partial}\bar{\partial}\Phi$.
Let ${\mathcal{H}}_\Phi$ be the weighted Hilbert space of square integrable holomorphic functions on $(M, g)$, with weight $e^{-\Phi}$, namely $$\label{hilbertspace}
{\mathcal{H}}_\Phi=\left\{ f\in{\mathrm{Hol}}(M) \ | \ \, \int_M e^{-\Phi}|f|^2\frac{\omega^n}{n!}<\infty\right\},$$ where $\frac{\omega^n}{n!}=\det({\partial}\bar {\partial}\Phi)\frac{\omega_0^n}{n!}$ is the volume form associated to $\omega$ and $\omega_0=\frac{i}{2}\sum_{j=1}^{n} dz_j\wedge d\bar z_j$ is the standard Kähler form on ${\mathbb{C}}^n$. If ${\mathcal{H}}_\Phi\neq \{0\}$ we can pick an orthonormal basis $\{f_j\}$ and define its reproducing kernel by $$K_{\Phi}(z, z)=\sum_{j=0}^N |f_j(z)|^2,$$ where $N+1$ denotes the complex dimension of ${\mathcal{H}}_\Phi\neq \{0\}$. Consider the function $$\label{epsilon}
\varepsilon_g(z)=e^{-\Phi(z)}K_{\Phi}(z, z).$$ As suggested by the notation it is not difficult to verify that $\varepsilon _g$ depends only on the metric $g$ and not on the choice of the Kähler potential $\Phi$ (which is defined up to an addition with the real part of a holomorphic function on $M$) or on the orthonormal basis chosen. 0,3cm
[**Definition.**]{} The metric $g$ is *balanced* if the function $\varepsilon_g$ is a positive constant. 0,3cm
A balanced metric $g$ on $M$ can be viewed as a particular projectively induced [Kähler]{} metric for which the Kähler immersion $f\!: M{\rightarrow}{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^N, N\leq\infty,\ x\mapsto [s_0(x), \dots ,s_j(x), \dots]$, is given by the orthonormal basis $\{f_j\}$ of the Hilbert space ${\mathcal{H}}_{\Phi}$. Indeed the map $f$ is well-defined since $\varepsilon_g$ is a positive constant and hence for all $x\in M$ there exists $\varphi\in {\mathcal{H}}_{\Phi}$ such that $\varphi(x)\neq 0$. Moreover, $$\begin{split}
f^*\omega_{FS}=&\frac{i}{2}{\partial}\bar{\partial}\log\sum_{j=0}^\infty|f_j(z)|^2\\
=&\frac{i}{2}{\partial}\bar{\partial}\log K_{ \Phi} (z, z)\\
=&\frac{i}{2}{\partial}\bar{\partial}\log \varepsilon_{\,g}+\frac{i}{2}{\partial}\bar{\partial}\log e^{\Phi}\\
=&\frac{i}{2}{\partial}\bar{\partial}\log \varepsilon_{g}+ \,\omega.\nonumber
\end{split}$$ Hence if $g$ is balanced the map $f$ is isometric.
In the literature the function $\varepsilon_g$ was first introduced under the name of $\eta$-[*function*]{} by J. Rawnsley in [@rawnsley], later renamed as $\varepsilon$-[*function*]{} in [@CGR]. The map $f$ is called in [@CGR] the [*coherent states map*]{}. It plays a fundamental role in the geometric quantization and quantization by deformation of a Kähler manifold. It also related to the Tian-Yau-Zelditch asymptotic expansion (see [@graloi], [@quant], [@constscal] and references therein).
\[exhyp\] Notice that a projectively induced metric is not always balanced. For example, in [@ca] E. Calabi shows that the complex hyperbolic space $({\mathbb{C}\mathrm{H}}^d, \alpha \,g_{hyp})$, endowed with a positive multiple of the hyperbolic metric $g_{hyp}$, is projectively induced for all $\alpha>0$. (Here ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{H}}^d=\{z\in {\mathbb{C}}^d\ | \ |z|^2<1\}$ and the [Kähler]{} form $\omega_{hyp}$ associated to $g_{hyp}$ is given by $\omega_{hyp}=-\frac{i}{2}\partial\bar\partial\log (1-|z|^2)$). Althought, it is well-known that the weighted Hilbert space of square integrable holomorphic functions on $({\mathbb{C}\mathrm{H}}^d, \alpha \,g_{hyp})$, i.e. $${\mathcal{H}}_{\alpha\Phi_{hyp}}=\left\{ \varphi\in{\mathrm{Hol}}({\mathbb{C}\mathrm{H}}^d), \int_{{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{H}}^d}\left(1-|z|^2\right)^{ \alpha -(d+1)}|\varphi|^2\frac{\omega_0^d}{d!}<\infty \right\},$$ is equal to $\{0\}$ for all $\alpha\leq d$. Similar considerations can be done for all Cartan domains (see Remark \[remarbalsym\] below).
The definition of balanced metrics was originally given by S. Donaldson [@donaldson] in the case of a compact polarized [Kähler]{} manifold $(M, g)$ and generalized in [@arezzoloi] (see also [@cucculoibal], [@englisweigh], [@grecoloi]) to the noncompact case. Here we give only the definition for those [Kähler]{} metrics which admits a globally defined potential as the Cartan and Cartan–Hartogs domains treated in this paper.
Balanced metrics on Cartan domains {#balancedcartan}
==================================
Let $(\Omega, \beta g_B)$, $\beta >0$, denote a Cartan domain, i.e. an irreducible bounded symmetric domain of ${\mathbb{C}}^d$ endowed with a positive multiple of its Bergman metric $g_B$. Recall that $g_B$ is the Kähler metric on $\Omega$ whose associated Kähler form $\omega_B$ is given by $\omega_B=\frac{i}{2}{\partial}\bar{\partial}\log K(z, z)$, where $K(z, z)$ is the reproducing kernel for the Hilbert space $${\mathcal{H}}=\left\{\varphi\in{\mathrm{Hol}}(\Omega),\ \int_\Omega |\varphi|^{2d}\ \frac{\omega_0^d}{d!}<\infty\right\},$$ where $\omega_0=\frac{i}{2} \sum_{j=1}^d dz_j\wedge d\bar z_j$ is the standard Kähler form of ${\mathbb{C}}^d$. A bounded symmetric domain $(\Omega,\alpha g_B)$ is uniquely determined by a triple of integers $(r,a,b)$, where $r$ represents the rank of $\Omega$ and $a$ and $b$ are positive integers. The genus $\gamma$ of $\Omega$ is defined by $\gamma=(r-1)a+b+2$. The table below summarizes the numerical invariants and the dimension of $\Omega$ according to its type (for a more detailed description of this invariants, which is not necessary in our approach, see e.g. [@arazy]).
\[inv\]
-0.5cm
\[inv\] $\textrm{}$
--------------------- ----- ------- ------- ---------- ------------
Type $r$ $a$ $b$ $\gamma$ dimension
$\Omega_1[m,n]$ $m$ $2$ $n-m$ $n+m $ $nm$
$\Omega_2[n]$ $n$ $1$ $0$ $n+1$ $n(n+1)/2$
$\Omega_4[n]$ $2$ $n-2$ $0$ $n$ $n$
$\Omega_{V}[16]$ $2$ $6$ $4$ $12$ $16$
$\Omega_{VI}[27]$ $3$ $8$ $0$ $18$ $27$
: Bounded symmetric domains, invariants and dimension.
We give now the definition of the [*Wallach set*]{} of a Cartan domain $\Omega$, referring the reader to [@arazy], [@faraut] and [@upmeier] for more details and results. The Wallach set, denoted by $W(\Omega)$, consists of all $\eta\in{\mathbb{C}}$ such that there exists a Hilbert space ${{\mathcal{H}}}_\eta$ whose reproducing kernel is $K^{\frac{\eta}{\gamma}}$. This is equivalent to the requirement that $K^{\frac{\eta}{\gamma}}$ is positive definite, i.e. for all $n$-tuples of points $x_1,\dots,x_n$ belonging to $\Omega$ the $n\times n$ matrix $(K(x_{\alpha},x_{\beta})^{\frac{\eta}{\gamma}})$, is positive [*semidefinite*]{}. It turns out (cfr. [@arazy Cor. 4.4, p. 27] and references therein) that $W(\Omega)$ consists only of real numbers and depends on two of the domain’s invariants, $a$ and $r$. More precisely we have $$\label{wallachset}
W(\Omega)=\left\{0,\,\frac{a}{2},\,2\frac{a}{2},\,\dots,\,(r-1)\frac{a}{2}\right\}\cup \left((r-1)\frac{a}{2},\,\infty\right).$$ The set $W_{dis}=\left\{0,\,\frac{a}{2},\,2\frac{a}{2},\,\dots,\,(r-1)\frac{a}{2}\right\}$ and the interval $W_c= \left((r-1)\frac{a}{2},\,\infty\right)$ are called respectively the [*discrete*]{} and [*continuous*]{} part of the Wallach set of the domain $\Omega$.
\[rchimm\]If $\Omega$ has rank $r=1$, namely $\Omega$ is the complex hyperbolic space ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{H}}^d$, then $g_B=(d+1)g_{hyp}$. In this case (and only in this case) $W_{dis}=\{0\}$ and $W_c=(0, \infty)$ (cfr. Example \[exhyp\]).
We can now proof Theorem \[cartanbalanced\].
Let $d$ denote the complex dimension of $\Omega$. It follows by standard results on bounded symmetric domains (see e.g. [@faraut]) that the Hilbert space $${{\mathcal{H}}}_\beta =\left\{ \varphi\in{\mathrm{Hol}}(\Omega) \ | \ \, \int_{\Omega}\frac{1}{K^{\beta}}|\varphi|^2\frac{\omega_B^{d}}{d!}<\infty\right\},$$ does not reduce to the zero dimensional space iff $\beta>\frac{\gamma-1}{\gamma}$.
Hence, in order to prove that $\beta\, g_B$ is balanced for $\beta>\frac{\gamma-1}{\gamma}$, it remains to show that for $\beta>\frac{\gamma-1}{\gamma}$ the map $h_{\beta}:\Omega\rightarrow {\mathbb{C}}P^{\infty}, \ x\mapsto [\dots , h_{\beta}^j(x), \dots]$, where $\{h_{\beta}^j\}$ is an orthonormal basis of ${{\mathcal{H}}}_\beta$, is a well-defined map of $\Omega$ into ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^{\infty}$ and it is [Kähler]{} i.e. $$h_{\beta}^*g_{FS}=\beta g_B. \nonumber$$ To prove that $h_{\beta}$ is well-defined one needs to verify that for all $x\in\Omega$ there exists $\varphi\in{{\mathcal{H}}}_\beta$ such that $\varphi(x)\neq 0$. Assume, by contradiction, that there exists $x_0\in\Omega$ such that $\varphi(x_0)=0$ for all $\varphi\in{\mathcal{H}}_\beta$. Write $\Omega=G/K$, where $G$ is a subgroup of ${\mathrm{Aut}}(\Omega)\cap{\mathrm{Isom}}(\Omega)$ which acts transitively on $\Omega$. Then for all $g\in G$, $\varphi\circ g$ is an element of ${{\mathcal{H}}}_\beta$ which, by assumption, vanishes on $x_0$. Thus $0= \varphi\circ g(x_0)= \varphi(gx_0)$ and since this holds true for all $g\in G$, $h_{\beta}$ is the zero function. Hence ${\mathcal{H}}_\beta=\{0\}$, which is in contrast with the fatct that ${\mathcal{H}}_{\beta}\neq\{0\}$ for $\beta>\frac{\gamma -1}{\gamma}$. In order to prove that $h_{\beta}$ is [Kähler]{} notice that the function $\frac{\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}|h_{\beta}^j|^2}{K^{\beta}}$ is invariant by the group $G$ and hence constant. Hence $$h_{\beta}^*\omega_{FS}=
\frac{i}{2}\partial\bar\partial\log \sum_{j=0}^{\infty}|h_{\beta}^j|^2= \beta\omega_B+\frac{i}{2}\partial\bar\partial\log \frac{\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}|h_{\beta}^j|^2}{K^{\beta}}=\beta\omega_B,$$ and we are done.
\[remarbalsym\] By Theorem \[cartanbalanced\] the subset of the positive real numbers $\beta$ for which $\beta \, g_B$ is balanced, i.e. $\left(\frac{\gamma-1}{\gamma},\infty\right)$, is a proper subset of the continuous part $\left((r-1)\frac{a}{2},\infty\right)$ of the Wallach set $W(\Omega)$. Combining this remark with (a) of Theorem LZ in the introduction one gets that for every Cartan domain there exists an infinite interval of positive real numbers $\beta$ such that $\beta g_B$ is projectively induced but not balanced.
\[convergencetheorem1\] Observe that it follows by Theorem \[cartanbalanced\] that, for all $\beta>\frac{\gamma-1}{\gamma}$, we have for some constant $\xi$ $$\label{integralomega}
\int_{\Omega}N^{\gamma(\beta-1)}_\Omega\, h^j_{\beta}\,\bar h^k_{\beta}\,\omega_0^d=\xi\,\delta_{j,k},$$ where $N_\Omega$ is the generic norm of $\Omega$ defined in (\[genericnorm\]) and $h_\beta$ is the Kähler map defined in the proof of Theorem \[cartanbalanced\]. In particular, the integral (\[integralomega\]) is convergent and does not depend on $j$, $k$.
Balanced metrics on Cartan–Hartogs domains {#balancedcartanhartogs}
==========================================
In order to prove Theorem \[cartanhartogs\] we need the following two lemmata. The first one gives an explicit description of the [Kähler]{} immersions of a $d+1$-dimensional Cartan–Hartogs domain $(M_\Omega(\mu),\alpha g(\mu))$ into ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^{\infty}$ while the second one describes a necessary condition for the metric $\alpha g(\mu)$ to be balanced.
\[immersion\] If $f\!:M_\Omega(\mu){\rightarrow}{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^\infty$ is a holomorphic map such that $f^*\omega_{FS}=\alpha\,\omega(\mu)$ then up to unitary transformation of ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^\infty$ it is given by $$\label{immf}
f=\left[ 1, s, h_{\frac{\mu\, \alpha}{\gamma}},\dots,\sqrt{\frac{(m+ \alpha-1)!}{(\alpha-1)!m!}}h_{\frac{\mu(\alpha +m)}{\gamma}}w^m,\dots\right],$$ where $s=(s_1,\dots, s_m,\dots)$ with $$s_m=\sqrt{\frac{(m+ \alpha-1)!}{(\alpha-1)!m!}}w^m,$$ and for all $k>0$, $h_k=(h_k^1,\dots,h_k^j,\dots)$ is the sequence of holomorphic maps on $\Omega$ such that the immersion $\tilde h_k=(1,h_k^1,\dots, h_k^j,\dots)$, $\tilde h_k\!:\Omega{\rightarrow}{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^\infty$, satisfies $\tilde h_k^*\omega_{FS}=k \omega_B$, i.e. $$\label{ie}
1+\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}|h_k^j|^2=\frac{1}{N^{\gamma\, k}}.$$
Since the immersion is isometric, by (\[diastM\]) we have $f^*\Phi_{FS}=-\alpha\log(N_{\Omega}^\mu(z,z)-|w|^2)$, which is equivalent to $$\frac{1}{(N^{\mu}-|w|^2)^\alpha}=\sum_{j=0}^\infty |f_j|^2,$$ for $f=[f_0,\dots, f_j,\dots]$. If we consider the power expansion around the origin of the left hand side with respect to $w$, $\bar w$, we get $$\begin{split}
\sum_{k=1}^\infty \left[\frac{{\partial}^{2k}}{{\partial}w^k {\partial}\bar w^k}\frac{1}{(N^{\mu}-|w|^2)^\alpha}\right]_{0}\frac{|w|^{2k}}{k!^2}=& \sum_{k=1}^\infty \left[\frac{{\partial}^{2k}}{{\partial}w^k {\partial}\bar w^k}\frac{1}{(1-|w|^2)^\alpha}\right]_{0}\frac{|w|^{2k}}{k!^2}\\
=&\left(\sum_{k=0}^\infty |w|^2\right)^\alpha-1.\nonumber
\end{split}$$ The power expansion with respect to $z$ and $\bar z$ reads $$\begin{split}
\sum_{j,k}\left[\frac{{\partial}^{|m_j|+|m_k|}}{{\partial}z^{m_j} {\partial}\bar z^{m_k}}\frac{1}{(N^{\mu}-|w|^2)^\alpha}\right]_{0}\frac{z^{m_j}\bar z^{m_k}}{m_j!m_k!}=&\sum_{j,k}\left[\frac{{\partial}^{|m_j|+|m_k|}}{{\partial}z^{m_j} {\partial}\bar z^{m_k}}\frac{1}{N^{\mu\alpha}}\right]_{0}\frac{z^{m_j}\bar z^{m_k}}{m_j!m_k!}\\
=&\sum_{j=1}^\infty |h_{\frac{\mu\alpha}{\gamma}}^j|^2,\nonumber
\end{split}$$ where the last equality holds since by (\[ie\]) $\sum_{j=1}^\infty h_{\frac{\mu\alpha}{\gamma}}^j$ is the power expansion of $\frac{1}{N^{\mu\alpha}}-1$. Here we are using Calabi’s multi index notation, namely we arrange every $d$-tuple of nonnegative integers as the sequence $m_j=(m_{j,1},\dots,m_{j,d})$ with nondecreasing order, that is $m_0=(0,\dots,0)$, $|m_j|\leq |m_{j+1}|$, with $|m_j|=\sum_{\alpha=1}^d m_{j,\alpha}$. Further $z^{m_j}$ denotes the monomial in $d$ variables $\prod_{\alpha=1}^d z_\alpha^{m_{j,\alpha}}$ and $m_j!=m_{j,1}!\cdots m_{j,d}!$.
Finally, the power expansion with respect to $z$, $\bar z$, $w$, $\bar w$ reads $$\begin{split}
&\sum_{m=1}^\infty\sum_{j,k}\left[\frac{{\partial}^{|m_j|+|m_k|}}{{\partial}z^{m_j} {\partial}\bar z^{m_k}}\frac{{\partial}^{2m}}{{\partial}w^m {\partial}\bar w^m}\frac{1}{(N^{\mu}-|w|^2)^\alpha}\right]_{0}\frac{z^{m_j}\bar z^{m_k}w^m\bar w^m}{m_j!m_k!m!^2}\\
=&\sum_{m=1}^\infty\sum_{j,k}\left[\frac{{\partial}^{|m_j|+|m_k|}}{{\partial}z^{m_j} {\partial}\bar z^{m_k}}\frac{(m+\alpha-1)!}{(\alpha-1)!m!N^{\mu(\alpha+m)}}\right]_{0}\frac{z^{m_j}\bar z^{m_k}}{m_j!m_k!}\\
=&\sum_{m=1}^\infty\sum_{j=1}^\infty \frac{(m+\alpha-1)!}{(\alpha-1)!m!}|w|^{2m}|h_{\frac{\mu(\alpha+m)}{\gamma}}^j|^2,\nonumber
\end{split}$$ where we are using (\[ie\]) again. It follows by the previous power series expansions, that the map $f$ given by (\[immf\]) is a [Kähler]{} immersion of $(M_{\Omega}(\mu), \alpha g(\mu))$ into ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^\infty$. By Calabi’s rigidity Theorem (cfr. [@ca]) all other [Kähler]{} immersions are given by $U\circ f$, where $U$ is a unitary transformation of ${\mathbb{C}}P^{\infty}$.
\[neccond\] If $\alpha\,g(\mu)$ is balanced then $\alpha>d+1$ and $\alpha\mu>\gamma-1$.
Assume that $\alpha\, g(\mu)$ is balanced. Then it is projectively induced and by Lemma \[immersion\], up to unitary transformation of ${\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^\infty$, the Kähler immersion $f\!:M_\Omega(\mu){\rightarrow}{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{P}}^\infty$, $f=[f_0, \dots , f_j, \dots]$, is given by (\[immf\]). By Section \[balancedmetrics\] $\{f_j\}_{j=0,1,\dots}$ is an orthonormal basis for the weighted Hilbert space $$\label{hilbertspaceexplicit}
{\mathcal{H}}_{\alpha\Phi}=\left\{ \varphi\in{\mathrm{Hol}}(M_{\Omega}(\mu)) \ | \ \, \int_{M(\mu)}\left(N^\mu_\Omega-|w|^2\right)^\alpha|\varphi|^2\frac{\omega( \mu )^{d+1}}{(d+1)!}<\infty\right\},$$ where up to the multiplication with a positive constant $$\frac{\omega(\mu)^{d+1}}{(d+1)!}=\frac{N_{\Omega}^{\mu(d+1)-\gamma}}{(N^\mu_\Omega-|w|^2)^{d+2}} \frac{\omega_0^{d+1}}{(d+1)!}.$$ Thus, in particular we have $$\begin{split}
&\int_{M_{\Omega}(\mu)}(N^\mu_\Omega-|w|^2)^ \alpha f_j\bar f_k\frac{\omega(\mu)^{d+1}}{(d+1)!}=\\
&\int_{M_{\Omega}(\mu)}(N^\mu_\Omega-|w|^2)^{\alpha-(d+2)}N_{\Omega}^{\mu(d+1)-\gamma}f_j \bar f_k\frac{\omega_0^{d+1}}{(d+1)!}=\lambda\, \delta_{jk},\nonumber
\end{split}$$ for some constant $\lambda$ indepentent from $j$ and $k$. It follows by (\[immf\]) that the following integral $$\int_{M_\Omega(\mu)}(N^\mu_\Omega-|w|^2)^{\alpha-(d+2)}N^{\mu(d+1)-\gamma}|h^j_{\mu\alpha}|^2\frac{\omega_0^{d+1}}{(d+1)!},\nonumber$$ is convergent. Passing to polar coordinates gets $$\label{integralm0}
\frac{\pi}{(d+1)!} \int_{\Omega}N_\Omega^{\mu(d+1)-\gamma} |h^j_{\mu\alpha}|^2 \int_0^{N_\Omega^\mu}(N^\mu_\Omega-\rho)^{\alpha-(d+2)}d\rho\,\omega_0^d.\nonumber
$$ The integral $$\int_0^{N_\Omega^\mu}(N^\mu_\Omega-\rho)^{\alpha-(d+2)}d\rho,$$ is convergent iff $\alpha-(d+2)>-1$, i.e. iff $\alpha>d+1$. Further, being $\alpha> d+1$, going on with computations gives $$\frac{\pi}{(d+1)!}\frac{1}{(\alpha-(d+2)+1)}\int_{\Omega}N^{\mu\alpha-\gamma}_\Omega |h^j_{\frac{\mu\alpha}{\gamma}}|^2\omega_0^d.\nonumber$$ By Remark \[convergencetheorem1\] this last integral converges and does not depends on $j$ iff $\alpha\mu>\gamma-1$, and we are done.
We are now in the position of proving Theorem \[cartanhartogs\].
Since by Theorem \[cartanbalanced\] the hyperbolic metric $\alpha g_{hyp}$ is balanced iff $\alpha>d+1$, the sufficient condition is verified (recall that for the hyperbolic metric we have $\mu=1$ and $\gamma=d+2$). For the necessary part, assume that $\alpha\, g(\mu)$ is balanced. By Lemma \[neccond\] we can assume $\alpha>d+1$ and $\alpha\mu>\gamma-1$. Following the same approach as in Lemma \[neccond\], this gives that the integral $$\int_{M_\Omega(\mu)}(N^\mu_\Omega-|w|^2)^{\alpha-(d+2)}N^{\mu(d+1)-\gamma}f_j\bar f_k\frac{\omega_0^{d+1}}{(d+1)!}\nonumber$$ is zero for $j\neq k$ and does not depend on $j$ otherwise. By (\[immf\]) this implies that the following integral $$\label{integral}
\begin{split}
&\int_{M_\Omega(\mu)}(N^\mu_\Omega-|w|^2)^{\alpha-(d+2)}N^{\mu(d+1)-\gamma}\frac{(m+ \alpha-1)!}{(\alpha-1)!m!}|h^j_{\frac{\mu(\alpha +m)}{\gamma}}|^2|w|^{2m}\frac{\omega_0^{d+1}}{(d+1)!}=\\
&\frac{\pi}{(d+1)!} \frac{(m+ \alpha-1)!}{(\alpha-1)!m!}\int_{\Omega}N_\Omega^{\mu(d+1)-\gamma} |h^j_{\frac{\mu(\alpha +m)}{\gamma}}|^2 \int_0^{N_\Omega^\mu}(N^\mu_\Omega-\rho)^{\alpha-(d+2)}\rho^{m}\omega_0^d=\\
&\frac{\pi\, m!}{(d+1)!} \frac{(m+ \alpha-1)!}{(\alpha-1)!\,m!}\frac{1}{(\alpha-(d+2)+1)\cdots(\alpha-(d+2)+m)}\cdot\\
&\textrm{ }\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad \cdot\int_{\Omega}N_\Omega^{\mu(d+1)-\gamma} |h^j_{\frac{\mu(\alpha +m)}{\gamma}}|^2 \int_0^{N_\Omega^\mu}(N^\mu_\Omega-\rho)^{\alpha-(d+2)+m}\omega_0^d=\\
&\frac{\pi}{(d+1)!} \frac{(m+ \alpha-1)!}{(\alpha-1)!}\frac{1}{(\alpha-(d+2)+1)\cdots(\alpha-(d+2)+m+1)}\cdot\\
&\textrm{ }\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad \cdot\int_{\Omega}N^{\mu(\alpha +m)-\gamma}_\Omega |h^j_{\frac{\mu(\alpha +m)}{\gamma}}|^2\omega_0^d,
\end{split}$$ does not depend on the choice of $m$ and $j$. Since $\alpha\mu>\gamma-1$ implies $\frac{\mu(\alpha +m)}{\gamma}>\frac{\gamma-1}{\gamma}$, Remark \[integralomega\] yields that $\int_{\Omega}N^{k-\gamma}_\Omega |h^j_{k}|^2\omega_0^d$ is constant for all $j$ and thus (\[integral\]) does not depend on $j$ (observe also that for $j=0$ one obtains the term $s_m$ of $s$ in Lemma \[immersion\] and for $j=m=0$ we recover the first term of $f$, $f_0=1$). Thus if $\alpha\,g(\mu)$ is balanced the quantity $$\frac{\pi}{(d+1)!} \frac{(m+ \alpha-1)!}{(\alpha-1)!}\frac{1}{(\alpha-(d+2)+1)\cdots(\alpha-(d+2)+m)}\int_{\Omega}N^{\mu(\alpha +m)-\gamma}_\Omega\omega_0^d$$ does not depend on $m$. By [@roosformula Prop. 2.1, p. 358] this is equivalent to ask that the quantity $$\frac{(m+ \alpha-1)!}{(\alpha-d-1)\cdots(\alpha-d+m-2)}\frac{F(\mu(\alpha +m)-\gamma)}{F(0)}$$ does not depend on $m$, where $$\frac{F(s)}{F(0)}=)\prod_{j=1}^r\frac{\Gamma\left(s+1+\frac{(j-1)a}{2}\right)\Gamma\left(b+2+\frac{(r+j-2)a}{2}\right)}{\Gamma\left(1+\frac{(j-1)a}{2}\right)\Gamma\left(s+b+2+\frac{(r+j-2)a}{2}\right)} ,$$ for $\Gamma$ the usual Gamma function and $(a,b,r)$ the domain’s invariants described in Table \[inv\]. Deleting the terms which do not depends on $m$ and changing the orders of terms in the argument of the Gamma functions, we get $$(\alpha +m-1)\cdots(\alpha +m-d)\prod_{j=1}^r\frac{\Gamma\left(\mu(\alpha +m)-\gamma+1+\frac{(j-1)a}{2}\right)}{\Gamma\left(\mu(\alpha +m)-\gamma+b+2+\frac{(r+j-2)a}{2}\right)},$$ $$(\alpha +m-1)\cdots(\alpha +m-d)\prod_{j=1}^r\frac{\Gamma\left(\mu(\alpha +m)-\gamma+1+\frac{(j-1)a}{2}\right)}{\Gamma\left(\mu(\alpha +m)-\gamma+b+2+\frac{(2r-j-1)a}{2}\right)},$$ $$(\alpha +m-1)\cdots(\alpha +m-d)\prod_{j=1}^r\frac{\Gamma\left(\mu(\alpha +m)-\gamma+1-\frac{a}{2}+\frac{ja}{2}\right)}{\Gamma\left(\left[\mu(\alpha +m)-\gamma+1-\frac{a}{2}+\frac{ja}{2}\right]+b+1+ra-ja\right)}.$$ Since the quantity $b+1+ra-ja$ is a positive integer, by the well-known property $\Gamma(z+1)=z\Gamma(z)$ we get $$\label{final}
\frac{(\alpha +m-1)\cdot\ldots\cdot(\alpha +m-d)}{\underbrace{\left(A+b+a(r-1)\right)\cdot\ldots\cdot A}_{j=1,\ b+1+a(r-1) \,\textrm{terms}}\cdot\ldots\cdot\underbrace{\left(A+b\right)\cdot\ldots\cdot A}_{j=r,\ b+1\, \textrm{terms}}},$$ where $A=\mu(\alpha +m)-\gamma+1-\frac{a}{2}+\frac{ja}{2}$. A necessary condition for the above quantity to be indipendent from $m$ is that numerator and denominator regarded as polynomials in $m$ have the same degree, i.e. $$d=\frac{(b+1+a(r-1))!}{b!}.$$ Observe that such condition is satisfied by the complex hyperbolic space whose rank is $r=1$ and $b=d-1$. Althought no one of the other domains satisfies it. It remains to show that $\left(M_{{\mathbb{C}\mathrm{H}}^d(\mu)}, \alpha \, g(\mu)\right)$ is balanced if and only if $\mu=1$. By (\[final\]), when $\Omega ={\mathbb{C}}H^{d}$, i.e. $r=1$, $b=d-1$ and $\gamma=d+1$, we get $$\frac{(\alpha +m-1)\cdot\ldots\cdot(\alpha +m-d)}{\left(\mu(\alpha +m)-1\right)\cdot\ldots\cdot \left(\mu(\alpha +m)-d\right)},\nonumber$$ that is independent from $m$ if and only if $\mu=1$, as wished.
[99]{}
J. Arazy, *A Survey of Invariant Hilbert Spaces of Analytic Functions on Bounded Symmetric Domains*, Contemporary Mathematics 185 (1995).
C. Arezzo, A. Loi, [*Moment maps, scalar curvature and quantization of [Kähler]{} manifolds*]{}, Comm. Math. Phys. 243 (2004), 543-559.
M. Cahen, S. Gutt, J. Rawnsley, *Quantization of Kähler manifolds. I: Geometric interpretation of Berezin’s quantization*, J. Geom. Physics 7 (1990), 45–62.
E. Calabi, [*Isometric Imbeddings of Complex Manifolds*]{}, Ann. Math. 58 (1953), 1-23.
F. Cuccu and A. Loi, [*Global symplectic coordinates on complex domains*]{}, J. Geom. and Phys. 56 (2006), 247-259.
S. Donaldson, [*Scalar Curvature and Projective Embeddings, I*]{}, J. Diff. Geometry 59 (2001), 479-522.
M. Engli$\rm \check{s}$, *Weighted Bergman kernels and balanced metrics*, RIMS Kokyuroku 1487 (2006), 40–54.
J. Faraut, A. Koranyi, *Function Spaces and Reproducing Kernels on Bounded Symmetric Domains*, Journal of Functional Analysis 88 (1990), 64–89.
T. Gramchev, A. Loi, [*TYZ expansion for the Kepler manifold*]{}, Comm. Math. Phys. 289, (2009), 825-840.
A. Greco, A. Loi, [*Radial balanced metrics on the unit disk*]{} J. Geom. Phys. 60 (2010), 53-59.
A. Loi, *Regular quantizations of Kähler manifolds and constant scalar curvature metrics*, J. Geom. Phys. 53 (2005), 354-364.
A. Loi, [*Regular quantizations of [Kähler]{} manifolds and constant scalar curvature metrics*]{}, J. Geom. Phys. 53 (2005), 354-364.
A. Loi, M. Zedda, *Kähler–Einstein submanifolds of the infinite dimensional projective space*, to appear in Mathematische Annalen.
G. Roos, Keiping Lu, Weiping Yin, *New classes of domains with explicit Bergman kernel*, Science in China 47, no. 3 (2004), 352–371.
G. Roos, A. Wang, W. Yin, L. Zhang, *The Kähler-Einstein metric for some Hartogs domains over bounded symmetric domains*, Science in China 49 (September 2006).
J. Rawnsley, *Coherent states and Kähler manifolds*, Quart. J. Math. Oxford (2), n. 28 (1977), 403–415.
H. Upmeier, [*Index theory for Toeplitz operators on bounded symmetric domains*]{}, Représentations des groupes et analyse complexe (Luminy, 1986), 89–94, Journées SMF, 24, Univ. Poitiers, Poitiers (1986).
[^1]: The first author was supported by the M.I.U.R. Project Geometric Properties of Real and Complex Manifolds”; the second author was supported by RAS through a grant financed with the “Sardinia PO FSE 2007-2013” funds and provided according to the L.R. $7/2007$.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'A recent result of Eisenbud-Schreyer and Boij-Söderberg proves that the Betti diagram of any graded module decomposes as a positive rational linear combination of pure diagrams. When does this numerical decomposition correspond to an actual filtration of the minimal free resolution? Our main result gives a sufficient condition for this to happen. We apply it to show the non-existence of free resolutions with some plausible-looking Betti diagrams and to study the semigroup of quiver representations of the simplest “wild” quiver.'
address:
- 'Department of Mathematics, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA'
- 'Department of Mathematics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-1043, USA'
- 'Mathematik und Informatik, Universität des Saarlandes, Campus E2 4, D-66123 Saarbrücken, Germany'
author:
- David Eisenbud
- Daniel Erman
- 'Frank-Olaf Schreyer'
title: Filtering Free Resolutions
---
Introduction
============
Let $k$ be a field, let $S:=k[x_1, \dots, x_n]$ be the polynomial ring, and let $M$ be a finitely generated graded $S$-module. We write: $$\xymatrix{
F^{M}_{\phantom{p}}:& 0\ar[r]&F^{M}_p \ar[r]^{\phi_p}& \dots\ar[r]^{\phi_2}& F^{M}_1 \ar[r]^{\phi_1} &F^{M}_0
}$$ for the graded minimal free resolution of $M$. We define $\beta_{i,j}(F^{M}) = \beta_{i,j}(M)$ by the formula $$F^M_i=\bigoplus_{j\in \mathbb Z} S(-j)^{\beta_{i,j}(M)}.$$ The underlying question of this paper is
\[question:beyond0\] When does a knowledge of the numbers $\beta_{i,j}$ imply that the module $M$ decomposes as a direct sum? More generally, when can we deduce from the Betti numbers that the $M$ has a submodule $M'$ whose free resolution $F^{M'}$ is a summand, term by term, of $F^{M}$?
We will say that a submodule $M' \subset M$ is if it satisfies the condition in the last sentence of the question—that is, if the natural map $${\rm Tor}_{i}^{S}(M', k) \to{\rm Tor}_{i}^{S}(M, k)$$ is a monomorphism for every $i$. Of course any summand is cleanly embedded.
Here is a well-known example where knowledge of the $\beta_{i,j}$ allows us to predict a summand: Suppose that $M$ is zero in negative degrees, that is, $\beta_{0,j}(M) = 0$ for $j<0$. If $\beta_{n,n}(M)= b$ then $M$ contains $\bigl(S/(x_{1},\dots,x_{n})\bigr)^{b}$ as a direct summand. (Reason: $\beta_{n,n}(M)$ is, by local duality, equal to the component of the socle of $M$ in degree $0$.)
Question \[question:beyond0\] has a special interest in light of Theory: The conjecture of Boij and Söderberg, proven by Eisenbud and Schreyer in [@eis-schrey1] and then extended in [@boij-sod2], says that the Betti diagram of $M$ can be written uniquely as a positive rational linear combination $$\beta(M) = \sum_{t = 0}^{s}c_{t}\pi_{d^{t}}$$ of *pure* Betti diagrams $\pi_{d^{t}}$ where the *degree sequences* $d^{t}$ satisfying $d^0 < d^1 < \ldots < d^s$. Here a degree sequence is an element $$d= (d_{0}, \dots, d_{n})\in ({{\mathbb Z}}\cup \{\infty\})^{n+1} \text{ with } d_i+1\le d_{i+1} \text{ for all } i ,$$ and the (rational) Betti diagram $\pi_{d}$ is given by $$\label{eqn:pid}
\beta_{i,j}(\pi_{d}) = \begin{cases} 0&j\ne d_i\\
\prod_{k\ne i, d_k<\infty}\frac{1}{|d_i-d_{k}|} &j=d_i,
\end{cases}$$ and $d^{t}\le d^{t+1}$ means that $d^{t}_{i}\leq d^{t+1}_{i}$ for every $i$. (see §\[sec:background\] for the definition of a pure diagram and a summary of the necessary part of theory).
With this result in mind it is natural to refine Question \[question:beyond0\] and ask:
\[question:beyond\]\[question:beyond1\] When does the decomposition of the Betti diagram of a graded module $M$ into pure diagrams arise from some filtration of $M$ by cleanly embedded submodules?
In particular, when does the Betti diagram $c_{0}\pi_{d^{0}}$ correspond to the resolution of a cleanly embedded submodule $M'\subset M$?
Certainly such a submodule $M'$ *does not* always exist: often the numbers $\beta_{i,j}(c_{0}\pi_{d^{0}})$ are not even integers, and there are subtler reasons as well (see Example \[ex:first filtration\] and §\[sec:beyond\]). However, our main result says such a module $M'$ *does* exist when $d^{0}$ is “sufficiently separate” from the rest of the $d^{t}$. To make this precise, we write $$d^{0}\ll d^{1} \text{ if } d^{0}<d^{1} \text{ and } d^{0}_{2}\leq d^{1}_{1} . $$
\[thm:puresexist\] Let $\dim(S)\geq 2$ and let $M$ be a finite length graded $S$-module with Boij-Söderberg decomposition $$\beta(M)=\sum_{i=0}^s c_{i}\pi_{d^i}.$$
1. \[thm:puresexist:1\] If $d^0 \ll d^{1}$, then there is a cleanly embedded submodule $M'\subset M$ with $\beta(M') = c_{0}\pi_{d^0}$. In particular, the diagram $c_{0}\pi_{d^0}$ has integer entries.
2. \[thm:puresexist:2\] If $d^{0}_{n}-n < d^{1}_{1}$, then $d^0 \ll d^{1}$ and $M'$ is a direct summand of $M$.
With corresponding hypotheses on all $d^{i}$, we obtain a full clean filtration (as in Definition \[defn:pure filtration\]).
\[cor:puresexist-iterated\] If, with hypotheses as in Theorem \[thm:puresexist\], $d^{0}\ll d^{1}\ll \cdots \ll d^{s}$, then $M$ admits a filtration $0= M^{0} \subset \cdots \subset M^{s}\subset M^{s+1}$ by cleanly embedded submodules $M^{i}$ such that $
\beta(M^{i+1}/M^{i})=c_i\pi_d^{i}.
$
In the following, and in the rest of the paper, we write the of $M$, $\beta(M)$, as a matrix whose entry in column $i$ and row $i+j$ is $\beta_{i,j}(M)$. In examples, we follow the convention that the upper left entry of $\beta(M)$ corresponds to $\beta_{0,0}(M)$.
Let $S=k[x,y,z]$. If $M$ is any module with $$\beta(M)=\begin{pmatrix}
4&8&6&-\\
-&6&8&4
\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}
3&8&6&-\\
-&-&-&1
\end{pmatrix}
+
\begin{pmatrix}
1&-&-&-\\
-&6&8&3
\end{pmatrix},$$ then, since the corresponding degree sequences are $d^0=(0,1,2,4)$ and $d^1=(0,2,3,4)$, Theorem \[thm:puresexist\] implies that $M$ splits as $M=M^1\oplus M^2$ with $$\beta(M^1)=\begin{pmatrix}
3&8&6&-\\
-&-&-&1
\end{pmatrix}
\quad \text{ and }
\beta(M^2)=\begin{pmatrix}
1&-&-&-\\
-&6&8&3
\end{pmatrix}.$$
The technique we develop to prove Theorem \[thm:puresexist\] actually yields the result in more general (but harder to formulate) circumstances; see §\[sec:beyond\].
Application: The Insufficiency of Integrality {#application-the-insufficiency-of-integrality .unnumbered}
---------------------------------------------
One application of Theorem \[thm:puresexist\] is to prove the non-existence of resolutions having otherwise plausible-looking Betti diagrams:
\[prop:sparserays\] Let $p\in {{\mathbb Z}}$ be any prime. Then there exists a diagram $D$ with integral entries, such that $cD$ is the Betti diagram of a module if and only if $c$ is divisible by $p$.
This result simultaneously strengthens parts $(2), (3)$ and $(4)$ of [@erman-semigroup Thm. 1.6]. Its proof is given in §\[sec:pathologies\]. The following question, posed in [@efw Conjecture 6.1], remains open: do all but finitely many integral points on a ray of *pure* diagrams correspond to the Betti diagram of a module?
\[ex:first filtration\] There is no graded module $M$ of finite length with Betti Diagram $$D:=
\begin{pmatrix}
2 & 3 & 2 & - \\
- & 3 &3 &-\\
- & 2&3&2
\end{pmatrix}.$$ Reason: The decomposition of $D$ is $$D =
\frac{1}{5}
\begin{pmatrix}
6&15&10&-\\
-&-&-&-\\
-&-&-&1
\end{pmatrix}
+
\frac{3}{5}
\begin{pmatrix}
1&-&-&-\\
-&5&5&-\\
-&-&-&1
\end{pmatrix}
+
\frac{1}{5}
\begin{pmatrix}
1&-&-&-\\
-&-&-&-\\
-&10&15&6
\end{pmatrix}$$ The corresponding degree sequences are $d^0=(0,1,2,5), d^1=(0,2,3,5)$ and $d^2=(0,3,4,5)$, so Theorem \[thm:puresexist\] implies that a module with Betti diagram $D$ would admit a cleanly embedded submodule $M'$ with betti diagram $$\beta(M')=\frac{1}{5}
\begin{pmatrix}
6&15&10&-\\
-&-&-&-\\
-&-&-&1
\end{pmatrix} =
\begin{pmatrix}
1/5&-&-&-\\
-&-&-&-\\
-&2&3&6/5
\end{pmatrix}.$$ This is absurd, since the entries of the diagram are not integers.
Now consider the diagrams $cD$, where $c$ is a rational number. The same argument implies that these are not Betti diagrams of modules of finite length unless $c$ is an integral multiple of 5. On the other hand, if $R:= k[x,y,z]/(x,y,z)^{3}, \omega_R(3)$ is the twisted dual of $R$, and $R':=k[x,y,z]/(x^{2},y^{2},z^{2}-xy, xz, yz)$, then $$\label{eqn:5D}
\beta(R\oplus \omega_R(3) \oplus R'^{\oplus 3} )=\begin{pmatrix}
10 & 15 & 10 & - \\
- & 15 &15 &-\\
- & 10&15&10
\end{pmatrix}
=
5D.$$ We conclude that $cD$ is the Betti diagram of a module of finite length if and only if $c$ is an integral multiple of $5$.
[**Application: Invariants of the Representations of $\bullet\triplearrow{}{}\bullet$.**]{} \[ex:2x3\] It was proven in [@erman-semigroup Thm 1.3] that the semigroup of all Betti diagrams of modules with bounded regularity and generator degrees is finitely generated, and the generators were worked out in some small examples. In those cases the semigroup coincides with the set of integral points in the positive rational cone generated by the Betti diagrams of modules. With the added power of Theorem \[thm:puresexist\] we can determine the generators in the first case where this does not happen: the case of modules over $k[x,y,z]$ having only two nonzero graded components, $M = M_{0}\oplus M_{1}$.
This case has an interpretation in the representation theory of quivers. Consider representations over $k$ of the quiver with three arrows: $$Q: \bullet \triplearrow{}{} \bullet$$ The problem of classifying representations of $Q$ up to isomorphism (or, equivalently, classifying triples of matrices up to simultaneous equivalence) is famously of “wild type”; the variety of classes of representations with a given dimension vector $D:=(\dim M_{0}, \dim M_{1}) $ has dimension that grows with $D$, and many components.
The Betti diagram of $M$ provides a discrete invariant of such a representation. The (Castelnuovo-Mumford) regularity of $M$ is 1, so the Betti diagram has the form $$\beta(M)=\begin{pmatrix}
\beta_{0,0}& \beta_{1,1}& \beta_{2,2}& \beta_{3,3} \\
\beta_{0,1}& \beta_{1,2}& \beta_{2,3}& \beta_{3,4} \\
\end{pmatrix}.$$ Some of the numbers in this diagram are easy to understand: for example, $\beta_{3,3}$ is the dimension of the common kernel of the three matrices, and $\beta_{0,1}$ is the dimension of $M_{1}$ modulo the sum of the images of the matrices. Passing to an obvious subquotient, therefore, we may assume that $\beta_{3,3} = \beta_{0,1} = 0$. In this case $\beta_{0,0} = \dim M_{0}$ and $\beta_{1,1} = \dim M_{1}-3\beta_{0,0}$ are determined by the dimension vector $D$, as are $\beta_{3,4}$ and $\beta_{2,3}$ and the difference $\beta_{1,2}-\beta_{2,2}$.
However, the value of $\beta_{2,2}$ is a more subtle invariant, semicontinuous on the family of equivalence classes of representations. In §\[sec:gensBmod\] we determine the semigroup of Betti diagrams $\beta(M)$ that come from representations of $Q$.
[**A Monotonicity Principle and the proof of Theorem \[thm:puresexist\].**]{} In order to prove Theorem \[thm:puresexist\], we must construct an appropriate submodule of $M$ based only on the information contained in the Betti diagram of $M$. Our construction is based on the notion of a .
\[defn:numerical subcomplex\] A of a minimal free resolution $F^{M}$ is a subcomplex $G$ “whose existence is evident from the Betti diagram $\beta(F^{M})$” in the sense that there is a sequence of integers $\alpha_{i}$ such that each $G_{i}$ consists of all the summands of $F^{M}_{i}$ generated in degrees $< \alpha_{i}$, and each $F^{M}_{i}/G_{i}$ is generated in degrees $\geq \alpha_{i+1}$.
For instance, in the example in , the linear strand $$S^{10}\gets S^{15}(-1)\gets S^{10}(-2)\gets 0.$$ of $F^M$ is a numerical subcomplex of $F^M$ determined by $\alpha = (0,1,2,3)$.
For the proof of Theorem \[thm:puresexist\], we use a numerical subcomplex $F^M$ to construct a submodule $M'\subseteq M$, where $\beta(M')=c_0\pi_{d^0}$. Defining the appropriate numerical subcomplex and the submodule $M'$ will be relatively straightforward. However, since numerical complexes generally fail to be exact, it is not a priori clear that we should be able to determine the Betti diagram of the submodule $M'$. This computation relies on a about the Betti numbers of pure diagrams.
\[lem:monotonicity\] Suppose that $d,e$ are degree sequences with $d_{i} = e_{i}$ and $d_{i+1}=e_{i+1}$. If $d<e$ then $$\frac{\beta_{i,d_i}(\pi_{d})}{\beta_{i+1,d_{i+1}}(\pi_{d})} < \frac{\beta_{i,e_i}(\pi_{e})}{\beta_{i+1,e_{i+1}}(\pi_{e})}$$
This lemma turns out to be surprisingly powerful, and we apply it to compute the Betti diagram of our submodule $M'\subseteq M$. This Monotonicity Principle is related to some of the numerical inequalities for pure diagrams from [@mccullough Lemma 4.1] and [@erman-beh §3].
This paper is organized as follows. In the next section we provide the necessary background on theory. In §\[sec:North fork\]–§\[sec:obtaining\], we develop our technique for producing cleanly embedded submodules. We then discuss some limitations and extensions of our main result in §\[sec:beyond\]. The last two sections are devoted to the applications described above.
Notation and Background on Boij-Söderberg Theory {#sec:background}
================================================
Throughout, all modules are assumed to be finitely generated, graded $S$-modules. We use $(F^M,\phi^M)$ to refer to the minimal resolution of a module $M$, though we may omit the upper index $M$ in cases where confusion is unlikely.
Fix a module $M$, a minimal free resolution $(F^M, \phi^M)$ of $M$, and a sequence of integers $\mathbf{f}=(f_0,\dots,f_n)\in {{\mathbb Z}}^{n+1}$. We define $(F(\mathbf{f})^M,\phi(\mathbf{f})^M)$ to be a sequence of free modules and maps $$\xymatrix{
\cdots \ar[r]& F(\mathbf{f})^M_i \ar[r]^-{\phi(\mathbf{f})^M}&F(\mathbf{f})^M_i \ar[r]&\cdots
}$$ as follows. Let $\iota_i: F(\mathbf{f})^M_i\to F_i^M$ be the inclusion of the graded free submodule consisting of all free summands of $F^M_i$ generated in degrees $< f_i$, and let $\pi_i: F_i^M\to F(\mathbf{f})^M_i$ be splitting of $\iota_{i}$ whose kernel consists of the free summands generated in degrees $\geq f_{i}$. Finally, set $$\phi(\mathbf{f})^M_i = \pi_{i-1}\circ \phi^M_i \circ \iota_i\colon F(\mathbf{f})^M_i\to F(\mathbf{f})^M_{i-1}.$$
Note that $F(\mathbf{f})^M$ is not necessarily a complex (see Example \[ex:not complex\]).
Let $$\beta(F^{M})=
\begin{pmatrix}
{12}&{26}&{16}&-\\
-&-&-&{1}\\
-&5&-&{1}\\
-&-&12&17
\end{pmatrix}.$$ Then $F((1,3,5,6))^{M}$ is a numerical subcomplex with Betti diagram $$\beta(F(1,3,5,6)^{M})=
\begin{pmatrix}
{12}&{26}&{16}&-\\
-&-&-&{1}\\
-&-&-&{1}\\
-&-&-&-
\end{pmatrix}.$$ This is the largest numerical subcomplex containing only the linear first syzygies.
\[ex:not complex\] For $S=k[x,y,z]$, let $M=S/(x,y,z^2)$. Then $$\beta(M)=\begin{pmatrix}
1&2&1&-\\
-&1&2&1
\end{pmatrix}.$$ We have $$\beta(F(1,2,4,5)^{M})=\begin{pmatrix}
1&2&1&-\\
-&-&2&1
\end{pmatrix},$$ but $F(1,2,4,5)^{M}$ is not a complex since $$\phi(1,2,4,5)^M_1=\begin{pmatrix} x&y \end{pmatrix} \quad \text{ and }\quad \phi(1,2,4,5)^M_2=\begin{pmatrix} 0&z^2&-y\\-z^2&0&x \end{pmatrix}$$ do not compose to $0$.
We think of a Betti diagram $\beta(M)$ as an element of the infinite dimensional $\mathbb Q$-vector space $\mathbb V:=\oplus_{i=0}^n \oplus_{j\in \mathbb Z} \mathbb Q$. The ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}$ is the subsemigroup of $\mathbb V$ generated by $\beta(M)$ for all modules $M$. We define the ${\ensuremath{B_\mathbb Q}}$ as the positive cone spanned by ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}$ in $\mathbb V$, and we define ${\ensuremath{B_\text{int}}}$ as the semigroup of lattice points in ${\ensuremath{B_\mathbb Q}}$. See [@erman-semigroup] for comparisons between ${\ensuremath{B_\text{int}}}$ and ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}$.
Boij-Söderberg theory describes the cone ${\ensuremath{B_\mathbb Q}}$.[^1] As proven in [@eis-schrey1; @boij-sod2], the extremal rays of ${\ensuremath{B_\mathbb Q}}$ are spanned by $\pi_{d}$ (as defined above in ) where $d = (d_{0},\dots,d_{n})\in ({{\mathbb Z}}\cup \{+\infty\})^{n+1}$ is a degree sequence, i.e. $d_i+1 \le d_{i+1}$. We will also use the notation $\widetilde{\pi}_d$ for the smallest integral point on the ray spanned by $\pi_d$. So $\widetilde{\pi}_d=m \pi_d$ with $m=lcm(\prod_{k \not=i,k\le c} |d_i-d_k| , i=0,\ldots, t)$ where $t= \max\{i \mid d_i < \infty\}$ is the length of the degree sequence.
The cone ${\ensuremath{B_\mathbb Q}}$ has the structure of a simplicial fan: if we partially order the sequences $d$ termwise, then there is a unique decomposition of any $\beta(M)\in {\ensuremath{B_\mathbb Q}}$ as $$\label{eqn:BSdecomp}
\beta(M)=\sum_{i=0}^s c_{i}\pi_{d^i}$$ with $c_{i}\in \mathbb Q_{\geq 0}$ and $d^{0} <\cdots< d^{s}$. We refer to this as the of $\beta(M)$. For an expository account of Boij-Söderberg theory, see one of [@eis-schrey-icm; @floystad].
If $\Delta=(d^0, \dots, d^s)$ is a chain of degree sequences $d^0<d^1<\dots<d^s$, then we use the notation ${\ensuremath{B_\mathbb Q}}(\Delta), {\ensuremath{B_\text{int}}}(\Delta)$ and ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}(\Delta)$ for the restrictions of ${\ensuremath{B_\mathbb Q}}, {\ensuremath{B_\text{int}}},$ and ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}$ to the simplex $\Delta$. When $D\in {\ensuremath{B_\mathbb Q}}(\Delta)$ with $\Delta=(d^0, \dots, d^s)$, the of $D$ consists of the entries parametrized by $d^0$, namely $\left(\beta_{0,d^0}(D), \beta_{1,d^0_1}(D), \dots, \beta_{n,d^0_n}(D)\right)$. We refer to $c_{0}\pi_{d^0}$ as the first step of the Boij-Söderberg decomposition, and so on. We will repeatedly use the fact that the algorithm for decomposing any such $D$ proceeds as a greedy algorithm on the top strand of $D\in {\ensuremath{B_\mathbb Q}}$. See [@eis-schrey1 §1] for details.
\[defn:pure filtration\] A of a finitely generated graded $S$-module $M$ is a sequence of cleanly embedded submodules $$M=M_0\supsetneq M_1\supsetneq M_2\supsetneq \dots \supsetneq M_t=0$$ such that each $M_i/M_{i+1}$ has a pure resolution.
It is immediate that we can put together full clean filtrations in extensions:
\[lem:pures extensions\] Let $M'\subseteq M$ be a cleanly embedded submodule, and let $M''=M/M'$. If $M'$ and $M''$ admit full clean filtrations, then so does $M$.
Many numerical invariants of $M$ may be computed in terms of the Betti diagram of $M$, including the projective dimension of $M$, the depth of $M$, the Hilbert polynomial of $M$, and more. We extend all such numerical notions to arbitrary diagrams $D\in \mathbb V$. For instance, we say that the diagram $$D=\begin{pmatrix}
1&\frac{8}{3}&2&-\\-&-&-&\frac{1}{3}
\end{pmatrix}$$ has projective dimension $3$.
When $M$ has finite length, we use the notation $M^\vee$ for the graded dual module ${\operatorname{Hom}}(M,k)$.
The North fork of $F^M$ {#sec:North fork}
=======================
We begin the construction of cleanly embedded submodules by studying the maximal numerical subcomplex of $F^M$ that contains only the first syzygies of minimal degree. For instance, let $M$ be any module such that $$\label{eqn:101510}
\beta(M)=\begin{pmatrix}
10 & 15 & 10 & - \\
- & 15 &15 &-\\
- & 10&15&10
\end{pmatrix}.$$ $M$ is generated entirely in degree $0$, and $M$ has some linear first syzygies. In this case, the maximal numerical subcomplex of $F^M$ containing these linear first syzygies is the linear strand of $F^M$, which corresponds to $F(\mathbf{f})^M$ where $\mathbf{f}=(1,2,3,5)$: $${\operatorname{F(\mathbf{f})}}^M: S^{10}\gets S(-1)^{15}\gets S(-2)^{10}\gets 0.$$
This type of numerical subcomplex plays an important role for us, and we refer to it as the . This name is meant to suggest that ${\operatorname{F(\mathbf{f})}}^M$ consists of the part of the complex that “flows through” the minimal degree first syzygies. More formally:
\[defn:North forkresolutions\] The is $({\operatorname{F(\mathbf{f})}}^M, \phi(\mathbf{f})^M)$, where $\mathbf{f}$ defined as follows: Let $f_0$ be one more than the maximal degree of a generator of $M$ and let $f_1$ be one more than the minimal degree of a first syzygy of $M$. For $i>1$, set $$\label{eqn:fi}
f_i:=\min\{j | j>f_{i-1},\text{ and } \beta_{i,j}(M)\ne 0\}.$$
The North fork of $F^M$ is a complex.
By splitting the inclusions ${\operatorname{F(\mathbf{f})}}^M_i\to F^M_i$, we may decompose each $\phi^M_i$ as $\phi^M_i=\begin{pmatrix} a^M_i & b^M_i\end{pmatrix}$, where the source $a^M_i$ is ${\operatorname{F(\mathbf{f})}}^M_i$. Since ${\operatorname{F(\mathbf{f})}}^M_i$ consists of all summands generated in degree $< f_{i}$, the image of $a^M_i$ does not depend on the choice of basis for $F_i$.
From the definition of the $f_i$ it follows that $a^M_i$ factors through the inclusion ${\operatorname{F(\mathbf{f})}}_{i-1}^M\to F^M_{i-1}$. As in Definition \[defn:numerical subcomplex\], we use $\phi(\mathbf{f})^M_i$ to denote the induced map $\phi(\mathbf{f})^M_i: {\operatorname{F(\mathbf{f})}}^M_i\to {\operatorname{F(\mathbf{f})}}^M_{i-1}$. We may thus rewrite $\phi^M_i$ as a block upper triangular matrix: $$\label{eqn:blocktriangle}
\phi^M_i=
\bordermatrix{
&\deg <f_i&\deg \geq f_i\cr
\deg < f_{i-1}&\phi(\mathbf{f})^M_i&*\cr
\deg \geq f_{i-1}&0&*
}$$ for all $i>1$. It follows immediately that $({\operatorname{F(\mathbf{f})}}^M, \phi(\mathbf{f})^M)$ is actually a complex.
\[ex:more101510\] Let $M$ be as in . The Betti diagram of $N:={\operatorname{coker}}(\phi(\mathbf{f})^M_1)$ has the form $$\beta(N)=\begin{pmatrix}
10&15&10&-\\
-&-&*&-\\
-&-&*&*\\
-&-&\vdots & \vdots
\end{pmatrix},$$ where the $*$’s indicate unknown entries. The $\beta_{3,3}$ and $\beta_{3,4}$ entries of $\beta(N)$ are $0$ because any low-degree third syzygy of $N$ would lift to a third syzygy of $M$.
In Section \[sec:obtaining\] we shall show that, under the hypotheses of Theorem \[thm:puresexist\], the cleanly embedded submodule of $M$ whose existence is asserted by the theorem is the module $H^0_{\mathfrak m}(N)$, where $N:={\operatorname{coker}}(\phi(\mathbf{f})^M_1)$.
The Monotonicity Principle and its application {#sec:determining}
==============================================
If $d$ and $e$ have the same length as degree sequences, then, by inserting a maximal chain of degree sequences between $d$ and $e$, we see that it is enough to treat the case where $d_{k} = e_{k}$ for all but one value of $k$, which cannot be equal to $i$ or to $i+1$. In view of the Herzog-Kühl equations , the desired inequality is $$\frac {|d_{k}-d_{i+1}|} {|d_{k}-d_{i}|} < \frac {|1+d_{k}-d_{i+1}|} {|1+d_{k}-d_{i}|}.$$ If $k>i+1$ then $0<d_{k}-d_{i+1} < d_{k}-d_{i}$, so the result has the form $$\frac{a}{b} <\frac{a+1}{b+1}$$ where $0<a<b$, and this is immediate. In case $k<i$, on the other hand, we have $d_{i+1} - d_{k} > d_{i}-d_{k}> d_i-d_k-1>0$, so the result has the form $$\frac{a}{b} <\frac{a-1}{b-1}$$ with $a>b>1$, and again this is immediate.
If $d$ and $e$ have different lengths as degree sequences, then we can immediately reduce to the case $d=(d_0,\dots, d_t)\in {{\mathbb Z}}^{t+1}$ and $e=(d_0,\dots,d_{t-1},\infty)\in ({{\mathbb Z}}\cup \{\infty\})^{t+1}$. In this case, we set $d^\ell:=(d_0,d_1,\dots,d_{t-1},d_t+\ell)$ for all $\ell\in \mathbb N$. A direct computation via yields: $$\pi_e=\lim_{\ell \to \infty}\ell \cdot \pi_{d^{\ell}}.$$ Since all of the degree sequences $d^\ell$ have length $t$, we conclude that $$\frac{\beta_{i,d_i}(\pi_{d})}{\beta_{i,d_{i+1}}(\pi_{d})} <\frac{\beta_{i,d_i}(\pi_{d^1})}{\beta_{i,d_{i+1}}(\pi_{d^1})}
<\dots<\frac{\beta_{i,d_i}(\pi_{d^\ell})}{\beta_{i,d_{i+1}}(\pi_{d^\ell})} <\frac{\beta_{i,d_i}(\pi_{d^{\ell+1}})}{\beta_{i,d_{i+1}}(\pi_{d^{\ell+1}})}
<\dots< \frac{\beta_{i,e_i}(\pi_{e})}{\beta_{i,e_{i+1}}(\pi_{e})}.$$
The next example shows how the Monotonicity Principle can be used to determine Betti diagrams.
\[ex:BSbetaNorthFork\] Consider $M$ and $N$ as in Example \[ex:more101510\]. Recall that the Betti diagram of $N$ has the form $$\label{eqn:Dpartial}
\beta(N)=\begin{pmatrix}
10 & 15 & 10 & - \\
- & - &* &-\\
- & -&*&*\\
-&-&\vdots &\vdots
\end{pmatrix}.$$ Can one determine the remaining entries of the above Betti diagram from the given information?
Since we know that ${\operatorname{F(\mathbf{f})}}^M$ is a numerical subcomplex of the minimal free resolution of $N$, we at least know something about the top strand of $\beta(N)$. One can thus attempt to compute the first Boij-Söderberg summand of $\beta(N)$. With the Monotonicity Principle this approach leads to a complete determination of $\beta(N)$ as follows.
If $\pi_d$ is a diagram that could appear in the Boij-Söderberg of $\beta(N)$ and which contributes to either the $\beta_{1,1}$ or $\beta_{2,2}$ entry, then $d$ must have the form $(0,1,d_2,d_3)$ with $2\leq d_2$ and $5\leq d_3$. The minimal such $d$ is $d=(0,1,2,5)$, and by applying the formula , we see $$\frac{\beta_{1,1}(\pi_{(0,1,2,5)})}{\beta_{2,2}(\pi_{(0,1,2,5)})}= \frac{15}{10}.$$ Note that equals the ratio $\frac{\beta_{1,1}(N)}{\beta_{2,2}(N)}$.
Now, the Monotonicity Principle implies that if $e=(0,1,2,d_3)$ with $d_3>5$ then $\frac{\beta_{1,1}(\pi_{e})}{\beta_{2,2}(\pi_{e})}> \frac{15}{10}.$ If we allow $e$ to have the form $e=(0,1,d_2,d_3)$ with $d_2>2$, then $\pi_e$ does not have any $\beta_{2,2}$ entry, and so the ratio would be $\infty$. We conclude that every pure diagram $\pi_d$ which could conceivably contribute to $\beta_{1,1}(N)$ satisfies $\frac{\beta_{1,1}(\pi_{d})}{\beta_{2,2}(\pi_{d})}\geq \frac{15}{10},$ with equality if and only if $d=(0,1,2,5)$.
Since the decomposition algorithm implies that we cannot eliminate $\beta_{1,1}$ before we eliminate $\beta_{2,2}$, it follows that we must eliminate both entries simultaneously. Thus, the first step of the decomposition of $\beta(N)$ is given by $1\cdot \widetilde{\pi}_{d^0}=1\cdot \widetilde{\pi}_{(0,1,2,5)}$.
Continuing to apply the decomposition, we next consider the diagram $\beta(N)-1\cdot \widetilde\pi_{d^0}$, which has the form $$\beta(N)-1\cdot \widetilde\pi_{d^0}=\begin{pmatrix}
4 & - & - & - \\
- & - &* &-\\
- & -&*&*\\
-&-&\vdots &\vdots
\end{pmatrix}.$$ Since the second column consists of all zeroes, this diagram must be $4 \pi_{(0)}$. Hence, $$\beta(N)=\widetilde\pi_{(0,1,2,5)}+4\widetilde\pi_{(0)}=\begin{pmatrix}
10 & 15 & 10 & - \\
- & - &- &-\\
- & -&-&1\\
\end{pmatrix}.$$
We will generally apply the Monotonicity Principle via the following corollary. However, as illustrated by Example \[ex:branching\] and by the computations in §\[sec:gensBmod\], the Principle can be useful in more general situations.
\[cor:0free\] Let $M$ be a module satisfying the hypotheses of Theorem \[thm:puresexist\], and let ${\operatorname{F(\mathbf{f})}}^M$ be the North fork of $F^M$. Set $N:={\operatorname{coker}}(\phi(\mathbf{f})^M_1)$. We may write $$\beta(N)=c_0\pi_{d^0}+D_{\text{free}}$$ where $D_{\text{free}}$ is the Betti diagram of a free module.
We first claim that $$\beta_{i,d^0_i}(M)=\beta_{i,d^0_i}(N) \quad \text{ for } i=1,2.$$ For $i=1$, this follows immediately from the definition of $N$. We may split $F^M_1$ as $F^M_1=S(-d^0_1)^{\beta_{i,d^0_i}(M)}\oplus G_1$, with $G_1$ generated in degree at least $d^1_1$. Consider the diagram $$\xymatrix{
&&S(-d^0_1)^{\beta_{1,d^0_1}(M)}\ar[rr]^-{\phi(\mathbf{f})^M_1}\ar[d]_{\iota}&&F^N_0\ar[d]_{\cong}\\
S(-d^0_2)\ar[rr]^-{\sigma}\ar@{-->}[rru]&&S(-d^0_i)^{\beta_{1,d^0_1}(M)}\oplus G_1\ar[rr]^-{\phi^M_1}&&F^M_0.
}$$ The square on the right is induced by the map $N\to M$, and hence commutes. Since $G_1$ is generated in degree at least $d^1_1$, which is at least as big as $d^0_2$ by assumption, it follows that any syzygy $\sigma$ of $\phi^M_1$ factors through the inclusion $\iota$. Thus $\beta_{2,d^0_2}(M)=\beta_{2,d^0_2}(N)$ as claimed. Next, we note that by hypothesis, $d^0_1<d^0_{2}\leq d^1_1$ and $d^0_{2}\leq d^1_1< d^1_{2}$. It follows that $\pi_{d^0}$ is the only pure diagram from the decomposition of $\beta(M)$ that contributes to the Betti numbers $\beta_{1,d_1}(M)$ and $\beta_{2,d_{2}}(M)$. This implies the second equality of $$\label{eqn:ratio equal}
\frac{\beta_{1,d^0_1}(N)}{\beta_{2,d^0_2}(N)}=\frac{\beta_{1,d^0_1}(M)}{\beta_{2,d^0_2}(M)}=\frac{\beta_{1,d^0_1}(\pi_{d^0})}{\beta_{2,d^0_2}(\pi_{d^0})}.$$
Let $e$ be a degree sequence which could conceivably contribute to $\beta(N)$. Since all of the first syzygies of $N$ lie in degree $d^0_1$, we have either $e=(e_0,d_0^1,e_2,\dots,e_n)$ with $e\geq d^0$ (we allow $e_i=\infty$), or $e=(e_0,\infty,\dots,\infty)$. We can write $\beta(N)$ as a sum $\sum_e a_e\pi_e$ with $e$ as above.
Now, if $e_2=d^0_2$ but $e\ne d^0$, then by Theorem \[lem:monotonicity\] combined with , we have that $$\frac{\beta_{1,d^0_1}(N)}{\beta_{2,d^0_2}(N)}<\frac{\beta_{1,d^0_1}(\pi_{e})}{\beta_{2,d^0_2}(\pi_{e})}.$$ If $e_2\ne d^0_2$, then the denominator on the right would be $0$.
By convexity, the only sums $\sum_e a_e\pi_e$ which satisfy are rational linear combinations of $\pi_{d^0}$ and of projective dimension $0$ pure diagrams $\pi_{(e_0,\infty,\dots,\infty)}$. Finally, since $\beta_{1,d^0_1}(N)=\beta_{1,d^0_1}(M)$, we conclude that the coefficient of $\pi_{d^0}$ in the decomposition of $\beta(N)$ equals $c_0$. This completes the proof.
(2,2.5)–(3.2,3.5); (3,2.5)–(3.2,3.5); (1,0)–(1.5,3); (1,0)–(2,2.5); (1,0)–(3,2.5); (1,0)–(3.8,2.8); (1,0)–(3.2,3.5); (1,0)–(2.2,3.5); (1.5,3)–(2.2,3.5)–(2,2.5)–cycle; (1.5,3)–(2,2.5)–(3,2.5)–(3.8,2.8)–(3.2,3.5)–(2.2,3.5)–cycle; (3,1.5) node [$B_{\mathbb Q}$]{}; (1.5,2.2) node [$\beta(N)$]{}; (1.55,1.95) node[$\bullet$]{}; (.1,1.7) node [$\mathcal P$]{}; (0,.2)–(1.55,1.95)–(-0.5,2);
\[rmk:polyhedron\] The idea behind Example \[ex:BSbetaNorthFork\] and Corollary \[cor:0free\] may be illustrated by convex geometry. Our goal is to understand where in the cone ${\ensuremath{B_\mathbb Q}}$ the diagram $\beta(N)$ lies. As illustrated in , we only have partial knowledge about $\beta(N)$. We can think of this partial information as cutting out a polyhedron $\mathcal P$ in the vector space $\mathbb V$, and the diagram $\beta(N)$ must lie in the intersection of $\mathcal P$ and ${\ensuremath{B_\mathbb Q}}$. The computation in Example \[ex:BSbetaNorthFork\] then shows that $\mathcal P\cap {\ensuremath{B_\mathbb Q}}$ consists of a single point (see Figure \[fig:polyhedron\]), which is how we determine the remaining entries of $\beta(N)$.
Proof of Theorem \[thm:puresexist\] and Corollary \[cor:puresexist-iterated\] {#sec:obtaining}
=============================================================================
We begin by showing that under suitable hypotheses the conclusion of Corollary \[cor:0free\] implies an actual splitting of $N$:
\[lem:0free\] If $N$ is a module such that $$\beta(N)=D_{\geq 2}+D_{\text{free}}$$ where $D_{\geq 2}$ is a diagram of codimension $\geq 2$ and $D_{\text{free}}$ is a diagram of projective dimension $0$, and such that $$\min \{j \mid \beta_{0,j}(D_{\text{free}})\ne 0\} \geq
\max \{j \mid \beta_{0,j}(D_{\geq 2})\ne 0\},$$ then $N$ splits as a direct sum $
N\cong N_{\geq 2}\oplus N_{\text{free}}
$ with $\beta(N_{\geq 2})=D_{\geq 2}$ and $\beta(N_{\text{free}})=D_{\text{free}}$.
Informally, the displayed inequality above says that the minimum degree of a “generator” of $D_{\text{free}}$ is at least as large as the maximum degree of a “generator” of $D_{\geq 2}$.
Let $a:=\max \{ j | \beta_{0,j}(N)\ne 0\}$, the maximal degree of a minimal generator of $M$. Let $K$ be the quotient field of $S$. By considering the Hilbert polynomial of $N$, we see that $N\otimes_S K$ has rank $\geq 1$, and thus some minimal generator of degree $a$ in $N$ generates a free submodule. This gives us an exact sequence $$0\to S(-a)\to N \to Q\to 0.$$ The map $S(-a)\to N$ lifts to a map $S(-a)\to F^{N}_{0}$ whose image is a free summand, so $\beta(Q)$ satisfies the same hypothesis as $\beta(N)$. By induction on the number of generators, we see that $Q$ is a direct sum of a a free module $G$ and a module $H$ of codimension $\geq 2$. Since ${\operatorname{Ext}}^{1}(G, S) = {\operatorname{Ext}}^{1}(H,S) = 0$, the sequence splits.
The inequality appearing in Lemma \[lem:0free\] is necessary. For instance, let $S=k[x,y]$ and let $N:=S(-1)\oplus S/(x^2,xy)$. Then $$\beta(N)=\begin{pmatrix}
1&-&-\\
1&2&1
\end{pmatrix}=
\begin{pmatrix}-&-&-\\
1&2&1
\end{pmatrix}
+
\begin{pmatrix}1&-&-\\
-&-&-
\end{pmatrix}.$$ Thus $\beta(N)$ has the form $D_{\geq 2}+D_{\text{free}}$. But $N\ncong S\oplus S(-1)/(x,y)$.
The conclusion of Lemma \[lem:0free\] may fail without the hypothesis “codimension $\geq 2$”. For instance, if $S=k[x,y]$ and $\mathfrak m=(x,y)$, then $$\beta(\mathfrak m)=\begin{pmatrix}
2&1
\end{pmatrix}=
\begin{pmatrix}1&1
\end{pmatrix}
+
\begin{pmatrix}1&-
\end{pmatrix},$$ but $\mathfrak m$ does not split.
We are now ready to complete the proof of our main result:
We first prove part . We let ${\operatorname{F(\mathbf{f})}}^M$ be the North fork of $F^M$, and we define $N:={\operatorname{coker}}(\phi(\mathbf{f})^M_1)$. Since $M$ satisfies the hypotheses of Theorem \[thm:puresexist\], we may apply Corollary \[cor:0free\] and Lemma \[lem:0free\], and conclude that $N=M'\oplus G$ where $\beta(M')=c_0\pi_{d^0}$ and $G$ is free.
We may then rewrite $\phi(\mathbf{f})^M_1$ as a block matrix $\phi(\mathbf{f})^M_1=\begin{pmatrix} \widetilde{a}_1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}$, where $\widetilde{a}_1$ is a minimal presentation matrix of $M'$. This enables us to rewrite $\phi_1$ in upper triangular form: $$\phi_1=\begin{pmatrix}\widetilde{a}_1 & \widetilde{b}_1\\ 0 & \widetilde{c}_1 \end{pmatrix}$$ for some matrices $\widetilde{b}_1$ and $\widetilde{c}_1$. Since $M$ is presented by a block triangular matrix, we obtain a right exact sequence: $$M'\to M\to {\operatorname{coker}}(\widetilde{c}_1)\to 0.$$
To finish the proof, we will show that this sequence is exact on the left, and that $M'$ is a cleanly embedded submodule. Since the top strand of $\beta(M)$ corresponds to the degree sequence $d^0=(d^0_0,\dots, d^0_n)$, we can split $F^M_i$ as $$F^M_i=S(-d^0_i)^{\beta_{i,d^0_i}(M)}\oplus G_i,$$ where $G_i$ is a graded free module generated in degree strictly greater than $d^0_i$. It is possible that $G_i=0$ in some cases. Further, since $\beta(M')=c_0\pi_{d^0}$, we know that $M'$ has a pure resolution of type $d^0$.
For each $i$, the map $M'\to M$ yields a commutative diagram of the form $$\xymatrix{
S(-d^0_i)^{\beta_{i,d^0_i}(M')}\ar[rr]^{\phi^{M'}_i}\ar[d]_{\kappa_i}&&S(-d^0_{i-1})^{\beta_{i-1,d^0_{i-1}}(M')}\ar[d]_{\kappa_{i-1}}\\
S(-d^0_i)^{\beta_{i,d^0_i}(M)} \oplus G_i\ar[rr]^{\phi^M_i}&&S(-d^0_{i-1})^{\beta_{i-1,d^0_{i-1}}(M)}\oplus G_{i-1},
}$$ where each vertical map $\kappa_i$ can be represented by a matrix of scalars. Note that $\kappa_0$ and $\kappa_1$ are injective by definition of $M'$. Since the columns of both horizontal arrows are linearly independent, we can inductively conclude that $\kappa_i$ is injective for all $i$. Since $M'$ and $M$ are both finite length, the inclusion $F^{M'}_n\to F^M_n$ implies that $M'\to M$ is injective, as claimed. Further, since each $\kappa_i$ is a split inclusion of graded modules, this implies that $M'\subseteq M$ is cleanly embedded, completing the proof of .
For , it follows immediately that $d^0\ll d^1$, and we thus obtain a cleanly embedded submodule $M'\subseteq M$ with $\beta(M')=c_0\pi_{d^0}$. Set $M'':=M/M'$. The sequence $$0\to M'\to M\to M''\to 0$$ corresponds to an element $\alpha\in {\operatorname{Ext}}^1(M'',M')$, which then corresponds to a cocycle $\alpha\in {\operatorname{Hom}}(F_1^{M''}, M')$. Since $F^{M''}_1$ is generated in degree at least $d^1_1$, it follows that the image of the map $\alpha_0$ is generated in degree at least $d^1_1$. However, since $\beta(M')=c_0\pi_{d^0}$, we see that $M'$ has regularity $d^0_{n}-n$, and thus is zero in degrees $>d^0_{n}-n$. By our assumption $$d^1_1> d^0_n-n,$$ so the image of $\alpha_0$ is $0$. We conclude that $\alpha$ corresponds to the zero element of ${\operatorname{Ext}}^1(M'',M')$, and thus that $M\cong M'\oplus M''$, as desired.
With notation as in Theorem \[thm:puresexist\], we choose $M^{1} = M'$. The proof of Theorem \[thm:puresexist\] shows that, for degree reasons, the induced map $F^{M^{1}}_j \to F^{M}_j$ is a split injection for all $j$. It follows that $$\beta(M/M^{1}) = \sum_{i=1}^s c_{i}\pi_{d^i},$$ so we may iterate the construction.
There exist cases covered by Corollary \[cor:puresexist-iterated\] where a full clean filtration exists, but where that filtration is not a splitting: Let $S=k[x,y,z]$ and let $\Phi$ be a generic $9\times 9$ skew-symmetric matrix of linear forms. Let $I\subseteq S$ be the ideal generated by the $8\times 8$ principal Pfaffians of $\Phi$, and let $R=S/I$. Then $R$ has a pure resolution of type $(0,4,5,9)$. We claim that if $M$ is a generic extension $$0\to R\to M\to R(-2)\to 0,$$ then $M$ admits a full clean filtration which is not a splitting.
Note first that, for any such extension, $R\to M$ is cleanly embedded for degree reasons. Namely, if we construct a resolution of $M$ by combining the resolutions of $R$ and $R(-2)$, then there is no possibility of cancellation. It thus suffices to show that ${\operatorname{Ext}}^1(R,R)_2\ne 0$. Such an extension corresponds to a nonzero map $\alpha: F^{R(-2)}_1=S(-6)^9\to R$ such that $\Phi\circ \alpha=0$. Since $R$ has regularity $6$ and ${\operatorname{im}}(\Phi\circ \alpha)\subseteq R_7=0$, we see that $\Phi\circ \alpha$ is automatically $0$. One may easily check that there exists such an $\alpha$ that is not a coboundary.
\[ex:old example\] For $n>2$, fix any $e\geq 2$, and let $M$ be any module such that $
\beta(M)$ decomposes as a sum of the pure diagrams $\pi_{(0,e,e+1,e+2,\dots,e+n-2,e+n-1)}$ and $\pi_{(0,1,2,\dots,n-1,e+n-1)}.$ Then $M$ has a Betti diagram of the form: $$\beta(M)=\begin{pmatrix}
*&*&*&\dots &*&-\\
-&-&-&\dots &-&-\\
\vdots&\vdots&& &\vdots&\vdots\\
-&-&-&\dots &-&-\\
-&*&*&\dots &*&*
\end{pmatrix}.$$ Theorem \[thm:puresexist\] implies that $M$ splits as $M=M'\oplus M''$ where $M'$ has a pure resolution of type $(0,e,e+1,e+2,\dots,e+n-2,e+n-1)$ and $M''$ has a pure resolution of type $(0,1,2,\dots,n-1,e+n-1)$. Note that every $S$-module with a pure resolution of $(0,e,e+1,e+2,\dots,e+n-2,e+n-1)$ is a direct sum of copies of $R:=S/\mathfrak m^e$. It follows that $M'$ is isomorphic to a direct sum of copies of $R$. By a similar argument, $M''$ is isomorphic to a number of copies of $\omega_R(n)$. Hence, any such $M$ decomposes as $M=R^a\oplus \omega_R(n)^b$ for some $a,b$.
Beyond Theorem \[thm:puresexist\] {#sec:beyond}
=================================
Since the Boij-Söderberg decomposition of a module may involve pure diagrams with non-integral entries, it is clear that there exist many graded modules which do not admit full clean filtrations.
\[ex:no filtration\] Let $n=2$, $R=k[x,y]/(x,y)^2,$ and $M=k[x,y]/(x,y^2)$. Then: $$\beta(M)=\begin{pmatrix} 1&1&-\\-&1&1\end{pmatrix} = \frac{1}{3}\beta(R)+\frac{1}{3}\beta(\omega_R(4)).$$ Clearly $M$ cannot admit a full clean filtration. Though we might hope that $M^{\oplus 3}$ admits such a filtration, this is not the case either [@sam-weyman Ex. 4.5].
However, there does exist a flat deformation $M'$ of $M^{\oplus 3}$ such that $M'$ admits a full clean filtration: $$0 \to R \to M' \to \omega_R(4) \to 0.$$ Namely, we may set $M'=\left( S/(x,y^2) \right) \oplus \left( S/(x^2,y) \right)\oplus \left( S/(x+y,(x^2-2y+y^2) \right)$. This suggests a more subtle possible affirmative answer to our Question \[question:beyond\].
Each result of §\[sec:North fork\]–\[sec:obtaining\] can be extended to situations that are not covered by the hypotheses of Theorem \[thm:puresexist\].
\[ex:branching\] Let $E:=\widetilde\pi_{(0,2,3,4,5,8)}+2\widetilde\pi_{(0,2,3,5,6,8)}+\widetilde\pi_{(0,3,4,5,6,8)}+\widetilde\pi_{(0,3,4,6,7,8)}$, and let $M$ be a module such that $\beta(M)=E$. We have $$E=\begin{pmatrix}
11 & - & - & - & -&-\\
- & 60 &128 &90 &32&-\\
- & 144 &300 &128 &60&-\\
- & - & -& 280&240&69
\end{pmatrix}.$$ Note that the degree sequences do not satisfy the conditions of Corollary \[cor:puresexist-iterated\]. Nevertheless, we will see that that $M$ admits a full clean filtration.
We first construct a cleanly embedded (but not pure) submodule of $M$. We let ${\operatorname{F(\mathbf{f})}}^M$ be the North fork of $F^M$ and we let $N:={\operatorname{coker}}(\phi(\mathbf{f})^M_1)$. The proof of Corollary \[cor:0free\] applies nearly verbatim to yield $$\beta(N)=\widetilde\pi_{(0,2,3,4,5,8)}+2\widetilde\pi_{(0,2,3,5,6,8)}+6\widetilde\pi_{(0)}.$$ By Lemma \[lem:0free\], we obtain a splitting $N=M'\oplus G$ where $G$ is a free module. The arguments used in the proof of Theorem \[thm:puresexist\] then imply that $M'$ is a cleanly embedded submodule of $M$. We thus have a short exact sequence $$0\to M'\to M\to M''\to 0$$ where $\beta(M')=\widetilde\pi_{(0,2,3,4,5,8)}+2\widetilde\pi_{(0,2,3,5,6,8)}$ and $\beta(M'')=\widetilde\pi_{(0,3,4,5,6,8)}+\widetilde\pi_{(0,3,4,6,7,8)}$.
Repeating the same argument for $(M')^\vee$ and for $(M'')^\vee$, and then applying Lemma \[lem:pures extensions\], we conclude that $M$ admits a full clean filtration.
One of the key features of our proof of Theorem \[thm:puresexist\] is that the diagrams $d^0, \dots, d^s$ that arise in the Boij-Söderberg decomposition are separated from each other in the poset of degree sequences. In particular, $d^i$ and $d^{i+1}$ always differ in at least two consecutive positions. This is essential to our proof of Corollary \[cor:0free\], and it suggests some interesting examples to explore.
Consider, for example, the diagrams $D=\widetilde\pi_{(0,1,3,5)}+\widetilde\pi_{(0,2,4,5)}$ and $D'=\widetilde\pi_{(0,1,2,3,5,6)}+\widetilde\pi_{(0,1,3,4,5,6)}$, so that $$D=\begin{pmatrix}
11&15&-&-\\
-&10&10&-\\
-&-&15&11
\end{pmatrix}
\qquad
\text{ and }
\qquad
D'=
\begin{pmatrix}
3&12&15&10&-&-\\
-&-&10&15&12&3
\end{pmatrix}.$$
Let $\beta(M)$ be a scalar multiple of either $D$ or $D'$. Does $M$ admit a cleanly embedded submodule with a pure resolution?
Application: Pathologies of ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}$ {#sec:pathologies}
=========================================================
Example \[ex:first filtration\] illustrates the existence of a ray of ${\ensuremath{B_\mathbb Q}}$ where only $\frac{1}{5}$ of the lattice points correspond to Betti diagrams of modules. We now prove Proposition \[prop:sparserays\], which implies that there are rays where the true Betti diagrams are arbitrarily sparse among the lattice points. The proof will show that such pathologies already arise in codimension $3$.
Let $S=k[x_1, x_2, x_3]$ and let $p\geq 5$ prime. Set $d^0=(0,1,2,p), d^1=(0,\lfloor p/2\rfloor, \lceil p/2 \rceil, p)$ and $d^2=(0,p-2,p-1,p)$. Consider the diagram $$D=\frac{1}{p}\widetilde{\pi}_{d^0}+\frac{\alpha}{p}\widetilde{\pi}_{d^1}+\frac{1}{p}\widetilde{\pi}_{d^2}$$ where $\alpha$ is any positive integer such $\alpha+1+\binom{p-1}{2}\equiv 0 \mod p$. We claim that $D$ has integral entries but that $cD\in {\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}$ if and only if $c$ is divisible by $p$.
We first check the integrality of $D$. Observe that each Betti number of $\widetilde{\pi}_{d^0}$ is divisible by $p$ except for the $0$th Betti number; each Betti number of $\widetilde{\pi}_{d^2}$ is divisible by $p$ except for the $3$rd Betti number; and the Betti numbers of $\widetilde{\pi}_{d^1}$ are $(1,p,p,1)$. Hence, we only need to check that $\beta_{0,0}(D)$ and $\beta_{3,p}(D)$ are integral. We compute $$\beta_{0,0}(D)=\frac{1}{p}\beta_{0,0}(\widetilde{\pi}_{d^0})+\frac{\alpha}{p}\beta_{0,0}(\widetilde{\pi}_{d^1})+\frac{1}{p}\beta_{0,0}(\widetilde{\pi}_{d^2})
=\frac{1}{p}+\frac{\alpha}{p}+\frac{\binom{p-1}{2}}{p}.$$ Our assumption on $\alpha$ then implies that $\beta_{0,0}(D)$ is integral. A symmetric computation works for $\beta_{3,p}(D)$.
If $cD\in {\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}$, then Theorem \[thm:puresexist\] implies that $c$ is divisible by $p$. It thus suffices to show that $pD\in {\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}$. This follows from the fact that $\widetilde{\pi}_{d^i}\in {\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}$ for $i=0,1$ or $2$. In particular, $\widetilde{\pi}_{d^2}=\beta(R)$ where $R:=S/(x_1,x_2,x_3)^{p-2}$, and $\widetilde{\pi}_{d^0}=\beta(R^\vee(p-3))$. To see that $\widetilde{\pi}_{d^1}\in {\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}$, let $A$ be a $p\times p$ skew-symmetric matrix of generic linear forms. By [@buchs-eis-codim3], the principal Pfaffians of $A$ define an ideal $I\subseteq S$ such that $\beta(S/I)=\widetilde{\pi}_{d^1}$. This completes the proof when $p\geq 5$. For the cases $p=2$ (respectively $3$), we may choose the diagram $D=\frac{1}{2}\widetilde{\pi}_{(0,1,2,4)}+\frac{1}{2}\widetilde{\pi}_{(0,2,3,4)}$ (respectively $D=\frac{1}{3}\widetilde{\pi}_{(0,1,2,5)}+\frac{2}{3}\widetilde{\pi}_{(0,3,4,5)}$) and apply similar arguments as above.
Application: Quiver representations {#sec:gensBmod}
===================================
In this section, we determine all Betti diagrams corresponding to quiver representations of the form $
\bullet \triplearrow{}{} \bullet$. As discussed in the introduction, this is equivalent to computing the possible Betti diagrams of finite length modules of the form: $$\beta(M)=\begin{pmatrix} \beta_{0,0} & \beta_{1,1} & \beta_{2,2} & \beta_{3,3} \\
\beta_{0,1} & \beta_{1,2} & \beta_{2,3} & \beta_{3,4}
\end{pmatrix}.$$ Throughout this section, we thus set $d^0=(0,1,2,3), d^1=(0,1,2,4), d^2=(0,1,3,4), d^3=(0,2,3,4)$ and $d^4=(1,2,3,4)$ and we let $\widetilde{\Delta}=(d^0,d^1,d^2,d^3,d^4)$.
Our goal is to compute the minimal generators of ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}(\widetilde{\Delta})$. In addition to the connection with quiver representations, this computation provides the first detailed and nontrivial example of the generators of ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}(\widetilde{\Delta})$. Further, this computation illustrates that the Monotonicity Principle and some of the other techniques introduced in §\[sec:North fork\]-\[sec:obtaining\] can be extended to more situations, but at the cost of wrestling with integrality conditions and precise numerics.
As noted in the introduction, if $\beta_{3,3}(M)$ (or $\beta_{0,1}(M)$) is nonzero, then a copy of the residue field $k$ (or $k(-1)$) splits from $M$. It is therefore equivalent to restrict to the case where $\beta_{3,3}=\beta_{0,1}=0$ and to compute the generators for ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}(\Delta)$ where $\Delta=(d^1,d^2,d^3)$. The result of this computation is summarized in the following proposition.
\[prop:gensBmod\] The semigroup ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}(\Delta)$ has ten minimal generators. These consist of the following ten Betti diagrams: $$\begin{pmatrix}
3&8&6&-\\
-&-&-&1
\end{pmatrix},
\begin{pmatrix}
1&-&-&-\\
-&6&8&3
\end{pmatrix},
\begin{pmatrix}
1&2&1&-\\
-&1&2&1
\end{pmatrix},
\begin{pmatrix}
1&1&-&-\\
-&3&5&2
\end{pmatrix},
\begin{pmatrix}
2&5&3&-\\
-&-&1&1
\end{pmatrix},$$ $$\begin{pmatrix}
2&4&1&-\\
-&1&4&2
\end{pmatrix},
\begin{pmatrix}
2&7&3&-\\
-&-&3&2
\end{pmatrix},
\begin{pmatrix}
2&3&-&-\\
-&3&7&3
\end{pmatrix},
\begin{pmatrix}
2&4&-&-\\
-&-&4&2
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
3&6&-&-\\
-&-&6&3
\end{pmatrix}
.$$
Before proving this proposition, we introduce some simplifying notation. Every element of ${\ensuremath{B_\text{int}}}(\Delta)$ can be represented as: $$D=4r\pi_{(0,1,2,4)}+2s\pi_{(0,1,3,4)}+4t\pi_{(0,2,3,4)}$$ with $(r,s,t)\in \mathbb Z_{\geq 0}^3$ (c.f. [@erman-semigroup pp. 347–9].) The necessary and sufficient conditions for a triplet $(r,s,t)\in \mathbb Z_{\geq 0}^3$ to yield an integral point are:
- $r+s\equiv 0 \mod 3$
- $r+t\equiv 0 \mod 3$
- $r+s+ t \equiv 0 \mod 2$.
For the rest of this section, we use triplets $(r,s,t)$ to refer to diagrams in ${\ensuremath{B_\text{int}}}(\Delta)$, and we only consider triplets $(r,s,t)$ that satisfy the above congruency conditions. In this notation, Proposition \[prop:gensBmod\] amounts to the claim that the following ten $(r,s,t)$ triplets are the generators of ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}$: $$\begin{matrix}
(6,0,0), (0,0,6), (1,2,1), (3,3,0), (0,3,3), \\
(1,8,1), (3,9,0), (0,9,3), (0,12,0), (0,18,0).
\end{matrix}$$
(0,0) circle (2pt); (-.5,-.5) node [$4c\pi_{(0,1,2,4)}$]{}; (2,3.4) circle (2pt); (2,3.9) node [$4c\pi_{(0,2,3,4)}$]{}; (4,0) circle (2pt); (4,-.5) node [$2c\pi_{(0,1,3,4)}$]{}; (0,0)–(2,3.4)–(4,0)–(0,0); (.4,0)–(2.16,3.14); (.3,1.9)–(1.1,1.6); (3.7,1.9)–(2.9,1.6); (-1.3,1.9) node [The region $s<5$]{}; (5.3,1.9) node [The region $s\geq 5$]{}; (.4,0)–(2.16,3.14)–(4,0);\] (0,0)–(.4,0)–(2.16,3.14)–(2,3.4);
We first note that each of the ten diagrams listed in Proposition \[prop:gensBmod\] is the Betti diagram of an actual module. When $\beta_{0,0}=1$ or $\beta_{3,4}=1$, such examples are straightforward to construct. Next, we have $$\beta \left({\operatorname{coker}}\begin{pmatrix}
x&y&0&0&z^2\\
0&x&y&z&x^2
\end{pmatrix}
\right)
=
\begin{pmatrix}
2&4&1&-\\
-&1&4&2
\end{pmatrix}.$$ Let $L$ be any $2\times 3$ matrix of linear forms whose columns satisfy no linear syzygies, and let $N:={\operatorname{coker}}(L)$. Then $$\beta(N/\mathfrak m^2N)=\begin{pmatrix}2&3&-&-\\-&3&7&3 \end{pmatrix}$$ The Betti diagram of $\left( N/\mathfrak m^2N\right)^\vee$ then yields the dual diagram. Finally, examples corresponding to $(0,12,0)$ and $(0,18,0)$ are given in [@erman-semigroup Proof of Thm. 1.6(1)].
We must now show that every diagram in ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}(\Delta)$ may be written as a sum of our ten generators. We proceed by analyzing cases based on the different possible values of $s$ in our $(r,s,t)$ representation of diagrams.
The case $s=0$ {#the-case-s0 .unnumbered}
--------------
Based on Example \[ex:old example\] in the case $n=3$ and $e=2$, we conclude that $(r,0,t)$ corresponds to an element of ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}(\Delta)$ if and only if both $r$ and $t$ are divisible by $6$.
The case $s=1$ {#the-case-s1 .unnumbered}
--------------
There are two families of triplets $(r,1,t)$ satisfying the congruency conditions. The first family is parametrized by $(2+6\gamma,1,5+6\alpha)$ for some $\gamma,\alpha \in \mathbb Z_{\geq 0}$, and the second family is parametrized by $(5+6\gamma,1,2+6\alpha)$. To prove that none of these diagrams belongs to ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}(\Delta)$, it suffices (by symmetry under $M\mapsto M^\vee$) to rule out the first family.
We thus assume, for contradiction, that there exists $M$ such that $\beta(M)$ corresponds to the triplet $(2+6\gamma, 1, 5+6\alpha)$ for some $\alpha, \gamma\in \mathbb Z_{\geq 0}$. We let $F(\mathbf{f})^M$ be the North fork of $F^M$. We then set $N:={\operatorname{coker}}( \phi(\mathbf{f})^M_1)$, and we have $$\beta(N) =\begin{pmatrix}2+\alpha+3\gamma & 3+8\gamma & 2+6\gamma& - \\
- & - & \beta_{2,3}(N)& \beta_{3,4}(N)\\
- & - & \beta_{2,4}(N) & \beta_{3,5}(N)\\
-&-&\vdots & \vdots
\end{pmatrix}.$$ To produce the Boij-Söderberg decomposition, we begin by subtracting $c_1\pi_{d^1}$ for some $c_1\geq 0$. Note that $$c_1\pi_{d^1}=c_1\begin{pmatrix}\frac{1}{8}&\frac{1}{3}&\frac{1}{4}&-\\-&-&-&\frac{1}{24} \end{pmatrix}.$$ Assume first that $c_1<24\gamma$. By the Monotonicity Principle, this would imply that the diagram $\beta(N)-c_1\pi_{d^1}$ has its $\beta_{1,1}$ entry canceled before its $\beta_{2,2}$ entry is canceled, and this contradicts the decomposition algorithm for Betti diagrams. Hence, we must have $c_1\geq 24\gamma$.
If now $c_1=24\gamma$, then we may again apply the Monotonicity Principle to $\beta(N)-24\gamma\pi_{d^1}$ to conclude that the next step of the Boij-Söderberg decomposition must be $12\pi_{(0,1,2,5)}$. This would leave nothing left in column $1$, and thus $\beta(N)-24\gamma\pi_{d^1}-12\pi_{(0,1,2,5)}$ would be a diagram of projective dimension $0$. But this would contradict the integrality of $\beta(N)$, since it would imply that $\beta_{3,5}(N)=\frac{1}{5}$.
The final possibility is that $c_1>24\gamma$, in which case $c_1$ must equal $8+24\gamma$. After subtracting $(8+24\gamma)\pi_{d^1}$, we are left with: $$\beta(N)-\left(8+24\gamma\right)\pi_{d^1}
=
\begin{pmatrix}1+\alpha& \frac{1}{3} &- & -\\
- & -& \beta_{2,3}(N) & \beta_{3,4}(N)-(\frac{1}{3}+\gamma)\\
-&-&\vdots&\vdots
\end{pmatrix}.$$ Since $\beta_{3,4}(N)-(\frac{1}{3}+\gamma)$ is nonzero (it is not an integer), the next step of the Boij-Söderberg decomposition must eliminate this entry. This means that the next step of the decomposition must be $4\pi_{d^2}$. However, this would leave a $0$ in column $1$ and a nonzero entry in column $2$, which is impossible.
The case $s=2$ {#the-case-s2 .unnumbered}
--------------
There are two families of triplets $(r,2,t)$ satisfying the congruency conditions. The first family has the form $(1+6\gamma, 2, 1+6\alpha)$ and the second family has the form $(4+6\gamma, 2, 4+6\alpha)$, where $\gamma, \alpha \in \mathbb Z_{\geq 0}$. Every element of the first family is a sum of our proposed generators, so we must show that no element of the second family belongs to ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}(\Delta)$. We obtain a contradiction by essentially the same analysis as in the case $s=1$.
The case $s=4$ {#the-case-s4 .unnumbered}
--------------
There are two families of triplets $(r,4,t)$ satisfying the congruency conditions, namely $2(+6\gamma, 4, 2+6\alpha)$ and $(5+6\gamma, 4, 5+6\alpha)$. Since every element of the first family is a sum of our proposed generators, we must show that no element of the second family belongs to ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}(\Delta)$. A similar, though more involved, analysis as in the case $s=1$ then illustrates that there are no such diagrams.
The cases $s=3,5,6$ {#the-cases-s356 .unnumbered}
-------------------
We claim that if $D\in {\ensuremath{B_\text{int}}}(\Delta)$ corresponds to an $(r,s,t)$-triplet where $s=3,5,$ or $6$, then $D\in {\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}(\Delta)$, with the exception of $(0,6,0)$. There are six families to consider in total: $(3+6\gamma,3,6\alpha), (6\gamma,3,3+6\alpha), (4+6\gamma,5,1+6\alpha), (1+6\gamma,5,4+6\alpha), (3+6\gamma,6,3+6\alpha),$ and $(6\gamma,6,6\alpha)$. Any element from any of these families may be written as a sum of our proposed generators, except for $(0,6,0)$. The diagram corrresponding to $(0,6,0)$ does not belong to ${\ensuremath{B_\text{mod}}}$ by [@erman-semigroup Proof of Thm. 1.6(1)].
The cases $s>6$ {#the-cases-s6 .unnumbered}
---------------
One may directly check that all elements of ${\ensuremath{B_\text{int}}}(\Delta)$ with $s>6$ can be written as an integral sum of the proposed generators.
Acknowledgements {#acknowledgements .unnumbered}
================
We thank Christine Berkesch, Jesse Burke, Courtney Gibbons, Steven Sam and Jerzy Weyman for useful conversations.
[^1]: There is also a“dual” side of the theory that describes the cone of cohomology diagrams of vector bundles and coherent sheaves on $\mathbb P^n$; see [@eis-schrey1; @eis-schrey2].
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Neodymium doped yttrium aluminum garnet powders (Nd:YAG or (Y$_{1-x}$Nd$_x$)$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$, $x=0.15$, 0.25, or 0.30, respectively) were prepared by a sol-gel technique. By DTA measurements up to $2000^{\:\circ}$C eutectic and liquidus temperatures could be determined. Exothermal peaks in the second and subsequent DTA heating runs indicate that the crystallized DTA samples are not in equilibrium. The section Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$–Nd$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ of the concentration triangle Al$_2$O$_3$–Nd$_2$O$_3$–Y$_2$O$_3$ is proposed on the basis of thermodynamic calculations that allows to explain the experimental results by the balance of metastable phase states in the previously crystallized DTA samples.'
address:
- 'Institute of Crystal Growth, Max-Born-Str. 2, 12489 Berlin, Germany'
- 'Institute of Electronic Materials Technology, 01-919 Warsaw, Poland'
author:
- 'D. Klimm'
- 'S. Ganschow'
- 'A. Pajczkowska'
- 'L. Lipińska'
date: 30 June 2006
title: 'On the solubility of Nd$^{3+}$ in Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$'
---
,
,
,
A. oxide materials ,B. sol-gel processes ,C. phase diagrams ,D. thermal analysis 42.70.Hj ,65.40.Gr ,81.30.Dz ,81.70.Pg
Introduction
============
Neodymium doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG or Y$_{1-x}$Nd$_x$)$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$) is one of the most important laser materials. Crystals are available from different commercial suppliers with dopant concentrations up to 2.5at% ($x\leq0.025$) [@Fee06]. Bakradze et al. [@Bakradze68] (see also reference in [@ACerS301], Fig. 04602) studied the subsolidus of the ternary system Al$_2$O$_3$–Nd$_2$O$_3$–Y$_2$O$_3$ and found as maximum solubility for Nd $\approx12$ wt-% in the garnet phase, corresponding to (Y$_{0.82}$Nd$_{0.18}$)$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ ($x=0.18$). The Nd:YAG samples were obtained by cooling from PbO/PbF$_2$ solutions held at $1200^{\:\circ}$C. Maximum solubility was observed along the “garnet section” “G” of the concentration triangle Fig. \[Fig:ternary\].
![Ternary concentration triangle with ternary sections G (garnets) and P (perovskites). The solid ternary line limits the partial system Al$_2$O$_3$–Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$–NdAlO$_3$.[]{data-label="Fig:ternary"}](ternary){width="46.00000%"}
Recently, some of the present authors reported on Nd:YAG powders that were prepared by a sol-gel technique followed by an annealing step at temperatures down to $T=800^{\:\circ}$C and found the maximum doping concentration (Y$_{0.725}$Nd$_{0.275}$)$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ ($x=0.275$) [@Lipinska06]. The results were confirmed by X-ray and chemical (ICP-AES and SEM-EDX) analysis. If single crystals were melt-grown from such sol-gel powders by the micro-pulling-down technique, already $x\geq0.08$ led to the formation of a second (perovskite) phase as the solubility limit of Nd$^{3+}$ in Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ was exceeded.
Both reports [@Bakradze68; @Lipinska06] indicate, that the solubility limit of Nd in YAG may be large in the subsolidus but drops drastically approaching the liquidus $T\gtrsim1900^{\:\circ}$C. Unfortunately, the experimental determination of equilibrium phase relations in the subsolidus region is difficult, as the time that is needed to reach equilibrium rises exponentially if $T$ is lowered.
The present study will report on DTA measurements with the same sol-gel samples that were already used in the previous study [@Lipinska06]. The results allow to propose the topology of the garnet section “G” Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$–Nd$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ of the ternary phase diagram Fig. \[Fig:ternary\].
Experimental
============
The preparation of nanocrystalline Nd:YAG powders (Y$_{1-x}$Nd$_x$)$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ with $x=0.15, 0.25, 0.30$ was performed in aqueous solution starting from Y$_2$O$_3$ and Nd$_2$O$_3$ that were dissolved in acetic acid and from aluminum nitrate and is described in more detail elsewhere [@Lipinska06]. $12-18$ mg of the apparently white Nd:YAG powders were filled in NETZSCH standard tungsten DTA crucibles. (The mass of the empty crucibles is $500-600$ mg.) A STA 409C thermal analyzer with graphite furnace and tungsten sample holder (W/Re thermocouples) was used to perform the DTA/TG measurements in flowing Ar (40 ml/min). The following $T$ program was performed twice for each sample: 1) From room temperature to $2000^{\:\circ}$C with 15 K/min. 2) Down to $500^{\:\circ}$C with 20 K/min. 3) Up to $2000^{\:\circ}$C with 15 K/min. 4) Down to $500^{\:\circ}$C with 20 K/min. This means, 4 heating/cooling runs were performed in total for each sample. It must be noted, that the signal/noise ratio of DTA signals in the region of very high $T\lesssim2000^{\:\circ}$C is large as compared to lower $T$: 1) A large portion of heat is exchanged by radiation and not by conduction through the sample holder. 2) The mass ratio sample/crucible is worse than for DTA crucibles that are used for lower $T$, e.g. from platinum.
![1$^\text{st}$ (solid), 2$^\text{nd}$ (dashed), and 3$^\text{rd}$ (dotted) DTA heating run of the Nd:YAG samples. (Nd concentration $x$ denoted in the respective graphs.)[]{data-label="fig:DTA"}](dta-15a "fig:"){width="42.00000%"} ![1$^\text{st}$ (solid), 2$^\text{nd}$ (dashed), and 3$^\text{rd}$ (dotted) DTA heating run of the Nd:YAG samples. (Nd concentration $x$ denoted in the respective graphs.)[]{data-label="fig:DTA"}](dta-25a "fig:"){width="42.00000%"} ![1$^\text{st}$ (solid), 2$^\text{nd}$ (dashed), and 3$^\text{rd}$ (dotted) DTA heating run of the Nd:YAG samples. (Nd concentration $x$ denoted in the respective graphs.)[]{data-label="fig:DTA"}](dta-30a "fig:"){width="42.00000%"}
No significant mass loss was found during the DTA/TG measurements, indicating that the Nd:YAG powders were free of volatiles. After the measurements the samples formed solidified melts covering the bottom of the W crucibles. The purple color of this melt deepened considerably with doping level. The DTA curves from the first heating runs of all samples were obviously different from the curves of the heating runs 2 – 4. The cooling curves showed strong exothermal peaks at different $T$, indicating undercooling upon crystallization and are therefore not well suited for the construction of an equilibrium phase diagram. Fig. \[fig:DTA\] shows the DTA heating curves 1 – 3 of the samples.
Discussion of DTA curves
========================
A solid that is heated above the fusion point $T_\text{f}$ melts under consumption of the heat of fusion $\Delta H_\text{f}$. Accordingly, melting is an endothermal process. If the melting phase transformation solid $\rightarrow$ liquid proceeds through a 2-phase region of the phase diagram, the solid melts incongruently. This may be the case for mixed crystals (solid solutions, melting starts at solidus $T_\text{sol}$ and terminates at liquidus $T_\text{liq}$) as well as for arbitrary compositions within an eutectic system (melting starts at eutectic $T_\text{eut}$ and terminates at $T_\text{liq}$). All melting events are endothermal.
The 15% Nd:YAG sample shows such normal behavior (solid line Fig. \[fig:DTA\] top): The first peak with onset $T_\text{sol}=1764^{\:\circ}$C can be attributed to the solidus. It is followed by a broad shoulder. The return to the baseline indicates termination of the melting at the liquidus $T_\text{liq}=1898^{\:\circ}$C. Contrary, the 25% and 30% samples do not show any endothermal peaks that can be related to the onset of a melting process. Instead, broad exothermal effects starting around $1700^{\:\circ}$C can be observed for both samples.
The 25% Nd:YAG sample shows in the 2$^\text{nd}$ and all following runs a sharp endothermal effect probably related to a eutectic with onset at $T_\text{eut}^{(25\%)}=1703^{\:\circ}$C. For the 30% sample one finds $T_\text{eut}^{(30\%)}=1700^{\:\circ}$C. Such eutectic melting is never observed in the 15% sample. This behaviour shows, that the composition (Y$_{0.85}$Nd$_{0.15}$)$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ is still within the solubility range of Nd$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ in Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ and the other compositions are beyond the solubility limit. Between $T_\text{sol}$ of 15% Nd:YAG and $T_\text{eut}$ of the higher doped samples some endo- and exothermal effects occur until the DTA curve returns to the baseline. This return (extrapolated offset) marks the liquidus that is clearly for the lower doped samples $T_\text{liq}^{(15\%)}=1897^{\:\circ}$C or $T_\text{liq}^{(25\%)}=1873^{\:\circ}$C, respectively. For (Y$_{0.70}$Nd$_{0.30}$)$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ $T_\text{liq}^{(30\%)}=1860^{\:\circ}$C was determined by repeated measurements. (Not all DTA curves are shown in Fig. \[fig:DTA\].)
It is surprising that for all compositions the 1$^\text{st}$ heating curve is greatly different from the following ones. Moreover, beginning endothermal peaks do sometimes knock over in sharp exothermal effects (e.g. 2$^\text{nd}$ heating of the 15% sample near $1680^{\:\circ}$C). Such endo-/exothermal effects during heating show bad reproducibility and cannot be explained by equilibrium processes. Instead, subsolidus transformations must be responsible for exothermal and non-reproducible effects, as in the subsolidus range the transformation between phases is governed by slow diffusion processes and tends thus to proceed beyond equilibrium. The following section will explain these phenomena on the thermodynamic basis.
Discussion of phase equilibria
==============================
The (Y$_{1-x}$Nd$_x$)$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ compositions that were investigated in this study can be found on line “G” of Fig. \[Fig:ternary\]. This line starts left at Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ that is a congruently melting quasi-binary compound of the rim system Al$_2$O$_3$–Y$_2$O$_3$. In the opposite rim system Al$_2$O$_3$–Nd$_2$O$_3$ the perovskite NdAlO$_3$ is the only congruently melting compound. Experimental phase diagrams of this system can be found in [@Toropov61; @Mizuno79; @Coutures85] (see also compilation in [@ACerS301], Figs. 2342, 6439, and 9262), for $T\gtrsim1300^{\:\circ}$C and show in addition to NdAlO$_3$ the $\beta$-alumina type phase Al$_{11}$NdO$_{18}$ and the monoclinic (space symmetry group $P\;2_1 /c$) Nd$_4$Al$_2$O$_9$ that melt both incongruently.
The “neodymium aluminum garnet” Nd$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ was, to the authors’ knowledge, not yet prepared. Attempts to produce the phase by the same sol-gel technique like the mixed garnets (Y$_{1-x}$Nd$_x$)$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$, or by crystallization from PbO/PbF$_2$ solutions, failed. Nd$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ is shown as a notional end member in the concentration triangle Al$_2$O$_3$–Nd$_2$O$_3$–Y$_2$O$_3$ [@Bakradze68]. Wu and Pelton [@Wu92] carried out a critical assessment of 15 different RE$_2$O$_3$–Al$_2$O$_3$ (RE – rare earth metal) systems, among them RE = Nd (but not Y) and calculated thermodynamic properties for Nd$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ and refined excess enthalpies for the binary melts on the basis of a quasi-chemical model. These data are incorporated in the data bases coming with FactSage [@FactSage5_4_1] and were used for the calculation of the Al$_2$O$_3$–Nd$_2$O$_3$ rim system in Fig. \[Fig:ternary\]. Following this calculation, Nd$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ should be stable only for $T<930^{\:\circ}$C and decomposes at higher $T$ to NdAlO$_3$ and $\alpha$-Al$_2$O$_3$. As the upper stability limit of Nd$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ is so low one can expect that the preparation of this compound will be very difficult, if not practically impossible.
Unfortunately, the very thorough analysis by Wu and Pelton [@Wu92] did not consider the system Y$_2$O$_3$–Al$_2$O$_3$ and well assessed thermodynamic data $G(T)$ for Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ are not found in the FactSage database. However, the properties of RE-Al garnets are known to be very similar, if the ionic radii $r_\text{RE}$ are similar too. In octahedral environment one finds $r_{\text{Y}^{3+}}=104.0$ pm. The most similar RE is holmium with $r_{\text{Ho}^{3+}}=104.1$ pm. The “mixer” function of FactSage that is based on a Born-Haber cycle allows to calculate data for Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ from the notional reaction
$$2~\underbrace{\text{Ho}_3 \text{Al}_5 \text{O}_{12}}_{(1)} +~3~\underbrace{\text{Y}_2 \text{O}_3}_{(2)} \rightarrow 2~\underbrace{\text{Y}_3 \text{Al}_5 \text{O}_{12}}_{(3)} +~3~\underbrace{\text{Ho}_2 \text{O}_3}_{(4)}
\label{eq:reaction}$$
where all data except for (3) are known. With (\[eq:reaction\]) one obtains for Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$
$$\begin{aligned}
G(T) &=& -7387342.19 + 3854.78457\;T \nonumber \\
&& - 3.7656\times10^{-3}\;T^2 + 6326731.0/T \nonumber \\
&& -8283.84604\;\sqrt{T} -170451139.0/T^2 \nonumber \\
&& - 573.3126\;T\ln T \label{eq:G} \\
c_p(T) &=& 573.3126 + 7.5312\times10^{-3}\; T \nonumber \\
&& -12653462.0/T^2 -2070.9615/\sqrt{T} \nonumber \\
&& + 1.02270684\times10^9/T^3 \label{eq:c_p}\end{aligned}$$
for $298\leq T/\text{K}\leq2213$ ($G$ given in J/mol, $c_p$ in J/(mol K), $\Delta H(298)=-7250905.48$ J/mol, $S(298)=285.461831$ J/(mol K)).
Fig. \[fig:cp\_YAG\] compares the results of the “mixer” calculation (\[eq:c\_p\]) with experimental data that were obtained by Konings et al. [@Konings98] using adiabatic calorimetry for $T=5-420$ K and by drop calorimetry for $T=470-880$ K with an experimental error of $<0.35$%. The theoretical data from (\[eq:reaction\]) approach the experimental data around room temperature with a difference of 1%. The difference drops with $T$ and reaches 0.05% at the experimental limit.
![Specific heat capacity of Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ calculated from (\[eq:reaction\]) together with experimental data [@Konings98].[]{data-label="fig:cp_YAG"}](cp_yag){width="42.00000%"}
The calculated thermodynamic data $G(T)$ for Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ (\[eq:G\]) result at the melting point $1940^{\:\circ}$C [@Bondar84; @Mah92] in a heat of fusion $\Delta H_\text{f}=300.9968$ kJ/mol. (Xiao, Derby [@Xiao94] use for Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ $\Delta H_\text{f}=270.3$ kJ/mol without further reference.) Together with the data for Nd$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ from FactSage [@FactSage5_4_1] one can calculate the “G” section through the concentration triangle Fig. \[Fig:ternary\], if reasonable estimations are done for the 2 mixed phases liquid (*l*) and garnet (*g*). As excess enthalpies $G_\text{ex}$ are unknown for both phases, ideal mixing and $G=G_0+G_\text{ideal}$ ($G_0$ – weighed $G$ for the pure components of the mixed phase) was assumed. The influence of neglecting $G_\text{ex}$ was checked for different other RE$_2$O$_3$–Al$_2$O$_3$ systems where experimental phase diagrams as well as $G_0$ and $G_\text{ex}$ are known [@ACerS301; @FactSage5_4_1]. It was found, that the deviations for liquidus temperatures are typically up to $T_\text{liq}\lesssim150$ K; but the topology of the whole phase diagram (occurrence of eutectics and of 1-, 2- or 3-phase rooms) was never changed.
![Calculated section “G” through the ternary phase diagram Fig. \[Fig:ternary\]: *l* – ideal liquid, *g* – ideal garnet, *p* – perovskite NdAlO$_3$, $\alpha$ – corundum ($\alpha$-Al$_2$O$_3$), $\beta$ – $\beta$-alumina type Al$_{11}$NdO$_{18}$. On the right ordinate the $T$ and phase compositions are given, that should be expected from the experimental phase diagram Fig. \[Fig:ternary\].[]{data-label="fig:PD-calc"}](pd-calca){width="46.00000%"}
The resulting section, that is shown in Fig. \[fig:PD-calc\], may therefore be regarded as a suitable and self-consistent basis for the discussion of the “G” section. This section cannot be quasi-binary as the end member Nd$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ melts incongruenly and can only be understood if the partial system Al$_2$O$_3$–Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$–NdAlO$_3$ of the concentration triangle Fig. \[Fig:ternary\] is considered.
In Fig. \[fig:PD-calc\] the right hand side Nd$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ corresponds to the right end of the “G” line in Fig. \[Fig:ternary\] and should basically bear the same information. However, Fig. \[Fig:ternary\] is based on a thermodynamic assessment of the whole system Al$_2$O$_3$–Nd$_2$O$_3$ by optimizing $G(T)$ data for all phases, especially $G_\text{ex}(T)$ for the melt. Unfortunately, the quantity and quality of experimental data available for the ternary system Al$_2$O$_3$–Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$–NdAlO$_3$ is not sufficient to perform such assessment here too, and ideal mixing ($G_\text{ex}=0$) was assumed for the melt as well as for the garnet phase. Irrespectively of these simplifications, the correspondence between Figs. \[fig:PD-calc\] and \[Fig:ternary\] is good: For the composition Nd$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ one finds the garnet phase stable up to $930^{\:\circ}$C as indicated by “*(g)*” near the right ordinate of Fig. \[fig:PD-calc\]. Upon further heating the garnet decomposes to a mixture of the perovskite NdAlO$_3$ and $\alpha$-Al$_2$O$_3$ (“*(p+$\alpha$)*” in Fig. \[fig:PD-calc\]). At $1393^{\:\circ}$C $\alpha$-Al$_2$O$_3$ disappears and the $\beta$-alumina type Al$_{11}$NdO$_{18}$ is formed: “*(p+$\beta$)*” in Fig. \[fig:PD-calc\]. At $T=1713^{\:\circ}$C Fig. \[Fig:ternary\] proposes disappearence of Al$_{11}$NdO$_{18}$, resulting in a 2-phase region “*(l+p)*”. Fig. \[fig:PD-calc\] slightly underestimates the stability of the melt with respect to Al$_{11}$NdO$_{18}$, hence a “*(l+p+$\beta$)*” phase field is found here below “*(l+p)*”. Fortunately, this minor deviation contributes only to solid/liquid equilibria and no substantial discrepancy in the subsolidus equilibria is evident that are in the focus of the present work.
The (Y$_{1-x}$Nd$_x$)$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ single phase field “*g*” extends in Fig. \[fig:PD-calc\] from $0\leq x\leq0.83$, but is in equilibrium with a liquid phase only for $x\leq0.12$. Following this figure, Nd:YAG with doping levels exceeding $\approx80$% should be stable on the “G” section only with additions of $\alpha$-Al$_2$O$_3$. For $x>0.12$ (Y$_{1-x}$Nd$_x$)$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ can only be obtained by solid and chemical (sol-gel) reactions. The ternary eutectic of the partial system Al$_2$O$_3$–Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$–NdAlO$_3$ is calculated at $T_\text{eut,t}\approx 1750^{\:\circ}$C. Only this ternary eutectic can be observed at constant $T$ for different compositions $x\gtrsim0.28$. For $0.12\leq x\leq0.28$ the phase boundary “*g+p*”/“*l+g+p*” is the projection of a binary eutectic groove with $T_\text{eut,b}\approx 1800\ldots1750^{\:\circ}$C depending on $x$. In DTA heating curves, eutectics are usually marked by sharp endothermal peaks. In the present study $T_\text{eut}^{(25\%)}=1703^{\:\circ}$C and $T_\text{eut}^{(30\%)}=1700^{\:\circ}$C were measured with good reproducibility. The experimental values are by $\approx50$ K below the theoretical values, but the slightly higher $T_\text{eut}$ for the 25% sample indicates, that $x=0.25$ is already situated on the binary eutectic groove where $T_\text{eut,b}$ depends on $x$. For large Nd concentrations (depending on $T$ for $x>0.12\ldots0.83$) the garnet phase is only stable in equilibrium with perovskite, $\alpha$-Al$_2$O$_3$ (corundum), or Al$_{11}$NdO$_{18}$ ($\beta$).
The subsolidus equilibria depicted in Fig. \[fig:PD-calc\] can explain the different DTA curves for the first and for subsequent heating runs that are shown in Fig. \[fig:DTA\]: If the (Y$_{1-x}$Nd$_x$)$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$ samples with e.g. $x=0.30$ are heated for the first time, the system starts in the “*g*” phase field and crosses subsequently the “*g+p*”, “*g+p+*$\beta$”, “*l+g+p*”,“*l+g*”, and finally the “*l*” fields. The first of the transformations “*g*” $\rightarrow$ “*g+p*” $\rightarrow$ “*g+p+*$\beta$” are only transformations between solid phases that are diffusion limited and lead to broad DTA peaks as the reaction is smeared out over a broad $T$ range. If the melt of this composition $x=0.30$ is cooled, the garnet phase crystallizes first with enrichment of Nd in the melt, as $k^\text{Nd}\approx0.15$ [@Nishimura75]. From Fig. \[fig:PD-calc\] one can estimate $k^\text{Nd}=x_\text{sol}/x_\text{liq}\approx0.12$ for small $x$. The remaining melt composition approaches the eutectic point and crystallizes then on the path “*l+g+p*” $\rightarrow$ “*g+p+*$\beta$” $\rightarrow$ “*g+p*”. Indeed, the perovskite phase was found in Nd:YAG fibres that were grown in this composition range [@Lipinska06]. However, the cooled solid is in a metastable nonequilibrium state where Y-rich garnet occurs together with Nd-rich garnet and with NdAlO$_3$ or even Al$_{11}$NdO$_{18}$. If this metastable sample is heated again it tends to reach equilibrium by a thermally activated exothermal solid state reaction that is responsible for the exothermal DTA peaks.
Summary
=======
The assumption of the existence of neodymium aluminum garnet allows to compile a self-consistent YAG–NdAG section of the Y$_2$O$_3$–Nd$_2$O$_3$–Al$_2$O$_3$ phase diagram that explains the measured DTA curves for heavily Nd-doped YAG powders. Accordingly, the solubility of Nd$^{3+}$ in YAG ranges up to 80 at%, i.e. is much higher than supposed so far. However, solubility decreases strongly with increasing temperature. Therefore, and due to distinct segregation, the Nd$^{3+}$ concentration in crystals grown from the melt is limited to $\lesssim\,12$ at%.
[10]{}
.
R. V. Bakradze, G. N. Kuznecova, S. A. Baryschev, T. N. Selivanova, V. Z. Byčkov, Neorganičeskie Materialy 4 (1968) 395–398.
, Phase quilibria diagrams, [CD]{}-[ROM]{} database (Ver. 3.0.1).
L. Lipinska, L. Lojko, A. Klos, S. Ganschow, R. Diduszko, W. Ryba-Romanowski, A.Pajaczkowska, J. Alloys Comp. accepted.
N. A. Toropov, T. P. Kiseleva, Zh. Neorg. Khim. 6 (1961) 2353–2358, [Russ. J. Inorg. Chem.]{} (Engl. Transl.), 6 (1961) 1193–1196.
M. Mizuno, Yogyo Kyokaishi 87 (1979) 405–412.
J. P. Coutures, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 68 (1985) 105–107.
P. Wu, A. D. Pelton, J. Alloys Comp. 179 (1992) 259–287.
, [FactSage]{} 5.4.1, http://www.factsage.com/ (2006).
R. Konings, R. R. V. der Laan, A. C. G. V. Genderen, J. C. V. Miltenburg, thermochimica acta 313 (1998) 201–206.
I. A. Bondar, L. N. Koroleva, E. T. Bezruk, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Neorganičeskie Materialy 20 (1984) 257–261, [Inorg. Chem.]{} (Engl. Transl.) 20 (1984) 214–218.
T.-I. Mah, M. D. Petry, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 75 (1992) 2006–2009.
Q. Xiao, J. J. Derby, J. Crystal Growth 139 (1994) 147–157.
T. Nishimura, T. Omi, Jap. J. Appl. Phys. 14 (1975) 1011–1016.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: |
For a given region, we have a dataset composed of car theft locations along with a linked dataset of recovery locations which, due to partial recovery, is a relatively small subset of the set of theft locations. For an investigator seeking to understand the behavior of car thefts and recoveries in the region, several questions are addressed. Viewing the set of theft locations as a point pattern, can we propose useful models to explain the pattern? What types of predictive models can be built to learn about recovery location given theft location? Can the dependence between theft locations and recovery locations be formalized? Can the *flow* between theft sites and recovery sites be captured?
Origin-destination modeling offers a natural framework for such problems. However, here the data is not for areal units but rather is a pair of point patterns, with the recovery point pattern only partially observed. We offer modeling approaches for investigating the questions above and apply the approaches to two datasets. One is small from the state of Neza in Mexico with areal covariate information regarding population features and crime type. A second, much larger one, is from Belo Horizonte in Brazil but lacks covariates.
author:
- 'Shinichiro Shirota[^1], Alan. E. Gelfand[^2] and Jorge Mateu[^3]'
title: 'Analyzing Car Thefts and Recoveries with Connections to Modeling Origin-Destination Point Patterns'
---
[*Keywords:*]{} Bayesian framework, log Gaussian Cox process, nonhomogeneous Poisson process, posterior predictive distribution, rank probability score
Introduction {#sec:Intro}
============
A criminal activity which has attracted little modeling attention in the statistics literature is that of automobile thefts. Such data will consist of a set of theft locations, perhaps with associated covariate information for the theft site, e.g., demographic information and criminal activity information. There will also be an associated set of recovery locations for which covariate information is available. However, recoveries are typically for only a small fraction of thefts so that the set of recovery locations is only a partial set of all of the potential recovery locations.
We are motivated by two real data settings. One consists of a collection of automobile thefts, with a fraction (roughly $10\%$) of recoveries, over the state of Neza in Mexico. The data is a total of 4,016 car theft locations (after deleting some missing locations) during 2015, over both northern and southern parts of Neza. This dataset is small but is endowed with areal covariate information regarding population features and crime type that can be used for explanation in our modeling strategy. See Figures 1 and 2, and Section 2 for further description. A second dataset consists of car thefts which occurred in Belo Horizonte (Brazil). It is a much larger dataset, but lacks covariates. This city is 331 km$^2$ in area and has approximately 2.4 million inhabitants. In the period from August, 1, 2000, to July, 31, 2001, the dataset consists of 5,250 *pairs* of theft and recovery locations. See Figure 3 and Section 2 for a more complete description.
It is important to note some limitations of the available data. The low recovery rate for the Neza dataset is disappointing. Issues such as what happened to the $90\%$ unrecovered vehicles, how different are they from the recovered vehicles (how representative of the total thefts are the $10\%$ we have observed), and what the local law enforcement might do to improve the recovery rate are evidently important and would enable us to enrich the story; unfortunately this information is not available. However, the data, as provided, reflects the reality of this type of crime data that police is reporting, and this is what we usually have to cope with. This expected poor nature of the data is a motivation for ad-hoc statistical modeling. Furthermore, the nature of the vehicles stolen - mark, condition, etc., would enable comparison of the subset of those recovered to the subset of those not recovered and might also make a promising story. However, the only available covariates are the aggregated ones we consider in Section 2 below. We have no individual vehicle data. As for the Belo Horizonte data, in fact there were $6339$ thefts during the study window with $5257$ eventually found within the city limits. So, there is a much higher recovery rate for this data than for the Neza data. However, we only received the theft locations for the cars that were recovered. It may be argued that there is potential bias in this subsample of thefts. We cannot assess this but with nearly $85\%$ of the total thefts included, we can hope that the bias is small. Another issue is that of a false report, e.g., the owner forgot where the vehicle was parked or the vehicle was borrowed by a friend or relative without informing the owner. Again, intriguing inference might emerge but this information is another “individual” feature that is not supplied.
Acknowledging the foregoing limitations, the contribution here is to take the perspective of crime data analysts/investigators trying to better understand the behavior of car thefts for a specified region. So, a first issue they might focus on would be to attempt to understand the *point pattern* of car thefts. They might seek a “risk” surface for theft. In Section 3 below, we offer modeling to provide an intensity surface for the point pattern of thefts to clarify where risk is high, where it is low. A second issue becomes one of attempting to predict recovery location given theft location. Evidently, an effective predictive model would help local law enforcement in the process of vehicle recovery. In Section 4 below, we offer modeling to provide such prediction.
A third issue connects us to Section 5. We find ourselves in what has been referred to as spatial interaction/origin-destination modeling. Such modeling is customarily proposed at areal scale. That is, the study region is partitioned into municipal units, e.g., postcodes, census units, business districts, labor markets. The observations consist of a pair of areal units, an origin unit and a destination unit. In addition, we would have potential regressors associated with each areal unit and a suitable distance between the units. The origin-destination modeling obtains $\{p_{ij}\}$, the matrix of origin-destination probabilities, e.g., the probability of living in unit $i$ and working in unit $j$ [@Chakrabortyetal(13)], or the probability of a mail originating from unit $i$ and sent to unit $j$ [@Banerjeeetal(00)]. Interest lies in *flows*, the number of people who live in unit $i$ and work in unit $j$, e.g., $n_{i}p_{ij}$ where $n_{i}$ is the number of people living in unit $i$.
Our car theft setting differs in two ways. First, the data is available at point level and can be viewed as a pair of point patterns. Second, the recovery point pattern is typically only partially observed. When a complete pair is observed, we have a geo-coded origin location and a geo-coded destination location; when recovery is missing, we have only a geo-coded origin. Regardless, we can phrase analogous questions but with no need to aggregate to areal units in order to consider them. Rather, we build a *joint* intensity of the form $\lambda(\bm{s}_{o}, \bm{s}_{d})$ over pairs of locations $(\bm{s}_{o}, \bm{s}_{d}) \in D_{o} \times D_{d}$ where $\bm{s}_{o}$ is a theft location over a region $D_{o}$ and $\bm{s}_{d}$ is a recovery location over a region $D_{d}$. Useful insight can be gleaned from the marginal intensity surface for both theft locations and recovery locations. To attempt to understand the flow of vehicles from theft location to recovery location, suppose a neighborhood is created, say $B_{o} \subset D_{o}$, as an theft neighborhood and, say $B_{d} \subset D_{d}$, a recovery neighborhood. Then, we can ask for the predictive distribution of the number of thefts in $B_{o}$ with recovery in $B_{d}$. Alternatively, we could convert to proportions, e.g., obtaining the proportion of recoveries in $B_{d}$ associated with a theft in $B_{o}$.
Examination of modeling of spatial interaction, also referred to as gravity modeling, has a long history in the literature. [@Wilson(75)] provides an early review. [@Fotheringham(83)] presents a more formal discussion. More recent reviews can be found in [@RoyThill(03)] and in [@LeSagePace(08)]. Spatial interaction data have become increasingly available due to the wide adoption of location-aware technologies [@Guoetal(12)]. Examination of mobility data also has some history, e.g., [@BrownHolmes(71)], [@Simpson(92)] and more recently, [@deVriesetal(09)]. Origin-destination problems involving mobility can be found in, e.g., [@Woodetal(10)]; [@AdrienkoAdrienko(11)]; [@Guoetal(12)].
For us, mobility refers to the movement of a vehicle from a theft location to a recovery location. Pertinent to our setting is work of [@AssuncaoLopes(07)] and [@LopesAssuncao(12)]. Particularly, the former builds a bivariate linked point process with a joint pairwise interaction function. Our view is that the theft locations should be viewed as conditionally independent given the intensity function so that either a nonhomogeneous Poisson process or a log-Gaussian Cox process model applies. The flexibility of the log-Gaussian Cox process along with the availability of covariates, as with the Neza data, will make it impossible for say a pairwise interaction model to outperform it. A point pattern model incorporating interactions between the points would seem to need some mechanistic motivation. The connection between origin-destination problems and spatial point processes has been little treated in the literature. [@Benesetal(05)] consider statistical analysis of linked point processes, where, in their study, for each case of a disease they have the coordinates of the individual’s home and of the reported infection location. However, they used only the distance between the two linked locations. Again, [@AssuncaoLopes(07)] and [@LopesAssuncao(12)] consider bivariate linked point processes as point processes with events marked with another spatial event representing origin-destination data types. Their methods are illustrated with the Belo Horizonte data on car theft locations and the eventual car retrieval locations; this data is also analyzed here.
As noted above, three types of issues are considered with regard to automobile theft data and we devote a section below to each. First, the set of theft locations is modeled by using both a nonhomogeneous Poisson process as well as a log-Gaussian Cox process. We demonstrate the benefit of the latter specification. Second, a conditional specification is proposed to provide the distribution of recovery location given theft location. Third, we consider a joint model, viewing the data as an origin-destination pair, and treating the point pattern as consisting of random pairs of locations. Because both origin and destination are points in $\mathbb{R}^{2}$, we propose to specify the model as a point pattern over a bounded set $D_{o} \times D_{d}\subset \mathbb{R}^{2}\times \mathbb{R}^{2}$. This approach needs an intensity over $D_{o} \times D_{d}$ linking pairs of locations. In this regard, the modeling can be cast in the context of a marked point pattern. That is, the recovery location can be viewed as a mark associated with the theft location where the mark lies in a subset of $\mathbb{R}^{2}$. Furthermore, these marks might depend on theft locations themselves, i.e., location dependent marks. A statistical challenge for this specification is to introduce spatial dependence into modeling of marks (recovery locations) defined on $D_{d}$. We propose a reasonable modeling in Section \[sec:Joint\]. The plan of the paper is the following. Section 2 provides a description of the two datasets that motivate this paper. Section 3 presents the statistical approach that models the set of theft locations using both a nonhomogeneous Poisson process as well as a log-Gaussian Cox process. Then Section 4 considers the conditional specification approach that provides the distribution of recovery locations given theft locations. Section 5 supplies the joint modeling approach, viewing the data as an origin-destination pair, and treating the point pattern as consisting of random pairs of locations. The paper ends with a summary and future work.
Data Description {#sec:Data}
================
We analyze two datasets consisting of a collection of automobile thefts and recoveries, one for the state of Neza in Mexico, the other in Belo Horizonte (Brazil). The supplied longitude and latitude information is transformed to eastings and northings on meter scale in Figures 1-3 below. In the analysis, we transformed from meter scale to kilometer scale. There may be measurement error in the locations but this is beyond the scope of the data we have to work with.
The Neza data {#sec:Neza}
-------------
The Ciudad Neza (referred to as Neza in what follows) is a city and municipality adjacent to the northeast corner of Mexico’s Federal district. It is part of the Mexico City metropolitan area. The region is composed of the North and South parts separated by a single road. On the east side of this road there is a large park, and on the west side an airport. In the analysis below, these two regions are separated. Our dataset contains car theft locations in 2015. The number of car theft locations is 4,016 after deleting some missing locations.
We also have several areal unit covariates split into two categories. The first category consists of population types: (1) `Pop15` - number of individuals 15 years and older, (2) `Apart` - number of apartments, (3) `Eco` - number of economically active individuals, (4) `Employ` - number of employed individuals, hence `unEmploy` - number of unemployed individuals, (5) `inBorn` - number of individuals born in the area, hence `outBorn` - number of individuals born outside the area, (6) `Health` - number of individuals with health insurance access, hence `noHealth` - number of individuals without health insurance access and (7) `Scholar` average of scholarly grade (integer values from $6- 10$). The second category consists of crime types: (1) `Extor` - number of extortion crimes, (2) `Murder` - number of murders, (3) `Burg` - number of burglaries, (4) `Shop` - number of shop robberies, (5) `Public` - number of public transport robberies, (6) `Street` - number of street robberies, (7) `Kidnap` - number of kidnappings and (8) `Total` - total number of infractions (some additional crimes beyond (1) through (7) are included here). These covariates are provided for 90 disjoint blocks in Neza. Figure \[fig:Map\] shows the theft locations for the North and South regions. 22 blocks are located in the North region with the remaining 68 blocks in the South region. They are indicated in white in the figure. Of the thefts, 3,327 points (689 points) are observed in the South (North) region. These locations seem to be spread smoothly over the each region rather than suggesting concentration in “hot spots.”
![Car theft locations in the North region (left) and the South region (right) in Neza ($x$-axis (easting) and $y$-axis (northing) are at meter scale).[]{data-label="fig:Map"}](PlotNorth.pdf){width="7.5cm"}
![Car theft locations in the North region (left) and the South region (right) in Neza ($x$-axis (easting) and $y$-axis (northing) are at meter scale).[]{data-label="fig:Map"}](PlotSouth.pdf){width="7.5cm"}
Unfortunately, the recovery locations are observed for only 382 theft locations. 56 of these locations are outside the Neza region. This is a commonly encountered situation in the context of car theft and recoveries. The set of recovery locations is often quite relative small compared to the set of theft locations, and police have to cope with this. In addition, we are additionally facing a problem of incompleteness of the data. This is typically the reality in car theft data, and what we show in this paper is modeling strategies within these limitations. Note also that the Mexican police are structured so that they also have authority over their city but information from other police departments is sometimes not accessible. This means that the Neza police have control only over the recoveries within the Neza region. This is the reason why we only have data within Neza. Figure \[fig:Pairs\] shows the plot of the recovery locations for observed theft and recovery pairs as well as a histogram of the distance between theft and recovery locations. Fortunately, by looking at Figure \[fig:Pairs\] the recoveries tend to be close to the origin or theft location. Thus there should not be a large number of recoveries (or missing recoveries) far from the city of Neza. And this closeness between recovery location and theft location is what motivates our ensuing modeling strategies. In addition, we have no individual vehicle data. However, the police published an internal report in which they described the cars most often stolen in Neza during the period 2013-2016. The list basically included pick-ups. The police confirmed that the black market was not the main aim behind a car theft; perhaps the theft was just needed to move (stolen) goods from one place to another. This could explain why the recoveries within the city tend to be close to the theft locations.
![Recovery locations (left, $x$-axis (easting) and $y$-axis (northing) are at meter scale) and histogram of the distance between theft and recovery locations (right, $x$-axis (distance) also at meter scale).[]{data-label="fig:Pairs"}](RecoveredNew.pdf){width="7.5cm"}
![Recovery locations (left, $x$-axis (easting) and $y$-axis (northing) are at meter scale) and histogram of the distance between theft and recovery locations (right, $x$-axis (distance) also at meter scale).[]{data-label="fig:Pairs"}](HistPairsNew.pdf){width="7.5cm"}
The Belo Horizonte data {#sec:Belo}
-----------------------
We also examine car theft and recovery point patterns in Belo Horizonte in Brazil ([@AssuncaoLopes(07)]). The dataset contains $6339$ thefts during the study window with $5257$ eventually found within the city limits. So, there is a much higher recovery rate for this data than for the Neza data. However, we only received the theft locations for the cars that were recovered. This dataset does not have any covariate information. It may be argued that there is potential bias in this subsample of thefts. This cannot be assessed but with nearly $85\%$ of the total thefts included, we hope that the bias is small. The left panel of Figure \[fig:MapBH\] shows the point patterns of theft and recovery locations. The point patterns are similar, though recovery points seemed to be a bit more concentrated. The right panel provides the histogram of the distance between theft and recovery locations. Again, recovery location tends to be near theft location; in fact, 770 pairs (roughly $15\%$) are observed to be within 200m of each other.
![Car theft and recovery locations (left, $x$-axis (easting) and $y$-axis (northing) are at meter scale) and histogram of the distance between theft and recovery locations (right, $x$-axis (distance) also at meter scale) in Belo Horizonte[]{data-label="fig:MapBH"}](PlotBH.pdf){width="8cm"}
![Car theft and recovery locations (left, $x$-axis (easting) and $y$-axis (northing) are at meter scale) and histogram of the distance between theft and recovery locations (right, $x$-axis (distance) also at meter scale) in Belo Horizonte[]{data-label="fig:MapBH"}](HistBH.pdf){width="7cm"}
Modeling of car thefts {#sec:Model}
======================
LGCP and NHPP models for vehicle theft {#sec:LGCPNHPP}
--------------------------------------
Here we turn to the first issue raised in the Introduction. Viewing the collection of car thefts as a random point pattern, can a satisfying explanatory model be developed? We seek to provide an investigator with understanding of the nature of the intensity surface that is driving the point pattern of thefts. This surface can be viewed as a risk surface for theft enabling clarification of where risk is high, where it is low.
We consider the vehicle theft events in Neza with available covariate information. Let $\mathcal{S}=\{\bm{s}_{1},\ldots,\bm{s}_{n}\}$ denote the observed point pattern over the study region $D\subset \mathbb{R}^{2}$. In our case, $\mathcal{S}$ is the set of car theft locations and $D$ is the North or the South region. We view the theft events as conditionally independent given the intensity and therefore consider a non-homogeneous Poisson process (NHPP) and a log-Gaussian Cox processes (LGCP, [@Molleretal(98)]) for modeling theft events.
The LGCP is defined so that the log of the intensity is a Gaussian process (GP), i.e., $$\begin{aligned}
\log \lambda(\bm{s})=\bm{X}(\bm{s})\bm{\beta}+z(\bm{s}), \quad \bm{z}(\mathcal{S})\sim \mathcal{N}(\bm{0}, \mathbf{C}_{\bm{z}}), \quad \bm{s}\in D.\end{aligned}$$ where $\bm{X}(\bm{s})$ is a covariate vector at $\bm{s}$ and $z(\bm{s})$ is a Gaussian process. In particular, the point pattern $\mathcal{S}$ has associated vector $\bm{z}(\mathcal{S})=(z(\bm{s}_{1}), \ldots, z(\bm{s}_{n}))$ which follows an $n$-variate zero mean Gaussian distribution, with covariance matrix $\mathbf{C}_{\bm{z}}=[C(\bm{s}_{i}, \bm{s}_{j})]_{i,j=1,\ldots, n}$. The component spatial random effects for the intensity surface provide pushing up and pulling down the surface, as appropriate. We assume an exponential covariance function, i.e., $C(\bm{u}, \bm{u}^{'})=\sigma^2 \exp(-\phi \|\bm{u}-\bm{u}^{'}\|)$[^4].
If $\bm{z}(\bm{s})$ is removed from the log intensity, the corresponding NHPP is obtained. NHPP’s have a long history in the literature (see, e.g., [@Illianetal(08)]). Furthermore, given $\lambda(\bm{s})$ with $z(\bm{s})$ included, $\mathcal{S}$ again, follows an NHPP with intensity $\lambda(\bm{s})$. The likelihood takes the form $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{S})&\propto \exp\biggl(-\int_{D}\lambda(\bm{u})d\bm{u} \biggl)\prod_{i=1}^{n}\lambda(\bm{s}_{i})\end{aligned}$$
For inference with a LGCP using (2), the stochastic integral inside the exponential need to be approximated. We create $K$ grid cells roughly uniformly over the study region $D$; convergence to the exact posterior distribution when $K \to \infty$ (with grid cell area decreasing to $0$) is guaranteed following [@Waagepetersen(04)]. Then, the approximate likelihood for the LGCP becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{S})\propto \exp\biggl(-\sum_{k=1}^{K}\lambda(\bm{u}_{k})\Delta_{k} \biggl)\prod_{k=1}^{K}\lambda(\bm{u}_{k})^{n_{k}}\end{aligned}$$ where $n_{k}$ is the number of points in $k$-th grid, i.e., $\sum_{k}^{K}n_{k}=n$, $\Delta_{k}$ is the area of $k$-th grid (in practice, we standardize $\Delta_{k}$ so that $\sum_{k}^{K}\Delta_{k}=|D|=1$) and $u_{k}$ is the “representative point" for $k$-th grid (e.g., [@MollerWaagepetersen(04)] and [@BanerjeeCarlinGelfand(14)]). In fact, since covariate values for 90 different areal units are available, this discretization is adopted. In order to implement full inference we work within a Bayesian framework, fitting the model using Markov chain Monte Carlo (see, e.g., [@RobertCasella(04)]). Other model fitting approaches are available, helpful for large point patterns (high dimensional grids). They include integrated nested Laplace approximation (INLA) [@Simpsonetal(16b)], approximate Gaussian process models, e.g, nearest neighbor Gaussian processes [@Dattaetal(16a)] and multi-resolution Gaussian processes [@Katzfuss(17)].
Covariate selection {#sec:Covariate}
-------------------
The spatstat R-package ([@BaddeleyTurner(05)]; [@Baddeleyetal(13)]) supports the model fitting of spatial point processes, in particular Poisson processes, and related inference and diagnostic tools. The function `ppm` fits a spatial point process to an observed point pattern and allows the inclusion of covariates. Two estimation methods, pseudo-maximum likelihood ([@BaddeleyTurner(00)]) and approximate maximum likelihood ([@HuangOgata(99)]), are implemented. Working with the 90 (22 in North and 68 in South) blocks, covariates from those listed in Section 2.1 are chosen by forward and backward selection (`step` function in R) based on the models fitted by the `ppm` function[^5].
We implement model fitting with the NHPP and the LGCP for theft locations in the two separate regions in Neza. Again, $K_{N}=22$ and $K_{S}=68$ are the number of grid cells for the North and South regions, respectively. We rescale the northings and eastings dividing by 1,000 and present estimation results at this scale.
Working with the NHPP model, the forward and backward algorithm is implemented (`step` function) with BIC penalty ($\log(n)$) for each region. What emerged is $k=1,\ldots, K_{S}$ $(K_{N})$: $$\begin{aligned}
\bm{X}_{S,k}\bm{\beta}&=\beta_{0}+\beta_{1}\texttt{Extor}_{k}+\beta_{2}\texttt{Shop}_{k} +\beta_{3}\texttt{Street}_{k}+\beta_{4}\texttt{Total}_{k} \nonumber \\
&+\beta_{5}\texttt{Eco}_{k}+\beta_{6}\texttt{Scholar}_{k} \\
\bm{X}_{N,k}\bm{\beta}&=\beta_{0}+\beta_{2}\texttt{Shop}_{k}+\beta_{4}\texttt{Total}_{k}+\beta_{7}\texttt{Apart}_{k}\end{aligned}$$ All covariates are centered and scaled. The same covariate vectors are used for the LGCP model.
Turning to model fitting, Markov chain Monte Carlo is implemented. For sampling of $\bm{\beta}$ in the LGCP and NHPP, an adaptive random walk MH algorithm ([@AndrieuThoms(08)]) is implemented. Elliptical slice sampling is implemented for the GP in the LGCP ([@MurrayAdams(10)], [@MurrayAdamsMacKay(10)], [@Leininger(14)]). 20,000 samples are discarded as burn-in period and a subsequent 20,000 samples are preserved as posterior samples for the LGCP and the NHPP, respectively. Since, for spatial Gaussian processes, $\phi$ and $\sigma^2$ are not identifiable but the product, $\phi \sigma^2$ is [@Zhang(04)], an informative prior distribution needs to be adopted for one of them. Here, we assume informative support for $\phi$ and adopt an inverse Gamma distribution for $\sigma^2$ with relatively large variance. As specific prior settings, we assume $\sigma^2\sim \mathcal{IG}(2,0.1)$ (inverse gamma), $\bm{\beta}\sim \mathcal{N}(\bm{0}, 100\mathbf{I})$ (normal) and $\phi \sim \mathcal{U}[0, 10]$ (uniform), where, after rescaling, the easting and northing, distances are in kilometers.
When the models were fitted, for the South region all coefficients were significant, i.e., a $95\%$ credible interval (CI) doesn’t include 0, for the NHPP while $\beta_{5}$ was insignificant under the LGCP. For the North region, again all coefficients were significant for the NHPP while $\beta_{7}$ was insignificant under the LGCP. The details are omitted but we note that the total number of infractions has a large positive (increasing) effect on theft events for both the North and South regions. For the South region, the posterior log likelihood for the NHPP can be summarized (posterior mean, $95\%$ credible interval) as $-294.3 \hspace{.2cm} (-298.6, -291.7)$ while that for the LGCP can be summarized as $-228.2 \hspace{.2cm} (-242.4, -216.7)$. For the North region, the posterior log likelihood for the NHPP can be summarized as $-81.98 \hspace{.2cm} (-.85.44, -80.28)$ while that for the LGCP can be summarized as $-68.47 \hspace{.2cm} (-75.46, -62.68)$. Since larger likelihood is desired, the LGCP emerges as preferred for both regions. We provide further support for the LGCP through cross-validation in the next subsection.
$p$-thinning cross validation {#sec:CV}
-----------------------------
Cross validation is a standard approach for assessing model adequacy and is available for point pattern models with conditionally independent locations given the intensity, hence, for both the NHPP and LGCP (see, [@LeiningerGelfand(17)]).
Cross validation is implemented by obtaining a training (fitting) dataset and a testing (validation) dataset using $p$-thinning as proposed by [@LeiningerGelfand(17)]. Let $p$ denote the retention probability, i.e., we delete $\bm{s}_{i}\in \mathcal{S}$ with probability $1-p$. This produces a training point pattern $\mathcal{S}^{train}$ and a test point pattern $\mathcal{S}^{test}$, which are independent, conditional on $\lambda(\bm{s})$. In particular, $\mathcal{S}^{train}$ has intensity $\lambda(\bm{s})^{train}=p \lambda(\bm{s})$. We set $p=0.5$ and estimate $\lambda(\bm{s})^{train}$ $\bm{s}\in D$. Then, the posterior draws of $\lambda^{train}(\bm{s})$ are converted into predictive draws of $\lambda^{test}(\bm{s})$ using $\lambda^{test}(\bm{s})=\frac{1-p}{p}\lambda^{train}(\bm{s})= \lambda^{train}(\bm{s})$.
Let $\{B_{r}\}$ be a collection of subsets of $D$ as a evaluation grid. For the choice of $\{B_{r}\}$, [@LeiningerGelfand(17)] suggest to draw random subsets of the same size uniformly over $D$. Specifically, for $q \in (0,1)$, if the area of each $B_{r}$ is $q|D|$, then $q$ is the *relative* size of each $B_{r}$. They argue that making the subsets disjoint is time consuming and unnecessary. Based on the $p$-thinning cross validation, two model performance criteria are considered: (i) predictive interval coverage (PIC) and (ii) rank probability score (RPS). PIC offers assessment of model adequacy, RPS enables model comparison.\
\
[**Predictive Interval Coverage**]{}\
After the model is fitted to $\mathcal{S}^{train}$, the posterior predictive intensity function can supply posterior predictive point patterns and therefore samples from the posterior predictive distribution of $N(B_{r})$ for each $r$. For the $\ell$-th posterior sample, $\ell = 1,...., L$, the associated predictive residual is defined as $$\begin{aligned}
R_{\ell}^{pred}(B_{r})=N^{test}(B_{r})-N^{(\ell)}(B_{r})\end{aligned}$$ where $N^{test}(B_{r})$ is the number of points of the test data in $B_{r}$. If the model is adequate, the empirical predictive interval coverage rate, i.e., the proportion of intervals which contain $0$, is expected to be roughly the nominal level of coverage; below, $90\%$ nominal coverage is chosen. Empirical coverage much less than the nominal suggests model inadequacy; predictive intervals are too optimistic. Empirical coverage much above, for example $100\%$, is also undesirable. It suggests that the model is introducing more uncertainty than needed.\
\
[**Rank Probability Score**]{}\
[@GneitingRaftery(07)] propose the continuous rank probability score (CRPS). This score is derived as a proper scoring rule and enables a criterion for assessing the precision of a predictive distribution for continuous variables. In our context, we seek to compare a predictive distribution to an observed count. [@Czadoetal(09)] and references therein discuss rank probability scores (RPS) for count data. Intuitively, a good model will provide a predictive distribution that is very concentrated around the observed count. While the RPS has a challenging formal computational form, it is directly amenable to Monte Carlo integration. In particular, for a given $B_{r}$, the RPS is calculated as $$\begin{aligned}
\text{RPS}(F, N^{test}(B_{r}))&=\frac{1}{L}\sum_{\ell=1}^{L}|N^{(\ell)}(B_{r})-N^{test}(B_{r})| \nonumber \\
&-\frac{1}{2L^2}\sum_{\ell=1}^{L}\sum_{\ell^{'}=1}^{L}|N^{(\ell)}(B_{r})-N^{(\ell^{'})}(B_{r})|\end{aligned}$$ Summing over the collection of $B_{r}$ gives a model comparison criterion. Smaller values of the sum are preferred.
The results of model validation are presented for the Neza data using predictive interval coverage and ranked probability score. We set $p=0.5$ for dividing into training and test datasets. Figure \[fig:MVTheft\] shows the PIC with 90$\%$ nominal level and the RPS for both regions. Here, $w$ denotes the number of randomly selected blocks for model comparison. As for the choice of ${B_{r}}$, since the total number of grid cells for this dataset is small, here we choose $w=1,\ldots, 10$ grids from the 22 grids in the North and 68 grids in the South, rather than choosing ${B_{r}}$ with respect to a rate $q$. Again, the LGCP outperforms the NHPP, more so for the South, the larger dataset.
![PIC (top) with $90\%$ nominal level (dashed line) and RPS (bottom) for the North (left) and South (right) regions: NHPP ($\bullet$) and LGCP ($\blacktriangle$). $w$ is the number of randomly selected blocks for model comparison.[]{data-label="fig:MVTheft"}](PICnorth.pdf){width="7cm"}
![PIC (top) with $90\%$ nominal level (dashed line) and RPS (bottom) for the North (left) and South (right) regions: NHPP ($\bullet$) and LGCP ($\blacktriangle$). $w$ is the number of randomly selected blocks for model comparison.[]{data-label="fig:MVTheft"}](PICsouth.pdf){width="7cm"}
![PIC (top) with $90\%$ nominal level (dashed line) and RPS (bottom) for the North (left) and South (right) regions: NHPP ($\bullet$) and LGCP ($\blacktriangle$). $w$ is the number of randomly selected blocks for model comparison.[]{data-label="fig:MVTheft"}](RPSnorth.pdf){width="7cm"}
![PIC (top) with $90\%$ nominal level (dashed line) and RPS (bottom) for the North (left) and South (right) regions: NHPP ($\bullet$) and LGCP ($\blacktriangle$). $w$ is the number of randomly selected blocks for model comparison.[]{data-label="fig:MVTheft"}](RPSsouth.pdf){width="7cm"}
Finally, Figures \[fig:LGCPsouth\] and \[fig:LGCPnorth\] display the results of nominally $50\%$ held out counts, comparing the observed with the posterior predictive intensity surface estimated by using the retained counts for the South and the North regions, respectively. Altogether, the posterior predictive intensity surfaces well explain the distribution of held out counts for both regions.
![Held out counts (left) and posterior predictive intensity surface (right) in the South region.[]{data-label="fig:LGCPsouth"}](Neza_South_Count.pdf){width="8cm"}
![Held out counts (left) and posterior predictive intensity surface (right) in the South region.[]{data-label="fig:LGCPsouth"}](Neza_South_Int.pdf){width="8cm"}
![Held out counts (left) and posterior predictive intensity surface (right) in the North region.[]{data-label="fig:LGCPnorth"}](Neza_North_Count.pdf){width="8cm"}
![Held out counts (left) and posterior predictive intensity surface (right) in the North region.[]{data-label="fig:LGCPnorth"}](Neza_North_Int.pdf){width="8cm"}
Conditioning recovery location on theft location {#sec:Conditioning}
================================================
We turn to a second issue with regard to vehicle theft. How can we predict recovery location given theft location? Evidently, an effective predictive model would help local law enforcement in the process of vehicle recovery. For the analysis of recovery locations, a conditional density specification given theft location is considered. We do not have to specify a set in which our recovery locations are considered; we can include some recovery points located outside the Neza region. Also, we do not have to split the Neza region for this analysis. Furthermore, we can allow the theft location to determine not only the mean for the recovery location but also the uncertainty in the recovery location.
We denote by $\bm{s}_{R}$ a recovery location and by $\bm{s}_{T}$ a theft location with $\mathcal{S}_{T}=\{\bm{s}_{T,1},\ldots, \bm{s}_{T,n}\}$ and $\mathcal{S}_{R}=\{\bm{s}_{R,1},\ldots, \bm{s}_{R,m}\}$ where $m<n$. We denote the conditional density specification for recovery location $\bm{s}_{R}$ given a theft location $\bm{s}_{T}$ as $f_{R}(\bm{s}_{R}|\bm{s}_{T})$.
Combined with the marginal point pattern model for theft locations in the previous section, a joint model is created for theft location and recovery location. In this way, we can employ all of the theft data and all of the available recovery data. This model would be a *partially* marked point pattern in the sense that when we have an associated recovery location, it becomes the mark for that location while all of the theft locations without a recovery location have a missing mark. We would then be modeling marks given locations rather than locations given marks. However, it is not a *joint* specification in the sense of viewing the data as a point pattern of pairs of locations over a bounded set in $\mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2$. This model is deferred to the next section. Let $\mathcal{S}_{T}^{*}=\{\bm{s}_{T,1}^{*},\ldots, \bm{s}_{T,m}^{*}\}$ be the theft locations corresponding to recovery points, i.e., $\bm{s}_{T,j}^{*}$ is the corresponding theft location for the recovery point $\bm{s}_{R,j}$ for $j=1,\ldots, m$. For $j=1,\ldots, m$, $$\begin{aligned}
f_{R}(\bm{s}_{R,j}|\bm{s}_{T,j}^{*})\propto |\Sigma(\bm{s}_{T,j}^{*})|^{-1/2}\exp\biggl(-(\bm{s}_{R,j}-\bm{s}_{T,j}^{*})'\Sigma(\bm{s}_{T,j}^{*})^{-1}(\bm{s}_{R,j}-\bm{s}_{T,j}^{*})\biggl), \label{eq:CD}\end{aligned}$$ $\Sigma(\bm{s}_{T,j}^{*})$ is $2\times 2$ covariance kernel dependent on theft location $\bm{s}_{T,j}^{*}$. A benchmark specification would assume a constant covariance kernel across theft locations, i.e., $$\begin{aligned}
\Sigma(\bm{s}_{T,j}^{*})=\Sigma=\begin{pmatrix}
\sigma_{1}^2 & \rho \sigma_{1}\sigma_{2} \\
\rho \sigma_{1}\sigma_{2} & \sigma_{2}^2
\end{pmatrix}\end{aligned}$$ A locally adaptive covariance kernel can be also considered, for example, employing the spatially varying covariance kernel in [@Higdonetal(99)], $$\begin{aligned}
\Sigma(\bm{s}_{T})^{\frac{1}{2}}=&\sigma \begin{pmatrix}
\biggl(\frac{\sqrt{4A^{2}+\|\psi(\bm{s}_{T}) \|^{4} \pi^{2}}}{2\pi}+\frac{\|\psi(\bm{s}_{T}) \|^2}{2} \biggl)^{\frac{1}{2}} & 0 \\
0 & \biggl(\frac{\sqrt{4A^{2}+\|\psi(\bm{s}_{T}) \|^{4} \pi^{2}}}{2\pi}-\frac{\|\psi(\bm{s}_{T}) \|^2}{2} \biggl)^{\frac{1}{2}}
\end{pmatrix} \nonumber \\
&\times \begin{pmatrix}
\cos(\alpha(\bm{s}_{T})) & \sin(\alpha(\bm{s}_{T})) \\
-\sin(\alpha(\bm{s}_{T})) & \cos(\alpha(\bm{s}_{T}))
\end{pmatrix}\end{aligned}$$ where $\|\psi(\bm{s}_{T}) \|^2=\psi_{x}(\bm{s}_{T})^2+\psi_{y}(\bm{s}_{T})^2$, $\alpha(\bm{s}_{T})=\tan^{-1}\psi_{y}(\bm{s}_{T})/\psi_{x}(\bm{s}_{T})$ and $A=3.5$ as fixed in [@Higdonetal(99)]. $\psi_{x}(\bm{s})$ and $\psi_{y}(\bm{s})$ are independent Gaussian processes with mean 0 and common Gaussian covariance function $C(\bm{s}_{T,i}, \bm{s}_{T,j})=\exp(-\phi^{*} \|\bm{s}_{T,i}-\bm{s}_{T,j}\|^2)$. They introduce spatial dependence in $\Sigma(\bm{s}_{T})$. $\phi^{*}$ is a tuning parameter which determines the spatial decay of the Gaussian processes. We fix this parameter at several different values in the ensuing analysis.
As a last remark here, there is no evident way to introduce spatial covariates such as those noted in the previous section into the conditional model. The mean for the recovery location should be the theft location; a regression specification here is not sensible. Furthermore, with the flexibility of a location dependent covariance matrix to accommodate direction and dispersion, more flexibility could not be gained by attempting to insert covariate information associated with $\bm{s}_{T}$ into $\Sigma(\bm{s}_{T})$.
Results {#sec:ResultCondtional}
-------
For recovery locations, we implement conditional density specification with constant and spatially varying covariance kernels for both datasets. For the constant covariance kernel parameters, we assume $\sigma_{1}^2, \sigma_{2}^2\sim \mathcal{IG}(2,0.1)$ and $\rho \in \mathcal{U}[-1,1]$. The first 10,000 samples are discarded and the subsequent 10,000 samples are retained as posterior samples. For the spatially varying covariance kernel parameter, we assume $\sigma^2\sim \mathcal{IG}(2,0.1)$. For this model, three fixed $\phi^{*}$ values are considered: (i) $\phi^{*}=30$, (ii) $\phi^{*}=10$ and (iii) $\phi^{*}=1$. The first 20,000 samples are discarded and the subsequent 20,000 samples are retained as posterior samples.
Computation for the Neza dataset is manageable. However, the number of theft locations in Belo Horizonte is a bit large (in terms of matrix inversion and determinant calculation) to sample the Gaussian processes at all $\bm{s}_{T}$. So, the study region is approximated by using 305 disjoint regular grid cells. $\Sigma(\bm{s}_{T})$ is evaluated at the nearest grid centroid. For sampling the Gaussian processes $\psi_{x}(\bm{s})$ and $\psi_{y}(\bm{s})$, elliptical slice sampling is implemented. The estimation results are given in Table \[tab:RealCond\]. The spatially varying covariance model fits better than the constant covariance kernel model with respect to the loglikelihood, preferring the larger values of $\phi^{*}$ (weaker spatial dependence in the $\Sigma(\cdot)$’s) for the Neza, less so for Belo Horizonte.
-------------- -------- ------- -------------------- ----- -- -------- ------- -------------------- ----- --
Mean Stdev $95\%$ Int IF Mean Stdev $95\%$ Int IF
$\sigma_{1}$ 2.360 0.084 \[2.199, 2.542\] 13 3.012 0.028 \[2.957, 3.071\] 13
$\sigma_{2}$ 2.142 0.076 \[2.001, 2.303\] 9 3.953 0.038 \[3.875, 4.028\] 11
$\rho$ -0.421 0.041 \[-0.502, -0.334\] 8 0.039 0.013 \[0.013, 0.067\] 17
like -961.9 1.214 \[-965.0, -960.5\] 14 -18269 1.231 \[-18272, -18268\] 12
$\sigma$ 1.527 0.050 \[1.430, 1.628\] 226 2.796 0.019 \[2.757, 2.835\] 45
like -744.2 15.28 \[-770.3, -711.4\] 649 -16632 16.15 \[-16666, -16603\] 730
$\sigma$ 1.532 0.049 \[1.436, 1.631\] 242 2.796 0.019 \[2.756, 2.837\] 32
like -746.6 14.56 \[-775.0, -717.0\] 681 -16631 16.13 \[-16660, -16598\] 457
$\sigma$ 1.693 0.047 \[1.604, 1.788\] 47 2.790 0.020 \[2.752, 2.830\] 36
like -822.9 8.519 \[-838.8, -805.7\] 259 -16613 16.93 \[-16656, -16586\] 672
-------------- -------- ------- -------------------- ----- -- -------- ------- -------------------- ----- --
: Estimation results for the conditional model specifications
\[tab:RealCond\]
Lastly here, model performance is compared by calculating *bivariate* CRPS. Following Section \[sec:CV\], let $\{\bm{s}_{T,h}^{test},\bm{s}_{R,h}^{test}\}_{h=1}^{H}$ be the randomly selected test samples for evaluating predictive performance and $\{\bm{s}_{T,j}^{train},\bm{s}_{R,j}^{train}\}_{j=1}^{m-H}$ be the remaining training samples for parameter estimation. The bivariate continuous rank probability score (CRPS) [@Gneitingetal(08)] values a bivariate distribution $F(\cdot|\bm{s}_{T}^{test})$ more if it is more concentrated around $\bm{s}_{R}^{test}$. The criterion is calculated through Monte Carlo integrations, using draws from $F(\cdot|\bm{s}_{T}^{test})$, as $$\begin{aligned}
CRPS(F(\cdot|\bm{s}_{T,h}^{test}), \bm{s}_{R,h}^{test})=\frac{1}{L}\sum_{\ell=1}^{L}\| \bm{s}_{R,h}^{(\ell)}-\bm{s}_{R,h}^{test}\|-\frac{1}{2L^{2}}\sum_{\ell=1}^{L} \sum_{\ell^{'}=1}^{L}\|\bm{s}_{R,h}^{(\ell)}- \bm{s}_{R,h}^{(\ell^{'})}. \|
\label{eq:biCRPS}\end{aligned}$$ Here, $\bm{s}_{R,h}^{(\ell)}$ are samples from $F(\cdot|\bm{s}_{T}^{test})$. Fitting within a Bayesian framework enables posterior samples from $F(\cdot|\bm{s}_{T}^{test})$ using posterior samples of the model parameters. In particular, for construction of the bivariate predictive distribution with spatially varying kernel, given the $\ell$-th posterior sample of $\psi_{x}(\bm{s})$, $\psi_{y}(\bm{s})$ at training samples $\{\bm{s}_{T,j}^{train}\}_{j=1}^{m-H}$ and $\sigma$, we generate $\psi_{x}(\bm{s})$, $\psi_{y}(\bm{s})$ at test samples $\{\bm{s}_{T,h}^{test}\}_{h=1}^{H}$ from the conditional Gaussian distribution and calculate $\Sigma(\bm{s}_{T,h}^{test})$ for $h=1,\ldots, H$. as defined in (\[eq:biCRPS\]).
For Neza (Belo Horizonte), $H=80$ (2625) samples are randomly held out for testing, and parameter values are estimated for the remaining 302 (2625) training dataset. Then, given test theft locations $\{\bm{s}_{T,h}^{test}\}_{h=1}^{H}$, the predictive conditional densities are calculated for the corresponding recovery locations. That is, for the spatially varying kernel, we predict $\psi_{x}(\bm{s}_{T,h}^{test})$ and $\psi_{y}(\bm{s}_{T,h}^{test})$ given posterior samples $\sigma$ and $\psi_{x}(\bm{s})$ and $\psi_{y}(\bm{s})$. For Neza, the estimated bivariate CRPS’s for the 80 test pairs are 2.947 ($\Sigma$ constant), 2.624 ($\phi^{*}=30$), 2.636 ($\phi^{*}=10$) and 2.962 ( $\phi^{*}=1$). The spatially varying kernel models with $\phi^{*}=30$ and $\phi^{*}=10$ show similar performance, being preferred to the spatially varying kernel model with $\phi^{*}=1$ and constant kernel model. For Belo Horizonte, $H=2,625$ (50$\%$ of the total number of points) are randomly held out. The estimated bivariate CRPS for 2,625 test pairs are 156.43 ($\Sigma$ constant), 152.59 ($\phi^{*}=30$), 152.29 ($\phi^{*}=10$) and 152.64 ($\phi^{*}=1$). The spatially varying kernel models are indistinguishable and slightly outperform the constant kernel model.
Since the question of interest here is prediction of recovery location given theft location, some illustrative posterior predictive densities are demonstrated for such recovery with held out recovery locations. Figure \[fig:CDNZ\] shows the conditional density $f_{R}(\cdot|\cdot)$ defined in (\[eq:CD\]) for some pairs in Neza (using $\phi^{*}=30$, which, above, gave the best predictive performance). For ID 2, 32, 49 and 50, theft locations are in the north region, and their conditional densities are close to be uncorrelated densities. On the other hand, conditional densities for some pairs in the south regions, e.g., ID 196, 301, 332 and 346, show different shapes for the kernels. Figure \[fig:CDBH\] shows the conditional density $f_{R}(\cdot|\cdot)$ for some pairs in Belo Horizonte (under $\phi^{*}=10$, which gave the best predictive performance). Conditional densities for some pairs, e.g., ID 33, 302 and 429, show different shapes for the kernels. These results suggest that the shapes of conditional densities are location dependent, particularly showing sensitivity when the theft locations are near the boundary of the region.
![Predictive conditional density $f_{R}(\cdot|\cdot)$ for selected pairs in Neza with $\phi^{*}=30$.[]{data-label="fig:CDNZ"}](OD_Conditional.pdf){width="15cm"}
![Predictive conditional density $f_{R}(\cdot|\cdot)$ for selected pairs in Belo Horizonte with $\phi^{*}=10$.[]{data-label="fig:CDBH"}](OD_Conditional_BH.pdf){width="15cm"}
Joint Point Pattern Modeling {#sec:Joint}
============================
Here, linking the theft location point pattern and the recovery location point pattern is considered. As noted in the Introduction, we find ourselves in an origin-destination setting but at point-referenced scale rather than areal unit scale. We build a *joint* intensity of the form $\lambda(\bm{s}_{o}, \bm{s}_{d})$ over pairs of locations $\lambda(\bm{s}_{o}, \bm{s}_{d}) \in D_{o} \times D_{d}$ where $\bm{s}_{o}$ is a theft location and $\bm{s}_{d}$ is a recovery location. A marginal intensity surface for both theft locations and for recovery locations emerges. In addition, to attempt to understand the flow of vehicles from theft location to recovery location, we consider a theft neighborhood, say $B_{o} \in D_{o}$ and a recovery neighborhood say $B_{d} \in D_{d}$. Then, we can ask for the predictive distribution of the number of thefts in $B_{o}$ with recovery in $B_{d}$. In fact, $D_{d}$ can be partitioned into several neighborhoods to see the flow from $B_{o}$ into each.
Now, a LGCP is introduced for *pairs* of locations as a joint point process model over $D_{o} \times D_{d} \subset \mathbb{R}^{2}\times \mathbb{R}^{2}$. In fact, $D_{o}=D_{d}=D$ is taken in the sequel. We denote observed pairs as $\mathcal{S}_{P}=\{\bm{s}_{P,1}, \ldots, \bm{s}_{P,m} \}=\{(\bm{s}_{R,1}, \bm{s}_{T,1}^{*}), \ldots, (\bm{s}_{R,m}, \bm{s}_{T,m}^{*}) \}$; $R$ denotes recovery, $T$ denotes theft. The intensity function for observed pairs is defined as $$\begin{aligned}
\log \lambda(\bm{s}_{R}, \bm{s}_{T}^{*})&=\bm{X}_{R}(\bm{s}_{R})\bm{\beta}_{R}+\bm{X}_{T}(\bm{s}_{T}^{*})\bm{\beta}_{T} \nonumber \\
&+\eta (\bm{s}_{R}-\bm{s}_{T}^{*})'\Sigma(\bm{s}_{T}^{*})^{-1}(\bm{s}_{R}-\bm{s}_{T}^{*})+z_{R}(\bm{s}_{R})+z_{T}(\bm{s}_{T}^{*}), \label{pairsintensity}
\\
\bm{z}_{R}& \sim \mathcal{N}(\bm{0}, \mathbf{C}_{\bm{z}_{R}}), \quad \bm{z}_{T} \sim \mathcal{N}(\bm{0}, \mathbf{C}_{\bm{z}_{T}}).\end{aligned}$$ Here, $z_{R}(\bm{s})$ and $z_{T}(\bm{s})$ are mean $0$ GP’s with covariance functions $C_{R}$ and $C_{T}$, respectively. $\bm{z}_{R}=(z(\bm{s}_{R,1}), \ldots, z(\bm{s}_{R,m}))$, $\bm{z}_{T}=(z(\bm{s}_{T,1}^{*}), \ldots, z(\bm{s}_{T,m}^{*}))$, and $\mathbf{C}_{\bm{z}_{R}}=[C_{R}(\bm{s}_{R,i},\bm{s}_{R,j})]_{i,j=1, \ldots, m}$ ($\mathbf{C}_{\bm{z}_{T}}=[C_{T}(\bm{s}_{T,i}^{*},\bm{s}_{T,j}^{*})]_{i,j=1, \ldots, m}$). Exponential covariance functions are assumed for $C_{R}$ and $C_{T}$, i.e., $C_{R}(\bm{u}, \bm{u}^{'})=\sigma_{R}^2\exp(-\phi_{R}\|\bm{u}-\bm{u}^{'}\|)$ and $C_{T}(\bm{u}, \bm{u}^{'})=\sigma_{T}^2\exp(-\phi_{T}\|\bm{u}-\bm{u}^{'}\|)$.
The first two terms of the log intensity introduce recovery location and theft location covariates, the third term provides a local (spatially varying) distance measure between the recovery location and the theft location, $\bm{s}_{R}$ and $\bm{s}_{T}^{*}$ through $\Sigma(\bm{s}_{T}^{*})$, the spatially varying kernel presented in the previous section. $\eta$ is the *critical* parameter; it captures the dependence between the point patterns. If it is not significant, then the joint intensity factors into an intensity for the theft point pattern times an intensity for the recovery point pattern. In fact, $\eta$ is expected to be negative, i.e., the recovery locations are more observed near the corresponding theft locations. In addition, the local $\Sigma(\bm{s}_{T}^{*})$ enables directional preference for $\bm{s}_{R}$ near the boundaries of $D$. The fourth and fifth terms provide recovery location and theft location random effects using Gaussian processes. Without them, the analogue of an NHPP is available; with them, we have the analogue of a LGCP. This joint specification only employs the complete pairs in the data and will need a large number of pairs in order to learn about the local random effects adjustments.
As above, the likelihood is approximated by gridding $D$ into $K$ blocks. Now, employing $K \times K$ blocks for $D \times D$, we obtain $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{S}_{P})&\propto \exp\biggl(-\int_{D}\int_{D}\lambda(\bm{u}_{R}, \bm{u}_{T})d\bm{u}_{T}d\bm{u}_{R} \biggl)\prod_{j=1}^{m}\lambda(\bm{s}_{R, j}, \bm{s}_{T,j}^{*}) \\
&\approx \exp\biggl(-\sum_{k=1}^{K}\sum_{k^{'}=1}^{K} \lambda(\bm{u}_{R,k}, \bm{u}_{T,k^{'}})\Delta_{T, k}\Delta_{T, k^{'}} \biggl)\prod_{k=1}^{K}\prod_{k^{'}=1}^{K}\lambda(\bm{u}_{R, k}, \bm{u}_{T, k^{'}})^{n_{kk^{'}}}\end{aligned}$$ where $\sum_{k=1}^{K}\sum_{k^{'}=1}^{K}n_{kk^{'}}=m$. Note that $\bm{u}_{R,k}=\bm{u}_{T,k}$ for $k=1,\ldots, K$.
Results {#sec:ResultJoint}
-------
We demonstrate results only for the Belo Horizonte data because of the large number of pairs of points (again, $5250$ points). The small number of pairs for the Neza region (only $68$ in the South) precludes informative model fitting for . Without covariates, the intensity model for the Belo Horizonte data becomes $$\begin{aligned}
\log \lambda(\bm{s}_{R}, \bm{s}_{T}^{*})&=\beta_{0}+\eta (\bm{s}_{R}-\bm{s}_{T}^{*})'\Sigma(\bm{s}_{T}^{*})^{-1}(\bm{s}_{R}-\bm{s}_{T}^{*})+z_{R}(\bm{s}_{R})+z_{T}(\bm{s}_{T}^{*}), \\
\bm{z}_{R}(\mathcal{S}_{R})& \sim \mathcal{N}(\bm{0}, \mathbf{C}_{R}(\mathcal{S}_{R},\mathcal{S}_{R})), \quad \bm{z}_{T}(\mathcal{S}_{T}^{*}) \sim \mathcal{N}(\bm{0}, \mathbf{C}_{T}(\mathcal{S}_{T}^{*},\mathcal{S}_{T}^{*})).\end{aligned}$$ $K=305$ grids are taken, the as same as in conditional density specification. Without covariates, two models are fitted: (i) a LGCP without the spatially varying distance measure (LGCP-Ind, i.e., $\eta=0$) and (ii) a LGCP with this measure (LGCP-Dep). For priors we assume $\sigma_{R}^2, \sigma_{T}^2\sim \mathcal{IG}(2, 0.1)$, $\beta_{0}\sim \mathcal{N}(0, 100)$ and $\phi_{R}, \phi_{T}\sim \mathcal{U}[0, 10]$. For sampling $\beta_{0}$, an adaptive random walk MH algorithm is implemented. Elliptical slice sampling is adopted for $\psi_{x}(\bm{s})$, $\psi_{y}(\bm{s})$, $z_{R}(\bm{s})$ and $z_{T}(\bm{s})$. We fixed the tuning parameter $\phi^{*}=1$. For high dimensional grids, approximate Gaussian process models can provide efficient process sampling, e.g., nearest neighbor Gaussian processes [@Dattaetal(16a)] and multi-resolution Gaussian processes [@Katzfuss(17)]. [@ShirotaBanerjee(18)] propose scalable inference for Gaussian Cox process models. Integrated nested Laplace approximation (INLA) for the LGCP [@Simpsonetal(16b)] is another option. However, the elliptical slice sampling approach is user friendly with no tuning required, enabling easy implementation for moderate size cases. 20,000 samples are discarded as the burn-in period and the subsequent 20,000 samples are retained as posterior samples. The likelihood value for the LGCP-Dep (-10789 \[-10829, -10744\]) is much larger than that of the LGCP-ind (-14348 \[-14381, -14319\]), demonstrating the superiority of LGCP-Dep. Furthermore, the estimated value of $\eta$ is significantly negative (-0.044 \[-0.046, -0.043\]) as expected.
We demonstrate the predictive flow of recovery locations from theft locations. Four subregions are created, each of which is composed of $G=25$ grid cells, around four locations: $L_{1}=(612500, 7797500)$, $L_{2}=(612500, 780500)$, $L_{3}=(605000, 7797500)$ and $L_{4}=(605000, 7805000)$. The proportion of predictive intensities and counts are compared for the same theft subregion, i.e., $p_{int}(B_{d}|B_{o})=\frac{\lambda(B_{d}, B_{o})}{\lambda(D_{d}, B_{o})}$ and $p_{count}(B_{d}|B_{o})=\frac{N(B_{d}, B_{o})}{N(D_{d}, B_{o})}$ where $B_{d}\subset D_{d}$ and $B_{o}\subset D_{o}$ and the $\lambda$s are integrated intensities. Figure \[fig:JointPreBH\] looks at two origin regions. The left two panels are associated with the southeast origin region, a high intensity region. The resulting predictive distribution shows that the flow is highly concentrated in that region, in agreement with the actual held out recoveries. The right two panels are associated with the northeast region, a lower intensity region. The resulting predictive distribution shows more flow from that region to the other three regions, again in agreement with the held out recoveries. Hence, the nature of the concentration of recovery locations is dependent on theft locations; our model is able to capture this dependence.
![Proportion of held out counts and predictive intensities on four subregions for the theft regions around $L_{1}$ (left two panels: southeast region) and $L_{2}$ (right two panels: northeast region).[]{data-label="fig:JointPreBH"}](JointPre_BH_Count.pdf){width="15cm"}
Summary and Future Work {#sec:Summary}
=======================
We have considered a little-studied problem for point patterns namely the setting where we have a point pattern of origins over $D \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ (in our case, locations of car thefts) and an associated partial point pattern of destinations, again over $D \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ (in our case locations of car recoveries). A marginal approach is proposed for modeling the theft locations using NHPP’s and LGCPs along with a conditional regression specification for predicting recovery locations given theft locations. Also, a joint modeling approach is proposed where we view the point pattern as a version of an origin-destination pair and specify a model over a subset of $\mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2$.
A potential follow-on analysis here would return to Section 4 and the partially marked point pattern specification. When an associated recovery location is available under this model, it becomes the mark for that location. On the other hand, all of the theft locations without a recovery location have a missing mark. We would then be modeling marks given locations rather than locations given marks. This conditioning direction opens up the possibility of preferential sampling [@Diggleetal(10)]. The question of whether the theft location influences the probability of recovery can be examined.
It is worth emphasizing that our approaches here can be applied to other origin-destination problems where the origins and destinations are provided at point level, as geo-coded locations. We have noted that working at the highest spatial resolution provides a more clear picture of the origin surface, the destination surface, and the dependence between the surfaces than working at areal unit scales. In this regard, with larger datasets, the dependence might be also included between the $z_{R}(\bm{s}_{R})$ process and the $z_{T}(\bm{s}_{T})$ process through say coregionalization [@BanerjeeCarlinGelfand(14)]. This would further illuminate the dependence structure between the two surfaces.
One path for future work will investigate a much different application. We will examine economic labor force data where, for an individual, we have the location where she/he resides as well as the location where she/he works. Working with metropolitan areas will provide much larger point patterns with much more demanding model fitting. Future work with theft-recovery data would introduce consideration of time, i.e., we will have not only the location of the theft but also the time of the theft. Similarly, we have not only a location for the recovery but as well the time of the recovery, with an implicit order in time for the latter relative to the former. Unfortunately, at present, neither of the datasets provide time information needed to enable such investigation.
Acknowledgements {#sec:Ack .unnumbered}
================
This work partially funded by Grant MTM2016-78917-R from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Education, and Grant P1-1B2015-40 from University Jaume I. The work of Shinichiro Shirota was supported in part by the Nakajima Foundation. The authors thank Renato Assun[ç]{}[ã]{}o for providing the datasets and shape file of Belo Horizonte. The authors also thank the Nezahualcoyotl Town Hall, Arturo Arango, and Direccion General de Seguridad Ciudadana (in Mexico) for providing the Neza dataset. The computational results are obtained by using Ox version 7.1 (Doornik (2007)).
[^1]: Department of Biostatistics, University of California, Los Angeles, US. E-mail: [email protected]
[^2]: Department of Statistical Science, Duke University, US. E-mail: [email protected]
[^3]: Department of Mathematics, Universitat Jaume I, Spain. E-mail: [email protected]
[^4]: Since we never see observations of the intensity, it is hard to justify or identify a richer covariance function for the spatial random effects.
[^5]: Using just forward or backward selection produced the same selection
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'This paper generalizes a rigidity result of complex hyperbolic spaces by M. Herzlich. We prove that an almost Hermitian spin manifold $(M,g)$ of real dimension $4n+2$ which is strongly asymptotic to ${\mbox{${\mathbbm{C}}\mathrm{H}$}}^{2n+1}$ and satisfies a certain scalar curvature bound must be isometric to the complex hyperbolic space. The fact that we do not assume $g$ to be Kähler reflects in the inequality for the scalar curvature.'
address: 'Department of Mathematics, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794-3651, USA'
author:
- Mario Listing
bibliography:
- 'complex.bib'
title: Scalar curvature rigidity of almost Hermitian spin manifolds which are asymptotically complex hyperbolic
---
[^1]
Introduction
============
Rigidity of symmetric spaces of non–compact type is a frequently studied problem (cf. [@Bart; @He3; @MinO; @MinO2]). Based on E. Witten’s idea in the proof of the positive energy theorem (cf. [@Wit]), R. Bartnik showed in [@Bart] that an asymptotically flat spin manifold of non–negative scalar curvature and with vanishing mass must be the Euclidean space. The analogous rigidity result for the real hyperbolic was proved by M. Min–Oo in [@MinO], in particular a strongly asymptotically hyperbolic spin manifold $(M^n,g)$ with scalar curvature $\mathrm{scal}\geq -n(n-1)$ is isometric to the hyperbolic space. Moreover, M. Herzlich showed in [@He3] that a strongly asymptotically complex hyperbolic Kähler spin manifold $(M^{2m},g)$ of odd complex dimension $m$ and with scalar curvature $\mathrm{scal}\geq -4m(m+1)$ must be isometric to the complex hyperbolic space ${\mbox{${\mathbbm{C}}\mathrm{H}$}}^m$.
In this paper we generalize Herzlich’s result in the way that we replace the Kähler assumption by the weaker condition: almost Hermitian.
$({\mbox{${\mathbbm{C}}\mathrm{H}$}}^m,g_0)$ denotes the complex hyperbolic space of complex dimension $m$ and holomorphic sectional curvature $-4$, i.e. $K\in [-4,-1]$, as well as $B_R(q)\subset M$ is the set of all $p\in M$ with geodesic distance to $q$ less than $R$. Let $(M^{2m},g,J)$ be an almost Hermitian manifold, i.e. $g$ is a Riemannian metric and $J$ is a $g$–compatible almost complex structure. $(M,g,J)$ is said to be *strongly asymptotically complex hyperbolic* if there is a compact manifold $C\subset M$ and a diffeomorphism $f:E:=M-C\to {\mbox{${\mathbbm{C}}\mathrm{H}$}}^m-\overline{B_R(0)}$ in such a way that the positive definite gauge transformation $A\in \Gamma (\mathrm{End}(TM_{|E}))$ given by $$g(AX,AY) = (f^{*}g_{0})(X,Y)\quad g(AX,Y) = g(X,AY)$$ satisfies:
1. $A$ is uniformly bounded.
2. Suppose $r$ is the $f^*g_0$–distance to a fixed point, $\nabla ^0$ is the Levi–Civita connection for $f^*g_0$ and $J_0$ is the complex structure of ${\mbox{${\mathbbm{C}}\mathrm{H}$}}^m$ pulled back to $E$, then $$\left| \nabla ^{0}A\right| +\left| A-\mathrm{Id} \right| +\left| AJ_0-J\right| \in L^{1}(E;e^{2r}\mathrm{vol}_{g})\cap L^{2}(E;e^{2r}\mathrm{vol}_{g}).$$
In particular, in contrast to the previous definition and result by Herzlich, a compact conformal transformation of the standard metric on ${\mbox{${\mathbbm{C}}\mathrm{H}$}}^m$ supplies a manifold which is strongly asymptotically complex hyperbolic.
\[rig\_thm\] Let $(M^{4n+2},g,J)$ be a complete almost Hermitian spin manifold of odd complex dimension $m=2n+1$. If $(M,g,J)$ is strongly asymptotically complex hyperbolic and satisfies the scalar curvature bound $$\label{ineq}
\mathrm{scal}\geq -4m(m+1)+2\Bigl[ |\mathrm{d}^*\Omega |+|\CMcal{D}^\prime \Omega |+|\CMcal{D}^{\prime \prime }\Omega |\Bigl] ,$$ then $(M,g,J)$ is Kähler and isometric to ${\mbox{${\mathbbm{C}}\mathrm{H}$}}^m$.
In this case $\Omega =g(.,J.)$ is the $2$–form associated to $J$, $\mathrm{d}^*$ is formal $L^2$–adjoint of the exterior derivative $\mathrm{d}$ and $\CMcal{D}^\prime +\CMcal{D}^{\prime \prime }$ is the Dolbeault decomposition of $ \CMcal{D}=\mathrm{d}+\mathrm{d}^*$ in $\Lambda ^*(TM)\otimes {\mathbbm{C}}$, i.e. if $e_1,\ldots ,e_{2m}$ is an orthonormal base, we define $\CMcal{D}^\prime =\sum e_j^{1,0}\cdot \nabla _{e_j}$ and $\CMcal{D}^{\prime \prime }=\sum e_j^{0,1}\cdot \nabla _{e_j}$. Introduce $\CMcal{D}^c:=\mathrm{d}^c+\mathrm{d}^{c,*}$ with $\mathrm{d}^c:=\sum J(e_k)\wedge \nabla _{e_k}$ and $\mathrm{d}^{c,*}:=-\sum J(e_k)\llcorner \nabla _{e_j}$, we obtain $\CMcal{D}^\prime =\frac{1}{2}(\CMcal{D}-\mathbf{i}\CMcal{D}^c)$ as well as $\CMcal{D}^{\prime \prime }=\frac{1}{2}(\CMcal{D}+\mathbf{i}\CMcal{D}^c)$. In particular, we can estimate $$|\CMcal{D}^\prime \Omega |+|\CMcal{D}^{\prime \prime }\Omega |\leq |\mathrm{d}^*\Omega |+|\mathrm{d}\Omega |+|\mathrm{d}^{c,*}\Omega |+|\mathrm{d}^c\Omega |.$$
The proof of this rigidity theorem is as usual based on the non–compact Bochner technique which was introduced by Witten in [@Wit]. We show an integrated Bochner–Weitzenböck formula for the Kähler Killing connection which allows the usage of this technique. We expect to prove a similar result in the complex even–dimensional case and for the quaternionic hyperbolic space, but because of representation theoretical problems, there will be more terms involved in inequality (\[ineq\]).
Preliminaries
=============
Let $(M,g,J)$ be an almost Hermitian spin manifold of complex dimension $m$ and denote by $\gamma $ respectively $\cdot $ the Clifford multiplication on the complex spinor bundle ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M$ of $M$. ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M$ decomposes orthogonal into $$\label{dec_spinor}
{\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M={\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_0\oplus \cdots \oplus {\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_m$$ (cf. [@Kir1; @LaMi]) where each ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_j$ is an eigenspace of $\Omega =g(.,J.)$ to the eigenvalue $\mathbf{i}(m-2j)$. We denote by $\pi _j$ the orthogonal projection ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M\to {\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_j$. The decomposition (\[dec\_spinor\]) is parallel (i.e. $\nabla \pi _j=0 $ for all $j$) if $(g,J)$ is Kähler. As usual we introduce $X^{1,0}:=\frac{1}{2}(X-\mathbf{i}J(X))$ as well as $X^{0,1}:=\frac{1}{2}(X+\mathbf{i}J(X))$ and obtain $\gamma (X^{1,0}):{\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_j\to {\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_{j+1}$ as well as $\gamma (X^{0,1}):{\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_j\to {\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_{j-1}$, where ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_j=\{ 0\} $ if $j\notin \{ 0,\ldots ,m\}$.
Supposing $(g,J)$ to be Kähler and $m=2n+1$ to be odd, then a Kähler Killing spinor (cf. [@Kir1]) is a section in ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_n\oplus {\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_{n+1}$ which is parallel w.r.t. $$\nabla _X+\kappa \left( \gamma (X^{1,0})\pi _n+\gamma (X^{0,1})\pi _{n+1}\right) .$$ In particular, if there is a non–trivial Kähler Killing spinor, $g$ is Einstein of scalar curvature $4m(m+1)\kappa ^2$. Moreover, the subbundle ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_n\oplus {\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_{n+1}$ is trivialized by Kähler Killing spinors on ${\mbox{${\mathbbm{C}}\mathrm{H}$}}^m$ if we choose $\kappa =\pm \mathbf{i}$.
Bochner–Weitzenböck formula
===========================
Suppose $(M,g,J)$ is spin and almost Hermitian of odd complex dimension $m=2n+1$. We define ${\CMcal{V}}:={\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_n\oplus {\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_{n+1}$, its projection $\mathrm{pr}_{\CMcal{V}}:=\pi _n+\pi _{n+1}$ and $$\frak{T}_X:=\mathbf{i}\left( \gamma (X^{1,0})\pi _{n}+\gamma (X^{0,1})\pi _{n+1}\right) .$$ Since $(\gamma (X^{1,0})\pi _j)^*=-\gamma (X^{0,1})\pi _{j+1}$, $\frak{T}$ is a selfadjoint endomorphism on ${\CMcal{V}}$ (respectively ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M$). Define the connection $\widehat{\nabla }:=\nabla +\frak{T}$ on ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M$. The Dirac operator of $\widehat{\nabla }$ is given by $\widehat{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}={\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}+{\CMcal{T}}$ where ${\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}$ is the Dirac operator of $\nabla $ and ${\CMcal{T}}$ equals $$-\mathbf{i}(m+1)\mathrm{pr}_{{\CMcal{V}}}$$ in this case we used (cf. [@Kir1]) $$\label{rel1}
\sum _k e_k\cdot e_k^{1,0}=-m+\mathbf{i}\gamma (\Omega )\ \ \text{and}\ \ \sum _k e_k\cdot e_k^{0,1}=-m-\mathbf{i}\gamma (\Omega ).$$ Since $\gamma (X){\CMcal{T}}$ is not selfadjoint on the full spinor bundle, we consider instead $\mathbb{T}:=-\mathbf{i}(m+1)$ as well as the Dirac operator $\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}:={\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}+\mathbb{T}$.
Let $(M,g,J)$ be almost Hermitian of odd complex dimension $m$, then the integrated Bochner–Weitzenböck formula $$\int\limits _{\partial N}\left< \widehat{\nabla }_\nu \varphi +\nu \cdot \widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\varphi ,\psi \right> = \int\limits _N \left< \widehat{\nabla}\varphi ,\widehat{\nabla }\psi \right> -\left< \widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\varphi ,\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\psi \right>+\left< \widehat{\frak{R}}\varphi ,\psi \right>$$ holds for any compact $N\subset M$ and $\varphi ,\psi \in \Gamma ({\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M)$. In this case $\nu $ is the outward normal vector field on $\partial N$ and $\widehat{\frak{R}}$ is given by $$\frac{\mathrm{scal}}{4}+m(m+1)+(m+1)^2\mathrm{pr}_{{\CMcal{V}}^\perp}+\delta \frak{T}$$ while $\mathrm{pr}_{{\CMcal{V}}^\perp}$ is the projection to the orthogonal complement of ${\CMcal{V}}$ in ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M $ and $\delta \frak{T}$ is the divergence of $\frak{T}$, i.e. $\delta \frak{T}=\sum (\nabla _{e_j}\frak{T})_{e_j}$. Moreover, the boundary operator $\widehat{\nabla }_\nu +\nu \cdot \widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}$ is selfadjoint.
The essential facts are $(\frak{T}_X)^*=\frak{T}_X$ and $(\gamma (X)\mathbb{T})^*=\gamma (X)\mathbb{T}$. In particular, since $\nabla _\nu +\nu \cdot {\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}$ is a selfadjoint boundary operator, $\widehat{\nabla }_\nu +\nu \cdot \widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}$ is selfadjoint. The formal $L^2$–adjoint of $\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}$ is given by $\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}^*={\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}-\mathbb{T}$. Thus, we can easily verify $$\int\limits _N \left< \widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\varphi ,\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\psi \right> =-\int\limits _{\partial N}\left< \nu \cdot \widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\varphi ,\psi \right> +\int\limits _N\left< \widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}^*\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\varphi ,\psi \right>$$ as well as $\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}^*\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}={\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}^2+(m+1)^2$. Moreover, using $(\frak{T}_X)^*=\frak{T}_X$ on ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M$ leads to $$\begin{split}
\int\limits _N\left< \widehat{\nabla }\varphi ,\widehat{\nabla }\psi \right> =&\int\limits _N \left< \nabla \varphi ,\nabla \psi \right> +\left< \nabla \varphi ,\frak{T}\psi \right> +\left< \frak{T}\varphi ,\nabla \psi \right> +\left< \frak{T}\varphi ,\frak{T}\psi \right>\\
=& \int\limits _{\partial N}\left< \nabla _\nu \varphi +\frak{T}_\nu \varphi ,\psi \right> +\int\limits _N \left< \nabla ^*\nabla \varphi ,\psi \right> +\\
&\quad +\int\limits _N\left< \frak{T}\varphi ,\frak{T}\psi \right> -\left< \delta \frak{T}\varphi ,\psi \right>
\end{split}$$ for all $\varphi ,\psi \in \Gamma ({\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M)$. We use the facts $\pi _j\gamma (X)\pi _{j-1}=\gamma (X^{1,0})\pi _{j-1}$ and $\pi _j\gamma (X)\pi _{j+1}=\gamma (X^{0,1})\pi _{j+1}$ as well as (\[rel1\]) to compute $$\begin{split}
\left< \frak{T}\varphi ,\frak{T}\psi \right> =&\sum _k\left< e_k\cdot \varphi _n,e_k^{1,0} \cdot \psi _n\right> +\sum _k\left< e_k\cdot \varphi _{n+1},e_k^{0,1} \cdot \psi _{n+1}\right> \\
=&(m+1)\left< \mathrm{pr}_{\CMcal{V}}\varphi ,\psi \right> .
\end{split}$$ In particular, the Lichnerowicz formula ${\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}^2=\nabla ^*\nabla +\frac{\mathrm{scal}}{4}$ gives the claim with $$\widehat{\frak{R}}=\frac{\mathrm{scal}}{4}+(m+1)^2-(m+1)\mathrm{pr}_{\CMcal{V}}+\delta \frak{T}.$$
Suppose inequality (\[ineq\]) of the main theorem holds, then at each point of $M$, $\widehat{\frak{R}}$ has no negative eigenvalues: $\widehat{\frak{R}}\geq 0$.
We have to find an estimate for $\delta \frak{T}$. Let $e_1,\ldots ,e_{2m}$ be normal coordinates at $T_pM$ with $e_{m+j}:=Je_j$ in $p$. We obtain $$\begin{split}
\delta \frak{T}=&\sum _{j=1}^{2m}(\nabla _{e_j}\frak{T})_{e_j}\\
=&\frac{1}{2}\gamma (\delta J)(\pi _{n}-\pi _{n+1})+\mathbf{i}\sum _{j=1}^{2m}\left( e_j^{1,0}\cdot \nabla _{e_j}\pi _n+e_j^{0,1}\cdot \nabla _{e_j}\pi _{n+1}\right) .
\end{split}$$ Thus, we have to estimate $\nabla _X\pi _r$ for $r=n,n+1$. We conclude from $\pi _n\gamma (\Omega )=\mathbf{i}\pi _n$ $$(\nabla _X\pi _n)(\mathbf{i}-\gamma (\Omega ))=\pi _n\gamma (\nabla _X\Omega )$$ as well as from $\gamma (\Omega )\pi _n=\mathbf{i}\pi _n$ $$(\mathbf{i}-\gamma (\Omega )) (\nabla _X\pi _n)=\gamma (\nabla _X\Omega )\pi _n .$$ Using the facts $\pi _n (\nabla _X\pi _n)\pi _n=0$ and $
\mathbf{i}-\gamma (\Omega )=\sum _{j\neq n}c_j\pi _j$ with $|c_j|\geq 2$, $|\nabla _X\pi _n|$ can be estimated by $\frac{1}{2}|\nabla _X\Omega |$. Thus, $$\sum _{j=1}^{2m}e_j^{1,0}\cdot (\nabla _{e_j}\pi _n)(\mathbf{i}-\gamma (\Omega ))=\pi _{n+1}\sum _{j=1}^{2m}\gamma (e_j^{1,0}\cdot \nabla _{e_j}\Omega )$$ leads to $$\Biggl| \sum _{j=1}^{2m}e_j^{1,0}(\nabla _{e_j}\pi _n)\phi \Biggl|\leq \frac{1}{2}\bigl| \gamma (\CMcal{D}^\prime \Omega )\phi \bigl| ,$$ if $\pi _n(\phi )=0$. Moreover, $$\begin{aligned}
\sum _{j=1}^{2m}\gamma (e_j^{1,0}\cdot \nabla _{e_j}\Omega )\pi _n&=& \sum _{j=1}^{2m}\gamma (e_j^{1,0})(\mathbf{i}-\gamma (\Omega ))(\nabla _{e_j}\pi _n)\\
&=& -\sum _{j=1}^{2m} (\mathbf{i}+\gamma (\Omega ))\gamma (e_j^{1,0}) (\nabla _{e_j}\pi _n)\end{aligned}$$ shows $$\Biggl| \sum _{j=1}^{2m}e_j^{1,0}(\nabla _{e_j}\pi _n)\phi \Biggl|\leq \frac{1}{2}\bigl| \gamma (\CMcal{D}^\prime \Omega )\phi \bigl| ,$$ if $\phi \in {\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_n$, in this case we used $\pi _{n+1}(e_j^{1,0}\cdot \nabla _{e_j}\pi _n)\pi _n=0$ and the fact that $\mathbf{i}+\gamma (\Omega )$ has absolute minimal eigenvalue $2$ on ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_{n+1}^\perp $ The same method applied to $\pi _{n+1}\gamma (\Omega )=-\mathbf{i}\pi _{n+1}$ and $\gamma (\Omega )\pi _{n+1}=-\mathbf{i}\pi _{n+1}$ yields $$\Biggl| \sum _{j=1}^{2m}e_j^{0,1}(\nabla _{e_j}\pi _{n+1})\Biggl|\leq \frac{1}{2}|\CMcal{D}^{\prime \prime }\Omega |.$$ Therefore, we obtain $$|\delta \frak{T}|\leq \frac{1}{2}\left( |\mathrm{d}^*\Omega |+|\CMcal{D}^\prime \Omega |+|\CMcal{D}^{\prime \prime }\Omega |\right)$$ which gives the claim $\widehat{\frak{R}}\geq 0$.
Proof of the theorem
====================
Suppose $(M,g)$ is a complete spin manifold of real dimension $2m$. If the scalar curvature is uniformly bounded with $\mathrm{scal}\geq -4m(m+1)$, the Dirac operator $$\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}={\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}-\mathbf{i}(m+1):W^{1,2}(M,{\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M)\to L^2(M,{\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M)$$ is an isomorphism of Hilbert spaces.
(cf. [@AnDa; @He3; @MinO]) Using the Lichnerowicz formula proves that the bilinear form $
B(\varphi ,\psi )=\int _M\left< \widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\varphi ,\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\psi \right>
$ is coercive and bounded on $W^{1,2}(M,{\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M)$. The surjectivity of $\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}$ follows from the Riesz representation theorem and [@GrLa3 Thm. 2.8].
Let $(M,g,J)$ be an almost Hermitian spin manifold which is strongly asymptotically complex hyperbolic, where $E\subset M$ is supposed to be the Euclidean end of $M$. We consider the connection $\widehat{\nabla }=\nabla +\frak{T}$ on ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M$ and the connection $\widehat{\nabla }^0=\nabla ^0+\frak{T}^0$ on ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M_{|E}$, where $\nabla ^0$ is the Levi–Civita connection and $\frak{T}^0$ is the Kähler Killing structure for the complex hyperbolic metric on $E$. The bundle ${\CMcal{V}}^0\subset {\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M_{|E}$ is trivialized by spinors parallel w.r.t. $\widehat{\nabla }^0$.
The gauge transformation $A$ extends to a bundle morphism $A:{\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M_{|E}\rightarrow {\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M_{|E}$ with (cf. [@AnDa]) $$\left| \overline{\nabla }\varphi -\nabla \varphi \right| \leq C\left| A^{-1}\right| \left| \nabla ^{0}A\right| \left| \varphi \right| \, ,$$ where $\nabla $ is the usual spin connection for $g$ and $\overline{\nabla }$ is a connection on ${\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M_{|E}$ obtained from the connection $\overline{\nabla }$ on $TM_{|E}$ and given by $\overline{\nabla }Y=A(\nabla ^{0}(A^{-1}Y))$.
Let $\psi _{0}$ be a spinor on $E\subset M$ which is parallel with respect to $\widehat{\nabla }^0$. Set $\psi :=h(A\psi _{0})$ for some cut off function $h$, i.e. $h=1$ at infinity, $h=0$ in $M-E$ and $\mathrm{supp}(\mathrm{d}h)$ compact. We compute $$\begin{split}
\widehat{\nabla }_{X}\psi = & (Xh)A\psi _{0}+h(\nabla _{X}A\psi _{0}+\frak {T}_{X}(A\psi _{0}))\\
= & (Xh)A\psi _{0}+h(\nabla _{X}-\overline{\nabla }_{X})A\psi _{0}-hA\frak {T}^{0}_{X}\psi _{0}+h\frak {T}_{X}A\psi _{0}
\end{split}$$ and thus, the asymptotic assumptions supply $$\widehat{\nabla }\psi \in L^2(M,T^*M\otimes {\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M)$$ and $$\label{41}
\left\langle \widehat{\nabla }_{\nu }\psi +\nu \cdot \widehat{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\psi ,\psi \right\rangle \in L^1(M)$$ ($|\psi _0|_0^2$ can be estimated by $ce^{2r}$ for some $c>0$). Using the above lemma gives a spinor $\xi \in W^{1,2}(M,{\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}M)$ with $\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\xi =\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\psi \in L^2$. In particular $\varphi :=\psi -\xi$ is $\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}$–harmonic and non–trivial ($\psi \notin L^2$). Moreover, the selfadjointness of the boundary operator $\widehat{\nabla }_\nu +\nu \cdot \widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}$ together with (\[41\]) implies as usual $$\liminf _{r\to \infty }\int\limits _{\partial M_r}\left< \widehat{\nabla }_\nu \varphi +\nu \cdot \widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\varphi ,\varphi \right> =0$$ for a non–degenerate exhaustion $\{ M_r\}$ of $M$ (cf. [@AnDa]). Since inequality (\[ineq\]) gives $\widehat{\frak{R}}\geq 0$, we conclude from the integrated Bochner–Weitzenböck formula: $$\int\limits _{\partial M_r}\left< \widehat{\nabla }_\nu \varphi +\nu \cdot \widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\varphi ,\varphi \right> \geq \int\limits _{M_r}\left| \widehat{\nabla }\varphi \right| ^2\geq 0,$$ that $\varphi $ is parallel w.r.t. $\widehat{\nabla }$. Since $0=\widehat{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\varphi ={\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}\varphi -\mathbf{i}(m+1)\mathrm{pr}_{\CMcal{V}}\varphi $ and $0=\widetilde{{\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}}\varphi ={\mbox{$\mathcal{D}\!\!\!\!\!\:/\!\;$}}\varphi -\mathbf{i}(m+1)\varphi $, we obtain that $\varphi $ is a section of ${\CMcal{V}}={\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_n\oplus {\mbox{$S\!\!\!\!\!\:/\;\!$}}_{n+1}$. Furthermore, $\widehat{\nabla }^0$ is a flat connection of ${\CMcal{V}}^0$, so ${\CMcal{V}}$ is trivialized by spinors parallel w.r.t. $\widehat{\nabla }$. In particular, $\nabla _X$ preserves sections of ${\CMcal{V}}$. Since $\widehat{\nabla }$ is flat on ${\CMcal{V}}$, $\widehat{R}=0$ implies $$0=R_{X,Y}^s+[\frak{T}_X,\frak{T}_Y]+(\nabla _X\frak{T})_Y-(\nabla _Y\frak{T})_X$$ on ${\CMcal{V}}$. A straightforward computations shows that $(\nabla _X\frak{T})_Y$ and $(\nabla _Y\frak{T})_X$ are Hermitian on ${\CMcal{V}}$ for all $X,Y$ (use the fact $(\frak{T}_X)^*=\frak{T}_X$), but $R_{X,Y}^s$ as well as $[\frak{T}_X,\frak{T}_Y]$ are skew–Hermitian on ${\CMcal{V}}$ which leads to $$\label{eq102}
0=R_{X,Y}^s+[\frak{T}_X,\frak{T}_Y].$$ From the fact (cf. [@BFGK]) $$\gamma (\mathrm{Ric}(X)) =2\sum _{i}e_i\cdot R^s_{e_i,X}$$ and equation (\[eq102\]), we conclude $\mathrm{Ric}(X)=-2(m+1)X$ (cf. [@Kir1]), i.e. $g$ is Einstein of scalar curvature $-4m(m+1)$. Inequality (\[ineq\]) yields $\mathrm{d}^*\Omega =0$ as well as $\CMcal{D}^\prime \Omega =0$ and $\CMcal{D}^{\prime \prime }\Omega =0$. In particular, $\CMcal{D}^\prime +\CMcal{D}^{\prime \prime }=\mathrm{d}+\mathrm{d}^*$ supplies $\mathrm{d}\Omega =0$. Therefore, if $J$ is integrable, $(g,J)$ must be Kähler (cf. [@KoNo2 p. 148]) and we could use the result by Herzlich to get the claim. However, we did not assume $J$ to be integrable and in order to prove the general case, we compute the Riemannian curvature of $(M,g,J)$. We have $$\begin{split}
[\frak{T}_X,\frak{T}_Y]=&(Y^{1,0}\cdot X^{0,1}\cdot -X^{1,0}\cdot Y^{0,1}\cdot )\pi _{n+1}+\\
&+(Y^{0,1}\cdot X^{1,0}\cdot -X^{0,1}\cdot Y^{1,0}\cdot )\pi _n\\
=&-\frac{1}{2}\gamma (X\wedge Y+JX\wedge JY)(\pi _n+\pi _{n+1})+\\
&+\mathbf{i}\Omega (X,Y)\pi _{n+1}-\mathbf{i}\Omega (X,Y)\pi _n
\end{split}$$ as well as $R^s_{X,Y}=\frac{1}{2}\gamma (\CMcal{R}(X\wedge Y))$, where $\CMcal{R}$ is the Riemannian curvature considered as endomorphism on $\Lambda ^2M$. Thus, we obtain $$\gamma \bigl(\CMcal{R}(X\wedge Y)-X\wedge Y -JX\wedge JY -2\Omega (X,Y)\Omega \bigl)\varphi =0$$ for all $\varphi \in \Gamma (\CMcal{V})$ from (\[eq102\]) and $\gamma (\Omega )\pi _n=\mathbf{i}\pi _n$, $\gamma (\Omega )\pi _{n+1}=-\mathbf{i}\pi _{n+1}$. In particular, the following lemma shows $$\label{curvature}
\mathrm{pr}_{\Lambda ^{1,1}M}\circ \CMcal{R}(X\wedge Y)=X\wedge Y +JX\wedge JY +2\Omega (X,Y)\Omega .$$
Suppose $(V,q)$ is a vector space of real dimension $2m$ with a quadratic form $q$ and a $q$–compatible complex structure $J$. Denote by $S=\oplus S_r$ the spinor space of $V$ where $S_r$ are induced from the action of the Kähler form $\Omega$. Choose $l:=\left[ \frac{m-1}{2}\right]$, then if $\eta \in \Lambda ^{1,1}V$ annihilates $S_l\oplus S_{l+1}$, i.e. $$\eta \cdot \psi =0$$ for all $\psi \in S_l\oplus S_{l+1}$, $\eta $ has to vanish.
Suppose that $m$ is even. The only $\Lambda ^{1,1}V$–forms which annihilate $S_{l+1}$ are multiples of $\Omega $ (cf. [@He3]). But $\Omega $ acts as $2\mathbf{i}$ on $S_l$ which shows the claim if $m$ is even. Assume that $m$ is odd and $\eta \cdot \psi =0$ for all $\psi \in S_l\oplus S_{l+1}$. We consider the vector space $V\oplus {\mathbbm{C}}^2$ with its spinor space $S\widehat{\otimes }{\mathbbm{C}}^2$. Since Clifford multiplication with $\Lambda ^2V$ satisfies $$\omega \cdot (\psi \otimes \varphi )=(\omega \cdot \psi )\otimes \varphi ,$$ and $(S\widehat{\otimes}{\mathbbm{C}}^2)_{l+1}$ is given by $S_l\otimes {\mathbbm{C}}\oplus S_{l+1}\otimes {\mathbbm{C}}$, we obtain $\eta \cdot \Psi =0$ for all $\Psi \in (S\widehat{\otimes}{\mathbbm{C}}^2)_{l+1}$. Thus, $\Lambda ^{1,1}V\subset \Lambda ^{1,1}(V\oplus {\mathbbm{C}}^2)$ together with the above case ($m$ even) implies that $\eta $ is a multiple of $\Omega $. But $\Omega $ acts as $\pm \mathbf{i}$ on $S_l$ respectively $S_{l+1}$ which shows the claim: $\eta =0$.
Using equation (\[curvature\]), the symmetry of the Riemannian curvature tensor and $\Omega \in \Gamma (\Lambda ^{1,1}M)$ lead to $$\left<\CMcal{R}(\Omega ),X\wedge Y\right>=\left< \CMcal{R}(X\wedge Y),\Omega \right> =2(m+1)\Omega (X,Y).$$ Consider the Bochner–Weitzenböck formula on $\Lambda ^2M$: $$\triangle =\mathrm{d}^*\mathrm{d}+\mathrm{d}\mathrm{d}^*=\nabla ^*\nabla +\frak{R} ,$$ then $\frak{R}$ is given by $\mathrm{Ric}+2\CMcal{R}$ (cf. [@Se2 Ap. B]), where $\mathrm{Ric}$ acts as derivation on $\Lambda ^2M$. We already know, that $g$ is Einstein, i.e. $\mathrm{Ric}=-4(m+1)\mathrm{Id} _{\Lambda ^2M}$ supplies $\frak{R}(\Omega )=0$. Moreover, $\mathrm{d}\Omega =0$ and $\mathrm{d}^*\Omega =0$ imply that $\Omega $ is harmonic: $\triangle \Omega =0$, i.e. we obtain $\nabla ^*\nabla \Omega =0$. Using the fact $$0=\triangle |\Omega |^2=\mathrm{d}^*\mathrm{d}|\Omega |^2=2\left< \nabla ^*\nabla \Omega ,\Omega \right> -2\left< \nabla \Omega ,\nabla \Omega \right>$$ we conclude that $(g,J)$ is Kähler. Thus, $\CMcal{R}:\Lambda ^2M\to \Lambda ^{1,1}M$ together with (\[curvature\]) yield constant holomorphic sectional curvature $-4$ of $(M,g,J)$. Since the end of $M$ is diffeomorphic to ${\mathbbm{R}}^{2m}-\overline{B_R(0)}$, $M$ must be isometric to ${\mbox{${\mathbbm{C}}\mathrm{H}$}}^m$.
[^1]: Supported by the German Research Foundation
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We study the thermodynamics of the vibrational modes of a lattice pinned by impurity disorder in the absence of topological defects (Bragg glass phase). Using a replica variational method we compute the specific heat $C_v$ in the quantum regime and find $C_v \propto T^3$ at low temperatures in dimension three and two. The prefactor is controlled by the pinning length. The non trivial cancellation of the linear term in $C_v$ arises from the so-called marginality condition and has important consequences for other mean field models.'
author:
- Gregory Schehr
- Thierry Giamarchi
- Pierre Le Doussal
title: Specific Heat of the Quantum Bragg Glass
---
Understanding the behavior of the specific heat in disordered and glassy systems is a longstanding theoretical challenge [@zeller_chalspe_struct_glasses]. Its low temperature dependence has been observed to be linear in a variety of glasses, including amorphous solids, disordered crystals and spin glasses [@phillips_chalspe_amorphous; @ackerman_chalspe_disordered_crystals; @binder_spinglass_review]. A phenomenological interpretation was proposed [*assuming*]{} the existence of two level systems [@anderson_twolevels] leading to such a linear behavior. Despite its remarkable success for many systems the range of applicability and microscopic justification of such arguments are still open questions. Analytical calculations based on models of quantum solids with structural disorder account for higher frequency features such as the “boson peak” [@boson_peak_review; @schirmacher_bosonpeak; @grigera_vibrational_spectrum] but produce only phonon-like specific heat $C_v \sim T^3$, except in the classical limit [@schehr_chalspe_classique; @schirmacher_anharmonic]. On the other hand new possibility arises from recent developments of the mean field methods [@mezard_variational_replica; @giamarchi_columnar_variat] to quantum spin glasses [@georges_mf_quantum_spinglass; @cugliandolo_quantum_p_spin]. The glass phase is there described by a replica symmetry broken saddle point solution and evidence was found [@georges_mf_quantum_spinglass; @cugliandolo_quantum_p_spin] for a linear specific heat both in the $p$-spin and Heisenberg spin glasses. Since even in these solvable models the specific heat remains delicate to extract analytically, a later numerical study claims instead $C_v \sim T^2$ [@rozenberg_t2] and compares to experiments. It is thus still an outstanding problem to understand the behavior of the specific heat already at the level of the mean field description of quantum glasses.
In addition to structural and spin glasses, there has been considerable recent interest in pinned elastic systems where disorder originates from substrate impurities. Such systems cover a wide range of experimental situations both in the classical and quantum limit, such as vortex lattices in superconductors [@blatter_vortex_review; @nattermann_vortex_review; @giamarchi_book_young; @giamarchi_vortex_review], electron crystals [@giamarchi_wigner_review; @chitra_wigner_long], charge and spin density waves [@gruner_book_cdw], disordered liquid crystals [@saunders_smectic_bragg_glass], etc.. All these systems are characterized by a competition between disorder and elasticity, which leads to pinning and glassy behavior. Although the question of positional order and correlations is now better understood, with reasonable agreement between theory and experiments, the behavior of the specific heat is still largely not understood and, in some cases, affected by non equilibration effects [@odin_chalspe_blue_bronze; @lasjaunias_chalspe_noneq_sdw; @blatter_chalspe; @izawa_chalspe_borocabide; @bulaevskii_chalspe; @caroli_core_states; @volovik_chalspe_dwaves].
It is thus crucial to develop a first principle method to compute the temperature dependence of the specific heat in such disordered elastic systems. Here we address this question for a Bragg glass system allowing both for thermal and quantum fluctuations [@giamarchi_columnar_variat] and obtain a quite general formula to compute the specific heat. We find that the term proportional to $T$ in the specific heat vanishes. This leads to a $T^3$ behavior of $C_v$ in all dimensions between $2$ and $4$. The Larkin Ovchinnikov pinning length is found to control the coefficient. The result holds for a periodic object, i.e. a Bragg glass, and for interfaces with continuous degrees of freedom. We elucidate the general mechanism leading, in the mean field approach, to the cancellation of the term linear in $T$. We discuss how this property allows to extract such a term in related quantum spin glass models. In a companion paper [@schehr_chalspe_classique] we investigate the classical limit and the applications to vortex lattices.
Let us consider a collection of interacting quantum objects of mass $\mu$ whose position variables are denoted by a $m$-component vector $u_\alpha(R_i,\tau)$. The equilibrium positions $R_i$ in the absence of any fluctuations form a perfect lattice of spacing $a$. Interactions result in an elastic tensor $\Phi_{\alpha,\beta}(q)$ which describes the energy associated to small displacements, the phonon degrees of freedom. Impurity disorder is modeled by a $\tau$ (imaginary time) independent gaussian random potential $U(x)$ interacting with the local density $\rho(x) = \sum_i \delta (x - R_i -
u(R_i,\tau))$. We will describe systems in the weak disorder regime $a/R_a \ll 1$ where $R_a$ is the translational correlation length, e.g. in a Bragg glass phase where the condition $|u_\alpha(R_i,\tau) - u_\alpha(R_i+a ,\tau)| \ll a$ holds, no dislocations being present. At equilibrium the system is described by the partition function $Z=
\text{Tr} e^{- \beta H} = \int Du D\Pi e^{-S/\hbar}$ with Hamiltonian $H=H_{\text{ph}} + H_{\text{dis}}$: $$\begin{aligned}
&& H_{\text{ph}} = \frac{1}{2} \int_q \frac{\Pi(q)^2}{\mu} +
\sum_{\alpha,\beta}
u_{\alpha}(q)
\Phi_{\alpha,\beta}(q) u_{\beta}(-q) \nonumber \\
&& H_{\text{dis}} = \int d^dx U(x) \rho(x, u(x)) \label{Hsys}\end{aligned}$$ and its associated Euclidean quantum action $-S[u,\Pi]=\int_\tau
\int_q i \Pi_{\alpha}(q) \partial_\tau u_{\alpha}(q) - H$. Here $\int_q \equiv \int_{BZ} \frac{d^d
q}{(2 \pi)^d}$ denotes integration on the first Brillouin zone and all integrals over the imaginary time variable $\tau$ go from $0$ to $\beta \hbar$, $\beta=1/T$ being the inverse temperature.
For simplicity we illustrate the calculation on a isotropic system with $\Phi_{\alpha,\beta}(q)= c q^2 \delta_{\alpha
\beta}$ and denote disorder correlations $\overline{U(x) U(x')} =
\Delta(x-x')$. The disorder average is performed using the replica trick $\overline{Z^k}=\int Du e^{-S_{\text{eff}}/\hbar}$ and integrating over $\Pi$, after some manipulations [@giamarchi_columnar_variat] one obtains the following replicated action $S_{\text{eff}} =
S_{\text{ph}} + S_{\text{dis}}$ with: $$\begin{aligned}
&& S_{\text{ph}} = \int d^d x d\tau \frac{c}{2} \sum_a (\nabla_x
u_a)^2 + \frac{1}{v^2} (\partial_{\tau} u_a)^2 \nonumber \\
&& S_{\text{dis}}=- \frac{1}{2 \hbar} \int d^d x d\tau d\tau'
\sum_{ab} R(u_a(x,\tau) - u_b(x,\tau')) \nonumber \\
&& R(u) = \rho_0^2 \sum_K \Delta_K \cos(K \cdot u)
\label{Srepliquee}\end{aligned}$$ Here $v=\sqrt{c/\mu}$ is the pure phonon velocity and $\Delta_K = \int d^d x e^{i K \cdot x} \Delta(x)$ denote the harmonics of the disorder correlator at the reciprocal lattice vectors $K$, and $\rho_0 \sim a^{-2}$ the average areal density.
This quantum model is then studied using the Gaussian Variational Method (GVM) on the imaginary time action [@mezard_variational_replica; @giamarchi_vortex_long; @giamarchi_columnar_variat], implemented by choosing a trial action: $$\begin{aligned}
S_{0} = \frac{1}{2 \beta \hbar} \int_q \sum_{a,b=1}^k\sum_n
G^{-1}_{ab} u_a(q,\omega_n) u_b(-q,-\omega_n) \label{Svar}\end{aligned}$$ where $k\to 0$ is the number of replicas. $S_0$ minimizes the variational free energy $F_{\text{var}} = F_0 + \frac{1}{\beta
\hbar} \langle S_{\text{eff}} - S_{0} \rangle_{S_0}$, where $F_0$ denotes the free energy calculated with the trial action $S_0$. The specific heat is defined as follows $$\begin{aligned}
C_v(T) = -T \frac{\partial^2 F}{\partial T^2} = \frac{\partial
\overline{\langle H \rangle}}{\partial T} \label{Chalspedef}\end{aligned}$$ where $\langle ... \rangle$ denotes a quantum and thermal average and $\overline {...}$ disorder averaged. Introducing replicas, one finds $\overline{\langle H \rangle}/\Omega = \frac{1}{k}\langle \sum_a
H_{\text{ph}}(u_a,\Pi_a) + \frac{2}{\beta \hbar}S_{\text{dis}}
\rangle_{S_{\text{eff}}}$. Integrating over the $\Pi_a$ fields we compute the resulting average using $S_0$ (which amounts exactly - thanks to the variational equations - to compute $C_v$ using the variational free energy instead of the exact one). We obtain: $$\begin{aligned}
&&\overline{\langle H \rangle}/(m \Omega) = \frac{1}{\beta} \sum_{n} \int_q
\frac{1}{2} +
\frac{c}{2} (q^2 - \frac{1}{v^2} \omega_n^2) \tilde{G}(q,i\omega_n)
\nonumber \\
&&+ \frac{1}{\hbar} \int_0^{\beta \hbar} d \tau (V(\hbar \tilde{B}(\tau))
- \int_0^1 du
V(\hbar B(u)) ) \label{Hquantmoy}\end{aligned}$$ where $\Omega$ is the volume of the system, $V(B) = - \rho_0^2
\sum_K \Delta_K \exp(- B K^2/2)$ and $\omega_n = 2\pi n/\beta
\hbar$ are the Matsubara frequencies. We have implicitly taken the limit $k \to 0$ in (\[Hquantmoy\]) : we denote $\tilde{G}(q,\omega_n) = G_{aa}(q,\omega_n)$ and parametrize $G_{a \neq b}(q,\omega_n)$ by $G(q,u)$, where $0 < u
<1$, which is $\omega_n$ independent. One has $$\begin{aligned}
\tilde{G}(q,\omega_n) &=& \frac{1}{c(q^2 + \omega_n^2/v^2) + \Sigma
+ I(\omega_n)} \\
& & + \delta_{n,0} \frac{1}{cq^2}(\frac{1}{u_c}
\frac{\Sigma}{cq^2 + \Sigma} + \int_0^{u_c} \frac{dv}{v^2}
\frac{[\sigma](v)}{cq^2 + [\sigma](v)})\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ Similarly we take $\hbar B_{ab}(\tau) =
\langle [u_a(x,\tau) - u_b(x,0)]^2\rangle/m$ with $\tilde{B}(\tau)$ and $B(u)$ which is $\tau$ independent. $u_c$ and $[\sigma](v)$ are defined in Ref. [@giamarchi_vortex_long; @giamarchi_columnar_variat]. $\overline{\langle H \rangle}/(m \Omega)$ is then calculated using the solution of the variational equations [@giamarchi_vortex_long; @giamarchi_columnar_variat] where the best trial Gaussian action (\[Svar\]) is obtained by breaking the replica-symmetry (RSB). Although the RSB scheme, and the behavior of $B(u)$, depend in general on $d$ and on $V(B)$, $C_v(T)$ depends on $T$ only through $u_c$, $\Sigma$ and $B = B(u > u_c)$: $$\begin{aligned}
&& 1 = - 4V''(B)\int_q \frac{1}{(cq^2+\Sigma)^2} \label{marginality} \\
&& \Sigma = c R_c^{-2} \label{larkin_length}\end{aligned}$$ where $R_c$ is the Larkin length, and (\[marginality\]) is the so called marginality condition (MC) which automatically holds here for $d \geq 2$. We recall here the variational equation [@giamarchi_columnar_variat], relevant for the computation of $C_v(T)$ : $$I(\omega_n)=\frac{2}{\hbar} \int_0^{\beta \hbar} d\tau
(1-\cos(\omega_n \tau)) (V'(\tilde{B}(\tau)) - V'(B) ) \label{EqVariat}$$ together with (\[marginality\]), where $$\begin{aligned}
B &=& \frac{2}{\beta} \sum_n \int_q \frac{1}{cq^2 +
c\omega_n^2/v^2 + \Sigma + I(\omega_n)} \label{matsum} \\
\tilde{B}(\tau) &=& \frac{2}{\beta} \sum_n \int_q \frac{1
-\cos(\omega_n\tau)}{cq^2 + c\omega_n^2/v^2 + \Sigma +
I(\omega_n)} \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ The solution of these coupled equations can be organized as an expansion in powers of $\hbar$, keeping $\beta \hbar$ fixed: $\Sigma = \Sigma_0 + \hbar \Sigma_1(\beta \hbar) + O(\hbar^2)$, $I(\omega_n) = I_0(\omega_n) + \hbar I_1(\omega_n,\beta \hbar) +
O(\hbar^2)$ where one finds that the lowest order solution does not depend explicitly on $\beta \hbar$ (of course $I(\omega_n)$ always depends implicitly on $\beta \hbar$ through $\omega_n$). In general, $\overline{\langle H \rangle}/\Omega$ and $C_v(T)$ will be functions both of $\hbar$ and $\beta \hbar$ : $ \overline{\langle H \rangle}/(m \Omega)
(\hbar,\beta
\hbar) = H_0 + \hbar H_1(\beta \hbar) + \hbar^2 H_2(\beta
\hbar)...$, where $H_0$ is independent of $\beta \hbar$ from which it follows that $$\begin{aligned}
C_v(T) = C_v(\hbar,\beta \hbar) = C_0(\beta \hbar) + \hbar C_1(\beta
\hbar) + ...\end{aligned}$$ After some manipulations, we find for $d \geq 2$ $$\begin{aligned}
\hbar H_1 = \frac{\hbar}{\beta \hbar} \sum_n \int_q
\frac{cq^2 + \Sigma_0 +
I_0(\omega_n)}{cq^2+\frac{c}{v^2}\omega_n^2+\Sigma_0+I_0(\omega_n)}
\label{Hmatsublowesthbar}\end{aligned}$$ where in that limit $\Sigma_0$ is fixed by (\[marginality\]) setting $B=0$ and $I_0(\omega_n)$ satisfies the equation [@giamarchi_columnar_variat] $$\begin{aligned}
&&I_0(\omega_n) = -4V''(0) (J_1(\Sigma_0) - J_1(\Sigma_0 +
\frac{c}{v^2}\omega_n^2 + I_0(\omega_n))) \nonumber \\
&&J_n(z) = \int_q \frac{1}{(cq^2+z)^n}\end{aligned}$$ from which we can extract the low $\omega$ behavior of its analytic continuation $I_0(\omega_n \to -i\omega + 0^+) =
I_0'(\omega) + i I_0''(\omega)$ : $$\begin{aligned}
I_0'(\omega) \simeq A \omega^2 \quad , \quad
I_0''(\omega) \simeq - B
\omega
\label{SolEqVarhbar0}\end{aligned}$$ with $A=\frac{c}{v^2}(1-\frac{J_2 J_4}{2
J_3^2})$ and $B=\sqrt{\frac{c}{v^2}\frac{J_2}{J_3}}$, where $J_n=J_n(\Sigma_0)$. Note that (\[Hmatsublowesthbar\]) correctly yields the equipartition for $\beta \to \infty$ : $\hbar H_1 = T \int_q$. The expression (\[Hmatsublowesthbar\]) is more illuminating if we use a spectral representation of the Green function to transform the discrete sum over the Matsubara frequencies in an integral : $$\begin{aligned}
&&\hbar H_1 = \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \frac{d\omega}{\pi} \hbar
\omega \rho(\omega) f_B(\omega) \label{HFree} \\
&& \rho(\omega) = \frac{c}{v^2}\omega \int_q \text{Im} G_c(q,\omega_n
\to -i\omega + 0^+) \\
&& = \int_q \frac{c}{v^2}\omega \frac{- I_0''(\omega)}{(cq^2 -
\frac{c}{v^2}\omega^2+\Sigma_0+I_0'(\omega))^2
+ (I_0''(\omega))^2} \label{density_of_states} \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ where $G^{-1}_c(q,\omega_n) = \sum_b G^{-1}_{ab}(q,\omega_n)$, $\rho(\omega)$ is the density of states and $f_B(\omega)$ the Bose factor. Eq. (\[HFree\]) is simply the internal energy of free excitations, whose density of states is given by $\rho(\omega)$, computed self-consistently within the variational method. As $\rho(\omega)$ does not depend, at this order, on temperature, all the temperature dependence is contained in the Bose factor. We thus obtain the specific heat $$\begin{aligned}
C_v = (\beta \hbar)^2 \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \frac{d\omega}{4 \pi}
\frac{\rho(\omega) \omega^2}{\sinh^2{\beta \hbar \omega/2}} +
O(\hbar) \label{chal_spe_lowest_order}\end{aligned}$$ Due to the Bose factor, the low $T$ behavior is governed by the low $\omega$ behavior of the density of states. From (\[SolEqVarhbar0\]) we see that $\rho(\omega) \sim - \omega
I_0''(\omega) \sim \omega^2$, which leads to $C_v(T) \sim T^3$ in all dimensions $d \geq 2$. Surprisingly, the linear term in the specific heat cancels at lowest order in $\hbar$. This cancellation, and the resulting $T^3$ behavior occurs in fact to [*all orders*]{} in $\hbar$, as is shown below. This results in the following behavior at low temperature [^1] $$\begin{aligned}
C_v(\hbar,\beta\hbar) = (C_0 +
\hbar C_1 + \cdots) \left( \frac{T}{\hbar} \right)^3 + O((T/\hbar)^4)\end{aligned}$$ $C_1$ will be given in [@schehr_chalspe_long] and we discuss here the dominant contribution (\[chal\_spe\_lowest\_order\]). Although the $T^3$ behavior is independent of the dimension $2 \leq d \leq 4$, the coefficient itself does depend on it. More precisely $$\begin{aligned}
&&C_v \sim \frac{8 \pi^3}{15}
\sqrt{\left(\frac{c}{v^2}\right)^3 \frac{J_2(\Sigma_0)^3}{J_3(\Sigma_0)}}
\left(\frac{T}{\hbar}\right)^3 + O(\hbar,(\beta \hbar)^{-4})
\nonumber \\
&& = \frac{4 \pi^4}{15} K_d R_c^{3-d}
F_{C_v}\left(\frac{R_c}{a}\right) \left(\frac{T}{\hbar v} \right)^3 +
O(\hbar,(\beta \hbar)^{-4}) \nonumber \\\end{aligned}$$ where $K_d = S_d/(2 \pi)^d$, $S_d$ being the volume of the sphere in dimension $d$ and $F_{C_v}(x)$ a scaling function. Choosing a spherical Brillouin zone, $F_{C_v}(x) =
2/\pi(f_2(x)^3/f_3(x))^{1/2}$, with $f_n(x) = \int_0^{2\pi x}du
u^{d-1}/(u^2+1)^n$. If we compare this result to the Debye law for pure phonons, $$\begin{aligned}
C_{v\text{Debye}} \sim \frac{4\pi^4}{15} K_d \left(\frac{T}{\hbar v}
\right)^d \label{Debye_law}\end{aligned}$$ we see that $d=3$ appears as a particular dimension below which the specific heat is lowered by the disorder although it is enhanced above. In three dimensions it remains of the Debye form with a prefactor governed by the scaling function $F_{C_v}(x)$: $$\begin{aligned}
&&F_{C_v}(x) \sim 1 \quad x \gg 1 \\
&&F_{C_v}(x) \sim \frac{16 \pi^2}{3} x^3 \quad x \ll 1\end{aligned}$$ Note that since one does recover exactly the Debye law at vanishing disorder, the corrections at weak disorder are rather small. At stronger disorder $R_c \sim a$ the specific heat is significantly lowered by the disorder.
In the case $d < 2$, it was noticed in [@giamarchi_columnar_variat] that to obtain the correct behavior of dynamical quantities (e.g. the conductivity $\sigma(\omega) \sim \omega^2$) through linear response within the Matsubara equilibrium approach, one should enforce the MC (\[marginality\]), which arises naturally within the dynamical methods [@cugliandolo_quantum_p_spin]. If we use this condition we obtain for $C_v(T)$ the expression (\[chal\_spe\_lowest\_order\]) where in the numerator $\frac{c}{v^2} \omega^2$ is replaced by $-\frac{2-d}{2(4-d)} \Sigma_0 + \frac{c}{v^2} \omega^2 $, and this leads to a negative specific heat at low $T$. However, if we use the thermodynamic condition, i.e. compute $u_c$ by minimizing the variational free energy, the internal energy can again be written as (\[Hmatsublowesthbar\]) which guarantees the equipartition and a positive $C_v(T)$. Then $I(\omega_n)
\sim \omega_n^2$, and $C_v(T)$ vanishes exponentially at low $T$, a signature of a gapped excitation spectrum. This apparent discrepancy between thermodynamic and dynamic quantities within the GVM, which occurs only for $d < 2$, is a hint of possible complications due to slow equilibration in these systems, as observed e.g. in Coulomb glass systems ([@ovadyahu_coul_glass; @cohen_coul_glass]).
Extracting the $T$-dependence to all orders in $\hbar$ is quite difficult, but we found a drastic simplification of the temperature dependence, at order $T^2$, of $\tau$ integrals such as in (\[Hquantmoy\]) and (\[EqVariat\]). Schematically, for [*any*]{} polynomial form $V(x)=x^p$, expressing $B^p$ and $\tilde B(\tau)^p$ as multiple Matsubara sums using (\[matsum\]) and performing the $\tau$ integral, one explicitly checks that cancellations occur term by term in the multinomial expansion of $\tilde B(\tau)^p$. Details are given in [@schehr_chalspe_long]. This further allows to derive the cancellation of the contribution linear in temperature of $C_v$ to all orders, arising naturally as [*a consequence of the marginality condition*]{} (\[marginality\]), which, here for $d \geq 2$, holds automatically. We find that the self-energy takes the interesting form: $$\begin{aligned}
&& \Sigma + I(\omega_n) = \Sigma + M (1 - \delta_{n 0}) +
\tilde{I}(\omega_n) \label{sum1} \\
&& \Sigma + M = \Sigma^{(0)} + O(T^4) \label{sum2}\\
&& \tilde{I}(\omega_n) = \tilde{I}^{(0)}(\omega_n) + T^4
\tilde{I}^{(2)}(\omega_n) + \cdots
\label{sum3}\end{aligned}$$ with $\Sigma = \Sigma^{(0)} + O(T^2)$ and $\tilde{I}(\omega_n) \sim |\omega_n| + O(\omega_n^2)$. The absence of $T^2$, $T^3$ dependences in Eq. (\[sum2\],\[sum3\]) allows to show, using marginality, that no $T^2$ nor $T^3$ term survives in (\[Hquantmoy\]) for $d \geq 2$. For $d<2$ the same conclusion as above persists (simply replacing $\Sigma_0$ by $\Sigma^{(0)}$).
The drastic simplification in $T$ dependence found here is also useful to compute analytically the putative linear term in $C_v(T)$ in the quantum spin glasses. Both models in [@georges_mf_quantum_spinglass] and [@cugliandolo_quantum_p_spin] are solved via a one step RSB solution, hence analogous to our $d<2$ case, and thus are gapless provided the marginality condition is enforced (see discussion above). Ref. [@cugliandolo_quantum_p_spin] studies the specific heat of the quantum $p$-spin model and obtain numerical evidence for a linear contribution. We find that this term vanishes. In Ref. [@georges_mf_quantum_spinglass] the SU(N) fully connected Heisenberg spin glass (of spin $S$) was solved for infinite $N$. There too it was found that the dominant term (analogous to $C_0$ here) in a $1/S$ semiclassical expansion also behaves as $\sim
T^3$. Whether it holds to higher order in $1/S$ has been discussed in [@parcollet_private_chaleur_spe] and [@rozenberg_t2] and is currently under investigation [@schehr_chalspe_long]. In all cases a structure similar to (\[sum1\],\[sum2\],\[sum3\]) also holds.
One can discuss the validity of the mean field method. The GVM can also be used to describe non periodic systems (e.g. directed polymer) in terms of a power law $V(B)$ [@mezard_variational_replica; @giamarchi_vortex_long] and then becomes exact for $m \to \infty$ with $R(u) = - m V(u^2/m)$. We thus expect that the $T^3$ behavior is exact in this limit in the full RSB case. For the periodic problem it is always an approximation which describes the vibrational phonon-like excitations of the pinned system and may not treat accurately excitations such as solitons. Whether these solitons or other type of excitations such as dislocations for a lattice could reestablish a linear contribution to the specific heat from two level systems type behavior remains to be investigated.
This weak T-dependence of the specific heat in the quantum regime is relevant to the so-called vortons modes of the vortex lattice of superconductors. Other contributions such as core electrons [@caroli_core_states], or their interaction with vortons (responsible for the dissipation in the quantum dynamics of the vortons) yield linear specific heat [@blatter_chalspe] which may dominate over the present one in the quantum regime. Whether this also holds in the classical regime for the vortons is examined in [@schehr_chalspe_classique].
In conclusion we have obtained from first principles the specific heat of an elastic quantum pinned system, such as the Bragg glass phase of a lattice in presence of impurities. We found that $C_v \sim T^3$ in $d=2,3$ due to a non trivial mechanism of cancellation of the linear term. This simplification which occurs from the marginality condition will be useful for a general understanding of the specific heat behavior within the mean field theory. The question remains concerning the contribution of other types of excitations such as plastic deformations. Further analytical and numerical investigations would be desirable to a better understanding of the behavior of the specific heat in glasses.
We acknowledge G. Blatter, L. F. Cugliandolo, S. Florens, A. Georges, L. Ioffe, T. Klein, P. Monceau, O. Parcollet and C. Varma for helpful discussions.
[32]{} natexlab\#1[\#1]{}bibnamefont \#1[\#1]{}bibfnamefont \#1[\#1]{}citenamefont \#1[\#1]{}url \#1[`#1`]{}urlprefix\[2\][\#2]{} \[2\]\[\][[\#2](#2)]{}
, ****, ().
.
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
in **, (, , ) and Ref. therein.
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, (), .
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ** (, , ), p. , .
, ****, ().
, in **, edited by (, , ), .
, in **, edited by (, , ), .
, ****, ().
, ** (, , ).
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
****, ().
****, ().
, (),
(),
[^1]: The cumbersome expression for $\overline{\langle H
\rangle}/\Omega$ will be given elsewhere [@schehr_chalspe_long] but we just mention that it does not reduce anymore to the “free particles” contribution (\[HFree\]).
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We use a van-der-Waals pickup technique to fabricate different heterostructures containing WSe$_2$(WS$_2$) and graphene. The heterostructures were structured by plasma etching, contacted by one-dimensional edge contacts and a topgate was deposited. For graphene/WSe$_2$/SiO$_2$ samples we observe mobilities of $\sim$12000cm$^2$/Vs. Magnetic field dependent resistance measurements on these samples show a peak in the conductivity at low magnetic field. This dip is attributed to the weak antilocalization(WAL) effect, stemming from spin-orbit coupling. Samples where graphene is encapsulated between WSe$_2$(WS$_2$) and hBN show a much higher mobility of up to $\sim$120000cm$^2$/Vs. However, in these samples no WAL peak can be observed. We attribute this to a transition from the diffusive to the quasiballistic regime. At low magnetic field a resistance peak appears, which we ascribe to a size effect, due to boundary scattering. Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations in fully encapsulated samples show all integer filling factors, due to complete lifting of the spin and valley degeneracy.'
author:
- Tobias Völkl
- Tobias Rockinger
- Martin Drienovsky
- Kenji Watanabe
- Takashi Taniguchi
- Dieter Weiss
- Jonathan Eroms
title: Magnetotransport in heterostructures of transition metal dichalcogenides and graphene
---
Introduction
============
In recent years, the assembly of van-der-Waals heterostructures containing graphene has gained much attention[@Geim2013]. Encapsulating graphene between hBN and employing one-dimensional edge contacts[@Wang614] has proven to be a reliable method to fabricate high mobility devices. With this a number of effects, such as ballistic transport[@Taychatanapat2013], viscous electron flow[@Bandurin2016] and moiré patterns[@Dean2013] have been observed. However, employing other two-dimensional materials for encapsulation allows to further tailor the properties of graphene. One promising objective is to increase the spin-orbit-coupling(SOC) in graphene, as this may offer numerous possibilities, including the generation of a pure spin-current through the spin-Hall effect or the manipulation of spin-currents through an electric field. Bringing graphene into proximity of transition metal dichalcogenides(TMDC) has been predicted theoretically[@Kaloni2014; @Gmitra2016] and observed experimentally[@Wang2015a; @Wang2016; @Yang2016; @Avsar2014] to increase SOC in graphene. Further, transport measurements[@Kretinin2014] and recent Raman measurements indicate the suitability of these substrates for high mobility graphene[@Banszerus2017]. This is in contrast to previously explored methods for increasing SOC in graphene, such as hydrogenation[@CastroNeto2009; @Balakrishnan2013a], fluorination[@Avsar2015] or the attachment of heavy atoms[@Ma2012; @Balakrishnan2014], as these methods have the disadvantage of increasing the scattering and therefore decreasing the mobility of graphene.\
Here, we report on a comparison of magnetotransport in graphene/TMDC heterostructures in a broad mobility range, realized by different material combinations in the van-der-Waals stacked layer sequence. We integrate one-dimensional contacts into the TMDC/graphene processing scheme, achieving a high yield of functional devices and include top gates using a TMDC layer as a gate dielectric. In diffusive samples, we observe weak antilocalization and study proximity-induced spin-orbit interaction at different out-of-plane electric fields, while in high mobility samples, a ballistic size effect and the quantum Hall effect are observed.\
Sample Fabrication
==================
Heterostructures were fabricated by using a dry pickup process[@Wang614]. Three different types of devices were fabricated. For device type1(see Fig. \[1\](a)) monolayer graphene was picked up by exfoliated multilayer WSe$_2$ and placed onto a standard p$^{++}$-doped Si/SiO$_2$ chip.
![(a,b) Schematic cross section of the devices. (a) Cross section of device type1, consisting of monolayer graphene and WSe$_2$ on top of SiO$_2$. (b) Cross section of device type3. Bilayer graphene is encapsulated between hBN and WSe$_2$. (c) Optical microscope picture of device 3. Part of the hBN/graphene stack lies on a WSe$_2$ flake, the other part lies directly on the SiO$_2$ substrate.\[1\]](C-WSe2_3.jpg "fig:"){width="\columnwidth"} ![(a,b) Schematic cross section of the devices. (a) Cross section of device type1, consisting of monolayer graphene and WSe$_2$ on top of SiO$_2$. (b) Cross section of device type3. Bilayer graphene is encapsulated between hBN and WSe$_2$. (c) Optical microscope picture of device 3. Part of the hBN/graphene stack lies on a WSe$_2$ flake, the other part lies directly on the SiO$_2$ substrate.\[1\]](hBn-C-WSe2_3.jpg "fig:"){width="\columnwidth"}
![(a,b) Schematic cross section of the devices. (a) Cross section of device type1, consisting of monolayer graphene and WSe$_2$ on top of SiO$_2$. (b) Cross section of device type3. Bilayer graphene is encapsulated between hBN and WSe$_2$. (c) Optical microscope picture of device 3. Part of the hBN/graphene stack lies on a WSe$_2$ flake, the other part lies directly on the SiO$_2$ substrate.\[1\]](04_topgate_100x-2.jpg){width="\columnwidth"}
For device type2 monolayer graphene was encapsulated between hBN and WS$_2$, while for device type3(see Fig. \[1\](b)) bilayer graphene was encapsulated between hBN and WSe$_2$. After assembly all three devices were annealed for 1hour at 320$^{\circ}$C in vacuum and 1hour at 320$^{\circ}$C in forming gas. Annealing removes contaminations between the layers, as well as the remaining PPC on top of the WSe$_2$(WS$_2$) flake. Then electron-beam lithography(EBL) and reactive ion etching(RIE) with CHF$_3$/O$_2$ were employed to define a Hall-bar structure. The graphene was then contacted by 5nm Cr/ 80nm Au side contacts. These edge contacts showed high reliability as 70 of 74 contacts were functional. As a last step 10nm Al$_2$O$_3$ were deposited by atomic layer deposition(ALD), followed by a Au topgate. The Al$_2$O$_3$ layer is necessary to prevent any leakage between topgate and graphene at the sides of the stack.\
Experimental Results
====================
Diffusive Regime
----------------
For measurements in the diffusive regime monolayer graphene/WSe$_2$ is placed onto SiO$_2$ in device type1. We therefore observe a mobility of only $\mu=12\,000$cm$^2$/Vs at $T=1.65$K. Figure\[2\] depicts the magnetoconductivity of this sample at different temperatures. In order to suppress universal conductance fluctuations an average over 15 curves at slightly different backgate voltages with a mean charge carrier concentration of $n=1.0 \cdot 10^{12}$/cm$^2$ was taken. The curves were obtained in a four-point lock-in measurement with an AC-current of $I_{AC}=10$nA for the curves at $T=1.65$K and $T=4.2$K, $I_{AC}=50$nA at T=10K and $I_{AC}=100$nA at T=100K at a frequency of f=13Hz.\
.\[2\]](07_WAL_temp.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
The occurrence of a sharp peak in the magnetoconductivity can be explained by weak-antilocalization, stemming from spin-orbit coupling. For the case that the intervalley scattering rate exceeds the decoherence rate, the low magnetic field dependence of the conductivity correction, due to WAL can be described as[@McCann2012]: $$\begin{split}
\Delta \sigma (B)=-\frac{e^2}{2 \pi h} \Bigg[ F \left( \frac{\tau_B^{-1}}{\tau_\phi^{-1}} \right) -F \left( \frac{\tau_B^{-1}}{\tau_\phi^{-1}+2 \tau_{asy}^{-1}} \right) \\
-2F \left( \frac{\tau_B^{-1}}{\tau_\phi^{-1}+\tau_{so}^{-1}} \right) \Bigg]
\end{split}
\label{eq1}$$ where $F(x)=\ln(x)+ \Psi(1/2+1/x)$, with $\Psi(x)$ being the digamma function, $\tau_B^{-1}=4DeB/\hbar$, $\tau_\phi$ the phase coherence time, $\tau_{so}$ the spin-orbit scattering time and $\tau_{asy}$ a scattering time that takes into account only spin-orbit coupling that is asymmetric in $z \rightarrow -z$ direction. Here $\tau_{so}$ combines symmetric and antisymmetric spin-orbit scattering: $\tau_{so}^{-1}=\tau_{sym}^{-1}+\tau_{asy}^{-1}$ [@McCann2012].\
Fitting the curve in Fig.\[2\] at $T=1.65$K(red curves in Fig.\[2\]) gives $\tau_\phi=25.7$ps, $\tau_{so}=0.57$ps and $\tau_{asy}=1.71$ps. These are comparable to the values that were reported for graphene placed on WSe$_2$[@Wang2016] and WS$_2$[@Wang2016; @Wang2015a; @Yang2016]. $\tau_{so}$, which is an upper bound for the spin-relaxation time is therefore much shorter than the values typically found in pristine graphene(100ps-1ns)[@Tombros2007; @Han2010; @Volmer2013]. The occurrence of WAL with such small $\tau_{so}$ is therefore a clear indication of strong SOC in this device. With increasing temperature the feature in Fig.\[2\] decreases as the phase coherence time $\tau_\phi$ decreases and the peak disappears at $T=20$K.\
The dual gated device allows us to examine the WAL peak with an applied transverse electric field, while leaving the charge carrier density unchanged.
. Inset: Electric field dependence of $\tau_\phi$(black squares), $\tau_{so}$(green triangles) and $\tau_{asy}$(red circles).\[6\]](07_topgate3.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
Figure\[6\] shows the magnetoconductivity at three different top- and backgate voltage combinations. Applying the electric field strongly decreases $\tau_{so}$ from $\tau_{so}=1.5$ps to $\tau_{so}=0.91$ps in one direction of the electric field and $\tau_{so}=1.25$ps in the other direction. The SOC strength is expected to increase with an electric field, due to the Rashba effect[@Bychkov1984]. However, $\tau_{so}$ depends on the total out-of-plane electric field acting on the carriers, which is composed of the externally applied field, as well as an internal field, due to the WSe$_2$-graphene interface. The weak asymmetry in the external electric field therefore points to a small contribution of an internal field. This is in contrast to the findings of Yang [*et al.*]{} in graphene/WS$_2$ samples, who reported a linear dependence of the spin orbit scattering rate $\tau_{asy}$ with the applied electric field, while they assume the symmetric part of the scattering rate to be zero[@Yang2016].\
Spin relaxation is expected to be dominated by the Dyakonov-Perel mechanism. The SOC strength $\Delta_{DP}$ can be estimated by[@Huertas-Hernando2009]: $$\tau_{so}^{-1}=4 \tau_e (\Delta_{DP}/\hbar)^2$$ This results in a SOC strength of $\Delta_{DP}=0.7-1.0$meV, which agrees well with theoretical predictions[@Gmitra2016]. For the case of Elliot-Yafet dominated spin relaxation the SOC strength can be estimated by[@Huertas-Hernando2009]: $\tau_{so}^{-1}=\tau_e^{-1} \Delta_{EY}^2/E_F^2$. This results in an unrealistically large SOC strength of $\Delta_{EY}=35-65$meV. Further, we observe a decrease of $\tau_{so}$ with increasing charge carrier concentration, which indicates that spin relaxation is dominated by the Dyakonov-Perel mechanism.\
Ballistic Regime
----------------
In order to increase the mobility of graphene we have encapsulated graphene between WSe$_2$(WS$_2$) and hBN(see Fig.\[1\](b)). Figure\[3\] shows Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations(black curve) and quantum-Hall effect(blue curve) of device2, containing monolayer graphene between hBN and WS$_2$.
![Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations(black curve) and quantum-Hall effect(blue curve) in hBN/graphene/WS$_2$. The splitting of valley and spin degeneracy in the Landau-levels indicates a high mobility of the sample.\[3\]](WS2_QHE4.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
This device showed mobilities of $\mu=50\,000$cm$^2$/Vs on the hole side and $\mu=120\,000$cm$^2$/Vs on the electron side. [In Fig. \[3\], a lifting of the spin and valley degeneracies can be observed, which results in integer filling factors in addition to the expected values of $4n+2$ for monolayer graphene. This behavior is typical for high mobility graphene[@Young2012].]{} The resistance peak at low magnetic field, followed by a negative magnetoresistance behavior will be discussed in the following sections.\
In order to directly compare the substrates WSe$_2$ and SiO$_2$ in device 3, a bilayer graphene/hBN stack was placed in such a way that part of the stack lies on a WSe$_2$-flake and part of it lies directly on the SiO$_2$ substrate(see Fig.\[1\](c)). Figure\[4\] shows topgate-sweeps of the four-point resistance of these two areas at $T=1.7$K.
. The black curves shows the resistance of the sample region lying on WSe$_2$, while the red curve depicts the resistance of the sample region on SiO$_2$.\[4\]](04_tgsw.pdf){width="\columnwidth"}
From this we extract a mobility of $\mu=3200$cm$^2$/Vs on the hole side and $\mu=5300$cm$^2$/Vs on the electron side for the graphene on SiO$_2$. For the graphene on WSe$_2$ we extract $\mu=57\,000$cm$^2$/Vs and $\mu=92\,000$cm$^2$/Vs for hole and electron sides. The overall high mobilities resulting from encapsulation confirm the suitability of WS$_2$ and WSe$_2$ as substrates for high mobility graphene.\
Figure\[5\](c) shows the magnetoresistance of the graphene on the SiO$_2$ substrate.
{width="1.6\columnwidth"}
Here we observe a peak in the resistance around $B=0$T, which we ascribe to weak localization. Fitting this peak with the formula for weak localization in bilayer graphene[@Gorbachev2007] reveals a phase coherence length of $L_\phi \sim 490$nm and an intervalley scattering length of $L_i \sim 420$nm.\
For the part of the bilayer graphene on WSe$_2$ we observe a dip in the resistance around $B=0$T in Fig.\[5\](a). At first glance this feature might be interpreted as WAL. However, this dip is much too large($\Delta \sigma=20$e$^2$/h) and too broad to be fitted with equation\[eq1\]. Further, the temperature dependence is much weaker and the dip is still visible at $T=60$K, in contrast to the WAL feature in Fig.\[2\]. Figure\[5\](b) shows the magnetoresistance of two bilayer graphene samples with different width. [While the black curve shows the magnetoresistance of the sample from Fig. \[4\] and \[5\](a), with a width of $W=4\,\mu$m, the red curve shows the magnetoresistance of a sample with width $W=1.5\,\mu$m. The mobility of this sample was $\mu=90\,000$cm$^2/$Vs on the hole side and $\mu=100\,000$cm$^2/$Vs on the electron side.]{} This behavior, i.e. the resistance peak at finite $B$, we ascribe to a ballistic effect, stemming from diffusive boundary scattering[@Beenakker1991; @Thornton1989; @Masubuchi2012]. A schematic description of this effect is shown in the inset of Fig.\[5\](a). At low magnetic fields the scattering between boundaries and therefore, the overall resistance, is initially increased(solid lines in the inset of Fig.\[5\](a)). [When the cyclotron diameter becomes smaller than the sample width, the scattering between boundaries is suppressed and therefore the resistance decreases(dashed lines in the inset of Fig.\[5\](a)).]{} From the curves in Fig.\[5\](b), the cyclotron radius $R_c$ at the magnetic field, where the resistance reaches the maximum can be calculated as: $$R_c(B)=\frac{\hbar k_F}{e B_{max}}=\frac{\hbar\sqrt{\pi n}}{e B_{max}}.
\label{eq2}$$ The calculated cyclotron radii are $R_c=2.17\,\mu$m for the sample with width $W=4\,\mu$m and $R_c=0.60\,\mu$m for the sample with width $W=1\,\mu$m. This shows that $R_c$ scales with the sample width $W$. For semiconductor 2DEGs, a relation $W=0.55 R_c$ was found [@Thornton1989], whereas for hBN encapsulated graphene a different prefactor was observed [@Masubuchi2012]. [The resistance peak at low magnetic field in Fig.\[3\] is also attributed to this effect.]{}\
No WAL behavior could be observed for graphene encapsulated between hBN and WSe$_2$(WS$_2$). We attribute this to a transition from the diffusive to the quasiballistic regime. [Since, equation\[eq1\] was developed in the diffusive regime, it is only valid for the case of: $\tau_{\phi}>\tau_{asy}>\tau_{so}>\tau_e$. Due to the higher mobility for decives of type2 and 3, we find $\tau_e$ to be in the range of $\tau_e \approx 1\,$ps. Therefore the relation $\tau_{so}>\tau_e$ may not be valid here. We expect WAL to be suppressed, due to reduced backscattering and the WAL peak to be narrower, resulting from the higher mobility in these samples(a similar behavior has been observed in GaAs heterostructures[@Grbiifmmodeacutecelsecfi2008]). Therefore the absence of WAL in these samples is not indicative of a lower SOC strength.]{}\
Conclusion
==========
In conclusion we investigated charge transport in several graphene/WSe$_2$(WS$_2$) heterostructures. We successfully employed the established fabrication techniques for hBN/graphene/hBN stacks to heterostructures containing WSe$_2$(WS$_2$) and graphene. Placing a graphene/WSe$_2$ stack on SiO$_2$ resulted in a mobility of $\mu=12\,000$cm$^2$/Vs. In this sample we observed a peak in the magnetoconductivity, which we attributed to the WAL effect, stemming from SOC. Applying an electric field increased the SOC strength in this sample. Encapsulating graphene between WSe$_2$(WS$_2$) and hBN increased the mobility to up to $\mu=120\,000$cm$^2$/Vs. No WAL behavior could be observed in these samples. We attribute this to a transition from the diffusive to the quasiballistic regime. This is further confirmed by the occurrence of a quasiballistic size effect, due to diffusive boundary scattering. These results confirm the suitability of WSe$_2$(WS$_2$) as a substrate for high quality graphene with strongly increased SOC.
Financial support by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) within the programs GRK 1570 and SFB 689 is gratefully acknowledged. The authors would like to thank J. Fabian and T. Korn for fruitful discussions.
[30]{}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 [****, ()](http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature12385) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1126/science.1244358) [****, ()](http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nphys2549) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1126/science.aad0201) [****, ()](http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature12186) [****, ()](\doibase http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4903895) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevB.93.155104) [****, ()](http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9339) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevX.6.041020) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/2053-1583/3/i=3/a=031012) [****, ()](http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5875) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1021/nl5006542) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/2053-1583/4/i=2/a=025030) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.026804) [****, ()](http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nphys2576) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/2053-1583/2/i=4/a=044009) [****, ()](\doibase
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.08.055) [****, ()](http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5748) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.166606) [****, ()](http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature06037) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.167202) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevB.88.161405) [****, ()](http://stacks.iop.org/0022-3719/17/i=33/a=015) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.146801) [****, ()](http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nphys2307) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.176805) in [**](\doibase
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0081-1947(08)60091-0), , Vol. , (, ) pp. [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevLett.63.2128) [****, ()](\doibase
10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.036601) [****, ()](\doibase 10.1103/PhysRevB.77.125312)
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'Motivated by the latest improved measurements of B-meson decays, we make a comprehensive analysis of the impact of a family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ boson on $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing and two-body hadronic B-meson decays, all being characterized by the quark-level $b\to s$ transition. Explicitly 22 decay modes and the related 52 observables are considered, and some interesting correlations between them are also carefully examined. Firstly, the allowed oases of $b-s-Z^{\prime}$ coupling parameters $|B^{L,R}_{sb}|$ and $\phi^{L,R}_s$ are extracted from $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing. Then, in the “SM limit" ([*i.e.,*]{} no new types of $Z^{\prime}$-induced four-quark operators arise compared to the SM case), we study the $Z^{\prime}$ effects on $B\to\pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$ decays. It is found that a new weak phase $\phi^{L}_s\sim -90^{\circ}$ is crucial for resolving the observed “$\pi K$ CP puzzle” and the allowed oases of the other $Z^{\prime}$ coupling parameters are also strongly restricted. Moreover, the $Z^{\prime}$ effects on $\bar{B}_s\to K K$, $K K^{\ast}$ and $\pi^0 \phi$ decays, being induced by the same quark-level $b\to s q\bar{q}~(q=u,d)$ transitions, are also investigated. Especially, it is found that the decay $\bar{B}_s \to \pi^0 \phi$, once measured, would play a key role in revealing the observed “$\pi K$ CP puzzle" and probing possible new physics hints. Finally, to check the non-universality of $Z^{\prime}$ couplings to light-quark pairs, we have studied the $B\to \phi K$ decays in detail and found that the left-handed $s-s-Z^{\prime}$ coupling is different from the $d-d-Z^{\prime}$ one, which is due to the large $A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to\phi K^-)$ reported by the BaBar collaboration.'
author:
- |
Qin Chang$^{a,b}$[^1], Xin-Qiang Li$^{b,c}$[^2] and Ya-Dong Yang$^{b}$[^3]\
[ $^a$Institute of Particle and Nuclear Physics, Henan Normal University, Henan 453007, P. R. China]{}\
[ $^b$Institute of Particle Physics and Key Laboratory of Quark and Lepton Physics (MOE),]{}\
[ Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei 430079, P. R. China]{}\
[ $^c$State Key Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, Institute of Theoretical Physics,]{}\
[ Chinese Academy of Sciences, P. R. China]{}
title: '**A Comprehensive Analysis of Hadronic $b\to s$ Transitions in a Family Non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ Model**'
---
[[**Keywords:**]{} B-Physics; Rare Decays; Beyond Standard Model; CP violation]{}
Introduction
============
With the fruitful running of BaBar, Belle, Tevatron, LHCb and the coming Super-KEKB experiments, rare B-meson decays play a vital role in precisely testing the Standard Model (SM) and deciphering the flavour structure of possible New Physics (NP) models. Although most of the experimental measurements are in good agreement with the SM predictions, some tensions or the so-called puzzles have been observed in the quark-flavour sector [@HFAG] over the past few years. With more statistics collected, some of them have gone, but some still persist and are confirmed by independent measurements.
For instance, for the CP-violating phase $\phi_s^{c\bar{c}s}$, which is defined as the weak phase difference between the $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing amplitude and the $b\to c\bar{c}s$ decay amplitude, a large deviation from the SM prediction was observed by the CDF [@CDFphiold] and D0 [@D0phiold] collaborations around 2008. A combined model-independent analysis performed by the UTfit collaboration found that the discrepancy was even more than $3\sigma$ [@UTfit], which attracted much attention. In our previous paper [@changsllzp], we pursued possible solution through a family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ boson and constrained the parameter space with these old data. However, the most recent updated measurements from CDF [@CDFDG], D0 [@D0DG], ATLAS [@ATLASDG] and LHCb [@LHCbDG] are now in good agreement with the SM expectation. Furthermore, beside the CP-violating phase $\phi_s^{c\bar{c}s}$, measurements of the other observables related to $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing, including the mass difference $\Delta M_s$, the decay width difference $\Delta\Gamma_s$ and the like-sign dimuon charge asymmetry, have also been updated recently, which could put a much stronger constraint on various NP models. Therefore, it is worth to reinvestigate the NP effects with these updated experimental data.
As is known, the four $B\to \pi K$ decays are among the most important hadronic B-meson decay modes with rich phenomenology. While their branching fractions have all been measured with high precision, it is still very difficult to explain the so-called “$\pi K$ CP puzzle", [*i.e.,*]{} why does the difference between the measured direct CP asymmetries $A_{CP}(B^-\to\pi^{0}K^{-})$ and $A_{CP}(\bar{B}^0\to\pi^{+} K^{-})$ differ from zero by $\sim 5.7\sigma$. It is noted that a family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ model could provide a possible solution to the observed “$\pi K$ CP puzzle" [@Barger; @changpikzp]. Since many other decay modes, such as $B\to\pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$, as well as $B_s\to K K^{(\ast)}$ and $B_{s}\to\pi^0\phi$, involve also the same quark-level $b\to s q\bar{q}$ ($q=u,d$) transitions, a combined investigation with these closely related decay modes taken into account at the same time is very necessary. Moreover, the correlations between observables of these decays are powerful probes of NP effects.
In a family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ model, the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings to different quarks are generally different from each other. Focusing on the hadronic B-meson decays induced by quark-level $b\to s$ transitions, one may check if the flavour-conserving $s-s-Z^{\prime}$ coupling differs from the $d-d-Z^{\prime}$ one. This could be done by studying the penguin-dominated $B\to \phi K$ decays. With the $b-s-Z^{\prime}$ coupling restricted by $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing, the $s-s-Z^{\prime}$ coupling is then accessible from these decays.
The direct search for $Z^{\prime}$ bosons is also an important physics program of current and future high-energy colliders [@ATLAS-Exotics; @CMS-Exotics; @Godfrey:2013eta; @Gershtein:2013iqa; @Kapukchyan:2013hfa]. Present limits from direct production at the LHC and virtual effects at LEP, through interference or mixing with the SM $Z$ boson, imply that the new $Z^{\prime}$ bosons are rather heavy and mix very little with the $Z$ boson. Depending on the considered theoretical model, $Z^{\prime}$ masses of the order of $2.5-3.0~{\rm TeV}$ [@ATLAS-Exotics; @CMS-Exotics; @Aad:2014cka; @Chatrchyan:2012oaa] and $Z-Z^{\prime}$ mixing angles at the level of a few per mil [@Erler:2009jh; @Andreev:2014fwa] are already excluded. It is expected that a $Z^{\prime}$ boson, if higher than about $5~{\rm TeV}$ and with order one couplings to SM fermions, could be discovered at a high luminosity $\sqrt{s}=14~{\rm TeV}$ LHC run [@Godfrey:2013eta]. The future $e^+e^-$ International Linear Collider (ILC) with high center-of-mass energies and longitudinally polarized beams could even go beyond the capabilities of the $14~{\rm TeV}$ LHC [@Kapukchyan:2013hfa; @Andreev:2012cj; @Ananthanarayan:2010bt]. After the discovery of a $Z^{\prime}$ boson at high-energy colliders, further detailed diagnostics of its couplings needs to be done in order to identify the correct theoretical framework.
Motivated by the above arguments, in this paper, we shall perform a comprehensive analysis of the impact of a family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ boson on hadronic $b\to s$ transitions. Such a family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ model, featured by tree-level flavour-changing neutral current (FCNC) and new CP-violating effect beyond the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa (CKM) picture [@ckm], has been detailed in Refs. [@Langacker1; @Langacker2] and attracted much attention in recent years, for instance in Refs. [@Barger; @chiang1; @Barger1; @BZprime; @BurasZp]. The study of $Z^{\prime}$ effects on low-energy flavour physics is very important for the direct searches and the specific model building. In our previous works [@changsllzp; @changpikzp; @changkllzp; @changphillzp], we have performed detailed investigations of the explicit structures of the effective $Z^{\prime}$ chiral coupling matrices and its effects in $b\to s$ transitions. Since then, measurements of many related observables have been significantly refined, which might affect our previous analyses and conclusions. It is, therefore, necessary to make a comprehensive reanalysis of these interesting processes, which are summarized and classified in Table \[clas\]. Our strategy is the following: Firstly, we extract the information about flavour-changing $b-s-Z^{\prime}$ coupling from $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing. Then, with the restricted $b-s-Z^{\prime}$ coupling as input, we discuss the flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings through the other decay modes listed in Table \[clas\]. Meanwhile, the space of $b-s-Z^{\prime}$ coupling could possibly be further bounded. After that, it is expected to get the explicit numerical results of the effective $Z^{\prime}$ chiral coupling matrices and to check if the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings are universal for the first two generations.
0.8pt 0.35in
Transition Decay modes $Z^{\prime}$ couplings involved
--------------------------- -------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------
$|\Delta B|=|\Delta S|=2$ $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing $b-s-Z^{\prime}$
$b\to s q\bar{q}~(q=u,d)$ $B_{u,d}\to\pi K,\, \pi K^{\ast},\,\rho K$ $b-s-Z^{\prime}$
$B_s \to K K,\, K K^{\ast},\,\pi^0 \phi$ $u-u-Z^{\prime}$, $d-d-Z^{\prime}$
$b\to s s\bar{s}$ $B_{u,d}\to \phi K$ $b-s-Z^{\prime}$, $s-s-Z^{\prime}$
: \[clas\] Summary and classification of the decay modes considered in this paper according to the involved $Z^{\prime}$ couplings.
Our paper is organized as following. In section 2, we give a brief overview of the family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ model. In sections 3 and 4, its effects on the $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing and the hadronic $b\to s$ transitions are discussed, respectively. We conclude in section 5. The relevant input parameters are collected in the Appendix.
Overview of the family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ model
=======================================================
In several well-motivated extensions of the SM, such as certain string constructions [@string], $E_6$ models [@E6], and theories with large extra dimensions, an additional $U(1)^{\prime}$ gauge symmetry and the associated $Z^{\prime}$ gauge boson could arise. Due to the non-diagonal chiral coupling matrix in the mass eigenstate basis, such a new $Z^{\prime}$ boson could have family non-universal couplings to the SM fermions and lead to FCNC processes even at the tree level, which are strictly forbidden within the SM. The basic formalism has been detailed in Refs. [@Langacker1; @Langacker2; @chiang1] in a way independent of the specific $Z^{\prime}$ model. For consistence and convenience, we shall recapitulate it below.
For a general NP model extended by an extra $U(1)^{\prime}$ gauge symmetry, the $Z^{\prime}$ part of the neutral-current Lagrangian in the gauge-eigenstate basis can be written as [@Langacker1] $$\label{LZp}
\mathcal {L}=-g^{\prime}J_{\mu}^{\prime}Z^{\prime\mu}\,,$$ where $g^{\prime}$ is the gauge coupling constant associated with the extra $U^{\prime}(1)$ group at the electro-weak (EW) scale, and $J_{\mu}^{\prime}$ is the $Z^{\prime}$-induced neutral chiral current given by $$J_{\mu}^{\prime}=\bar{\psi}_i\gamma_{\mu}\Big[\epsilon^{\psi_L}_{ij}\, \frac{1-\gamma_5}{2}\, + \,\epsilon^{\psi_R}_{ij}\, \frac{1+\gamma_5}{2}\Big]\psi_j\,,$$ with $\psi$ being the chiral field of fermions and $i, j$ the family indices. If the diagonal $U^{\prime}(1)$ chiral charge is non-universal for different families, nonzero flavour-changing $Z^{\prime}$ couplings could be generated through fermion mixing. After diagonalizing the Yukawa couplings to quarks by the unitary matrices $V_{\psi_{L,R}}$ (which give the CKM matrix $V_{\rm CKM}=V_{u_L}V_{d_L}^{\dag}$), the $3\times3$ $Z^{\prime}$ chiral coupling matrices $\epsilon^{\psi_X}$ can be rewritten as $$\label{3}
B^{\psi_X}=V_{\psi_X}\epsilon^{\psi_X}V_{\psi_X}^{\dagger}\,,\qquad ( X=L,R)$$ in the quark mass-eigenstate basis. Here the off-diagonal elements, at least for $B^{\psi_X}_{13}$ and $B^{\psi_X}_{23}$, are generally complex parameters, while the diagonal ones are real due to the hermiticity of the Lagrangian. To be consistent with the convention for the effective Hamiltonian given by Eqs. (\[Heff\]) and (\[heffz2\]), we have absorbed into the effective couplings $B^{\psi_X}$ a global factor $(g^{\prime}M_Z)/(g_1M_{Z^{\prime}})$ that always associates with the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings, where $g_1=e/(\sin{\theta_W}\cos{\theta_W})$ and $M_{Z^{\prime}}$ denotes the mass of the new $Z^{\prime}$ gauge boson.
It is known that the most promising channels for $Z^{\prime}$ searches at the hadron colliders are dilepton and dijet final states [@Godfrey:2013eta]. If the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings to leptons are negligible, the overwhelming constraints from LHC resonant searches in dilation final states would be not so informative. Furthermore, the current lower limits on $M_{Z^{\prime}}$ set by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations are obtained only within several benchmark scenarios, assuming the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings to fermions to be of order one [@ATLAS-Exotics; @CMS-Exotics; @Aad:2014cka; @Chatrchyan:2012oaa]. In a most general $Z^{\prime}$ model, on the other hand, a lighter $Z^{\prime}$ boson, being of the order of EW scale, could still be allowed. In this paper, since only the effective couplings $B^{\psi_X}$ are involved and the $Z^{\prime}$ mass is not treated as an independent parameter, we shall assume that these high-energy constraints on $Z^{\prime}$ properties are satisfied.
Starting with the Lagrangian Eq. (\[LZp\]) and after integrating out the heavy $Z^\prime$ gauge boson, one can easily obtain the resulting effective $|\Delta B|=1$ and $|\Delta B|=2$ four-fermion interactions induced by tree-level $Z^\prime$ exchange [@Langacker2; @chiang1], which will be presented in the following sections.
$B_s-\bar B_s$ mixing
=====================
In this section, we shall firstly recapitulate the theoretical framework and the current experimental status of $B_s-\bar B_s$ mixing, and then present our numerical results and discussions.
Theoretical framework for $B_s-\bar B_s$ mixing
-----------------------------------------------
The $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing is described by the following Schrödinger equation $$i\frac{d}{dt}\left(\begin{array}{c}|B_s(t)\rangle\\|\bar{B}_s(t)\rangle\end{array}\right) =\left(M^s-\frac{i}{2}\Gamma^s\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}|B_s(t)\rangle\\|\bar{B}_s(t)\rangle\, \end{array} \right)\,,$$ where $M^s$ and $\Gamma^s$ denote the mass and the decay matrix, respectively. The mass and the width difference between the two mass eigenstates $|B_{H}\rangle$ and $|B_{L}\rangle$ are obtained after diagonalizing $M^s$ and $\Gamma^s$ and are defined, respectively, as [@Lenz1] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:deltams-deltagammas-def}
\Delta M_s &\equiv M_{H}-M_{L}=2 |M_{12}^s|\,, \nonumber \\[0.2cm]
\Delta \Gamma_s &\equiv \Gamma_{L}-\Gamma_{H}=2 |\Gamma_{12}^s|\cos\phi_s\,,\end{aligned}$$ where $\phi_s \equiv \arg(-M_{12}^s/\Gamma_{12}^s)$ is the CP-violating phase, with $M_{12}^s$ and $\Gamma^s_{12}$ the off-diagonal elements of the mass and the decay matrix, respectively.
There are another two interesting observables for $B_s-\bar B_s$ mixing, the flavour-specific CP asymmetry $a_{sl}^s$ and the CP-violating phase $\phi_s^{c\bar{c}s}$, which are defined, respectively, as [@Lenz1] $$a_{sl}^{s}={\rm Im}\frac{\Gamma^s_{12}}{M_{12}^s}=\frac{\Delta M_s}{\Delta \Gamma_s}\tan\phi_s\,, \qquad
\phi_s^{c\bar{c}s}={\rm arg}(M_{12}^s)\,.$$ The CP-violating phase $\phi_s^{c\bar{c}s}$ appears in tree-dominated $b\to c\bar{c}s$ $B_s$ decays like $B_s\to J/\psi\phi$ and $B_s\to J/\psi \pi^+\pi^-$, taking possible mixing effect into account. It should be noted that $\phi_s^{c\bar{c}s}\neq\phi_s$ unless the terms proportional to $V_{cb}V_{cs}^{\ast}V_{ub}V_{us}^{\ast}$ and $(V_{ub}V_{us}^{\ast})^2$ in $\Gamma^s_{12}$ are neglected [@Lenz1].
Thus, in order to predict the mixing observables $\Delta M_s$, $\Delta \Gamma_s$, $\phi_s^{c\bar{c}s}$, as well as $a_{sl}^{s}$, we need to know the off-diagonal elements $M_{12}^s$ and $\Gamma_{12}^s$ both within the SM and in the $Z^\prime$ model. The off-diagonal element $M_{12}^s$ can be obtained from $$2m_{B_s}M_{12}^s=\langle B_s|{\cal H}_{\rm eff}^{\rm full}|\bar{B}_s\rangle\,,$$ where the full effective Hamiltonian responsible for $|\triangle B|=2$ transition, including both the SM and $Z^{\prime}$ contributions, can be written as $$\label{Heff}
{\cal H}_{\rm eff}^{\rm full} = \frac{G_F^2}{16\pi^2}\, m_W^2\, (V_{tb}V^{\ast}_{ts})^2\, \Big[C_V^{LL}O_V^{LL} +C_V^{RR}O_V^{RR} +C_V^{LR}O_V^{LR}+C_S^{LR}O_S^{LR}\Big]+{\rm h.c.}\,,$$ with the four-quark operators defined as \[oper\] &&O\_V\^[LL]{}=(|[s]{}b)\_[V-A]{}(|[s]{}b)\_[V-A]{},O\_V\^[RR]{}=(|[s]{}b)\_[V+A]{}(|[s]{}b)\_[V+A]{},\
&&O\_V\^[LR]{}=(|[s]{}b)\_[V-A]{}(|[s]{}b)\_[V+A]{},O\_S\^[LR]{}=(|[s]{}b)\_[S-P]{}(|[s]{}b)\_[S+P]{}. While only $O_V^{LL}$ contributes in the SM [@Buchalla:1996vs], the first three operators $O_V^{LL}$, $O_V^{RR}$ and $O_V^{LR}$ are all present in the $Z^{\prime}$ model, due to the simultaneous presence of left- and right-handed $Z^{\prime}$ couplings. Moreover, the last operator $O_S^{LR}$ arises through renormalization group evolution (RGE) [@BurasDF2]. The hadronic matrix elements of these operators can be parameterized as [@BagPara] O\_V\^[LL]{}&=&O\_V\^[RR]{}=m\_[B\_s]{}\^2f\_[B\_s]{}\^2B\_1(\_b),\
O\_V\^[LR]{}&=&-()\^2 m\_[B\_s]{}\^2f\_[B\_s]{}\^2B\_5(\_b),\
O\_S\^[LR]{}&=&2()\^2m\_[B\_s]{}\^2f\_[B\_s]{}\^2B\_4(\_b).
After neglecting the effects of RGE between the scales $\mu_{Z^{\prime}}$ and $\mu_{W}$ and the $Z-Z^{\prime}$ mixing characterized by a small mixing angle $\theta\sim\mathcal {O}(10^{-3})$ [@Erler:2009jh; @Andreev:2014fwa; @Abreu], the corresponding Wilson coefficients at the scale $\mu_{W}$ can be written as \[11\] C\_V\^[LL]{}(\_[W]{})&=&C\^[SM]{}(\_[W]{})+,\
C\_V\^[RR]{}(\_[W]{})&=&,\
C\_V\^[LR]{}(\_[W]{})&=&,\
C\_S\^[LR]{}(\_[W]{})&=&0, with the SM contribution given by [@Buchalla:1996vs] C\^[SM]{}(\_[W]{})=S\_0(x\_t)+. The $Z^{\prime}$ contributions are encoded by the off-diagonal left- and right-handed $b-s-Z^{\prime}$ couplings $B_{sb}^{L,R}=|B_{sb}^{L,R}|e^{i\phi_s^{L,R}}$, where $\phi_s^{L,R}$ denote the corresponding weak phases. Further RGE of these Wilson coefficients from the scale $\mu_W$ down to $\mu_b$ is the same as in the SM [@BurasDF2].
Within the SM, the off-diagonal element $\Gamma^s_{12}$ can be written as [@Lenz2]
\^s\_[12]{}&=-\
&=-,
with the CKM factors $\lambda_i=V_{ib}V_{is}^{\ast}$ for $i=u,c,t$. The explicit expressions for $\Gamma_{12}^{cc,uu,uc}$ could be found in Refs. [@Lenz2; @BenekeGam]. It should be noted that, while the $Z^{\prime}$ correction could significantly affect $M_{12}^{s}$, its effect on $\Gamma_{12}^s$ is numerically negligible [@xqLi], since $\Gamma_{12}^s$ is dominated by the CKM-favoured $b\to c\bar{c}s$ tree-level part $\Gamma^{cc}_{12}$ within the SM [@Lenz2; @BenekeGam].
Experimental status of $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing
---------------------------------------------
The two complex parameters $M_{12}^s$ and $\Gamma_{12}^s$ can be fully determined by the following four observables: the mass difference $\Delta M_s$, the width difference $\Delta\Gamma_s$, the CP-violating phase $\phi_s^{c\bar{c}s}$, as well as the flavour-specific CP asymmetry $a_{sl}^s$. Thanks to the dedicated experimental efforts, all of these four observables have been measured with much improved precision [@HFAG].
The mass difference $\Delta M_s$ has been precisely measured by the CDF [@CDFDM] and LHCb [@LHCbDM] collaborations, with the averaged value given by [@HFAG] M\_s=17.690.08[ps\^[-1]{}]{}. The value of the width difference $\Delta \Gamma_s$, averaged over the measurements by CDF [@CDFDG], D0 [@D0DG], ATLAS [@ATLASDG] and LHCb [@LHCbDG] collaborations, reads [@HFAG] \_s=0.0810.011[ps\^[-1]{}]{}. These two results are in good agreement with the most recent SM predictions, $\Delta M_s=17.3\pm2.6\,{\rm ps^{-1}}$ and $\Delta \Gamma_s=0.087\pm0.021\,{\rm ps^{-1}}$ [@Lenz3].
The CP-violating phase $\phi_s^{c\bar{c}s}$ has been measured through the analyses of $B_s\to J/\psi\phi$ and $B_s\to J/\psi \pi^+\pi^-$ decays. Around 2008, the CDF [@CDFphiold] and D0 [@D0phiold] results indicated a large deviation from the SM prediction $\phi_s^{c\bar{c}s}=-2\beta_s\simeq-0.036$. A combined model-independent analysis preformed by the UTfit collaboration found that the discrepancy was even more than $3\sigma$ [@UTfit], which attracted much attention at that time. In Ref. [@changsllzp], for example, we have used these old data to constrain the parameter space of the flavour-changing $Z^{\prime}$ couplings. However, the most recent updated data, $[-0.60,0.12]$ (CDF, $68\%$ CL) [@CDFDG] and $-0.55^{+0.38}_{-0.36}$ (D0) [@D0DG], show a better agreement with the SM expectation. Furthermore, the ATLAS and LHCb collaborations have presented their updated measurements, $0.22\pm0.41\pm0.10$ (ATLAS) [@ATLASDG], $0.07\pm0.09\pm0.01$ and $0.01\pm0.07\pm0.01$ [@LHCbDG] (LHCb), which are also consistent with the SM expectation. Averaging over the up-to-date measurements, the Heavy Flavour Averaging Group (HFAG) gives [@HFAG] \_s\^[c|[c]{}s]{}=0.04\^[+0.10]{}\_[-0.13]{}, which now agrees with the SM prediction within $1\sigma$, and is expected to put more stringent constraints on various NP parameter space.
The flavour-specific CP asymmetry $a_{sl}^{s}$ is another important quantity to explore the CP violation in $B_s$ system, and has also been measured by several experiments. With an integrated luminosity of $9.1~{\rm fb}^{-1}$, the D0 collaboration measured the like-sign dimuon charge asymmetry, $A_{sl}^{b}=(-0.787\pm0.172 (stat)\pm0.093 (syst))\%$ [@D0dimu1], which can be expressed as a linear combination of the $B_d$ and $B_s$ parts, $A_{sl}^{b}=C_d\,a_{sl}^{d}+C_s\,a_{sl}^{s}$. Using the B-factory result for $a_{sl}^{d}$ and evaluating the muon impact parameter, the D0 collaboration extracted the result [@D0dimu1] \[D0in\] a\_[sl]{}\^[s]{}([D0,dimuon]{})=(1.811.06)%, which deviates from the SM prediction $a_{sl}^{s}({\rm SM})=(1.9\pm0.3)\times10^{-5}$ by about $1.7\sigma$. In addition, by measuring the charge asymmetry of the tagged $B_s^0\to D_s\mu X$ decays, the D0 collaboration has also performed a direct determination of $a_{sl}^{s}$ [@D0dimu2] \[D0dir\] a\_[sl]{}\^[s]{}([D0, direct]{})=(-1.120.74 ([stat]{})0.17([syst]{}))%. On the other hand, a recent similar measurement of $a_{sl}^{s}$ by the LHCb collaboration reads [@LHCbdimu] \[LHCbdir\] a\_[sl]{}\^[s]{}([LHCb, direct]{})=(-0.060.50([stat]{})0.36 ([syst]{}))%. Different from the earlier D0 result, the LHCb measurement does not confirm the significant deviation from the SM prediction, although their results are consistent with each other due to the large uncertainties involved. Thus, much refined measurements of $a_{sl}^{s}$ are needed to clarify such a discrepancy in $B_s$ system. Averaging over the direct measurements given by Eqs. (\[D0dir\]) and (\[LHCbdir\]), one obtains a\_[sl]{}\^[s]{}([direct]{})=(-0.480.48)%, which will be used in the following numerical analysis.
Numerical results and discussions
---------------------------------
With the input parameters collected in the Appendix, we give our SM predictions in the third column of Table \[tabpredmix\]. To obtain the theoretical uncertainties, we scan randomly the points in the allowed ranges of the inputs. Our results agree with the ones given in Ref. [@Lenz2], with a bit of differences induced by different values of input parameters. It is also found that there are no significant deviations from the experimental data listed in the second column of Table \[tabpredmix\]. Thus, these observables are expected to put strong constraints on the flavour-changing $Z^{\prime}$ couplings.
Including the $Z^{\prime}$ contributions and with the default values of input parameters, we get the numerical results for the amplitudes: \[Amp1\] [A]{}\_V\^[LL]{}(SM+Z\^)10\^[11]{} &=& (6.03-0.27i)+2.47e\^[i2\_s\^[L]{}]{}|B\_[sb]{}\^[L]{}10\^[3]{}|\^2,\
\[Amp2\] [A]{}\_V\^[RR]{}(Z\^)10\^[11]{} &=& 2.47e\^[i2\_s\^[R]{}]{}|B\_[sb]{}\^[R]{}10\^[3]{}|\^2,\
\[Amp3\] [A]{}\_V\^[LR]{}(Z\^)10\^[11]{} &=& -9.60e\^[i(\_s\^[L]{}+\_s\^[R]{})]{}|B\_[sb]{}\^[L]{}10\^[3]{}| |B\_[sb]{}\^[R]{}10\^[3]{}|,\
\[Amp4\] [A]{}\_S\^[LR]{}(Z\^)10\^[11]{} &=& -7.75e\^[i(\_s\^[L]{}+\_s\^[R]{})]{}|B\_[sb]{}\^[L]{}10\^[3]{}| |B\_[sb]{}\^[R]{}10\^[3]{}|, which correspond, respectively, to the four operators listed in Eq. (\[oper\]). One can find that the $Z^{\prime}$ contributions are comparable to the SM one when $|B_{sb}^{L}|\sim10^{-3}$ and/or $|B_{sb}^{R}|\sim10^{-3}$. Moreover, even though the operator $O_S^{LR}$ cannot be directly generated by the tree-level $Z^{\prime}$ exchange, its contribution is significant due to the large RGE effect. It is also found that ${\cal A}_V^{LL}(Z^{\prime})$ or ${\cal A}_V^{RR}(Z^{\prime})$ will dominate the $Z^{\prime}$ contributions when $B_{sb}^{L}\gg B_{sb}^{R}$ or $B_{sb}^{L}\ll B_{sb}^{R}$. However, if $B_{sb}^{L}\approx B_{sb}^{R}$, the $Z^{\prime}$ contributions will be dominated by ${\cal A}_V^{LR}(Z^{\prime})$ and ${\cal A}_S^{LR}(Z^{\prime})$. Thus, for simplicity, we shall consider the following two limiting scenarios:
1. Scenario LL with $B_{sb}^{R}=0$ assumed (the case with $B_{sb}^{L}=0$ and $B_{sb}^{R}$ arbitrary is similar);
2. Scenario LR with $B_{sb}^{L}=B_{sb}^{R}$ assumed.
Due to the different signs between Eqs. (\[Amp1\])–(\[Amp2\]) and Eqs. (\[Amp3\])–(\[Amp4\]), the dependence of the amplitudes on the weak phases $\phi_s^{L,R}$ is different from each other in the two scenarios.
0.8pt 0.12in
SM
-------------------- ------------------------ --------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
$\Delta M_s$ $17.69\pm0.08$ $17.07^{+4.64}_{-3.62}$ $15.16^{+5.08+1.11}_{-3.11-0.01}$ $16.27^{+4.50}_{-3.39}$
$\Delta \Gamma_s$ $0.081\pm 0.011$ $0.089^{+0.021}_{-0.027}$ $0.088^{+0.025+0.000}_{-0.024-0.000}$ $0.087^{+0.020}_{-0.023}$
$\phi^{c\bar{c}s}$ $0.04^{+0.10}_{-0.13}$ $-0.044^{+0.009}_{-0.009}$ $-0.045^{+0.004+0.101}_{-0.004-0.090}$ $-0.135^{+0.012}_{-0.010}$
$a_{sl}^s(\%)$ $-0.48\pm0.48$ $(2.85^{+0.87}_{-0.68})\times10^{-3}$ $(-2.12^{+1.31+55.02}_{-0.61-52.30})\times10^{-3}$ $-0.050^{+0.013}_{-0.010}$
: \[tabpredmix\] Numerical results for observables in $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing both within the SM and in the $Z^{\prime}$ model.
Under the constraints from $\Delta M_s$, $\Delta \Gamma_s$, $\phi_s^{c\bar{c}s}$, $a_{sl}^{s}$, as well as their combination within $2\sigma$ error bars, the allowed parameter spaces for the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings are shown in Fig. \[ParaSpac\]. One can see that the precise $\Delta M_s$ and $\phi_s^{c\bar{c}s}$ constrain the $Z^{\prime}$ coupling $B_{sb}^{L}$ strongly, whereas the constraints from $\Delta \Gamma_s$ and $a_{sl}^{s}$ are weak due to the large experimental uncertainties. In both scenarios, the modulus $|B_{sb}^{L}|$ is stringently bounded, and we get numerically
|B\_[sb]{}\^[L]{}|&0.9810\^[-3]{},,\
|B\_[sb]{}\^[L,R]{}|&0.4310\^[-3]{},.
However, no restriction for the weak phases $\phi_s^{L,R}$ is obtained from the updated experimental data, which is quite different from that obtained in Ref. [@changsllzp], where the new weak phase $\phi_s^{L}$ is strongly bounded at $\sim-60^{\circ}$ and $\sim-80^{\circ}$ by $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing.
It is noted that the weak phases $\phi_s^{L,R}$ are also restricted by the direct CP violation of hadronic B-meson decays. In the next section as well as in Ref. [@changpikzp], for Scenario LL, we find that a weak phase $\phi_s^{L}\sim-90^{\circ}$ is needed to account for the data of $B\to\pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$ decays, especially the so-called “$\pi K$ CP puzzle”. The allowed $\phi_s^{L}$ range $-91^{\circ}\pm33^{\circ}$ (see section 4.2 for detail) is shown as horizontal lines in Fig. \[ParaSpac\](a). With $\phi_s^{L}$ fixed at this range, we get \[Zpmix\] |B\_[sb]{}\^[L]{}|0.8310\^[-3]{},\_s\^[L]{}=-91\^33\^,. Taking $|B_{sb}^{L}|=0.5\times10^{-3}$ as a benchmark value, which will also be used as the default value in the following sections, we present our final predictions in the fourth column of Table \[tabpredmix\], where the first uncertainty is induced by the SM input parameters, and the second one by the $Z^{\prime}$ parameters $\phi_s^{L}$ given in Eq. (\[Zpmix\]). One can find that, with these inputs, all the results agree with the experimental data within uncertainties.
![\[aslphis\] The dependence of $a_{sl}^{s}$ on the weak phase $\phi_s^{L}$, with different values of $|B_{sb}^{L}|$.](aslphis.pdf){width="8.5cm"}
From Table \[tabpredmix\], it is also found that $a_{sl}^{s}$ is very sensitive to the weak phase $\phi_s^{L}$, and could be either enhanced or reduced by orders of magnitude. The dependence of $a_{sl}^{s}$ on the phase $\phi_s^{L}$, with different values of $|B_{sb}^{L}|$, is shown in Fig. \[aslphis\]. It is easily seen that $a_{sl}^{s}$ reaches its minimum value at $\phi_s^{L}=-62^{\circ}$, which is favored for bridging the discrepancy between theoretical prediction and experimental measurement. As a simplified scenario, taking $\phi_s^{L}=-62^{\circ}$ and $|B_{sb}^{L}|=0.5\times10^{-3}$, we present the corresponding predictions in the last column of Table \[tabpredmix\]. One can see that, although being enhanced by 20 times compared to the SM prediction, the predicted $a_{sl}^{s}$ is still one order of magnitude smaller than the central experimental value. Thus, if future refined measurements support $|a_{sl}^{s}|\gg{\cal O}(10^{-4})$, such a family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ model will suffer a severe challenge. Furthermore, with the indirect result Eq. (\[D0in\]) taken into account in the average of $a_{sl}^s$, the constraint from $a_{sl}^{s}$ is shown as black dashed circles in Fig. \[ParaSpac\]. One can see that there is no overlap with the combined constraints. So, more accurate experimental measurements are eagerly needed to clarify such a $a_{sl}^{s}$ puzzle observed in $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing.
Hadronic $b\to s q\bar{q}~(q=u,d,s)$ transitions
================================================
With the $b-s-Z^{\prime}$ couplings constrained by $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing, in this section we shall proceed to discuss the impact of $Z^{\prime}$ boson on hadronic $b\to s q\bar{q}~(q=u,d,s)$ transitions.
Theoretical framework for $b\to s q\bar{q}~(q=u,d,s)$ transitions
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Within the SM, the effective weak Hamiltonian responsible for the quark-level $b\to s q\bar{q}$ transitions is given by [@Buchalla:1996vs] $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:eff}
{\cal H}_{\rm eff} &=& \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\,\biggl[V_{ub}
V_{us}^* \left(C_1 O_1^u + C_2 O_2^u \right) + V_{cb} V_{cs}^* \left(C_1
O_1^c + C_2 O_2^c \right) - V_{tb} V_{ts}^*\, \big(\sum_{i = 3}^{10}
C_i O_i \big. \biggl. \nonumber\\[0.2cm]
&& \biggl. \big. + C_{7\gamma} O_{7\gamma} + C_{8g} O_{8g}\big)\biggl] +
{\rm h.c.},\end{aligned}$$ where $V_{qb} V_{qs}^*$ ($q=u,c,t$) are products of the CKM matrix elements, and $C_{i}$ the Wilson coefficients of the corresponding dimension-six operators.
Starting from the Lagrangian Eq. (\[LZp\]) and with the assumption that only the left-handed flavour-changing $Z^{\prime}$ coupling $B_{sb}^L$ is nonzero, the tree-level $Z^{\prime}$-induced effective Hamiltonian for $b\to s q\bar{q}~(q=u,d)$ transitions can be written as $$\label{heffz1}
{\cal H}_{\rm eff}^{Z^{\prime}} = \frac{2G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\,B_{sb}^L\,(\bar{s}b)_{V-A}\,\sum_{q}\Big[B_{qq}^L (\bar{q}q)_{V-A}+B_{qq}^R(\bar{q}q)_{V+A}\Big]+{\rm h.c.}\,,$$ It is noted that, within our assumption, the forms of the above operators already exist within the SM. Thus, in accordance with the SM expression Eq. (\[eq:eff\]), we can rewrite Eq. (\[heffz1\]) as $$\label{heffz2}
{\cal H}_{\rm eff}^{Z^{\prime}} = -\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\,V_{tb}V_{ts}^{\ast}\, \sum_{q}\Big(\Delta C_3 O_3^q +\Delta C_5 O_5^q+\Delta C_7 O_7^q+\Delta C_9
O_9^q\Big)+{\rm h.c.}\,,$$ where $O_i^q~(i=3,5,7,9)$ are the effective four-quark operators, and $\Delta C_i$ the modifications to the corresponding Wilson coefficients due to the tree-level $Z^{\prime}$ exchange. In terms of the model parameters, these Wilson coefficients at the $M_W$ scale are given by $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta C_{3,5}&=&-\frac{2}{3V_{ts}^{\ast}V_{tb}}\,B_{sb}^L\,P_{ud}^{L,R}\,, \label{c35} \\
\Delta C_{9,7}&=&-\frac{4}{3V_{ts}^{\ast}V_{tb}}\,B_{sb}^L\,D_{ud}^{L,R}\,, \label{c79}\end{aligned}$$ where the off-diagonal coupling $B_{sb}^L=|B_{sb}^L|e^{\phi_s^L}$ is generally complex, and the parameters $P_{ud}^{L,R}$ and $D_{ud}^{L,R}$ are linear combinations of the real flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings and read $$\begin{aligned}
\label{PLR}
P_{ud}^{L,R}&=&B_{uu}^{L,R}+2B_{dd}^{L,R}\,,\\
\label{DLR}
D_{ud}^{L,R}&=&B_{uu}^{L,R}-B_{dd}^{L,R}\,.\end{aligned}$$ For the $b\to s s\bar{s}$ transition, the $Z^{\prime}$-induced effective Hamiltonian is still given by Eq. (\[heffz2\]), but with the corresponding Wilson coefficients modified to $$\begin{aligned}
\Delta C_{3,5}&=&-\frac{4}{3V_{ts}^{\ast}V_{tb}}\,B_{sb}^L\,B_{ss}^{L,R}\,, \label{c35s} \\
\Delta C_{9,7}&=&\frac{4}{3V_{ts}^{\ast}V_{tb}}\,B_{sb}^L\,B_{ss}^{L,R}\,. \label{c79s}\end{aligned}$$ To evaluate the hadronic matrix elements of $O_i$, we shall adopt the QCD factorization (QCDF) approach, which has been extensively studied within the SM in Refs. [@Beneke1; @Beneke2; @Beneke3; @Beneke4; @Cheng1; @Cheng2]. It should, however, be noted that the framework suffers from the endpoint divergences during the evaluation of the hard spectator-scattering and annihilation corrections. The endpoint divergent integrals are usually treated as signs of infrared sensitive contributions and can be parameterized with at least two phenomenological parameters, for example, $X_A=\int^{1}_{0}dy/y=\mathrm{ln}(m_b/\Lambda_h)\,(1+\rho_A e^{i\phi_{A}})$ [@Beneke3]. The different scenarios corresponding to different choices of $\rho_{A,H}$ and $\phi_{A,H}$ have been thoroughly discussed in Refs. [@Beneke3; @Beneke4; @Cheng1; @Cheng2]. As an alternative scheme, one could use an infrared-finite gluon propagator, $1/(k^2+i\epsilon)\to1/(k^2-M_g(k^2)+i\epsilon)$ [@Cornwall], to regulate the divergent integrals, which have been thoroughly studied in Refs. [@ChangpikT; @changann]. In the latter scheme, it is found that the hard spectator-scattering contributions are real and the annihilation corrections are complex with a large imaginary part [@ChangpikT]. Moreover, the strength of the annihilation corrections is sensitive to the effective gluon mass scale $m_g$, which is the only input parameter with a typical value $0.5\pm0.2~{\rm GeV}$ obtained by relating the gluon mass to the gluon condensate [@Cornwall]. Interestingly, a similar result $m_g=0.5\pm0.05~{\rm GeV}$ is also obtained with the constraints from $B_{u,d}\to\pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$ decays taken into account [@ChangpikT]. In this paper, we shall use the second scheme and, for simplicity, take $m_g=0.5\pm0.05~{\rm GeV}$ to regulate the encountered endpoint divergences.
$B{\to}\pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$ decays
-------------------------------------------------
One of the well-known anomalies observed in hadronic $b\to s$ transitions is the so-called “$\pi K$ CP puzzle" [@pikpuz], [*i.e.,*]{} the significant discrepancy between experimental data and theoretical prediction for the difference between the direct CP asymmetries, $\Delta A\equiv A_{CP}(B^{-}\to K^{-}\pi^{0}) - A_{CP}(\bar{B}^{0}\to K^{-}\pi^{+})$. Using the up-to-date averaged results, $A_{CP}(B^{-}\to K^{-}\pi^{0})=(4.0\pm2.1)\%$ and $A_{CP}(\bar{B}^{0}\to K^{-}\pi^{+})=(-8.6\pm0.7)\%$ [@HFAG], one gets \[Dpik\] A=(12.62.2)%, which differs from zero by about $5.7\sigma$. Within the SM, however, $A_{CP}(B^{-}\to K^{-}\pi^{0})$ and $A_{CP}(\bar{B}^{0}\to K^{-}\pi^{+})$ are expected to be approximately equal to each other [@pikpuz].
It is noted that a family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ model, featured by tree-level FCNCs and new CP-violating phases, could provide a possible solution to the observed “$\pi K$ CP puzzle" [@Barger]. However, since the $B\to\pi K^{\ast}$, $\rho K$ and $B_s\to K K^{(\ast)}$ decays also involve the same quark-level $b\to s q\bar{q}$ ($q=u,d$) transitions, it is necessary to take into account all these decay modes at the same time. In Ref. [@changpikzp], we have studied in detail the $Z^{\prime}$ effect on $B\to\pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$ decays and obtained the allowed parameter spaces for the involved $Z^{\prime}$ couplings. In this paper, due to a lot of updated experimental measurements, we shall update the fitting results for the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings under the constraints of these decay modes.
Adopting the same conventions as in Ref. [@Beneke3], we can write the decay amplitudes for the four $B\to\pi K$ decays, respectively, as $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal A}_{B^-\to\pi^- \bar{K}}
&=& \sum_{p=u,c}V_{pb}V_{ps}^{\ast} A_{\pi \bar{K}} \Big[
\delta_{pu}\,\beta_2 + \alpha_4^p - {\frac{1}{2}}\alpha_{4,{\rm
EW}}^p +\beta_3^p+\beta_{3,{\rm
EW}}^p\Big]\,, \\[0.2cm]
\label{amp1}
\sqrt2\, {\cal A}_{B^-\to\pi^0 K^-}
&=& \sum_{p=u,c}V_{pb}V_{ps}^{\ast} \biggl\{ A_{\pi^0 K^-} \Big[
\delta_{pu}\,(\alpha_1+\beta_2) + \alpha_4^p + \alpha_{4,{\rm
EW}}^p +\beta_3^p+\beta_{3,{\rm EW}}^p\Big]\nonumber\\
&&+ A_{ K^- \pi^0}\Big[\delta_{pu}\,\alpha_2+\frac{3}{2}
\alpha_{3,{\rm EW}}^p\Big]\biggl\}\,,
\label{amp2}\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal A}_{\bar{B}^0\to\pi^+ K^-}
&=& \sum_{p=u,c}V_{pb}V_{ps}^{\ast} A_{\pi^+ K^-} \Big[
\delta_{pu}\,\alpha_1 + \alpha_4^p + \alpha_{4,{\rm
EW}}^p +\beta_3^p-{\frac{1}{2}}\beta_{3,{\rm EW}}^p\Big]\,,\\[0.2cm]
\label{amp3}
\sqrt2\, {\cal A}_{\bar{B}^0\to\pi^0 \bar{K}^0}
&=& \sum_{p=u,c}V_{pb}V_{ps}^{\ast} \biggl\{ A_{\pi^0 \bar{K}^0}
\Big[-\alpha_4^p + {\frac{1}{2}}\alpha_{4,{\rm
EW}}^p -\beta_3^p+{\frac{1}{2}}\beta_{3,{\rm EW}}^p\Big]\nonumber\\
&&+ A_{ \bar{K}^0
\pi^0}\Big[\delta_{pu}\,\alpha_2+\frac{3}{2}\alpha_{3,{\rm
EW}}^p\Big]\biggl\}\,,
\label{amp4}\end{aligned}$$ where the explicit expressions for the coefficients $\alpha_i^p\equiv\alpha_i^p(M_1M_2)$ and $\beta_i^p\equiv\beta_i^p(M_1M_2)$ can be found in Ref. [@Beneke3]. The decay amplitudes for $B\to\pi K^{\ast}$ and $B\to\rho K$ decays could be obtained from the above ones by replacing $(\pi K)\to (\pi K^{\ast})$ and $(\pi K)\to (\rho K)$, respectively.
With the above mentioned theoretical formulae and the input parameters collected in the Appendix, our SM predictions for the branching fractions, direct and mixing-induced CP asymmetries of $B\to\pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$ decays are summarized in the third column of Tables \[pikbr\], \[pikdircp\] and \[pikmixcp\], respectively. It is found that most of our theoretical predictions are generally consistent with the experimental data. However, as is expected within the SM, $A_{CP}(B^-\to K^{-}\pi^{0})\sim-11.7\%$ is still very close to $A_{CP}(\bar{B}^0\to K^{-}\pi^{+})\sim-14.5\%$, which has already been observed in Ref. [@changpikzp].
0.8pt 0.12in
-------------------------------------- ------------------------- ----------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
data Scenario I Scenario II
$B^-\to\pi^-{\bar K}^0$ $23.79\pm0.75$ $19.81^{+7.10+2.41}_{-5.62-1.72}$ $19.85^{+7.75+2.41+0.95}_{-5.59-1.72-0.96}$ $19.82^{+7.34+2.41+0.13}_{-5.13-1.72-0.13}$
$B^-\to\pi^0K^-$ $12.94^{+0.52}_{-0.51}$ $10.75^{+3.76+1.23}_{-2.91-0.88}$ $10.36^{+3.63+1.23+1.66}_{-2.91-0.88-1.27}$ $10.40^{+3.74+1.23+1.37}_{-2.82-0.88-1.31}$
${\bar B}^0\to\pi^{+}K^-$ $19.57^{+0.53}_{-0.52}$ $16.75^{+6.17+2.17}_{-4.79-1.55}$ $16.37^{+6.05+2.18+1.32}_{-4.78-1.56-1.41}$ $16.63^{+5.98+2.18+0.09}_{-4.58-1.56-0.07}$
${\bar B}^0\to\pi^0{\bar K}^0$ $9.93\pm0.49$ $7.66^{+3.01+1.07}_{-2.32-0.76}$ $7.70^{+3.25+1.07+1.93}_{-2.12-0.76-1.00}$ $7.76^{+2.49+1.07+1.22}_{-2.23-0.76-1.03}$
$B^-\to\pi^-{\bar K}^{\ast0}$ $9.9^{+0.8}_{-0.9}$ $8.5^{+2.5+2.0}_{-2.2-1.5}$ $8.5^{+2.9+2.0+0.6}_{-2.1-1.5-0.5}$ $8.5^{+2.5+2.0+0.4}_{-2.0-1.5-0.4}$
$B^-\to\pi^0K^{\ast-}$ $8.2\pm1.8$ $5.2^{+2.0+1.0}_{-1.5-0.7}$ $4.6^{+1.9+1.0+0.6}_{-1.4-0.7-0.6}$ $4.6^{+1.6+1.0+0.7}_{-1.3-0.8-0.6}$
${\bar B}^0\to\pi^{+}K^{\ast-}$ $8.5\pm0.7$ $7.8^{+3.1+1.8}_{-2.2-1.3}$ $8.0^{+3.2+1.8+0.5}_{-2.4-1.3-0.5}$ $7.9^{+2.8+1.8+0.3}_{-2.2-1.3-0.3}$
${\bar B}^0\to\pi^0{\bar K}^{\ast0}$ $2.5\pm0.6$ $3.2^{+1.2+0.9}_{-1.0-0.6}$ $3.4^{+1.2+0.9+0.9}_{-0.9-0.6-0.7}$ $3.4^{+1.0+0.9+0.8}_{-0.8-0.6-0.6}$
$B^-\to\rho^-{\bar K}^0$ $8.0^{+1.5}_{-1.4}$ $8.3^{+3.1+2.2}_{-2.3-1.6}$ $8.8^{+3.1+2.3+1.2}_{-2.3-1.6-1.4}$ $8.4^{+2.5+2.2+0.9}_{-2.1-1.6-0.8}$
$B^-\to\rho^0K^-$ $3.81^{+0.48}_{-0.46}$ $4.10^{+1.61+1.05}_{-1.09-0.75}$ $3.88^{+1.86+1.10+0.94}_{-1.24-0.79-0.89}$ $3.66^{+1.64+1.06+0.52}_{-1.15-0.75-0.40}$
${\bar B}^0\to\rho^{+}K^-$ $7.2\pm0.9$ $10.1^{+3.7+2.3}_{-2.7-1.6}$ $11.4^{+4.9+2.4+1.3}_{-3.0-1.7-2.2}$ $10.4^{+3.7+2.3+0.9}_{-2.9-1.7-0.8}$
${\bar B}^0\to\rho^0{\bar K}^0$ $4.7\pm0.7$ $5.4^{+1.7+1.2}_{-1.4-0.9}$ $6.4^{+2.0+1.2+1.4}_{-1.6-0.9-2.0}$ $5.8^{+1.7+1.2+1.8}_{-1.4-0.9-1.6}$
-------------------------------------- ------------------------- ----------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
: The CP-averaged branching ratios (in units of $10^{-6}$) of $B\to\pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$ decays both within the SM and in the $Z^{\prime}$ model with the two different scenarios. The first and the second theoretical uncertainties shown in the last three columns are due to the variations of the SM parameters listed in Appendix and the effective gluon mass $m_g=0.5\pm0.05~{\rm GeV}$, respectively. The third theoretical uncertainties in the last two columns are due to the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings listed in Table \[ZpCoupValue1\].[]{data-label="pikbr"}
0.8pt 0.15in
-------------------------------------- -------------- ------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
[Exp.]{} [ SM ]{}
data Scenario I Scenario II
$B^-\to\pi^-{\bar K}^0$ $-1.5\pm1.9$ $0.3^{+0.2+0.0}_{-0.2-0.0}$ $1.5^{+1.6+0.8+1.6}_{-1.7-0.8-1.2}$ $2.8^{+0.9+0.5+0.4}_{-1.0-0.5-0.9}$
$B^-\to\pi^0K^-$ $4.0\pm2.1$ $-11.7^{+3.2+0.8}_{-3.5-0.8}$ $-0.5^{+4.2+1.0+3.3}_{-3.9-1.0-0.5}$ $-1.0^{+5.1+0.7+1.3}_{-3.7-0.8-1.4}$
${\bar B}^0\to\pi^{+}K^-$ $-8.2\pm0.6$ $-14.5^{+3.7+0.4}_{-3.6-0.3}$ $-10.9^{+4.1+1.0+4.1}_{-3.9-0.9-2.3}$ $-11.4^{+4.1+0.7+0.6}_{-3.7-0.6-0.8}$
${\bar B}^0\to\pi^0{\bar K}^0$ $-1\pm10$ $0^{+1+0}_{-1-0}$ $-7^{+4+1+6}_{-6-1-5}$ $-9^{+4+1+3}_{-5-0-3}$
$B^-\to\pi^-{\bar K}^{\ast0}$ $-3.8\pm4.2$ $0.3^{+0.2+0}_{-0.2-0}$ $-4.7^{+4.3+1.7+13.5}_{-3.7-1.6-11.0}$ $1.0^{+2.8+0+0.3}_{-2.6-1-0.4}$
$B^-\to\pi^0K^{\ast-}$ $-6\pm24$ $-48^{+9+2}_{-10-1}$ $-29^{+15+0+13}_{-12-0-12}$ $-22^{+15+0+6}_{-12-0-7}$
${\bar B}^0\to\pi^{+}K^{\ast-}$ $-23\pm6$ $-55^{+11+4}_{-10-4}$ $-58^{+10+3+10}_{-8-2-8}$ $-56^{+9+3+1}_{-8-2-1}$
${\bar B}^0\to\pi^0{\bar K}^{\ast0}$ $-15\pm13$ $4^{+2+0}_{-2-0}$ $-28^{+10+2+16}_{-11-2-16}$ $-36^{+8+3+10}_{-11-1-11}$
$B^-\to\rho^-{\bar K}^0$ $-12\pm17$ $1^{+0+0}_{-0-0}$ $0^{+3+1+11}_{-3-1-9}$ $-1^{+2+1+1}_{-2-1-0}$
$B^-\to\rho^0K^-$ $37\pm11$ $56^{+15+4}_{-14-4}$ $7^{+20+1+22}_{-23-1-1}$ $8^{+20+0+18}_{-22-0-2}$
${\bar B}^0\to\rho^{+}K^-$ $20\pm11$ $40^{+11+2}_{-10-3}$ $36^{+10+1+3}_{-10-1-6}$ $36^{+10+1+1}_{-10-2-1}$
${\bar B}^0\to\rho^0{\bar K}^0$ $-6\pm20$ $-2^{+2+1}_{-2-1}$ $29^{+7+0+6}_{-7-1-15}$ $26^{+7+1+7}_{-6-1-11}$
-------------------------------------- -------------- ------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
: The direct CP asymmetries (in units of $10^{-2}$) of $B\to\pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$ decays. The other captions are the same as in Table \[pikbr\].[]{data-label="pikdircp"}
0.8pt 0.26in
--------------------------- ------------------ --------------------- ---------------------------- -------------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
[Decay Mode]{} [Experiment]{} [SM]{}
[data]{} Scenario I Scenario II
${\bar B}^0\to\pi^0K^0$ $57\pm17$ $85^{+7+0}_{-10-0}$ $73^{+11+1+15}_{-14-1-15}$ $67^{+11+1+4}_{-17-1-3}$
${\bar B}^0\to\rho^0 K^0$ $54^{+18}_{-21}$ $76^{+9+0}_{-9-0}$ $94^{+3+1+3}_{-6-1-30}$ $91^{+2+0+1}_{-3-0-2}$
--------------------------- ------------------ --------------------- ---------------------------- -------------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
: The mixing-induced CP asymmetries (in units of $10^{-2}$) of $\bar{B}^0\to\pi^0K^{0}$ and $\bar{B}^0\to\rho^0K^{0}$ decays. The other captions are the same as in Table \[pikbr\].[]{data-label="pikmixcp"}
As has already been found in Refs. [@Barger; @changpikzp], a family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ model could provide a solution to the observed “$\pi K$ CP puzzle", provided that there is a significant correction to the EW-penguin coefficient $\alpha^p_{3,{\rm EW}}(PP)=a_{9}^{p}-a_7^p$ in the amplitude of $B^-\to K^-\pi^0$ decay (see Eq. (\[amp2\])). However, being of a similar amplitude as that of $B^-\to K^-\pi^0$, the $B^-\to K^-\rho^0$ decay will also receive a significant $Z^{\prime}$ correction and, therefore, provide a further constraint on the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings required to reconcile the observed “$\pi K$ CP puzzle" [@changpikzp]. Under different simplifications for the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings, four different cases have been systematically investigated in Ref. [@changpikzp]. In this paper, we shall pay our attention to the following two scenarios:
- Scenario I: without any simplification for the flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings;
- Scenario II: assuming that the right-handed flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings vanish.
As the decay modes considered in this and the following sections are all related to the combination of flavour-changing and flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings (see Eqs. (\[c35\])–(\[c79s\])), with the modulus of the flavour-changing $b-s-Z^{\prime}$ coupling constrained by $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing, from now on we shall focus on the constraint on the weak phase $\phi^{L}_s$ and the flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings imposed by these hadronic $b\to s$ transitions. Taking $|B_{sb}^L|=0.5\times 10^{-3}$ as the default value, our fitting for the other $Z^{\prime}$ parameters is performed with the experimental data varying randomly within their $2\sigma$ error bars, while the theoretical uncertainties are obtained by varying the input parameters within the ranges specified in the Appendix. In addition, the uncertainty of $m_g$ is not considered in the fitting for simplicity.
### Scenario I: without any simplification for the flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings {#scenarioi-without-any-simplification-for-the-flavour-conserving-zprime-couplings .unnumbered}
As a most general case, we make no simplifications for the flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings in this scenario. Under the constraints from ${\cal B}(B\to \pi K, \rho K)$ and $A_{CP}(B\to \pi K,\rho K)$, the allowed regions for the effective couplings $D_{ud}^{L,R}$ and $P_{ud}^{L,R}$, as well as the weak phase $\phi^{L}_s$ are shown in Fig. \[ZpSpac1\], with the corresponding numerical results given in the second row of Table \[ZpCoupValue1\].
\
0.8pt 0.13in
$D_{ud}^{L}$ $D_{ud}^{R}$ $P_{ud}^{L}$ $P_{ud}^{R}$ $\phi^{L}_s[^{\circ}]$
------------- ---------------- ---------------- --------------- ---------------- ------------------------ -- -- -- -- -- --
Scenario I $-0.63\pm0.17$ $-0.07\pm0.11$ $4.98\pm5.53$ $-0.61\pm1.58$ $-91\pm33$
Scenario II $-0.59\pm0.12$ — $2.82\pm0.68$ — $-91\pm31$
: Numerical results for the flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings $D_{ud}^{L,R}$ and $P_{ud}^{L,R}$, as well as the weak phase $\phi^{L}_s$ in the two different scenarios, in which $|B_{sb}^L|=0.5\times 10^{-3}$ is adopted.[]{data-label="ZpCoupValue1"}
It is found that the weak phase $\phi^{L}_s$ is bounded to be around $-91^{\circ}$, which has already been used to study the $Z^{\prime}$ effect in $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing, as detailed in section 3. It is also found that such a family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ model either with a negative $D_{ud}^{L}$ and $\phi^{L}_s\sim -91^{\circ}$ or with a relatively large positive $P_{ud}^{L}$ and $\phi^{L}_s\sim -91^{\circ}$ is required to reconcile the observed “$\pi K$ CP puzzle". As is shown in Figs. \[ZpSpac1\](b) and \[ZpSpac1\](d), on the other hand, the strengths of the right-handed $Z^{\prime}$ couplings $D_{ud}^{R}$ and $P_{ud}^{R}$ could be zero, indicating their effects to be dispensable.
Using the obtained numerical points shown in Fig. \[ZpSpac1\] and the relations given by Eqs. (\[PLR\]) and (\[DLR\]), we give also numerical results for the effective $Z^{\prime}$ couplings $B_{uu}^{L,R}$ and $B_{dd}^{L,R}$ in Table \[ZpCoupValue2\]. It can be seen that the right-handed couplings are smaller by about one order of magnitude than the left-handed ones. However, since we could only obtain the direct constraints on their combinations $D_{ud}^{L,R}$ and $P_{ud}^{L,R}$, uncertainties of the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings $B_{uu}^{L,R}$ and $B_{dd}^{L,R}$ listed in Table \[ZpCoupValue2\] are very large due to the interference effects among them.
0.8pt 0.23in
$B_{uu}^{L}$ $B_{dd}^{L}$ $B_{uu}^{R}$ $B_{dd}^{R}$
------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------- ---------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Scenario I $1.28\pm1.79$ $1.85\pm1.87$ $-0.20\pm0.54$ $-0.20\pm0.53$
Scenario II $0.55\pm0.25$ $1.15\pm0.25$ — —
: Numerical results for the flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings $B_{uu}^{L,R}$ and $B_{dd}^{L,R}$ in the two different scenarios. The other captions are the same as in Table \[ZpCoupValue1\].[]{data-label="ZpCoupValue2"}
### Scenario II: assuming that the right-handed flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings vanish {#scenarioii-assuming-that-the-right-handed-flavour-conserving-zprime-couplings-vanish .unnumbered}
As has already been found in scenario I, the left-handed flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings are crucial and non-negligible, whereas the right-handed ones are dispensable. Thus, as a maximally simplified case, in this scenario we assume that the right-handed $Z^{\prime}$ couplings vanish. Under the constraints from ${\cal B}(B\to \pi K,\rho K)$ and $A_{CP}(B\to \pi K,\rho K)$, the allowed parameter spaces of the flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings $D_{ud}^{L}$ and $P_{ud}^{L}$, as well as the weak phase $\phi^{L}_s$ are then shown in Fig. \[ZpSpac2\]. From the second row of Tables \[ZpCoupValue1\] and \[ZpCoupValue2\], in which the numerical results for $D_{ud}^{L}$, $P_{ud}^{L}$ and $B_{uu,dd}^{L}$ are presented respectively, one may find that, due to the absence of interference effects induced by the right ones, the uncertainties of the left-handed $Z^{\prime}$ couplings are significantly reduced. Moreover, it is found that the down-type coupling $B_{dd}^{L}\sim 1.2$ is about two times larger than the up-type one $B_{uu}^{L}\sim 0.6$.
Taking the fitted numerical results of the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings listed in Table \[ZpCoupValue1\] as inputs, we present our predictions for the observables in last two columns of Tables \[pikbr\], \[pikdircp\] and \[pikmixcp\]. It can be seen that, compared to the SM prediction $\sim-11.7\%$, the direct CP asymmetry of $B^-\to\pi^0 K^-$ decay is significantly reduced by the $Z^{\prime}$ contribution, $(-0.5^{+4.2+1.0+3.3}_{-3.9-1.0-0.5})\%$ in scenario I and $(-1.0^{+5.1+0.7+1.3}_{-3.7-0.8-1.4})\%$ in scenario II, both of which are roughly consistent with the experimental data $(4.0\pm2.1)\%$, with their respective large uncertainties taken into account. In this sense, we say that the $Z^{\prime}$ model considered in this paper could provide a possible solution to the observed “$\pi K$ CP puzzle". Meanwhile, it is also observed that our predictions for the other observables are in agreement with the experimental data within errors.
$B_s\to K K$, $K K^{\ast}$ and $\pi^0 \phi$ decays
--------------------------------------------------
Along with the successful running of LHCb, many decay modes of $B_s$ meson will be measured in the near future, which will provide another fertile ground to test the SM and various NP models. It is well-known that, under the approximation of neglecting annihilation contributions, some $B_s\to K K^{(\ast)}$ decays are related to the $B\to\pi K^{(\ast)}$ and $\rho K$ decays through the U-spin symmetry acting on the spectator quark of B meson. Especially the pairs ($\bar{B}_{s}\to{K}^{+}{K}^{-}$, $\bar{B}_{d}\to{\pi}^{+}{K}^{-}$) and ($\bar{B}_{s}\to{K}^{0}{\bar{K}}^{0}$, $B^-\to\pi^-{\bar K}^0$) are two interesting U-spin related examples. Moreover, these $B_s$ decay modes, being induced by the same quark-level $b\to s q\bar{q}$ transitions, involve the same $Z^{\prime}$ couplings as in $B_{u,d}\to\pi K^{(*)}$ and $\rho K$ decays. Thus, in this subsection, we shall investigate the impact of $Z^{\prime}$ contribution in $B_s\to K K$, $K K^{\ast}$ and $\pi^0 \phi$ decays.
### $B_s\to K K, K K^{\ast}$ decays
The amplitudes of the two $B_s\to K K$ decays are given, respectively, as [@Beneke3] $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal A}_{\bar{B}_s^0\to\bar{K}^0 K^0}
&=& B_{\bar{K} K} \Big[b_4^p - \frac{1}{2}b_{4,{\rm EW}}^p\Big]\nonumber\\
&&+ A_{K \bar{K}}\Big[\alpha_4^p - \frac{1}{2}\alpha_{4,{\rm
EW}}^p + \beta_3^p + \beta_4^p - \frac{1}{2}\beta_{3,{\rm EW}}^p - \frac{1}{2}\beta_{4,{\rm EW}}^p],
\label{amp5}\end{aligned}$$ $$\begin{aligned}
{\cal A}_{\bar{B}_s^0\to K^- K^+}
&=& B_{K^- K^+} \Big[
\delta_{pu} b_1 + b_4^p + b_{4,{\rm EW}}^p\Big]\nonumber\\
&&+ A_{ K^+ K^-}\Big[\delta_{pu} \alpha_1 + \alpha_4^{p}+ \alpha_{4,{\rm
EW}}^p + \beta_3 + \beta_4 + \frac{1}{2}\beta_{3,{\rm EW}}^p - \frac{1}{2}\beta_{4,{\rm EW}}^p\Big]\,.
\label{amp6}\end{aligned}$$ The corresponding amplitudes of $\bar{B}_s\to \bar{K} K^{\ast}$, $\bar{B}_s\to \bar{K}^{\ast} K$, $\bar{B}_s\to K^- K^{\ast+}$, and $\bar{B}_s\to K^{\ast+} K^-$ can be obtained from the above expressions with the replacement $(\bar{K} K)\to (\bar{K} K^{\ast})$, $(\bar{K} K)\to (\bar{K}^{\ast} K)$, $(K^- K^+)\to (K^- K^{\ast+})$, and $(K^- K^+)\to (K^{\ast-} K^+)$, respectively.
0.8pt 0.12in
-- -------------------------------------------- -------------- ---------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
SM
Modes data Scenario I Scenario II
$\bar{B}_s\to{K}^+K^-$ $24.5\pm1.8$ $27.2^{+7.2+5.3}_{-6.0-3.8}$ $26.9^{+7.8+5.3+1.6}_{-5.5-3.8-2.1}$ $27.2^{+7.5+5.3+0.2}_{-5.9-3.8-0.2}$
$\bar{B}_s\to{K}^0\bar{K}^0$ $<66$ $29^{+7+6}_{-6-4}$ $30^{+7+6+1}_{-6-4-3}$ $29^{+7+6+0}_{-6-4-0}$
$\bar{B}_{s}\to{K}^{+}K^{{\ast}-}$ — $8.7^{+3.4+2.3}_{-2.4-1.6}$ $9.0^{+3.1+2.3+0.4}_{-2.6-1.6-0.6}$ $8.8^{+3.2+2.3+0.3}_{-2.4-1.6-0.2}$
$\bar{B}_{s}\to{K}^{0}{\bar{K}}^{{\ast}0}$ — $8.7^{+2.9+2.4}_{-2.0-1.7}$ $8.8^{+2.6+4.0+0.6}_{-2.2-1.7-0.6}$ $8.7^{+2.6+2.4+0.5}_{-1.9-1.6-0.5}$
$\bar{B}_{s}\to{K}^{-}K^{{\ast}+}$ — $16.3^{+5.8+3.8}_{-4.7-2.7}$ $18.1^{+6.3+4.0+1.8}_{-5.4-2.9-3.4}$ $16.7^{+6.4+3.8+1.1}_{-4.6-2.7-1.1}$
$\bar{B}_{s}\to{\bar{K}}^{0}{K}^{{\ast}0}$ — $13.2^{+4.8+3.6}_{-3.5-2.5}$ $13.8^{+4.7+3.7+1.7}_{-4.0-2.6-2.0}$ $13.3^{+4.6+3.6+1.2}_{-3.5-2.5-1.3}$
$\bar{B}_{s}\to\pi^0\phi$ — $0.19^{+0.07+0.00}_{-0.05-0.00}$ $0.38^{+0.10+0.01+0.36}_{-0.08-0.01-0.17}$ $0.41^{+0.11+0.01+0.38}_{-0.09-0.01-0.22}$
-- -------------------------------------------- -------------- ---------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
: The CP-averaged branching fractions (in units of $10^{-6}$) of $\bar{B}_s \to K K^{(\ast)}$ and $\pi^0\phi$ decays. The other captions are the same as in Table \[pikbr\].[]{data-label="brKK"}
0.8pt 0.14in
-- -------------------------------------------- ---------- ---------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Exp. SM
Mode data Scenario I Scenario II
$\bar{B}_{s}\to K^+K^-$ $2\pm18$ $-15^{+3+1}_{-3-1}$ $-16^{+3+0+3}_{-3-0-6}$ $-15^{+3+0+0}_{-3-0-0}$
$\bar{B}_{s}\to K^0\bar{K}^0$ — $0.44^{+0.16+0.05}_{-0.13-0.05}$ $0.45^{+0.17+0.05+0.07}_{-0.08-0.06-0.04}$ $0.43^{+0.17+0.05+0.00}_{-0.14-0.05-0.00}$
$\bar{B}_{s}\to{K}^{+}K^{{\ast}-}$ — $-45^{+9+5}_{-10-4}$ $-60^{+10+4+16}_{-8-3-12}$ $-56^{+10+4+1}_{-9-4-2}$
$\bar{B}_{s}\to{K}^{0}{\bar{K}}^{{\ast}0}$ — $0.5^{+0.2+0.1}_{-0.2-0.1}$ $-13^{+2+1+21}_{-2-1-18}$ $-5^{+2+1+1}_{-1-1-1}$
$\bar{B}_{s}\to{K}^{-}K^{{\ast}+}$ — $38^{+12+2}_{-10-3}$ $37^{+10+1+1}_{-10-2-3}$ $35^{+11+2+1}_{-11-2-1}$
$\bar{B}_{s}\to{\bar{K}}^{0}{K}^{{\ast}0}$ — $0.2^{+0.1+0.0}_{-0.1-0.0}$ $4.4^{+2.8+0.9+11.8}_{-2.9-1.0-11.8}$ $0.3^{+1.8+0.8+0.0}_{-2.2-0.9-0.0}$
$\bar{B}_{s}\to\pi^0\phi$ — $31^{+6+0}_{-6-0}$ $8^{+5+0+6}_{-6-0-15}$ $7^{+6+0+5}_{-6-0-11}$
-- -------------------------------------------- ---------- ---------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
: The direct CP asymmetries (in unit of $10^{-2}$) of $\bar{B}_s \to K K^{(\ast)}$ and $\pi^0\phi$ decays. The other captions are the same as in Table \[pikbr\].[]{data-label="dcpKK"}
0.8pt 0.21in
-- -------------------------------------- ----------- ----------------------------- ------------------------------------- ----------------------------- -- --
SM
Mode data Scenario I Scenario II
$\bar{B}_{s}\to{K}^{+}{K}^{-}$ $17\pm19$ $25^{+6+2}_{-6-2}$ $13^{+7+2+25}_{-7-2-23}$ $23^{+6+2+1}_{-6-2-1}$
$\bar{B}_{s}\to{K}^{0}{\bar{K}}^{0}$ — $0.6^{+0.2+0.0}_{-0.1-0.0}$ $0.6^{+0.1+0.0+0.0}_{-0.1-0.0-0.1}$ $0.6^{+0.2+0.0}_{-0.1-0.0}$
$\bar{B}_{s}\to\pi^0\phi$ — $39^{+10+4}_{-11-3}$ $-99^{+1+0+68}_{-0-0-1}$ $-99^{+2+0+46}_{-0-0-1}$
-- -------------------------------------- ----------- ----------------------------- ------------------------------------- ----------------------------- -- --
: The mixing-induced CP asymmetries (in unit of $10^{-2}$) of $\bar{B}_s \to K K$ and $\pi^0\phi$ decays. The other captions are the same as in Table \[pikbr\].[]{data-label="mcpKK"}
With the theoretical inputs listed in the Appendix and the restricted parameter spaces of the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings listed in Table \[ZpCoupValue1\], our predictions for the branching fractions, the direct and the mixing-induced CP asymmetries of $B_s\to K K$, $K K^{\ast}$ and $\pi^0 \phi$ decays are summarized, respectively, in Tables \[brKK\], \[dcpKK\] and \[mcpKK\]. Among these decays, only the $\bar{B}_{s}\to{K}^{+}{K}^{-}$ decay has been measured so far, for which our SM prediction is consistent with the previous theoretical evaluations [@Cheng2; @VirtoKK] and agrees well with the experimental data.
For the penguin-dominated $B_s\to K K$ and $K K^{\ast}$ decays, as the branching fractions are dominated by the module of the effective coefficients $\alpha_{4}$ and $\alpha_{4,{\rm EW}}$, to which the $Z^{\prime}$ contributions are colour-suppressed, the NP effect in the branching fractions are not significant and diluted by the large theoretical uncertainties. On the other hand, due to the weak phase $\phi_s^L$ being non-zero, some of their CP asymmetries are very sensitive to the $Z^{\prime}$ contributions, which can be clearly seen from Tables \[dcpKK\] and \[mcpKK\].
\
In order to further test the $Z^{\prime}$ effects and check if the $Z^{\prime}$ contributions in the two different scenarios could be distinguished from each other and from the SM predictions, we show in Fig. \[kkvs\] the correlations between various CP asymmetries both within the SM and in the $Z^{\prime}$ model, in which the theoretical uncertainties induced by the input parameters listed in Appendix are considered. It is observed that, for $A_{CP}^{dir}(\bar{B}_{d}\to \pi^+K^-)$ and $A_{CP}^{dir}(\bar{B}_{s}\to K^+K^-)$, while the results in the case of scenario II are quite similar to the SM ones, the scenario I case could deviate significantly from the SM predictions, which could provide a useful probe of $Z^{\prime}$ contribution with right-handed $u(d)-u(d)-Z^{\prime}$ couplings. For $A_{CP}^{mix}(\bar{B}_{s}\to K^+K^-)$, the $Z^{\prime}$ effect is even more significant and could flip the sign of the SM prediction. However, the experimental data for these asymmetries are currently still too rough to give a definite conclusion. In addition, even though the $Z^{\prime}$ contributions also exhibit some deviations from the SM predictions, the observables $A_{CP}^{dir, mix}( \bar{B}_s^0\to\bar{K}^0 K^0)$ are too small to be accessible in the near future.
It is also found that $A_{CP}^{dir}(\bar{B}_s\to{K}^{0}\bar{K}^{\ast 0})$ and $A_{CP}^{dir}(\bar{B}_s\to{K}^{\ast 0}\bar{K}^{0})$ are another two interesting observables that can be used to probe the $Z^{\prime}$ effect. As is shown in Fig. \[kkvvs\], while both of them are predicted to be around zero within the SM, the $Z^{\prime}$ contribution in scenario I could bring a significant deviation from the SM prediction. Explicitly, in this scenario, both a large negative $A_{CP}^{dir}(\bar{B}_s\to{K}^{0}\bar{K}^{\ast 0})$ and a large positive $A_{CP}^{dir}(\bar{B}_s\to{K}^{\ast 0}\bar{K}^{0})$ are predicted, which, if confirmed by future experimental measurements, could be used to distinguish these two different scenarios from each other.
### $\bar{B}_{s}\to\pi^0\phi$ decay
Besides $B_s\to K K$ and $K K^{\ast}$ decays, the $\bar{B}_s \to \pi^0 \phi$ decay is another interesting and important process to probe the $Z^{\prime}$ effect [@ZpLiphipi], even though being very rare with a branching fraction of order of $10^{-7}$. The decay amplitude of this mode is very simple and given as [@Beneke3] \_[|[B]{}\_s\^0 ]{}=. \[amp7\] From Eq. (\[amp7\]), it can be seen that this decay is dominated by the effective EW-penguin coefficient $\alpha_{3,{\rm EW}}^p=a_9^p-a_7^p$, while the contribution from $\alpha_2$ is CKM-suppressed. Recalling that the significant $Z^{\prime}$ effect on $A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to\pi^0K^-)$ is through $\alpha_{3,{\rm EW}}^p$ (see Eq. (\[c79\])), it is therefore expected that the observables of $\bar{B}_s\to \pi^0 \phi$ decay should also be very sensitive to the $Z^{\prime}$ contribution. Another important feature of this decay channel is that it is not contaminated by the annihilation correction, which suffers from large theoretical uncertainties due to the known end-point divergence. Thus, the $\bar{B}_s \to \pi^0 \phi$ decay is considered as a relatively “clean" channel for testing the SM and probing possible NP effects [@Vernazza].
With the obtained $Z^{\prime}$ coupling parameters listed in Table \[ZpCoupValue1\], our predictions for the observables of $\bar{B}_s \to \pi^0 \phi$ decay both within the SM and in the $Z^{\prime}$ model with the two different scenarios are presented in the last row of Tables \[brKK\], \[dcpKK\] and \[mcpKK\]. As has already been mentioned, the $Z^{\prime}$ corrections are significant for all of these observables compared to the SM predictions. Numerically, one can find that ${\cal B}(\bar{B}_s\to \pi^0 \phi)$ could be enhanced to $\sim 0.8\times 10^{-6}$ by the $Z^{\prime}$ contribution, which is about four times larger than the SM prediction $\sim 0.19\times 10^{-6}$. For $A_{CP}^{dir}(\bar{B}_s\to \pi^0 \phi)$, the difference between the SM and the $Z^{\prime}$ predictions $A_{CP}^{dir,SM}-A_{CP}^{dir,Z^{\prime}}$ is about $(10\sim30)\%$. For $A_{CP}^{mix}(\bar{B}_s\to \pi^0 \phi)$, the difference is even larger, with signs completely flipped. Moreover, as is shown in Fig. \[phipivs\], even with the theoretical uncertainties taken into account, the predicted $A_{CP}^{dir,mix}(\bar{B}_s\to \pi^0 \phi)$ in the $Z^{\prime}$ model deviates entirely from the SM regimes, which means that such an observable is very powerful for probing possible $Z^{\prime}$ effects. However, the two different $Z^{\prime}$ scenarios are found to be almost indistinguishable from each other by this decay. Thus, future experimental measurements of $\bar{B}_s\to \pi^0 \phi$ decay, especially the direct and mixing-induced CP asymmetries, will play a very important role in confirming or refuting the possible $Z^{\prime}$ effect considered in this paper.
As is discussed extensively in the literature [@Barger; @changpikzp; @pikpuz], in order to reconcile the observed “$\pi K$ CP puzzle", one has to modify either the color-suppressed tree amplitude $\alpha_2^p$ or the EW-penguin amplitude $\alpha_{3,{\rm EW}}^p$; the way studied in this paper by introducing a family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ model belongs to the latter. It is interesting to note that the decay amplitude ${\cal A}_{\bar{B}_s\to \pi^0 \phi}$ (see Eq. (\[amp7\])) involves both of these two effective coefficients. Thus, with the coming experimental measurements of $\bar{B}_s \to \pi^0 \phi$ decay at LHCb and Super-KEKB, a combined study of $B\to\pi K$ and $\bar{B}_s\to \pi^0 \phi$ decays will provide a much more crucial test of various NP scenarios designed to resolve the observed “$\pi K$ CP puzzle".
$B\to \phi K$ decays
--------------------
In a family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ model, the couplings of $Z^{\prime}$ boson to quarks are generally not the same for different generations. Focusing on the hadronic B-meson decays induced by the quark-level $b\to s$ transitions, this means that the flavour-conserving $s-s-Z^{\prime}$ coupling might be different from the $d-d-Z^{\prime}$ one discussed in the previous two subsections. In order to further test such a $Z^{\prime}$ model, in this subsection, we shall proceed to discuss the penguin-dominated $B\to \phi K$ decays, which are induced by the quark-level $b\to s s\bar{s}$ transition and hence offer access to the strength of $s-s-Z^{\prime}$ coupling.
With the input parameters summarized in the Appendix, our SM predictions for the branching fractions, direct and mixing-induced CP asymmetries of $B\to\phi K$ decays are presented in the third column of Table \[phiKobs\]. It can be seen that, while most of these observables are consistent with the experimental data, our estimation of $A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to\phi K^-)=(0.4^{+0.2}_{-0.2})\%$, although being in good agreement with the previous SM predictions (for instance, $0.7\%$ (QCDF, S4) [@Beneke3] and $(1^{+0}_{-1})\%$ (pQCD) [@LiPV]), is still about $2.4\sigma$ smaller than the experimental data [@HFAG] \[phiKHFAG\] A\_[CP]{}\^[dir]{}(B\^-K\^-)=(10.44.2)%, which is obtained by taking average over the following experimental data A\_[CP]{}\^[dir]{}(B\^-K\^-)= {
[l]{} (-717\^[+3]{}\_[-2]{})%\
(1125)%\
(12.84.41.3)%,
. and is obviously dominated by the BaBar measurement. Recently, using the known value of the $B^-\to J/\psi K^-$ asymmetry, $A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to \phi K^-)$ has also been measured by the LHCb collaboration and is determined to be $(2.2\pm2.1\pm0.9)\%$ [@phiKLHCb], which is in agreement with the SM prediction but is not included in the HFAG’s average. Averaging the BaBar and the LHCb data roughly, we get the weighted average $A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to \phi K^-)=(4.3\pm 2.0)\%$, which is still about $2.2\sigma$ away from the SM expectation. So, such a possible discrepancy, if confirmed by more precise experimental measurements, would imply possible new sources of CP violation beyond the SM. In the following, we shall investigate whether the family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ model considered in this paper could provide a possible solution.
0.8pt 0.16in
---------------------------------------------- --------------------- ------------------------------ --------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
data Scenario I Scenario II
${\cal B}(B^-\to\phi K^-)$ $8.8\pm0.5$ $10.0^{+3.4+2.7}_{-2.8-1.8}$ $10.0^{+3.1+2.6+0.4}_{-2.7-1.8-0.7}$ $10.0^{+3.1+2.7+0.7}_{-2.7-1.8-0.6}$
${\cal B}({\bar B}^0\to\phi {\bar K}^0)$ $7.3^{+0.7}_{-0.6}$ $9.1^{+3.2+2.4}_{-2.6-1.7}$ $9.2^{+2.9+2.4+0.5}_{-2.5-1.7-1.8}$ $9.1^{+2.9+2.5+0.7}_{-2.5-1.6-0.6}$
$A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to\phi K^-)$ $10.4\pm4.2$ $0.5^{+0.3+0.0}_{-0.2-0.0}$ $12.7^{+1.7+0.7+6.1}_{-1.7-0.8-11.4}$ $11.3^{+1.0+0.7+7.5}_{-1.0-0.9-9.2}$
$A_{CP}^{dir}({\bar B}^0\to\phi {\bar K}^0)$ $-1\pm14$ $0.8^{+0.4+0.1}_{-0.3-0.1}$ $8^{+1+1+14}_{-1-1-19}$ $12^{+1+1+8}_{-1-1-9}$
$A_{CP}^{mix}({\bar B}^0\to\phi {\bar K}^0)$ $74^{+11}_{-13}$ $82^{+8+0}_{-17-0}$ $91^{+5+1+7}_{-7-1-11}$ $86^{+6+1+2}_{-9-1-4}$
---------------------------------------------- --------------------- ------------------------------ --------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
: The CP-averaged branching ratios (in units of $10^{-6}$), the direct and the mixing-induced CP asymmetries (in units of $10^{-2}$) of $B\to \phi K$ decays both within the SM and in the $Z^{\prime}$ model with the two different scenarios. The other captions are the same as in Table \[pikbr\].[]{data-label="phiKobs"}
\
The dependence of the observables of $B{\to}\phi K$ decays on the $Z^{\prime}$ coupling parameters are shown in Fig. \[phiK\_zp\]. It is found that, with $\phi_s^L\sim-91^{\circ}$ fitted from $B\to\pi K$ decays, the $Z^{\prime}$ contributions with a negative $B_{ss}^L$ and/or $B_{ss}^R$ are helpful to moderate the discrepancy for $A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to\phi K^-)$, which is shown in Fig. \[phiK\_zp\](b). At the same time, such a possible solution also satisfies the constraint from $A_{CP}^{dir}({\bar B}^0\to\phi {\bar K}^0)$, as is shown in Fig. \[phiK\_zp\](d). However, from Figs. \[phiK\_zp\](a) and \[phiK\_zp\](c), one can find that this solution is marginal around $\phi_s^L\sim-91^{\circ}$. An exact numerical evaluation is, therefore, needed to find the allowed regions for the $Z^{\prime}$ coupling parameters, which will be presented in the following.
### Scenario II: assuming that the right-handed flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings vanish {#scenario-ii-assuming-that-the-right-handed-flavour-conserving-zprime-couplings-vanish .unnumbered}
Firstly, we study the case with only left-handed $s-s-Z^{\prime}$ coupling being nonzero. Under the constraints from $B^-\to\phi K^-$ and ${\bar B}^0\to\phi {\bar K}^0$ decays, the allowed regions (blue) are shown in Fig. \[ZpSpac3\]. It is found that there exist two separated allowed regions, $B_{ss}^L<0$ with $\phi_s^L\in[-\pi,0]$ and $B_{ss}^L>0$ with $\phi_s^L\in[0,\pi]$, mainly due to the constraint from $A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to\phi K^-)$ as has already been shown in Fig. \[phiK\_zp\](b). However, taking into account the bound on the weak phase $\phi_s^L$ from $B\to \pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$ decays, $\phi_s^L=-91^{\circ}\pm31^{\circ}$, the allowed regions will be significantly reduced and are shown in red in Fig. \[ZpSpac3\]. The corresponding numerical results are given in Table \[ZpPareValueSS\], in which a negative $B_{ss}^{L}=-0.13\pm0.11$ with $\phi_s^L=-91^{\circ}\pm31^{\circ}$ is needed to moderate the large divergency for $A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to\phi K^-)$. Comparing this result with the value of $B_{dd}^{L}$ listed in table \[ZpCoupValue2\], one can easily find that $B_{ss}^{L}\neq B_{dd}^{L}$ in this scenario.
![\[ZpSpac3\]The allowed regions (blue) for the $Z^{\prime}$ coupling parameters $B_{ss}^L$ and $\phi_s^L$ under the $2\sigma$ constraints of the branching ratios and direct CP asymmetries of $B\to\phi K$ decays. The red region is obtained with $\phi_s^L=-91^{\circ}\pm31^{\circ}$ fitted from $B\to \pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$ decays.](phiSII.pdf){width="7.5cm"}
0.8pt 0.4in
$B_{ss}^{L}$ $B_{ss}^{R}$ $\phi^{L}_s[^{\circ}]$
------------- ---------------- ---------------- ------------------------ -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Scenario I $0.05\pm0.54$ $-0.21\pm0.51$ $-91\pm33$
Scenario II $-0.13\pm0.11$ — $-91\pm31$
: Numerical results for the flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ parameters $B_{ss}^L$ and $B_{ss}^R$ in two different scenarios, with $\phi_s^L$ fitted from $B\to \pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$ decays.[]{data-label="ZpPareValueSS"}
With the obtained numerical results listed in Table \[ZpPareValueSS\] as inputs, we present our predictions in the fifth column of Table \[phiKobs\]. One can find that our theoretical prediction $A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to\phi K^-)=(11.3^{+1.0+0.7+7.5}_{-1.0-0.9-9.2})\%$ is in agreement with the experimental data $A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to\phi K^-)=(10.4\pm4.2)\%$ [@HFAG] at $1\sigma$ level. In addition, our predictions for the other observables also agree well with the current experimental measurements.
### Scenario I: without any simplifications for the flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings {#scenarioi-without-any-simplifications-for-the-flavour-conserving-zprime-couplings .unnumbered}
From Fig. \[phiK\_zp\](b), it can be seen that a negative $B_{ss}^R$ with $\phi_s^L\sim-91^{\circ}$ is also preferred to reconcile the discrepancy of $A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to\phi K^-)$, which motivates us to consider the second scenario where both left- and right-handed $s-s-Z^{\prime}$ couplings are considered. With the branching ratios and direct CP asymmetries of $B\to\phi K$ decays as constraints, the allowed regions for the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings are shown in blue in Fig. \[ZpSpac4\]. The pink regions shown in Fig. \[ZpSpac4\] are obtained with the bound $\phi_s^L=-91^{\circ}\pm33^{\circ}$, which is fitted under the constraints from $B\to \pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$ decays in scenario I (see Table \[ZpCoupValue1\]).
Before presenting our numerical results, we would like to firstly discuss the universality of the flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings for the first two generations. For the down-type quarks, the $3\times3$ diagonal $Z^{\prime}$ chiral charge matrices $\epsilon^{\psi_X}$ ($X=L,R$) in the gauge eigenstate basis and the corresponding unitary matrices $V_{\psi_X}$ can be written, respectively, as \^[\_X]{}= (
[ccc]{} \^[\_X]{}\_d & 0 & 0\
0 & \^[\_X]{}\_s& 0\
0& 0 & \^[\_X]{}\_b
),V\_[\_X]{}= (
[ccc]{} V\_[11]{}\^X & V\_[12]{}\^X& V\_[13]{}\^X\
V\_[21]{}\^X & V\_[22]{}\^X& V\_[23]{}\^X\
V\_[31]{}\^X & V\_[32]{}\^X& V\_[33]{}\^X
). Using Eq. (\[3\]), one can get the corresponding off-diagonal matrix element of $Z^{\prime}$ coupling in the mass eigenstate basis, \[Bx\] B\_[ds]{}\^[X]{}=V\_[11]{}\^X V\_[21]{}\^[X ]{} \^[\_X]{}\_d + V\_[12]{}\^X V\_[22]{}\^[X ]{} \^[\_X]{}\_s+V\_[13]{}\^X V\_[23]{}\^[X ]{} \^[\_X]{}\_b. Moreover, using the unitarity of the matrices $V_{\psi_X}$, \[Vx\] V\_[11]{}\^X V\_[21]{}\^[X ]{}+ V\_[12]{}\^X V\_[22]{}\^[X ]{} +V\_[13]{}\^X V\_[23]{}\^[X ]{} =0, and in the limit of small fermion mixing, Eq. (\[Bx\]) can be further simplified to \[rela\] B\_[ds]{}\^[X]{}V\_[11]{}\^X V\_[21]{}\^[X ]{}( \^[\_X]{}\_d- \^[\_X]{}\_s).
It should be noted that, in this section, our studies of the $Z^{\prime}$ effects are performed in the “SM limit", [*i.e.,*]{} the right-handed $Z^{\prime}$ coupling matrix is diagonal and hence no new types of four-quark operators arise compared to the SM ones given in Eq. (\[eq:eff\]). This implies $B_{ds}^{R}=0$ and, as indicated by Eq. (\[rela\]), $\epsilon^{\psi_R}_d=\epsilon^{\psi_R}_s$, which results in $B_{ss}^{R}=B_{dd}^{R}$. In order to check if our fitted $Z^{\prime}$ coupling parameters satisfy such a relation, we re-plot in Fig. \[FCZpSpac\] the allowed parameter spaces of the flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings $(B_{dd}^{L},B_{dd}^{R})$ (in blue in Fig. \[ZpSpac1\], from $B\to\pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$ decays) and $(B_{ss}^{L},B_{ss}^{R})$ (in pink in Fig. \[ZpSpac4\], from $B\to\phi K$ decays). It can be seen that, due to the fact that the allowed range of $B_{ss}^{R}$ is larger than that of $B_{dd}^{R}$, the relation $B_{ss}^{R}=B_{dd}^{R}$ can be easily satisfied. With the constraint $B_{ss}^{R}=B_{dd}^{R}$ assumed, the allowed ranges of $(B_{ss}^{L},B_{ss}^{R})$ are further reduced as is shown in red in Figs. \[ZpSpac4\] and \[FCZpSpac\]. It is interesting to note that, by fitting the points in Fig. \[FCZpSpac\], one may find an approximate linear relation between $B_{ss}^{L}$ and $B_{ss}^{R}$, \[relas\] B\_[ss]{}\^[L]{}-0.12-1.02B\_[ss]{}\^[R]{}, which implies that the left-handed $Z^{\prime}$ coupling parameter $B_{ss}^{L}$ would also be further restricted.
![\[FCZpSpac\]The allowed regions for the flavour-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings $(B_{ss}^{L},B_{ss}^{R})$ and ($B_{dd}^{L},B_{dd}^{R})$ in the $B_{ii}^L-B_{ii}^R$ plane. The red region is obtained with the assumption that $B_{ss}^{R}=B_{dd}^{R}$.](Csd.pdf){width="7.5cm"}
However, as is shown in Fig. \[FCZpSpac\], it is found that there is no overlap between the allowed regions of $(B_{dd}^{L},B_{dd}^{R})$ and $(B_{ss}^{L},B_{ss}^{R})$, which implies that $B_{dd}^{L}\neq B_{ss}^{L}$ and hence generally the off-diagonal element $B_{ds}^{L}\neq 0$. While $B_{ss}^{L}=B_{dd}^{L}$ and $B_{ds}^{L}=0$ are generally assumed due to the constraints from $K^0-\bar{K}^0$ mixing, a recent explicit investigation performed in Refs. [@BurasZp; @chiangK] indicate that the constraints from $K^0-\bar{K}^0$ mixing on the module of $B_{ds}^{L}$ are quite weak, because the observables $\triangle M_K$ and $\epsilon_K$ are governed, respectively, by the real and the imaginary part of $M^K_{12}$; it was found that the $Z^{\prime}$ contribution to $\epsilon_K$ even vanishes when $\phi_{sd}=n\pi/2$ [@BurasZp]. Thus, a nonzero $B_{ds}^{L}$ is at least not excluded under the constraints from $K^0-\bar{K}^0$ mixing, and hence the case with $B_{ss}^{L}\neq B_{dd}^{L}$ is still allowed.
Finally, our numerical results of the $Z^{\prime}$ couplings in scenario I are presented in the second column of Table \[ZpPareValueSS\]. It is found that, while the ranges of $B_{ss}^{L,R}$ are severely restricted, their signs are hardly determined due to the interference effects between them. Furthermore, as is determined by Eq. (\[relas\]) and shown in Fig. \[FCZpSpac\], the two parameters $B_{ss}^{L}$ and $B_{ss}^R$ could not simultaneously take the same signs, which is mainly required by the observable $A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to\phi K^-)$. With these numerical results of $Z^{\prime}$ couplings as inputs, our theoretical predictions for the observables of $B\to\phi K$ decays are then presented in the fourth column of Table \[phiKobs\], from which one can find that the predicted $A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to\phi K^-)$ agrees well with the data.
Conclusions
===========
In this paper, motivated by the latest experimental data of $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing and various hadronic $b\to s$ transitions, we have performed a comprehensive reanalysis of the impact of a family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ boson on these processes. For hadronic B-meson decays, our studies of the $Z^{\prime}$ effects are performed in the “SM limit", [*i.e.,*]{} the right-handed $Z^{\prime}$ coupling matrix is diagonal and hence no new types of four-quark operators arise compared to the SM ones. Our main conclusions are summarized as follows:
- Among the several observables of $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing, the precise $\Delta M_s$ and $\phi_s^{c\bar{c}s}$ put stringent constraints on the $Z^{\prime}$ coupling $B_{sb}^{L}$, whereas the constraints from $\Delta \Gamma_s$ and $a_{sl}^{s}$ are very weak due to the large experimental uncertainties. While the moduli $|B_{sb}^{L,R}|$ are stringently bounded, the weak phases $\phi_s^{L,R}$ are still not restricted by these updated experimental data. Numerically, we get $|B_{sb}^{L}|\leqslant 0.98\times10^{-3}$ and $|B_{sb}^{L,R}|\leqslant 0.43\times10^{-3}$ in scenarios LL and LR, respectively. Moreover, with $\phi_s^{L}=-91^{\circ}\pm33^{\circ}$, which is required to resolve the observed “$\pi K$ CP puzzle", we get $|B_{sb}^{L}|\leqslant 0.83\times10^{-3}$.
- The allowed parameter spaces of $Z^{\prime}$ couplings are found to satisfy the constraints from $B\to\pi K$, $\pi K^{\ast}$ and $\rho K$ decays, and hence could provide a possible solution to the observed “$\pi K$ CP puzzle" through a sizable correction to the EW-penguin coefficient $\alpha^p_{3,{\rm EW}}(PP)=a_{9}^{p}-a_7^p$. Furthermore, the direct CP asymmetries of these hadronic B-meson decays put stringent constraints on the weak phase $\phi_s^{L}$ and the flavor-conserving $Z^{\prime}$ couplings. Our evaluations are performed in two different scenarios, with the corresponding numerical results of the $Z^{\prime}$ coupling parameters summarized in Tables \[ZpCoupValue1\] and \[ZpCoupValue2\], respectively.
- The $B_s\to K K$, $K K^{\ast}$ and $\pi^0 \phi$ decays, being induced by the same quark-level $b\to s q\bar{q}~(q=u,d)$ transitions, could provide further tests of such a family non-universal $Z^{\prime}$ model with the successful running of LHCb. Especially, as the $\bar{B}_s \to \pi^0 \phi$ decay is dominated by the EW-penguin coefficient $\alpha_{3,{\rm EW}}^p$ and is relatively “clean", it would play a key role in revealing the observed “$\pi K$ CP puzzle" and probing the proposed NP explanations.
- To get information about the $s-s-Z^{\prime}$ coupling and check if the couplings of $Z^{\prime}$ boson to quarks are universal for the first two generations, we have also studied the penguin-dominated $B\to \phi K$ decays. The numerical results for $s-s-Z^{\prime}$ couplings are summarized in Table \[ZpPareValueSS\]. It is found that, due to the large $A_{CP}^{dir}(B^-\to\phi K^-)$ reported by the BaBar collaboration, a significant $Z^{\prime}$ correction is required and the left-handed $s-s-Z^{\prime}$ coupling is different from the $d-d-Z^{\prime}$ one. However, as the LHCb measurement conflicts slightly with the BaBar data and their experimental uncertainties are still quite large, the refined measurements are required to either confirm or refute such a finding.
As a final comment, we would like to point out that, given the current lower limits on $m_{Z^{\prime}}\geq2~{\rm TeV}$ set by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations [@ATLAS-Exotics; @CMS-Exotics; @Aad:2014cka; @Chatrchyan:2012oaa], the $Z^{\prime}$ effects on $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing and hadronic B-meson decays are going to be small, and are usually plagued by large experimental and theoretical uncertainties. It is therefore quite difficult to deduce definitely the presence of $Z^{\prime}$ effects at the moment. With the running LHCb and the upcoming Super-KEKB experiments, together with the improved theoretical predictions, B physics is expected to enter a precision era, which would exhibit the exact features and the flavour structures of various NP models, including the $Z^{\prime}$ model considered in this paper.
Acknowledgments {#acknowledgments .unnumbered}
===============
The work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grant Nos. 11105043, 11005032, 11225523 and 11224504, Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China under Grant Nos. 20114104120002 and 20104104120001. Q. Chang was also supported by a Foundation for the Author of National Excellent Doctoral Dissertation of P. R. China (Grant No. 201317) and Program for Science and Technology Innovation Talents in Universities of Henan Province (Grant No. 14HASTIT036). X. Q. Li was also supported in part by the Scientific Research Foundation for the Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars, State Education Ministry.
Appendix: Theoretical input parameters {#appendix-theoretical-input-parameters .unnumbered}
======================================
For the CKM matrix elements, we adopt the results [@PDG12] $$\begin{aligned}
&& |V_{us}|=0.2252\pm0.0009\,,\qquad
|V_{ub}|=0.00415\pm0.00049\,,\nonumber\\
&& |V_{cb}|=0.0409\pm0.0011\,,\qquad
\gamma=(68^{+10}_{-11})^{\circ}\,,\end{aligned}$$ which are all extracted from tree-dominated processes and are, therefore, almost insensitive to physics beyond the SM.
As for the quark masses, we take [@PDG12] $$\begin{aligned}
&&m_u=m_d=m_s=0, \qquad m_c=1.67\pm0.07\,{\rm GeV},\nonumber\\
&&m_b=4.78\pm0.06\,{\rm GeV}, \qquad m_t=173.5\pm1.0\,{\rm GeV}\,,\end{aligned}$$ for the pole masses and $$\begin{aligned}
&& \frac{\overline{m}_s(\mu)}{\overline{m}_q(\mu)} = 27\pm1\,,\qquad
\overline{m}_{s}(2\,{\rm GeV})=95\pm5\,{\rm MeV}, \qquad
\overline{m}_{c}(\overline{m}_{c})=1.275\pm0.025\,{\rm GeV}\,\nonumber\\
&& \overline{m}_{b}(\overline{m}_{b}) = 4.18\pm0.03\,{\rm GeV}\,,\qquad
\overline{m}_{t}(\overline{m}_{t})=160.0^{+4.8}_{-4.3}\,{\rm GeV}\,,\end{aligned}$$ for the running masses, where $m_q=m_{u,d}$. In addition, the value of mass parameter $m_b^{pow}=4.8^{+0.0}_{-0.2}$, which appears in the parameterization of the matrix elements $\langle B_s|O_i| \bar{B}_s \rangle $, is used.
The B-meson decay constants read [@DecayCon]
f\_[B\_[s]{}]{}=(0.2310.015)[GeV]{}, f\_[B\_[d]{}]{}=(0.1900.013)[GeV]{},
and the ones of the other light mesons read
& f\_=(130.40.2)[MeV]{}, f\_[K]{}=(156.10.8)[MeV]{}, [@PDG12]\
& f\_[K\^]{}=(2175) [MeV]{}, f\_=(2059) [MeV]{}, f\_=(2155) [MeV]{}. [@BallZwicky]
We take the following inputs for the heavy-to-light transition form factors [@BallZwicky] $$\begin{aligned}
& &F^{B\to \pi}_{0}(0)=0.258\pm0.031\,, \qquad
F^{B\to {K}}_{0}(0)=0.331\pm0.041\,,\nonumber\\
&&A_0^{B\to K^\ast}(0)=0.374\pm0.034, \qquad
A_0^{B\to \rho}(0)=0.303\pm0.028,\nonumber\\
&&A_0^{B_s\to K^\ast}(0)=0.360\pm0.034, \qquad
A_0^{B_s\to \phi}(0)=0.474\pm0.033.
\end{aligned}$$ For $\bar{B}_s\to K K$ decays, as is suggested in Ref. [@Cheng2], we shall use $F^{B_s\to K}_{0}(0)=0.24$ obtained by both lattice and pQCD calculations.
The B-parameters for $B_s-\bar{B}_s$ mixing read [@BagPara]
&B\_1=0.860.02\^[+0.05]{}\_[-0.04]{},B\_2=0.830.020.04,B\_3=1.030.040.09,\
&B\_4=1.170.02\^[+0.05]{}\_[-0.07]{},B\_5=1.940.03\^[+0.23]{}\_[-0.07]{}.
[99]{}
Y. Amhis [*et al.*]{} \[Heavy Flavor Averaging Group Collaboration\], arXiv:1207.1158 \[hep-ex\], and online update at: <http://www.slac.stanford.edu/xorg/hfag>. T. Aaltonen [*et al.*]{} \[CDF Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. Lett. [**100**]{} (2008) 161802 \[arXiv:0712.2397\].
V. M. Abazov [*et al.*]{} \[D0 Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. Lett. [**101**]{} (2008) 241801 \[arXiv:0802.2255\].
M. Bona [*et al.*]{} \[UTfit Group Collaboration\], PMC Phys. A [**3**]{} (2009) 6 \[arXiv:0803.0659\].
Q. Chang, X. Q. Li and Y. D. Yang, JHEP [**1002**]{} (2010) 082 \[arXiv:0907.4408\].
T. Aaltonen [*et al.*]{} \[CDF Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. Lett. [**109**]{} (2012) 171802 \[arXiv:1208.2967\].
V. M. Abazov [*et al.*]{} \[D0 Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. D [**85**]{} (2012) 032006 \[arXiv:1109.3166\].
G. Aad [*et al.*]{} \[ATLAS Collaboration\] JHEP [**1212**]{} (2012) 072 \[arXiv:1208.0572\].
R. Aaij [*et al.*]{} \[LHCb Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. D [**87**]{} (2013) 112010 \[arXiv:1304.2600\].
V. Barger, C. W. Chiang, P. Langacker and H. S. Lee, Phys. Lett. B [**598**]{} (2004) 218 \[hep-ph/0406126\].
Q. Chang, X. Q. Li and Y. D. Yang, JHEP [**0905**]{} (2009) 056 \[arXiv:0903.0275\].
ATLAS Collaboration, “ATLAS Exotics Summary", <https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/AtlasPublic/ExoticsPublicResults>.
CMS Collaboration, “CMS Exotics Summary", <https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/CMSPublic/PhysicsResultsCombined/exo-limits_ICHEP2014.pdf>.
S. Godfrey and T. Martin, arXiv:1309.1688 \[hep-ph\]. Y. Gershtein, M. Luty, M. Narain, L. -T. Wang, D. Whiteson, K. Agashe, L. Apanasevich and G. Artoni [*et al.*]{}, arXiv:1311.0299 \[hep-ex\]. D. Kapukchyan and T. M. P. Tait, arXiv:1312.3377 \[hep-ph\]. G. Aad [*et al.*]{} \[ATLAS Collaboration\], arXiv:1405.4123 \[hep-ex\]; JHEP [**1211**]{} (2012) 138 \[arXiv:1209.2535 \[hep-ex\]\]. S. Chatrchyan [*et al.*]{} \[CMS Collaboration\], Phys. Lett. B [**720**]{} (2013) 63 \[arXiv:1212.6175 \[hep-ex\]\]; CMS-PAS-EXO-12-061. J. Erler, P. Langacker, S. Munir and E. Rojas, JHEP [**0908**]{} (2009) 017 \[arXiv:0906.2435 \[hep-ph\]\]; V. V. Andreev and A. A. Pankov, Phys. Atom. Nucl. [**75**]{} (2012) 76 \[Yad. Fiz. [**75**]{} (2012) 67\]. V. V. Andreev, G. Moortgat-Pick, P. Osland, A. A. Pankov and N. Paver, arXiv:1406.6776 \[hep-ph\]. V. V. Andreev, G. Moortgat-Pick, P. Osland, A. A. Pankov and N. Paver, Eur. Phys. J. C [**72**]{} (2012) 2147 \[arXiv:1205.0866 \[hep-ph\]\]. B. Ananthanarayan, M. Patra and P. Poulose, JHEP [**1102**]{} (2011) 043 \[arXiv:1012.3566 \[hep-ph\]\]. N. Cabibbo, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**10**]{} (1963) 531; M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, Prog. Theor. Phys. [**49**]{} (1973) 652.
P. Langacker and M. Plümacher, Phys. Rev. D [**62**]{} (2000) 013006 \[hep-ph/0001204\]; P. Langacker, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**81**]{} (2009) 1199 \[arXiv:0801.1345 \[hep-ph\]\]. V. Barger, L. Everett, J. Jiang, P. Langacker, T. Liu and C. Wagner, JHEP [**0912**]{} (2009) 048 \[arXiv:0906.3745\].
C. W. Chiang, Y. F. Lin, J. Tandean, JHEP [**1111**]{} (2011) 083 \[arXiv:1108.3969\].
V. Barger, C. W. Chiang, P. Langacker and H. S. Lee, Phys. Lett. B [**580**]{} (2004) 186 \[hep-ph/0310073\]; V. Barger, C. W. Chiang, J. Jiang and P. Langacker, Phys. Lett. B [**596**]{} (2004) 229 \[hep-ph/0405108\].
K. Cheung, C. W. Chiang, N. G. Deshpande and J . Jiang, Phys. Lett. B [**652**]{} (2007) 285 \[hep-ph/0604223\]; J. H. Jeon, C. S. Kim, J. Lee and C. Yu Phys. Lett. B [**636**]{} (2006) 270 \[hep-ph/0602156\]; C. H. Chen and H. Hatanaka, Phys. Rev. D [**73**]{} (2006) 075003 \[hep-ph/0602140\]; I. Ahmed, M. J. Aslam and M. A. Paracha, Phys. Rev. D [**88**]{} (2013) 014019 \[arXiv:1307.5359\]; N. Katirci and K. Azizi, J. Phys. G [**40**]{} (2013) 085005 \[arXiv:1207.4053\]; T. M. Aliev and M. Savci, Phys. Lett. B[**718**]{} (2012) 566 \[arXiv:1202.5444\]; Nucl. Phys. B [**863**]{} (2012) 398 \[arXiv:1202.0398\]; Y. Li, J. Hua and K. C. Yang, Eur. Phys. J. C [**71**]{} (2011) 1775 \[arXiv:1107.0630\]; Y. Li, X. J. Fan, J. Hua and E. L. Wang, Phys. Rev. D [**85**]{} (2012) 074010 \[arXiv:1111.7153\]; R. H. Li, C. D. Lu and W. Wang, Phys. Rev. D [**83**]{} (2011) 034034 \[arXiv:1012.2129\]; E. Golowich, J. A. Hewett, S. Pakvasa, A. A. Petrov and G. K. Yeghiyan, Phys. Rev. D [**83**]{} (2011) 114017 \[arXiv:1102.0009\]; A. Dighe, D. Ghosh, Phys. Rev. D [**86**]{} (2012) 054023 \[arXiv:1207.1324\].
A. J. Buras, F. D. Fazio and J. Girrbach, JHEP [**1302**]{} (2013) 116 \[arXiv:1211.1896\]; A. J. Buras and J. Girrbach, arXiv:1309.2466.
Q. Chang, X. Q. Li and Y. D. Yang, JHEP [**1004**]{} (2010) 052 \[arXiv:1002.2758\].
Q. Chang and Y. H. Gao, Nucl. Phys. B [**845**]{} (2011) 179 \[arXiv:1101.1272\].
G. Buchalla, G. Burdman, C. T. Hill and D. Kominis Phys. Rev. D [**53**]{} (1996) 5185 \[hep-ph/9510376\]; G. Burdman, K. D. Lane and T. Rador, Phys. Lett. B [**514**]{} (2001) 41 \[hep-ph/0012073\]; A. Martin and K. Lane, Phys. Rev. D [**71**]{} (2005) 015011 \[hep-ph/0404107\].
E. Nardi, Phys. Rev. D [**48**]{} (1993) 1240 \[hep-ph/9209223\]; E. Nardi, Phys. Rev. D [**48**]{} (1993) 3277 \[hep-ph/9304266 \]; J. Bernabeu, E. Nardi and D. Tommasini, Nucl. Phys. B [**409**]{} (1993) 69 \[hep-ph/9306251\]; V. D. Barger, M. S. Berger and R. J. N. Phillips, Phys. Rev. D [**52**]{} (1995) 1663 \[hep-ph/9503204\]; M. B. Popovic and E. H. Simmons, Phys. Rev. D [**62**]{} (2000) 035002 \[hep-ph/0001302\]; T. G. Rizzo Phys. Rev. D [**59**]{} (1998) 015020 \[hep-ph/9806397\].
A. Lenz, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. [**81**]{} (2008) 177 \[arXiv:0705.3802\].
G. Buchalla, A. J. Buras, and M. E. Lautenbacher, Rev. Mod. Phys. [**68**]{} (1996) 1125 \[hep-ph/9512380\]; A. J. Buras, hep-ph/9806471; hep-ph/0101336.
A. J. Buras, S. Jager, J. Urban, Nucl. Phys. B [**605**]{} (2001) 600 \[hep-ph/0102316\].
D. Becirevic, V. Gimenez, G. Martinelli, M. Papinutto and J. Reyes, JHEP [**0204**]{} (2002) 025 \[hep-lat/0110091\].
P. Abreu [*et al.*]{} \[DELPHI Collaboration\], Z. Phys. C [**65**]{} (1995) 603.
A. Lenz and U. Nierste, JHEP [**0706**]{} (2007) 072 \[hep-ph/0612167\].
M. Beneke, G. Buchalla and I. Dunietz Phys. Rev. D [**54**]{} (1996) 4419 \[hep-ph/9605259\]; M. Beneke, G. Buchalla, C. Greub, A. Lenz and U. Nierste, Phys. Lett. B [**459**]{} (1999) 631 \[hep-ph/9808385\]; M. Beneke, G. Buchalla, A. Lenz and U. Nierste, Phys. Lett. B [**576**]{} (2003) 173 \[hep-ph/0307344\].
X. Q. Li, Y. M. Li, G. R. Lu and F. Su, JHEP [**1205**]{} (2012) 049 \[arXiv:1204.5250\].
A. Abulencia [*et al.*]{} \[CDF Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. Lett. [**97**]{} (2006) 242003 \[hep-ex/0609040\].
R. Aaij [*et al.*]{} \[LHCb Collaboration\], Phys. Lett. B [**709**]{} (2012) 177 \[arXiv:1112.4311\]; New J. Phys. [**15**]{} (2013) 053021 \[arXiv:1304.4741\].
A. Lenz and U. Nierste, arXiv:1102.4274.
V. M. Abazov [*et al.*]{} \[D0 Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. D [**84**]{} (2011) 052007 \[arXiv:1106.6308\].
V. M. Abazov [*et al.*]{} \[D0 Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. Lett. [**110**]{} (2013) 011801 \[arXiv:1207.1769\].
R. Aaij [*et al.*]{} \[LHCb Collaboration\], arXiv:1308.1048.
M. Beneke, G. Buchalla, M. Neubert and C. T. Sachrajda , Phys. Rev. Lett. [**83**]{} (1999) 1914 \[hep-ph/9905312\]; Nucl. Phys. B[**591**]{} (2000) 313 \[hep-ph/0006124\].
M. Beneke, G. Buchalla, M. Neubert, C. T. Sachrajda, Nucl. Phys. B [**606**]{} (2001) 245 \[hep-ph/0104110\]; M. Beneke and M. Neubert, Nucl. Phys. B [**651**]{} (2003) 225 \[hep-ph/0210085\].
M. Beneke and M. Neubert, Nucl. Phys. B [**675**]{} (2003) 333 \[hep-ph/0308039\].
M. Beneke, J. Rohrer and D. S. Yang, Nucl. Phys. B [**774**]{} (2007) 64 \[hep-ph/0612290\].
H. Y. Cheng and K. C. Yang, Phys. Rev. D [**78**]{} (2008) 094001 \[arXiv:0805.0329\]; Erratum-ibid. D [**79**]{} (2009) 039903.
H. Y. Cheng and C. K. Chua, Phys. Rev. D [**80**]{} (2009) 114026 \[arXiv:0910.5237\].
J. M. Cornwall, Phys. Rev. D [**26**]{} (1982) 1453; J. Papavassiliou and J. M. Cornwall, Phys. Rev. D [**44**]{} (1991) 1285.
Q. Chang, X. Q. Li and Y. D. Yang, JHEP [**0809**]{} (2008) 038 \[arXiv:0807.4295\].
Q. Chang, X. W. Cui, L. Han and Y. D. Yang, Phys. Rev. D [**86**]{} (2012) 054016 \[arXiv:1205.4325\].
A. J. Buras, R. Fleischer, S. Recksiegel and F. Schwab, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**92**]{} (2004) 101804 \[hep-ph/0312259\]; Nucl. Phys. B [**697**]{} (2004) 133 \[hep-ph/0402112\].
S. Descotes-Genon, J. Matias and J. Virto, Phys. Rev. Lett. [**97**]{} (2006) 061801 \[hep-ph/0603239\].
J. Hua, C. S. Kim and Y. Li, Phys. Lett. B [**690**]{} (2010) 508 \[arXiv:1002.2532\].
L. Hofer, D. Scherer and L. Vernazza, JHEP [**1102**]{} (2011) 080 \[arXiv:1011.6319\]; L. Hofer, arXiv:1212.4785; G. Faisel, JHEP [**1208**]{} (2012) 031 \[arXiv:1106.4651\]; G. Faisel, Phys. Lett. B [**731**]{} (2014) 279 \[arXiv:1311.0740 \[hep-ph\]\].
H. N. Li and S. Mishima, Phys. Rev. D [**74**]{} (2006) 094020 \[hep-ph/0608277\].
D. Acosta [*et al.*]{} \[CDF Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. Lett. [**95**]{} (2005) 031801 \[hep-ex/0502044\].
K. F. Chen [*et al.*]{} \[Belle Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. Lett. [**91**]{} (2003) 201801 \[hep-ex/0307014\].
J. P. Lees [*et al.*]{} \[BaBar Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. D [**85**]{} (2012) 112010 \[arXiv:1201.5897\].
R. Aaij [*et al.*]{} \[LHCb Collaboration\], arXiv:1309.3742.
C. W. Chiang, N. G. Desphande and J. Jiang, JHEP [**0608**]{} (2006) 075 \[hep-ph/0606122\].
J. Beringer [*et al.*]{} \[Particle Data Group Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. D [**86**]{} (2012) 010001 and 2013 partial update for the 2014 edition. E. Gamiz, C. T. H. Davies, G. P. Lepage, J. Shigemitsu and M. Wingate \[HPQCD Collaboration\], Phys. Rev. D [**80**]{} (2009) 014503 \[arXiv:0902.1815\].
P. Ball and R. Zwicky, Phys. Rev. D [**71**]{} (2005) 014015 \[hep-ph/0406232\]; ibid. [**71**]{} (2005) 014029 \[hep-ph/0412079\]; Phys. Lett. B [**633**]{} (2006) 289 \[hep-ph/0510338\]; P. Ball, G. W. Jones and R. Zwicky, Phys. Rev. D [**75**]{} (2007) 054004 \[hep-ph/0612081\]; P. Ball and G. W. Jones, JHEP [**0703**]{} (2007) 069 \[hep-ph/0702100\].
[^1]: [email protected]
[^2]: [email protected]
[^3]: [email protected]
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'This paper introduces a fully deep learning approach to monocular SLAM, which can perform simultaneous localization using a neural network for learning visual odometry (L-VO) and dense 3D mapping. Dense 2D flow and a depth image are generated from monocular images by sub-networks, which are then used by a 3D flow associated layer in the L-VO network to generate dense 3D flow. Given this 3D flow, the dual-stream L-VO network can then predict the 6DOF relative pose and furthermore reconstruct the vehicle trajectory. In order to learn the correlation between motion directions, the Bivariate Gaussian modeling is employed in the loss function. The L-VO network achieves an overall performance of $2.68\%$ for average translational error and $0.0143 ^\circ/m$ for average rotational error on the KITTI odometry benchmark. Moreover, the learned depth is leveraged to generate a dense 3D map. As a result, an entire visual SLAM system, that is, learning monocular odometry combined with dense 3D mapping, is achieved.'
author:
- 'Cheng Zhao$^{1}$, Li Sun$^{2}$, Pulak Purkait$^{3}$, Tom Duckett$^{2}$ and Rustam Stolkin$^{1}$ [^1]'
bibliography:
- './references.bib'
title: |
**Learning monocular visual odometry with dense 3D mapping\
from dense 3D flow**
---
Introduction {#sec:1}
============
Simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) is an essential technique for mobile robot applications. In the past few decades, a substantial amount of research has been devoted to visual SLAM systems that enable robots to localize robustly and accurately in different environments. One of the most challenging branches of visual SLAM is monocular SLAM, which often suffers critically from absolute scale drift. Usually, some prior knowledge such as the height of the camera is necessary to alleviate scale drift. Moreover, these methods require hand-coded engineering efforts and excellent parameter tuning skills.
In recent years, deep learning techniques for visual odometry and SLAM have attracted considerable attention in the SLAM community. These methods not only provide good performance in challenging environments but also rectify the incorrect scale estimation of monocular SLAM. Supervised learning approaches formulate visual odometry (VO) as a regression problem. They explore the ability of CNN [@costante2017ls] or RNN [@wang2017end][@clark2017vinet] to learn ego-motion estimation using the change of RGB value features [@haarnoja2016backprop], deep flow [@muller2017flowdometry] and non-deep flow [@costante2016exploring] features. These methods are calibration-free but require a lot of expensive ground truth data for training.
On the other hand, some networks for predicting VO take advantage of geometric constraints, e.g. similarity constraints, epipolar constraints, etc., by integrating them into the loss function and training the network in an unsupervised manner. Although the trajectory ground truth is not required for these methods, consecutive frames [@zhou2017unsupervised][@ummenhofer2017demon][@vijayanarasimhan2017sfm] or stereo image pairs [@li2017undeepvo] along with the above geometric constraints are enough to provide sufficient supervision to train the network. However, these methods usually require the intrinsic parameters of the camera.
The main limitation of the above methods is that they all suffer from high dataset bias and require domain similarity between the training and testing sequences. Moreover, most of the deep learning geometry research only focus on visual odometry for localization without mapping. CNN-SLAM [@tateno2017cnn] is the forerunner to integrate learning of depth prediction with monocular SLAM to generate an accurate dense 3D map. But the odometry in CNN-SLAM is still based on the conventional method. Therefore, it is still not a pure deep learning SLAM method. In addition, some researches [@zhao2017fully][@zhao2017dense][@sun2017weakly][@sun2018recurrent] integrate deep semantic information into a conventional SLAM system. In this paper, a learning system for monocular SLAM is developed, which can simultaneously perform localization and dense 3D mapping through an end-to-end neural network. A learning visual odometry (L-VO) network with a 3D association layer is proposed for ego-motion estimation, which achieves an overall performance of $2.68\%$ for average translational error and $0.0143 ^\circ/m$ for average rotational error on the KITTI[^2] odometry benchmark. The main contributions can be briefly summarized as follows: i) A new baseline L-VO method with a 3D association layer is proposed for ego-motion estimation, ii) a Bivariate Gaussian loss function is used to learn the correlation between motion directions, iii) L-VO is extended to a learning monocular SLAM system. An overview of the proposed architecture is shown in Fig. \[fig:DeepVO\_Mapping\].
Related work {#sec:2}
============
Learning based visual odometry (Pre-deep learning era) {#sec:2.1}
------------------------------------------------------
In the recent past, some learning-based visual odometry estimation methods [@roberts2008memory][@roberts2009learning][@guizilini2011visual][@guizilini2012semi][@ciarfuglia2014evaluation] were explored, before deep learning began to dominate many computer vision and robotics tasks. These learning-based methods mainly explored different pre-deep learning methods such as SVM, Gaussian Processes, etc. using sparse optical flow features for camera localisation and motion estimation.
Supervised deep learning for visual odometry {#sec:2.2}
--------------------------------------------
One of the pioneering works on deep learning for visual odometry estimation was proposed by Costante *et al.* [@costante2016exploring]. They employed convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for ego-motion estimation from dense optical flow obtained by a non-deep method [@brox2004high]. Then, Muller *et al.* [@muller2017flowdometry] proposed Flowdometry, which combines FlowNet [@dosovitskiy2015flownet] and CNNs to obtain an end-to-end odometry system. Gabriele *et al.* [@costante2017ls] proposed Latent Space Visual Odometry (LS-VO) to find a non-linear representation of the optical flow manifold.
Tuomas *et al.* [@haarnoja2016backprop] explored LSTM for visual odometry. They utilized CNNs on the temporal change of RGB values (temporal derivatives) between two adjacent images. They utilized LSTM as a baseline in their work and proposed a back-propagation method for a Kalman Filter to learn the discriminative deterministic state estimators. Another seminal work on learning visual odometry was proposed by Wang *et al.* [@wang2017end][@wang2017deepvo]. They utilized FlowNet features with LSTM for an end-to-end visual odometry system. Clark *et. al* [@clark2017vinet] used the same network but fused the features of the monocular RGB camera with additional IMU readings for improved performance. Mehmet *et al.* [@turan2018deep] adopted a similar architecture – CNNs with LSTM – to develop a visual odometry system for endoscopic capsule robots.
Unsupervised deep learning for visual odometry {#sec:2.3}
----------------------------------------------
Most of the unsupervised visual odometry estimation methods predict the depth and ego-motion simultaneously. These methods do not require the trajectory ground truth but need camera parameters and often some additional information such as stereo images for training. Benjamin *et al.* [@ummenhofer2017demon] proposed the DeMoN architecture, which estimates not only depth and motion but also the surface normals and optical flow from a pair of images. They employed an unsupervised training loss function based on the relative spatial differences. Zhou *et al.* [@zhou2017unsupervised] also used a training loss function which minimizes image warping error of an image sequence for unsupervised depth prediction and ego-motion estimation. SfM-Net [@vijayanarasimhan2017sfm] predicts depth, segmentation, camera and rigid object motions, and transforms these to obtain frame-to-frame dense optical flow. Li *et al.* [@li2017undeepvo] combined the loss functions from [@zhou2017unsupervised] and [@godard2017unsupervised] to obtain an unsupervised visual odometry method that can recover the absolute scale.
Learning visual SLAM {#sec:2.4}
--------------------
Most of the deep learning geometry research only focuses on VO for localization without mapping. The only forerunner of deep learning SLAM, CNN-SLAM [@tateno2017cnn], integrates CNN-style depth prediction with monocular SLAM to recover the absolute scale, and meanwhile generates a dense 3D map. However the odometry in CNN-SLAM is still based on the conventional method. As the estimated odometry of CNN-SLAM is not based on learning methods, it is not a complete end-to-end approach for learning SLAM.
Discussion {#sec:2.5}
----------
Conventional monocular visual odometry suffers from scale drift. Pioneering researchers [@muller2017flowdometry][@wang2017deepvo][@clark2017vinet][@costante2017ls] show that this problem can be mitigated via learning from 2D flow features. Inspired by RGBD-SLAM, the relative transform can be estimated directly from solving the PnP problem when the depth is given. In this paper, we model the visual odometry problem as a probabilistic regression problem. Multi-modal features, i.e. 3D flow (derived from the 2D flow and depth flow), are used to enhance the observation of the learning visual odometry. We further explore the correlation of motion directions and learn the translation with a multi-variate Gaussian rather than isotropic Gaussian [@wang2017end]. Moreover, the learned depth is leveraged to generate a dense 3D map. As a result, an entire visual SLAM system, that is, learning monocular odometry combined with dense 3D mapping, is achieved.
Methodology {#sec:3}
===========
Overview {#sec:3.1}
--------
The pipeline of the proposed learning monocular SLAM is shown in Fig. \[fig:DeepVO\_Mapping\]. The proposed L-VO network is an end-to-end neural network for simultaneous monocular visual odometry and dense 3D mapping. To be more specific, L-VO Net takes a pair of consecutive images as input and predicts Ego-motion. The dense 2D flow and depth are obtained with FlowNet2 [@ilg2017flownet] and DepthNet [@godard2017unsupervised] respectively. The estimated dense 2D flow and depth are further associated to obtain the 3D flow. Next, the 3D flow is fed into two separate regressors to predict the 6DOF relative pose (including scale) transform between each pair of images. As a consequence, the 6DOF camera trajectory can be obtained by accumulating relative poses. The point cloud is simultaneously generated and mapped incrementally from the given RGB image and the estimated depth. Furthermore, a 3D refinement is employed to remove the outliers and incorrect predictions. Finally, a dense 3D map is generated.
2D optical flow and depth prediction {#sec:3.2}
------------------------------------
For dense 2D optical flow prediction, the state-of-the-art approach FlowNet2 [@ilg2017flownet] is employed. FlowNet2 is a stacked architecture composed of a series of FlowNet-S [@dosovitskiy2015flownet], FlowNet-C [@dosovitskiy2015flownet] and FlowNet-SD [@ilg2017flownet]. It can deliver robust 2D dense optical flow, which is of significant importance for learning odometry. We fine-tune this network using the training KITTI data (as described in \[sec:4.3\]) and then transplant the network for our task.
For depth prediction, any of the state-of-the-art methods [@ummenhofer2017demon], [@zhou2017unsupervised] and [@godard2017unsupervised] can be adapted to our approach. In this paper, [@godard2017unsupervised] is employed because of its good performance in outdoor scenes. [@godard2017unsupervised] is an encoder-decoder architecture with appearance matching loss, disparity smoothness loss and left-right disparity consistency loss, which can be trained in unsupervised fashion. The training objective enables the network to perform the depth estimation from a monocular image. The network is also fine-tuned using the training KITTI data (as described in \[sec:4.3\]).
3D flow association layer {#sec:3.3}
-------------------------
We propose a 3D flow association layer which generates dense 3D flow from 2D flow and the corresponding depth maps. Assuming $F_{XY}^{k:k+1} \in \mathbb{R}^{h\times w \times2}$ is the predicted dense 2D flow (on X-Y image plane) between frame $k$ and $k+1$, and $D^{k}\in \mathbb{R}^{h\times w}$ is the predicted depth map of frame $k$, the 3D flow association layer can be defined as:
$$F_Z^{k:k+1} (x,y) = D^{k+1} \big( (x,y)+F_{XY}^{k:k+1}(x,y) \big) - D^{k}(x,y)$$
$$F_{3D}^{k:k+1} = \mathcal{C}(F_{XY}^{k:k+1}, F_Z^{k:k+1})$$
where $F_{3D}^{k:k+1} (x,y) \in \mathbb{R}^{3}$ refers to the 3D flow at pixel coordinate $(x,y)$ and $\mathcal{C}$ is the concatenation operation. If the depth value in frame $k+1$ cannot be associated with the corresponding depth value in frame $k$, the missing flow pixels between two adjacent frames can be interpolated through bilinear filtering. It is worth noting that the inverse depth (i.e. disparity) is more sensitive to the motion of surroundings and objects close to the camera. Hence, the inverse depth is used instead of the depth value in our approach. We still use the term “depth” in order to make the following description more readable.
Learning odometry {#sec:3.4}
-----------------
As shown in Fig. \[fig:DeepVO\_Net\], our learning odometry network is a dual stream architecture network, composed of two branches of convolution stacks followed by a squeeze layer [@iandola2016squeezenet] and two fully connected regressors. The convolution layers are composed of $3\times3$ filters and are of stride $2$. The numbers of channels in the two branches are $64$, $128$, $256$ and $512$. In order to keep the spatial geometry information, the pooling layer is abandoned in these two CNN stacks. In the end, the feature maps of the two branches are concatenated together and squeezed using a $1\times1$ filter: $$F_{3D} = \mathcal{S}(F_{XY}, F_{Z})$$ where $\mathcal{S}$ is the squeeze operation, $F_{XY} \in \mathbb{R}^{h\times w\times n}$ and $F_{Z} \in \mathbb{R}^{h\times w\times n}$ are the feature maps of 2D flow and depth flow respectively, $F_{3D} \in \mathbb{R}^{h\times w\times n/4}$ is the squeezed feature, and $n$ is the number of feature channels. The squeeze layer embeds the 3D feature map into a lower dimensional space, thereby reducing the input dimension of the regressors. A triple-layer fully-connected network is used for regression. We set the hidden layers of the regressors to size $128$ with $relu$ activation function. The output of the translation regressor is $6$ for bivariate Gaussian loss and that of the rotation regressor is $3$, which is trained through a $\ell_2$ loss. The details of the loss function are described as follows.
Bivariate Gaussian loss function {#sec:3.5}
--------------------------------
For most of the outdoor on-road driving data, e.g. KITTI dataset, there is a strong correlation between the translations along different axes in the horizontal plane. In contrast with the previous loss functions used in learning odometry, we aim to let our network learn the correlation along the forward and left/right translation directions. In this paper, this correlation is modeled as a multivariate Gaussian distribution.
The same camera configuration (axes definitions) as in the KITTI dataset is used, i.e. $x:$ right (horizontal), $y:$ down (vertical), $z:$ forward (horizontal), then the translation variation along $y$ coordinate is small compared to the other axes. Therefore, we only need to find the correlations between translation $x$ and translation $z$. In our approach, the Bivariate Gaussian Probabilistic-Density-Function ($PDF$) [@graves2013generating] is employed as the likelihood function for $x$ (left/right) and $z$ (forward) translation prediction. For the translation in $y$ direction and orientations, $\ell_2$ loss is used for optimization. Similar to [@elgammal2004inferring], the Euler angles rather than quaternion are used to represent the orientation, as the quaternion representation opens up the possibility of over-fitting in the rotation regression. We further include a $\ell_2$ regularization term for all weights to mitigate over-fitting. Our loss function is defined as: $$\begin{split}
loss = \sum_i^N -\log\left(PDF((x_{gt}^i, z_{gt}^i),~\mathcal{N}^i(\mu, \Sigma)\right) ~~~~~~~\\
+ \lambda_{1} \sum_i^N \Vert y_p^i-y_{gt}^i\Vert_2 + \lambda_{2} \sum_i^N \Vert r_p^i-r_{gt}^i\Vert_2 + \lambda_{3} \Vert W \Vert_2 &
\end{split}$$ where $N$ is the number of training pair images, $(x_{gt}^i, y_{gt}^i, z_{gt}^i)$ is the ground truth camera translation, and $(x_p^i, y_p^i, z_p^i)$ is the predicted translation of the $i^{th}$ image/camera. $r_p^i:=(e_p^z, e_p^y, e_p^x)^i$ and $r_{gt}^i:=(e_{gt}^z, e_{gt}^y, e_{gt}^x)^i$ are the predicted and ground-truth Euler angles, respectively. $W$ are the trainable weights of the neural network. $\lambda_{1}$, $\lambda_{2}$ and $\lambda_{3}$ are the scale factors to balance the weights of translation and orientations. The Gaussian Density Function $PDF$ is defined as: $$\begin{split}
PDF\left((x_{gt}^i, z_{gt}^i),~\mathcal{N}^i(\mu, \Sigma)\right) = ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\
\frac{exp(-\frac{1}{2}((x_{gt}^i, z_{gt}^i)-\mu) \Sigma^{-1} ((x_{gt}^i, z_{gt}^i)-\mu)^{T})} {((2 \pi)^2|\Sigma|)^{-1/2}}
\end{split}$$
where the bivariate Gaussian distribution $\mathcal{N}$ is:
$$\small
\mu = ( \mu_x, \mu_z )^i
, ~ \Sigma = \Big(
\begin{tabular}{cc}
$\sigma_x^2$ & $\rho \sigma_x \sigma_z$ \\
$\rho \sigma_x \sigma_z$ & $\sigma_z^2$,
\end{tabular}
\Big)^i.$$
where $\mu_x$ and $\mu_z$ are two mean variables in the left/right and forward direction, $\sigma_x, \sigma_z$ are the corresponding standard deviations and $\rho$ is the correlation coefficient of the translation between left/right and forward direction in the horizontal plane. Our neural network is expected to learn $(\mu_x, \mu_z, \sigma_x, \sigma_z, \rho, y_p)$, and $(e_p^z, e_p^y, e_p^x)$, corresponding to the 6-dimensional and 3-dimensional outputs of two regression neural networks.
Once the network is trained, i.e. the translation $(\mu_x, \mu_z, \sigma_x, \sigma_z, \rho, y_p)$ and rotation $(e_p^z, e_p^y, e_p^x)$ can be estimated from the network, the predicted translation in the horizontal plane is obtained through sampling within the bi-variant Gaussian distribution using:
$$x, z = \frac{1}{N_{s}} \sum_k^{N_{s}} (x_s, z_s)^k \sim \mathcal{N}_{p}(\mu, \Sigma),$$
where $\mathcal{N}_p$ is obtained from $(\mu_x, \mu_z, \sigma_x, \sigma_z, \rho)$, $(x_s, z_s)^k$ is the $k$th sample, and $N_s$ is the number of samples.
Octree depth fusion for mapping {#sec:3.6}
-------------------------------
We also proposed a dense 3D mapping method using the learned odometry and depth. Given the RGB image and the corresponding predicted depth image, the 3D point cloud $(X, Y, Z)$ can be obtained through:
$$\label{eq:backprojection}
d_{u, v}~
\begin{bmatrix}
u\\
v\\
1
\end{bmatrix} =
\begin{bmatrix}
f_{x}~s~c_{x}\\
0~f_{y}~c_{y}\\
0~~0~~1\\
\end{bmatrix}
~
\begin{bmatrix}
X\\
Y\\
Z
\end{bmatrix}$$
where $f_{x}, f_{y}$ are the focal lengths, $(c_{x}, c_{y})$ is the principal point offset and $s$ is the axis skew. $(u, v)$ is the pixel position in the image plane.
Unfortunately, the depth prediction usually suffers from blur around the depth borders. The predicted depth is not accurate enough to be utilized directly for 3D mapping. In our approach, the OctoMap representation [@hornung2013octomap] is used to refine and maintain the 3D map. In order to build a robust, accurate dense 3D map, depth fusion using measurements from multiple views is employed. In OctoMap, each leaf node $n$ stores the occupancy probability $P(n|o_{1:t})$. Given the 3D point measurements $o_{1:t}$, the probability $P(n|o_{1:t})$ can be updated as: $$\small
P(n|o_{1:t}) = \left[1 + \dfrac{1-P(n|o_{t})}{P(n|o_{t})} \dfrac{1-P(n|o_{1:t-1})}{P(n|o_{1:t-1})} \dfrac{P(n)}{1-P(n)} \right]^{-1}$$
here, $P(n|o_{t})$ can be obtained by a beam tracing sensor model. If the probability $P(n|o_{1:t})$ of the leaf node is beyond a threshold, this node will be marked as occupied in the dense 3D map. This probabilistic occupancy fusion can fuse the depth estimations from multiple views, and remove points arising from inaccurate depth predictions.
\[table:The comparison of performance\]
Experiments {#sec:4}
===========
Dataset {#sec:4.1}
-------
The proposed L-VO Net is evaluated on the most popular KITTI VO/SLAM benchmark. The KITTI VO/SLAM benchmark consists of $22$ sequences saved in PNG format. Sequences $00-10$ provide the sensor data with the accurate ground truth ($<10cm$) from a GPS/IMU system, while sequences $11-21$ only provide the raw sensor data. The large number of dynamic objects such as cars means that visual odometry could easily fail on this challenging dataset.
Network training and testing {#sec:4.2}
----------------------------
The network is trained with Adam optimization. The batch size is set to $100$, the momentum is fixed to $(0.9, 0.999)$, and the starting learning rate is $0.0001$. The step learning policy is adopted and the learning rate decay is set to $0.95$. The network is trained by $100$ epochs. In order to reduce the GPU memory requirement and training time, the raw images from the KITTI dataset are down-sampled $4$ times to $320 \times 96$. But using this small image size for training can definitely degrade the performance. The whole network is end-to-end trainable. Considering the GPU limitation, training the network step-by-step is more practicable. The pre-trained model (without training on KITTI dataset) from [@ilg2017flownet] and [@godard2017unsupervised] is adapted and then fine-tuned using the training KITTI data (as described in \[sec:4.3\]). In order to enhance the performance and avoid over-fitting, both geometric augmentation (translation, rotation, scaling) and image augmentation (color, brightness, gamma) are employed. As mentioned in [@dosovitskiy2015flownet][@godard2017unsupervised] and [@wang2017end], we also observe that these data augmentation techniques are crucial to improve the 2D flow estimation, depth prediction, and especially VO prediction, because of the limited number of training examples. During testing, the number of Gaussian samples is set to $10000$.
Visual odometry performance {#sec:4.3}
---------------------------
We perform two kinds of evaluation for the proposed methods. The first evaluation is based on sequence $00-10$. Both the qualitative and quantitative results are reported for analysis. For fair comparison, we follow the same partition proposed by [@wang2017deepvo][@wang2017end] and split the sequences 00-10 to 00, 02, 08, 09 for training and 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 10 for testing. The second evaluation is based on sequence 00-21. The sequence 00-10 is employed for training and sequence 11-21 for testing. Only the qualitative results are provided because the ground truth of sequence 11-21 are not provided. The open-source visual odometry library VISO2 [@geiger2011stereoscan] is employed as the baseline method. It provides both monocular visual odometry and stereo odometry. For monocular VO, the fixed height (1.7) and pitch (-0.03) are employed in order to recover the absolute scale.
We evaluate the learning odometry using the KITTI VO evaluation metrics, computing the average translational and rotational RMSE for all possible sub-sequences of length $(100,\ldots,800)$ meters. Note that the same evaluation metric was employed in [@wang2017end].
For the first evaluation, the overall performance of average translational and rotational errors of L-VO based on 2D flow and 3D flow can reach $4.71\%, 0.0241 ^\circ/m$ and $2.68\%, 0.0143 ^\circ/m$, respectively, using the standard KITTI evaluation metrics. The detailed comparison of performances (some entries are copied from [@wang2017end]) is shown in Table \[table:The comparison of performance\]. It is clear that the performance of both L-VO (2D) and L-VO (3D) is much better than conventional monocular VO. L-VO (3D) performs slightly worse than conventional stereo VO. This can also be seen in the predicted trajectory Fig. \[fig:odometry\]. Most of the time, the average drift distances of the red line (L-VO 3D) and green one (L-VO 2D) are between that of the light blue line (stereo VO) and dark blue line (monocular VO). The red line is much closer to the light blue line.
The main limitation of monocular VO and SLAM is the absolute scale estimation. However, with a deep learning method, the scale can be estimated more accurately without any scene-based geometric constraints such as camera height. This is one of the main reasons why the proposed L-VO(2D) and L-VO(3D) outperform the conventional monocular VO.
As we formulate VO prediction as a regression problem, multi-modal features can enhance the prediction. That is the reason why the result of L-VO(3D) is better than L-VO(2D) and closer to the performance of stereo VO. Another reason why L-VO(3D) can be close to stereo VO is that the $(x, z)$ constraint in the Bivariate Gaussian loss function can learn the translation correlation between the left/right and forward direction. This learned constraint can make the trajectory more accurate – see, for example, the straight line in Fig. \[fig:sequence04\] and corner in Fig. \[fig:sequence05\].
For low-speed scenarios, the magnitude of 2D flow is insignificant and thus provides a weak feature response to the network, while the magnitude of the depth flow is still quite strong even in a low-speed situation. Thus, the depth flow feature is a good complement to 2D flow in low-speed situations, which is further observed in Fig. \[fig:TS\] and Fig. \[fig:RS\]. Moreover, because the training data is only provided by $4$ sequences, multi-modal features, *i.e.*, 3D flow can enhance the robustness of 6DOF relative pose regression.
For the second evaluation, the L-VO network is trained using more data, i.e. sequence 00-10. Due to the lack of ground truth, only qualitative results are shown in Fig. \[fig:odometry1\]. It can be seen that the L-VO network can also give a high-quality prediction in the new scenarios. Both L-VO(2D) and L-VO(3D) outperform monocular VO thanks to better scale estimation. The trajectory of L-VO(3D) is closer to stereo VO than L-VO(2D). However, the performance of L-VO(2D) is boosted more than L-VO(3D) by using more training data.
During testing, we observe that L-VO cannot give a similar prediction to stereo VO for sequence 21 (Fig. \[fig:sequence21\]). This sequence is very challenging as it is captured over a long distance in a high-speed scenario (up to 80km/h). The main difficulty L-VO encounters is the high number of moving objects such as fast-moving cars in this street. As displayed in Fig. \[fig:Failed\], the main flow feature is extracted from the fast-moving cars. Therefore, the main challenge for flow-based learning VO is to remove the effects of dynamic objects.
Dense 3D mapping {#sec:4.4}
----------------
A learning monocular SLAM system integrated with L-VO(3D) is deployed in this paper. The whole system is implemented under ROS and the neural network is implemented using Tensorflow trained on an NVIDIA Titan GPU. Compared to LSD and ORB monocular SLAM, our system can generate a significantly denser 3D map. In order to alleviate the border blur and wrong prediction of depth, depth fusion from multiple frames is employed during mapping. In order to reduce the hardware resource requirement, OctoMap is used for the map representation instead of the point cloud. Given the dense refinement of depth information, a dense 3D map can be generated online. In Fig. \[fig:Map\], the center image is the dense 3D map of the sequence $07$ in the KITTI dataset and the small images in the surrounding show enlarged local areas of the global map. It can be seen that after depth fusion, sharply defined shapes such as the car, trees and building are obtained. Moreover, a lot of outliers and noise are removed to make the map cleaner.
Conclusion {#sec:5}
==========
In this paper, a learning system for monocular SLAM is proposed, which can deploy simultaneous localization using a L-VO neural network and the dense 3D mapping. Its performance exceeds most of the monocular SLAM approaches and is even comparable with some stereo SLAM approaches. Compared with conventional SLAM, its main limitations are the high computational requirements and high dataset bias. A demo can be found on the first author’s Youtube channel[^3].
Acknowledgement
===============
The authors was funded by a DISTINCTIVE scholarship, EU H2020 projects: RoMaNS (645582) & ILIAD (732737).
[^1]: $^{1}$ Extreme Robotics Lab, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK, B15 2TT. [[email protected]]{}. $^{2}$ Lincoln Centre for Autonomous Systems (L-CAS), University of Lincoln, UK, LN6 7TS. $^{3}$ Cambridge Research Lab, Toshiba Research Europe, Cambridge, UK, CB4 0GZ.
[^2]: <http://www.cvlibs.net/datasets/kitti>
[^3]: <https://youtu.be/Ccj1O7yndIk>
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We demonstrate control and stabilization of an optical frequency comb generated by four-wave mixing in a monolithic microresonator with a mode spacing in the microwave regime (86 GHz). The comb parameters (mode spacing and offset frequency) are controlled via the power and the frequency of the pump laser, which constitutes one of the comb modes. Furthermore, generation of a microwave beat note at the comb’s mode spacing frequency is presented, enabling direct stabilization to a microwave frequency standard.'
author:
- 'P. Del’Haye, O. Arcizet, A. Schliesser, R. Holzwarth, T. J. Kippenberg'
title: Full Stabilization of a Microresonator based Optical Frequency Comb
---
*Introduction.—*Optical frequency combs [@Holzwarth2000; @Diddams2000] have become a powerful tool for high precision spectroscopy over the past decade and are moreover used for various applications such as broadband gas sensing [@Thorpe2006], molecular fingerprinting [@Diddams2007], optical clocks [@Diddams2001] and attosecond physics [@Goulielmakis2007]. Frequency comb generation naturally occurs in mode-locked lasers whose emission spectrum constitutes an optical frequency ruler and consists of phase coherent modes with frequencies $f_{m}=f_{\text{CEO}}+m\cdot f_{\text{rep}}$ (where $m$ is the number of the comb mode). Consequently, stabilization of a frequency comb requires access to two parameters: the spacing of the modes, which is given by the rate $f_{\text{rep}}$ at which pulses are emitted, and the offset frequency, given by the carrier envelope offset frequency $f_{\text{CEO}}$, which can be measured and stabilized using the powerful technique of self-referencing (by employing for instance an $f-2f$ interferometer [@Jones2000a; @Telle1999]). Indeed, these techniques have been critical to the success of mode locked lasers as sources of optical frequency combs.
Recently, a *monolithic* frequency comb generator has been demonstrated for the first time [@Del'Haye2007]. This approach is based on continuously pumped fused silica microresonators on a chip, in which frequency combs are generated via parametric frequency conversion through four-wave mixing [@chang1996], mediated by the Kerr nonlinearity [@Kippenberg2004a; @Savchenkov2004a; @Ilchenko2006; @Agha2007; @Maleki2008]. In this energy conserving process, two pump photons are converted into a symmetric pair of sidebands with a spacing given by the free spectral range (FSR) of the microcavity. This four-wave mixing process can cascade and give rise to frequency combs spanning up to 500 nm in the infrared with a mode spacing of up to 1 THz [@Del'Haye2007]. The comb modes have been shown to be equidistant to a fractional frequency uncertainty of one part in $10^{17}$ relative to the pump frequency [@Del'Haye2007].
{width="\linewidth"}
Here we present two major advancements that are neccessary preconditions for the monolithic comb generator to be viable in frequency metrology and related applications. First, we demonstrate that it is possible to control two degrees of freedom of the microcavity frequency comb (MFC) spectrum, which is required for full stabilization of the comb spectrum. In contrast to mode locked lasers, one comb parameter can be *directly* accessed via the frequency of the pump laser (since it is part of the MFC), whereas the mode spacing as second degree of freedom is controlled by changing the optical pathlength of the microcavity via the pump power dependent refractive index change of the microresonator. This type of comb control is very robust, since no moveable elements are involved as in the case of mode-locked femtosecond lasers. The actuators are used to demonstrate full stabilization of a microcavity frequency comb. Second and equally important, we show that smaller mode spacings in the microwave regime can be achieved in monolithic comb generators. This result thus overcomes a drawback [@Cundiff2007] of our previous work [@Del'Haye2007], which exhibited a mode spacing in the THz range that was not amenable to direct detection with photodiodes. Using larger scale microresonators approaching the mm-range, comb spacings of less than 100 GHz are achieved. We show that these combs produce an amplitude modulation in time domain, which is sufficient to directly measure a beat note at the mode spacing frequency. Using this beat note, stabilization of the mode spacing to a microwave frequency standard is demonstrated.
Figure 1 depicts a photograph of this next generation of larger scale monolithic comb generators with an increased diameter of $D = 750 \ \mu$m and a corresponding mode spacing of 86 GHz (optical quality factor $Q\approx 2\cdot10^{7}$, optical linewidth 10 MHz). The measured parametric oscillation threshold of 39 mW agrees well with the theoretical value [@Kippenberg2004a] of $P_{\mathrm{th}} \approx 2 \pi^2 \cdot n^2 \cdot \frac{D \cdot A_{\mathrm{eff}}}{\lambda \cdot n_2} \cdot \frac{1}{Q^2} \approx 32 \ \mathrm{mW}$ [^1] for an effective mode area of $A_{\mathrm{eff}} \approx \pi \cdot \left( 1.5 \ \mathrm{\mu m} \right)^2$ using $n=1.45$ and $n_2=2.2 \cdot 10^{-20} \frac{\mathrm{m}^2}{W}$ for the linear and nonlinear refractive index of silica. The toroids have been made from microfabricated silica disks with an initial diamameter of 800 $\mu$m, while the reflow process for the generation of surface tension induced toroids has been performed by moving the focus of a CO$_{2}$-laser beam around the circumference of the silica disks. Coupling of laser light into these resonators is achieved via tapered optical fibers as detailed in prior work [@Spillane2003; @Cai2000] yielding coupling efficiencies of more than 95%, an important prerequisite for high circulating energies within the resonator. Fig. 1(b) shows a comb spectrum with 86 GHz mode spacing, which is produced by pumping a 750-$\mu$m-diameter microtoroid with 200 mW of continuous wave (cw) power at 1570 nm. The spectral width may be improved by increasing the optical quality factor of the microtoroid ($Q$-factors of up to $10^{9}$ have been attained in millimeter size microspheres [@Vernooy1998; @BRAGINSKY1989]).
{width="\linewidth"}
*Stabilization of the microcavity frequency comb.—*The setup to control and stabilize the spectrum of microcavity based frequency combs is depicted in Fig. 2(a). One mode of a toroidal microresonator is pumped with a tunable external cavity diode laser (ECDL) amplified by an erbium doped fiber amplifier (EDFA), leading to the generation of a frequency comb. In contrast to earlier work [@Savchenkov2004a; @Savchenkov2008] reporting only phase modulation in the four-wave mixing process, we were able to directly measure the 86-GHz mode spacing beat by sending the comb to a fast photodiode (3 dB cut-off at 50 GHz). To measure the 86 GHz signal, it is mixed down to radio frequency (RF) using a harmonic mixer and the 6th harmonic of a local oscillator around 14.3 GHz. The generated RF-signal and thus the comb spacing is stabilized using a phase-locked loop (PLL) that controls the power launched into the microresonator via the diode current of the EDFA.
The second degree of freedom of the MFC is controlled via the frequency of the pump laser (defining the central mode of the comb), which is phase-locked to an optical reference defined by a mode of a fully stabilized erbium fiber laser based frequency comb with a repetition rate of $\approx$100 MHz [@Kubina2005]. Fast control on the pump laser frequency is achieved by actuation of the diode current of the ECDL (actuation bandwidth $\approx$1 MHz). Note that this actuator does not affect the launched pump power, since the subsequent EDFA is operated in saturation, correspondingly amplifying the signal to a constant value. An additional beat note between a MFC mode and a reference comb mode is generated for out-of-loop analysis of the comb stabilization \[“Beat 2” in figure 2(a)\]. All local oscillators used for stabilization of the MFC as well as the fiber laser comb are referenced to the same in-house hydrogen maser.
The temporal evolution of the mode spacing without stabilization is depicted in Fig. 2(b), measured with a radio frequency counter at a gate time of 1 s. The first part of the data corresponds to the situation where the active feedback to the pump power is disabled. A slow mode spacing drift of approximately 60 kHz/h has been observed, which can be attributed to resonator temperature drifts during the measurement. Additionally, faster fluctuations with a time constant of several seconds, which originate from pump power fluctuations and unstable coupling are present. The fluctuations are dramatically reduced when the lock is activated, as can be seen in figure 2(c). Note that the mode spacing in figure 2(b) and 2(c) has been measuring and stabilized using “beat1” and “beat2” (The experiment has been conducted with a smaller cavity with 400 GHz mode spacing). The recorded beat reveals counter gate time limited fluctuations of less than 1 mHz. Fig. 2(d) depicts the in-loop beat of the pump laser, phase-locked to a reference comb mode. An out-of-loop measurement of the stabilized MFC is presented in the last section.
To obtain a better understanding of the mode spacing of MFCs, a measurement of the Allan deviation $\sigma_A (\tau)$ of both the stabilized and free drifting comb spacing has been conducted \[Fig. 3\] with a fast photodiode (using the resonator with mode spacing of $\approx$86 GHz). At a gate time of 1 second, the free drifting comb exhibits relative fluctuations of $\sigma_A = 4 \times 10^{-8}$ while the stabilized beat is stable to $\sigma_A = 7 \times 10^{-13}$ relative to the mode spacing frequency. The inset of Fig. 3 shows a spectrum of the stabilized microwave mode spacing beat note, whereby the width of the coherent peak is limited by the resolution of the spectrum analyzer (10 Hz).
{width="\linewidth"}
{width="\linewidth"}
*Control parameters of the microcavity frequency comb.—*Since the pump laser is part of the frequency comb (similar to the comb generators based on intracavity phase modulators [@KOUROGI1993]), we can describe the comb modes by $\nu_{m}=\nu_\mathrm{0}\pm
m\cdot\nu_{\mathrm{ms}}$ (with the pump frequency $\nu_\mathrm{0}$, the mode spacing $\nu_{\mathrm{ms}}$ and $m$ being an integer number). To measure the dependence of the mode spacing $\nu_{\mathrm{ms}}$ on the pump power $P_{\mathrm{in}}$, one microresonator mode is thermally locked to the pump laser [@Carmon2004] (whereby small fluctuations of the pump detuning are compensated due to the thermally induced frequency shift of the microresonator). This thermal self-locking allows for tuning ranges of tens of GHz without losing the resonance of the microcavity [@Carmon2004]. After thermally locking the microcavity mode to the pump laser we investigate the influence of pump laser frequency $\nu_\mathrm{0}$ and power $P_\mathrm{in}$ on the comb spacing. Using a matrix notation, the two comb parameters can be written as: $$\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
\nu_\mathrm{0} \\
\nu_{\mathrm{ms}}-\nu^0_{\mathrm{ms}}
\end{array}
\right)
=
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & 0 \\
\gamma_\nu & \gamma_\mathrm{p}
\end{array}
\right)
\cdot
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
\nu_\mathrm{0} \\
P_\mathrm{in}
\end{array}
\right) \ \ \mathrm{,}
\label{eqn:matrixform}$$ where $\nu^0_{\mathrm{ms}}$ is the mode spacing at a certain setpoint used for stabilization. The two parameters $\gamma_\mathrm{p}$ and $\gamma_\nu$ describe the influence of the pump laser’s power and frequency on the mode spacing, respectively. They are determined by measuring the mode spacing change when varying the power $P_\mathrm{in}$ at a constant frequency $\nu_\mathrm{0}$ and vice versa. Figure 4(a) and (b) show the result of this measurement yielding $\gamma_\mathrm{p} \approx 20 \ \mathrm{kHz} / \mathrm{mW}$ and $\gamma_\nu \approx 650 \ \mathrm{Hz} / \mathrm{MHz}$ around the chosen setpoint. Thus, having a non-zero $\gamma_\mathrm{p}$ allows for diagonalization of the transfer matrix in equation \[eqn:matrixform\] and consequently independent control of both comb parameters.
The main contribution to the mode spacing change with launched power (cf. Fig. 4b) can be explained by the changed temperature of the resonator through absorped optical power. This temperature change leads to a changed refractive index in silica which affects the optical pathlength of the microresonator modes. The thermal contribution to the mode spacing tuning has been quantified by comparing the mode spacing tunability with the pump power dependent frequency of the microcavity mode. The latter has been measured in the same toroid used for stabilization by scanning the laser over a resonance and measuring the maximum detuning frequency with respect to the cold cavity mode at different powers (see reference [@Carmon2004] for details on thermal effects in microcavites). The *maximum* resonance shift as a function of pump power has been measured to vary with $\Gamma_\mathrm{p} = -46 \ \mathrm{MHz} / \mathrm{mW}$, which is in good agreement with the measured mode spacing change multiplied by the mode number of $\gamma_\mathrm{p} \cdot m =-20 \ \mathrm{kHz} / \mathrm{mW} \cdot 2244 \approx - 45 \ \mathrm{MHz}/\mathrm{mW}$ (using m = 2244 for a cavity mode at 193 THz and a mode spacing of 86 GHz). Note that for larger pump power tuning ranges the mode spacing dependence becomes more complex, which may be attributed to the generation of additional sidebands contributing differently to the thermal effect of the microcavity and the influence of cross and self-phase modulation [@Kippenberg2004a].
{width="\linewidth"}
Next the locking bandwidth was investigated using the setup in Fig. 4(c). The control signal for the intracavity power is modulated at varying frequencies and added to the correction signal of the phase-locked loop, while simultaneously measuring the correction signal that tries to compensate the perturbation. The result of the measurement in Fig. 4(d) shows the frequency dependence of the correction signal, exhibiting a 3 dB cut-off at ca. 10 kHz. This measured value is in good agreement with the expected thermal cut-off frequency in silica, which can be estimated by $f_{\mathrm{c}}=\frac{\kappa
}{2 \pi \cdot R_{0}^{2}}\approx 16$ kHz [@Boyd] (with the thermal diffusivity of silica $\kappa\approx
9\cdot10^{-7}\ \frac{\mathrm{m^{2}}}{\mathrm{s}}$ and $R\approx3\ \mathrm{\mu
}$m being the radius of the toroidal cross section). Thus, the small dimensions of the microcavity makes the thermal response sufficiently fast for the mode spacing stabilization.
*Out-of-loop measurements.—*To quantify the actual stability of the microcavity comb, an additional out-of-loop beat note of a sideband of the stabilized MFC and the reference comb has been generated and measured. The stability of the out-of-loop beat note has been measured with a RF-counter at a gate time of 1 second and shows a standard deviation of 1.24 Hz \[Fig. 5\].
*Conclusion.—*Stabilization of optical frequency combs generated by four-wave mixing in on-chip microresonators has been demonstrated for the first time. It is emphasized that the presented scheme for stabilization does not require *any* moveable parts and is thus highly mechanically robust. Moreover, generation of microwave beat notes is demonstrated allowing locking of the mode spacing to a frequency reference. The stabilization of a microcavity frequency comb in conjuction with mode spacings in the microwave domain is an important step towards a low cost, small sized frequency comb generator for spectroscopy applications, astrophysical spectrometer calibration [@Murphy2007], arbitrary optical waveform generation, optical distribution of microwave clock signals and high capacity telecommunication.
We thank T. W. Hänsch for discussions and suggestions. T.J.K. acknowledges support via an Independent Max Planck Junior Research Group. This work was funded as part of a Marie Curie Excellence Grant (RG-UHQ) and the DFG funded Nanosystems Initiative Munich (NIM). We thank J. Kotthaus for access to clean room facilities for sample fabrication.
[26]{} natexlab\#1[\#1]{}bibnamefont \#1[\#1]{}bibfnamefont \#1[\#1]{}citenamefont \#1[\#1]{}url \#1[`#1`]{}urlprefix\[2\][\#2]{} \[2\]\[\][[\#2](#2)]{}
, , , , , , ****, ().
, , , , , , , , , , ****, ().
, , , , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , , , , , , , , , ****, ().
, , , , , , , , , ****, ().
, , , , , , , ****, ().
, , , , , , ****, ().
, , , , , , ****, ().
, eds., ** (, ).
, , , ****, ().
, , , , , , ****, ().
, ****, ().
, , , , , ****, ().
, , , , , , ().
, ****, ().
, , , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , , , ****, ().
, , , , , , , , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, , , ****, ().
, ** (, ).
, , , , , , , , , , , ****, ().
[^1]: The same threshold bevaviour can be derived by calculating the power that is needed to shift a microcavity resonance by one linewidth via the static Kerr effect.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
---
abstract: 'We introduce TIGRESS, a novel framework for multi-physics numerical simulations of the star-forming interstellar medium (ISM) implemented in the [Athena]{} MHD code. The algorithms of TIGRESS are designed to spatially and temporally resolve key physical features, including: (1) the gravitational collapse and ongoing accretion of gas that leads to star formation in clusters, (2) the explosions of supernovae (SNe) both near their progenitor birth sites and from runaway OB stars, with time delays relative to star formation determined by population synthesis, (3) explicit evolution of SN remnants prior to the onset of cooling, which leads to the creation of the hot ISM, (4) photoelectric heating of the warm and cold phases of the ISM that tracks the time-dependent ambient FUV field from the young cluster population, (5) large-scale galactic differential rotation, which leads to epicyclic motion and shears out overdense structures, limiting large-scale gravitational collapse, (6) accurate evolution of magnetic fields, which can be important for vertical support of the ISM disk as well as angular momentum transport. We present tests of the newly-implemented physics modules, and demonstrate application of TIGRESS in a fiducial model representing the Solar neighborhood environment. We use a resolution study to demonstrate convergence and evaluate the minimum resolution $\Delta x$ required to correctly recover several ISM properties, including the star formation rate, wind mass-loss rate, disk scale height, turbulent and Alfvénic velocity dispersions, and volume fractions of warm and hot phases. For the Solar neighborhood model, all these ISM properties are converged at $\Delta x \le 8{\;{\rm pc}}$.'
author:
- 'Chang-Goo Kim'
- 'Eve C. Ostriker'
bibliography:
- 'ms\_arxiv.bib'
title: 'Three-phase Interstellar medium in Galaxies Resolving Evolution with Star formation and Supernova feedback (TIGRESS): Algorithms, Fiducial Model, and Convergence'
---
Introduction
============
Feedback from massive young stars plays a crucial role in regulating star formation and the properties of the interstellar medium (ISM) at all scales . Stellar winds and ionizing+non-ionizing radiation from massive stars profoundly affect their birth environment, and the large-scale outflows that these processes produce impose an upper limit on the lifetime star formation efficiency of the parent giant molecular cloud (GMC) [e.g., @2014ApJ...795..121L; @2015NewAR..68....1D; @2016ApJ...829..130R]. Protostellar outflows and jets driven in the course of low mass star formation may also contribute to supporting the parent molecular cloud, and extending its life [e.g., @2010ApJ...709...27W; @2014prpl.conf..451F]. When a massive stars dies, the most extreme feedback event occurs, with the instantaneous release of $\sim10^{51}{\; {\rm erg}}$ in the form of high-velocity supernova (SN) ejecta [e.g., @1999ApJS..123....3L; @2003ApJ...591..288H]. Among the many forms of stellar feedback, SNe are believed to be the most important for driving turbulence of the warm neutral medium and cold neutral medium of the ISM (WNM and CNM, respectively) [e.g., @2004RvMP...76..125M] and for regulating galactic star formation rates (SFRs) [e.g., @2010ApJ...721..975O; @2011ApJ...731...41O; @2011ApJ...743...25K], as well as for creating the hot component of the ISM [e.g., @1974ApJ...189L.105C; @1977ApJ...218..148M]. The collective effects of many (spatially and temporally) correlated SNe create superbubbles that expand away from the disk midplane and contribute to driving galactic fountains and winds [e.g., @2017ApJ...834...25K and references therein]. Expulsion of baryons in winds driven by star formation feedback are believed to play a critical role in shaping the galaxy stellar mass function, particularly in low-mass haloes .
Although the importance of SN feedback to the ISM has long been recognized [e.g., @1977ApJ...218..148M], proper implementation in numerical simulations is challenging due to the requirements of very high spatial and temporal resolution. A SN releases prodigious energy that is extremely concentrated in both space and time. This produces high velocity shock waves propagating into the surrounding gas, and the shocked ambient medium that comprises the interior of a SN remnant is extremely hot. At later stages, after the denser portion of the hot gas is able to cool, both individual SN remnants and superbubbles are bounded by shells of cooled, dense gas, while their interiors remain hot. Since the initial momentum of the SN ejecta is boosted (more than an order of magnitude) during the energy-conserving stage by the work of the expanding hot bubble on the surrounding ISM, it is crucial to resolve this evolutionary stage [e.g., @1988ApJ...334..252C; @1998ApJ...500...95T; @2015ApJ...802...99K]. For an isolated SN propagating into gas of number density $n=100-0.1{\;{\rm cm}^{-3}}$, the energy-conserving Sedov-Taylor stage ends at the shell formation time $t_{\rm sf} \sim 10^3 - 10^5{\; {\rm yr}}$, when the SN remnant radius is $r_{\rm sf}\sim 1 - 10{\;{\rm pc}}$. In order to obtain numerically converged results – in particular for the history of hot gas mass and the final radial momentum – these temporal and spatial scales must be resolved. @2015ApJ...802...99K found that convergence requires $r_{\rm sf}$ to be resolved by at least three grid zones, which imposes an upper limit on the initial size of the SN feedback region and the grid resolution $\Delta x$.
In cosmological galaxy formation simulations using current computational resources (where the best resolution is several tens of pc), it is generally not possible to resolve the Sedov-Taylor stage of individual SN remnants. Thermal energy dumped into a scale larger than the expected $r_{\rm sf}$ (or shared with a larger mass than this radius would enclose) immediately cools away, and this feedback has no impact on subsequent star formation [e.g., @1992ApJ...391..502K]. “Over-cooling” from unresolved SN feedback leads to overly efficient conversion of gas to stars, and galaxies which are too massive. To deal with the “over-cooling” problem in galaxy formation simulations, a wide variety of sub-grid models for treating feedback has been developed [e.g., @2012MNRAS.426..140D; @2013ApJ...770...25A; @2013MNRAS.429.3068T; @2014ApJ...788..121K; @2014MNRAS.445..581H]. Many sub-grid models have been calibrated to reproduce basic observables such as the stellar mass to halo mass relation [e.g., @2013ApJ...770...57B; @2013MNRAS.428.3121M], the Kennicutt-Schmidt relation [@1998ApJ...498..541K], star formation history, and other properties [e.g., @2014MNRAS.445..581H; @2014Natur.509..177V; @2015MNRAS.446..521S; @2015MNRAS.450.1937C; @2016MNRAS.462.3265D; @2016ApJ...824...79A; @2016MNRAS.463.1431K].
While recent efforts have been successful in matching stellar abundances and SFRs, detailed gas properties in the ISM and also circumgalactic and intergalactic media (CGM and IGM, respectively) can differ substantially depending on the feedback treatment adopted. For example, in @2017MNRAS.466...11R, delayed cooling and kinetic feedback approaches unphysically enhance the ratio of gas outflow rate to SFR (a.k.a. the mass loading factor), altering the volume filling factors and compositions of the CGM and IGM. Approaches that accumulate enough energy from SNe that the temperature of the feedback region is high are able to limit cooling. However, from higher resolution simulations, it is known that the spatial and temporal correlations (or de-correlations) of SNe with the gas can strongly affect the proportions of ISM mass and volume in different phases . “Accumulation” of feedback energy based on the resolution of simulation will not in general recover the true space-time correlations of SN with each other and with the ISM gas.
In intermediate scale simulations, it is possible to incorporate detailed ISM physics and to resolve SN feedback. Utilizing vertically-stratified boxes that represent local patches in galactic disks, the roles of SNe in driving turbulence and shaping the multiphase ISM in galactic disks have been extensively investigated . Most studies to date have simply imposed a SN rate based on an empirical relationship between gas surface density and the surface density of star formation [e.g., the Kennicutt-Schmidt relation of @1998ApJ...498..541K], and evolve the ISM subject to this fixed rate, setting off SNe either at random locations or at loci restricted by their density. However, imposed feedback of this kind can lead to ISM states that are quite unphysical, e.g. with the hot medium occupying either a negligible volume or almost the entire domain. Instead, for self-consistency, the rate of star formation and SN explosions should be self-regulated, since SN feedback provides a strong negative feedback [e.g., @2010ApJ...721..975O; @2011ApJ...731...41O; @2011ApJ...743...25K; @2013ApJ...776....1K].
Only a few recent simulations have studied the effects of resolved SN feedback within models in which the SN rate in the three-phase ISM is self-consistently determined by collapse under self-gravity . Furthermore, these simulations have had relatively brief duration ($\le 100{\;{\rm Myr}}$), and do not appear to have reached a quasi-steady state in which the rates of star formation and feedback and the ISM properties are independent of initial conditions. These simulations have also neglected galactic differential rotation, which is responsible for limiting gravitational collapse at large scales [e.g., @2002ApJ...581.1080K] and creating and maintaining magnetic fields via galactic dynamos [e.g., @2015ApJ...815...67K].
In this paper, we present a comprehensive framework for modeling the turbulent, magnetized, multiphase, self-gravitating ISM in a local, vertically-stratified box with sheared rotation, including star formation and SN feedback. The TIGRESS (Three-phase Interstellar medium in Galaxies Resolving Evolution with Star formation and Supernova feedback) framework we have developed is designed to be applied in a wide variety of galactic environments. The investigation underway will produce detailed theoretical representations of the ISM and star formation properties for comparison to observations of the Milky Way and nearby galaxies. In addition, resolved TIGRESS simulations may be used to develop and calibrate sub-grid models for galaxy formation simulations in which direct resolution of the ISM, star formation, and feedback effects – including driving winds – is not possible.
To achieve the highest level of realism and predictive power in simulating the star-forming ISM, standard algorithms to evolve the equations of magnetohydrodynamics (MHD), solve for self-gravity, and apply heating and cooling must be coupled to a number of more specialized methods that represent key physical elements that are particular to the problem at hand. The specialized TIGRESS algorithms include treatment of local gravitational collapse and accretion onto sink/star particles representing clusters, and treatment of direct feedback to the ISM from sink/star particles in the form of SNe and photoelectric heating, based on a stellar population synthesis model. In addition to OB stars in clusters represented by sink/star particles, we model runaway OB stars ejected from these sites; both produce SNe. TIGRESS allows for three different types of SN feedback, representing different evolutionary stages of SN remnants, and the type applied depends on the ambient density surrounding the explosion site and the local grid resolution. In addition to explicitly following the energy-conserving stage of SN remnants (which is almost always possible at the typical grid resolution), TIGRESS allows for two other treatments of SNe that follow the momentum-conserving or the free-expansion stages of SN remnants (SNRs) when the ambient density is either very high or very low, respectively. In the former case this captures the correct momentum injection by a SN to the surrounding ISM when the pre-radiative SNR evolution is unresolved, and in the latter case this captures early evolution more correctly before thermalizing the interior of the SNR. In this paper, we describe the specialized TIGRESS algorithms (and tests of these methods) fully so that the simulations we conduct will be reproducible by other groups.
To demonstrate the application of TIGRESS, we present results from a fiducial simulation with parameters similar to those of the Solar neighborhood. This model runs long enough (three galactic orbits, or $\sim 700{\;{\rm Myr}}$) that a fully self-consistent quasi-steady state is reached, with more than ten self-regulation cycles of star formation. We show time histories of star formation and feedback loops, as well as basic gas properties including phase balance, turbulent velocities, magnetic field strengths, and disk scale heights. The resulting ISM is highly realistic, with cold, warm, and hot phases; velocity dispersions and magnetic field strengths are also realistic.
In addition to simple tests of individual numerical modules, it is important to test the overall behavior of the complex, highly-coupled nonlinear model system. An essential “system test” that is required in any complex application, and particularly any application involving turbulence, is the study of convergence with respect to numerical resolution. Previously, there have been resolution studies mainly focused on convergence in the mass fractions of the three thermal phases mediated by SN feedback (at fixed rates) in different models . In the present work, a significant advance is that the SN feedback rate is self-regulated (by the response of star formation to changes in the ISM induced by feedback), and the temporal/spatial correlations of SNe are realistic with respect to the various ISM phases. Systematic exploration of resolution effects and convergence criteria for the self-consistent TIGRESS implementation is required. We present a resolution study for the fiducial simulation, varying resolution from $\Delta x =2{\;{\rm pc}}$ to $64{\;{\rm pc}}$. We analyze convergence of several properties including the SFR, wind mass-loss rate, disk scale height, turbulent and Alfvénic velocity dispersions, and volume fractions of warm and hot phases.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section \[sec:method\], we describe our numerical algorithms. Section \[sec:sp\] describes treatment of sink/star particles (including creation, accretion, aging, and integration of motion). Section \[sec:feedback\] describes feedback algorithms including our population synthesis treatment, treatment of FUV radiation/photoelectric heating (Section \[sec:sp\_fuv\]), and treatment of SN rates and energy injection prescriptions (Sections \[sec:snr\] - \[sec:explosion\]). In Section \[sec:Fiducial\], we present results from our fiducial Solar neighborhood model with spatial resolution of $\Delta x=4{\;{\rm pc}}$. In Section \[sec:conv\], we present a convergence study of the fiducial run with varying spatial resolution. Section \[sec:summary\] summarizes the paper.
Numerical Methods {#sec:method}
=================
Magnetohydrodynamic Equations and Additional Physics
----------------------------------------------------
We solve the ideal MHD equations in a local, shearing box [e.g., @2010ApJS..189..142S]. The transformation maps from global cylindrical $(R,\phi)$ coordinates to local Cartesian coordinates as $(x,y)=(R-R_0, R_0[\phi-\Omega t])$, where $R_0$ is the galactocentric distance of the box center and $\Omega$ is the angular velocity of galactic rotation at $R_0$. The vertical coordinate $z$ remains global. Assuming galactic differential rotation with the shear parameter $q\equiv -d\ln\Omega/d\ln R|_{R_0}=1$ for a flat rotation curve, we have background shear velocity of ${\mathbf{v}}_s=-q\Omega x{\hat{\mathbf{y}} }$. In this local, rotating frame, inertial forces emerge in the form of the Coriolis force, $-2\mathbf{\Omega}\times {\mathbf{v}}$, and the tidal potential, $\Phi_{\rm tidal}=-q\Omega^2 x^2$. Including gaseous and (young) stellar self-gravity, a fixed “external” gravitational potential to represent the old stellar disk and dark matter halo, and optically thin cooling and heating, the governing equations are given by $$\label{eq:cont}
{\frac{\partial {\rho}}{\partial {t}}}+{\nabla \cdot {\left({\rho{\mathbf{v}}}\right)}}=0,$$ $$\label{eq:mom}
{\frac{\partial {(\rho{\mathbf{v}})}}{\partial {t}}}+{\nabla \cdot {\left({\rho{\mathbf{v}}{\mathbf{v}}+ P + \frac{B^2}{8\pi}-
\frac{{\mathbf{B}}{\mathbf{B}}}{4\pi}}\right)}}=
-2\mathbf{\Omega}\times(\rho{\mathbf{v}})-\rho\nabla\Phi_{\rm tot},$$ $$\label{eq:energy}
{\frac{\partial {}}{\partial {t}}}{\left({\frac{1}{2}\rho v^2+\frac{P}{\gamma-1}+\frac{B^2}{8\pi}}\right)}+
{\nabla \cdot {\left[{{\left({\frac{1}{2}\rho v^2 +
\frac{\gamma}{\gamma-1}P+\rho\Phi_{\rm tot}}\right)}{\mathbf{v}}+\frac{({\mathbf{B}}\times{\mathbf{v}})\times{\mathbf{B}}}{4\pi}}\right]}}=
-\rho\mathcal{L},$$ $$\label{eq:induction}
{\frac{\partial {\mathbf{B}}}{\partial {t}}}={\nabla \times {\left({{\mathbf{v}}\times\mathbf{B}}\right)}},$$ $$\label{eq:poisson}
\nabla^2\Phi=4\pi G(\rho+\rho_{\rm sp}).$$ Here, $\rho$ is the gas density, ${\mathbf{v}}$ is the gas velocity, $P$ is the gas thermal pressure, ${\mathbf{B}}$ is the magnetic field, $\Phi_{\rm tot}=\Phi+\Phi_{\rm ext} +\Phi_{\rm tidal}$ is the total gravitational potential, $\rho\mathcal{L}=n_H[n_H\Lambda(T)-\Gamma]$ is the net cooling function, $n_H=\rho/(\mu_H m_H)$ is the number density of hydrogen nuclei, and all other symbols have their usual meaning. The quantity $\rho_{\rm sp}$ is the density of sink/star particles (representing stellar clusters formed by gravitational collapse) mapped onto the nearest $3^3$ grid cells using the triangular-shaped-cloud scheme [@1981csup.book.....H].
To follow radiative heating and cooling over the full range of temperatures and densities that occur in the three-phase ISM, a variety of approaches can be adopted. For most accurate treatment, time-dependent chemistry is required; although in general this is computationally quite expensive, it is also possible to design a reduced chemical network that retains just the most essential reactions for key coolants [e.g., @2016arXiv161009023G]. For present purposes, we take the simpler approach of adopting a cooling coefficient $\Lambda(T)$ using the fitting formula in @2002ApJ...564L..97K [see @2008ApJ...681.1148K for form with correction of typographical error] for $T<10^{4.2}$, and collisional ionization equilibrium (CIE) cooling with solar metalicity from @1993ApJS...88..253S for $T>10^{4.2}$. In order to obtain gas temperature from pressure and density, in principle we need to know the gas composition (or, in other words, the mean molecular weight, $\mu$). However, here we do not follow detailed chemistry of molecule formation/dissociation and ionization/recombination. Instead, we simply use a tabulated mean molecular weight for the adopted CIE cooling at Solar metallicity of @1993ApJS...88..253S. As temperature increases, $\mu(T)$ varies from $\mu_{\rm ato}=1.295$ for neutral gas (here we do not include molecular gas) to $\mu_{\rm ion}=0.618$ for fully ionized gas. At intermediate temperatures, $\mu$ is calculated iteratively for a given pair of $P$ and $\rho$. The shape of the cooling function and mean molecular weight as a function of $T$ are shown in Figure \[fig:cool\]. For neutral gas, we include heating due to the photoelectric effect on grains; to exclude the ionized component we apply a normalization whose shape follows $\mu(T)$ (see Equation (\[eq:heat\])). The heating rate scales with the instantaneous FUV luminosity from sink/star particles (see § \[sec:sp\_fuv\] for details).
The external gravity in the vertical direction is modelled with a fixed potential. We use the Kuijken & Gilmore form [@1989MNRAS.239..571K] with a modification for the dark matter potential at large $|z|$. The combined (old) stellar disk and dark matter halo potential is given by $$\label{eq:phi_ext}
\Phi_{\rm ext}\equiv 2\pi G \Sigma_* z_*{\left[{{\left({1+\frac{z^2}
{z_*^2}}\right)}^{1/2}-1}\right]} + 2\pi G \rho_{\rm dm} R_0^2\ln{\left({1+\frac{z^2}{R_0^2}}\right)}.$$ Adopted parameters are given for the fiducial Solar neighborhood model in Section \[sec:Fiducial\]. Alternative values of $R_0$, $\Sigma_*$, $z_*$, and $\rho_{\rm dm}$ can be adopted to represent other local environments, whether within the Milky Way or within other disk galaxies.
Our physics modules are implemented within the [Athena]{} code, which employs directionally unsplit Godunov methods to solve the ideal MHD equations, including the constrained-transport algorithm to preserve $\nabla \cdot {\mathbf{B}}=0$ [@2008ApJS..178..137S]. In this paper, we use [Athena]{}’s predictor-corrector type integrator [@2009NewA...14..139S], adopting piecewise linear spatial reconstruction, and employing Roe’s Riemann solver. In addition, we apply “H-correction” [@1998JCoPh.145..511S] when the difference in signal speed is larger than $20{\; {\rm km}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}$ to suppress the carbuncle instability that can arise from strong blastwaves produced by SN explosions. We also apply “first-order-flux-correction” to cells with negative pressure and/or density after the second-order update; this situation can be produced by strong rarefaction waves in highly turbulent medium [@2009ApJ...691.1092L].
We solve Poisson’s equation (Eq. (\[eq:poisson\])) using the FFT method with shearing-periodic boundary conditions in the horizontal directions [e.g., @2001ApJ...553..174G] and vacuum boundary conditions in the vertical direction [@2009ApJ...693.1316K]. The net cooling source term is solved fully implicitly in an operator-split manner before the integrator step. Since the cooling time $t_{\rm cool}\equiv |P/[(\gamma-1)\rho\mathcal{L}]|$ in cold, dense gas is usually much shorter than the MHD time step, $\Delta t$, the cooling solver is sub-cycled if $t_{\rm cool}<\Delta t$. For sub-cycling the cooling, we use an adaptive time step corresponding to the instantaneous cooling time. We neglect explicit thermal conduction, viscosity, and Ohmic resistivity. Other key features in the TIGRESS implementation are sink/star particles and feedback in the form of stellar heating and SN explosions. We delineate the details of these below.
Sink/Star Particles {#sec:sp}
-------------------
We use sink/star particles to trace formation and evolution of star clusters and to apply appropriate feedback from massive stars based on a population synthesis model. The original implementation of our sink particle method is described in @2013ApJS..204....8G [GO13]. We modify this to accommodate a non-isothermal equation of state for sink creation, and to allow for non-accreting star particles (representing older clusters). We also implement a symplectic particle integration method for the shearing-box rotating frame, and introduce a particle age attribute needed to handle feedback from massive stars (the feedback itself is described in Section \[sec:feedback\]).
### Sink Creation {#sec:sp_creation}
We create a sink particle when the gas in a cell and its surroundings satisfies three conditions:
- [ the density of the cell exceeds a threshold]{},
- [ the cell is at the local potential minimum]{},
- [ the flow is converging]{}.
For the first condition, we use the Larson-Penston [@1969MNRAS.145..271L; @1969MNRAS.144..425P LP] density threshold suggested by GO13, $$\label{eq:rhoLP}
\rho_{\rm thr}\equiv\rho_{\rm LP}(\Delta x/2)=\frac{8.86}{\pi} \frac{c_s^2}{G \Delta x^2},$$ where $c_s\equiv (P/\rho)^{1/2}$ is the sound speed of the cell. Note that the density threshold suggested by @1997ApJ...489L.179T has the same parameter dependence, but with a coefficient of $\pi/16$ instead of $8.86/\pi$. As discussed by GO13, the motivations for using the LP density threshold are (1) the LP solution $\rho_{\rm LP} (r) \rightarrow 8.86 c_s^2/(4 \pi G r^2)$ for $r\rightarrow 0$ is an “attractor” of gravitational collapse not just for the spherical case, but for arbitrary turbulent flows; and (2) the LP asymptotic solution guarantees supersonic collapse ($v_r \rightarrow
-3.28c_s$ for $r\rightarrow 0$). For an isothermal equation of state, numerical simulations have validated that these two conditions hold quite generally in collapsing regions [e.g., @1993ApJ...416..303F; @2005MNRAS.360..675V; @2011ApJ...729..120G; @2015ApJ...806...31G and references therein]. From the first condition, if the density reaches the threshold of Equation (\[eq:rhoLP\]), it may be a signature that runaway gravitational collapse is occurring; the singularity implies that this collapse is inherently unresolved on a computational grid. The second condition is important because introduction of a sink particle could potentially alter the fluid variables in the surrounding volume if the inflow were subsonic; supersonic inflow ensures that the sink region is causally disconnected from its surroundings.
In order to check the validity of the LP approximation for a non-isothermal collapse, we have run collapsing simulations that include time-dependent heating and cooling. To set this up, we start with a spherical profile in which instantaneous thermal and dynamical equilibrium hold at each radius. This initial equilibrium profile can be uniquely determined by solving the static momentum equation, Poisson’s equation, and thermal equilibrium for the CNM branch, with given central temperature and edge pressure. Here, we use $T_{\rm center}=20{\;{\rm K}}$ and $P_{\rm edge}/k_B=2000{{\;{\rm cm}^{-3}}\,{\rm K}}$. To initiate collapse, we multiply the density and pressure by a factor of 2. Due to the short cooling time, the temperature immediately readjusts to restore thermal equilibrium, but gravity is not balanced by pressure and the sphere undergoes collapse similar to that of an isothermal sphere.
Figure \[fig:besphere\] plots (a) number density and (b) radial Mach number $v_r/c_s$ as a function of radius for several different times. The initial condition is shown in black; profiles before (blue), at (red), and after singularity formation (green) are also shown. The dashed line in (a) denotes the LP density profile, $\rho_{\rm LP}=8.86c_s^2(r)/(4\pi G r^2)$ with sound speed at each radius set by local values at the time of singularity. Because $c_s$ is not a constant but increases outward, this density profile is slightly shallower than that in the isothermal case $\rho_{\rm LP}\propto r^{-2}$. The collapse starts from large radius and propagates inward (i.e. the location of the velocity extremum moves inward; e.g., @2009ApJ...699..230G). Eventually, the radial collapsing velocity exceeds the local sound speed, and the density profile of the inner part approaches the dashed line. When the central density reaches the LP density threshold (Eq. (\[eq:rhoLP\]) using the local $c_s$), we create a sink particle, and continue to follow the late-time accretion. At the time of singularity formation, $v_r\sim -3c_s$ for the high resolution run. If we do not create a sink particle when the central density reaches the LP threshold, unresolved collapse causes unphysical overshoots of density and out-of-equilibrium temperature; this failure is why sink particles are required. Figure \[fig:besphere\] shows that when we apply the LP density threshold as the creation criterion for sink particles, unphysical behavior does not arise and both low and high resolution runs give essentially the same density and velocity profiles before, at, and after singularity formation.
Since cold gas where collapse occurs is generally quite close to thermal equilibrium, we can estimate typical values of the LP threshold density for given $\Delta
x$ and given cooling/heating functions. For the CNM ($T<200{\;{\rm K}}$), the cooling function can be approximated by $\Lambda(T)\approx
2.8\times10^{-28}\sqrt{T}\exp(-92/T){\; {\rm erg}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}{\rm cm}^{3}$, where $T$ is the temperature in Kelvins. Then, the thermal equilibrium condition ($n_H\Lambda(T)-\Gamma=0$) can be solved for the equilibrium density at a given temperature. By equating the thermal equilibrium density to $n_{\rm thr}=\rho_{\rm thr}/(\mu_H m_H)\propto T/(\Delta x)^2$, the threshold temperature ($T_{\rm thr}$) is given by the nonlinear equation $$\label{eq:TLP}
T_{\rm thr}^{3/2}\exp{\left({-\frac{92}{T_{\rm thr}}}\right)}=0.6 {\left({\frac{\Gamma}{\Gamma_0}}\right)}
{\left({\frac{\Delta x}{{\rm pc}}}\right)}^2,$$ where $\Gamma_0=2\times10^{-26}{\; {\rm erg}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}$ is adopted for the Solar neighborhood [see @2002ApJ...564L..97K]. Given the solution $T_{\rm thr}$, the sink particle density threshold using the LP condition is then obtained from Equation (\[eq:rhoLP\]). The corresponding density threshold from the Truelove condition would use a coefficient of $\pi/16$ instead of $8.86/\pi$.
Figure \[fig:threshold\] shows the threshold density, temperature, and pressure that satisfy both the LP density threshold and thermal equilibrium, as a function of $\Delta x$ for $\Gamma=\Gamma_0$. We overplot as dotted lines the maximum equilibrium temperature of the CNM ($184{\;{\rm K}}$, blue) and the two-phase pressure ($P_{\rm two}=3110k_B{{\;{\rm cm}^{-3}}\,{\rm K}}(\Gamma/\Gamma_0)$, red) defined by the harmonic mean of the maximum and minimum equilibrium pressures of the WNM and CNM, respectively. $P_{\rm two}$ is characteristic of the midplane thermal pressure in the warm/cold atomic ISM when star formation is in a self-regulated state [@2010ApJ...721..975O; @2011ApJ...743...25K; @2013ApJ...776....1K]. Note that these particular values of $T_{\rm CNM, max}$ and $P_{\rm two}$ depend on the adopted cooling curve and on the value of $\Gamma$.
For self-gravitating collapse to be numerically captured under typical ISM conditions, the central pressure of a collapsing cloud at the local simulation resolution must be sufficiently high compared to the typical ambient ISM pressure; i.e. $P_{\rm thr}$ must be large enough compared to $P_{\rm two}$. If the resolution is too low, collapse cannot be captured. For example, Figure \[fig:threshold\] shows that resolution $\Delta x < 20{\;{\rm pc}}$ would be needed for the expected central pressure of a collapsing cloud to exceed that of the environment under Solar-neighborhood conditions ($\Gamma=\Gamma_0$). We note that the resolution needed to obtain $P_{\rm thr} \gg P_{\rm two}$ and capture collapse is easily accessible for local simulations, but that even the marginal resolution needed for $P_{\rm thr} \sim P_{\rm two}$ is inaccessible for current cosmological galaxy formation simulations.
After identifying any location where the threshold density is exceeded, we check the second two criteria for sink particle formation. In particular, we first test whether the gravitational potential in a candidate cell is the minimum in the control volume of the $3^3$ surrounding cells. Finally, we check flow convergence in all directions, $dv_x/dx<0$, $dv_y/dy<0$, and $dv_z/dz<0$ (not simply $\nabla\cdot{\mathbf{v}}<0$). We note that if the resolution is high enough, the additional criteria are essentially always satisfied (see GO13). The control volume has an effective radius of $r_{\rm ctrl}\equiv 1.5\Delta x$, and we check whether there are any existing sink particles within $2r_{\rm ctrl}$. If there are, a new sink particle will not be created.
For a cell that passes all the above conditions, we create a sink particle at the cell center. When a sink particle is created, the control volume is treated as ghost zones for the purpose of resetting the fluid variables. For example, the cells at faces, sides, and corners of the cubic control volume use averages of (respectively) one, two, and three contact cells in the surrounding grid to compute the density, momentum, and pressure. The cell containing the sink particle uses the average of six contact cells to compute its density, momentum, and pressure. In the shearing box, we need to carefully subtract and add the background velocity for corresponding cells, before taking and after applying averages, respectively. Note that we do not reset magnetic fields in the control volume. After the control volume density and momentum are reset as ghost zones, the sink particle mass and velocity are assigned such that the total mass and momentum of sink particle + control volume are equal to the value integrated over all $3^3$ zones prior to sink particle creation.
Finally, we note that we immediately treat a sink particle as a star cluster. This implicitly assumes that the “star formation time scale” – representing the interval from the beginning of gravitational collapse to star cluster formation – is negligible compared to other relevant timescales. In particular, our treatment is valid provided that the “feedback time scale” – the interval between star cluster formation and the first SN event ($\sim 4{\;{\rm Myr}}$ for [STARBURST99]{}) – is longer than “the star formation time scale.” Physically, it is reasonable to assume that massive stars would form within a free-fall time at the threshold density. In this light, instantaneous introduction of a sink particle would be valid up to resolution of $\Delta x=8{\;{\rm pc}}$, where $n_{\rm thr}{\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$}}100{\;{\rm cm}^{-3}}$ and $t_{\rm ff}\sim4{\;{\rm Myr}}$. In low resolution models with lower $n_{\rm thr}$, the free-fall time would exceed the true time before the onset of feedback. However, we do not explicitly introduce a time delay to account for this. Also, low resolution tends to lead to very massive sink particles, whereas in a higher resolution simulation there would have been several smaller sinks that form at different times. Taken together, these effects tend to (unphysically) increase the space-time correlation of star formation and feedback at low resolution, as we shall show later.
### Sink Accretion and Merging {#sec:sp_acc}
In contrast to the original GO13 implementation, subsequent to particle creation we reset control volume fluid variables and add mass and momentum to sink particles only when gas is converging to the control volume in all three directions. This modification is desirable because the current simulations develop very strong turbulence, such that there can be large relative velocities of particles and the surrounding gas. To check for flow convergence, we define the right/left face-averaged fluxes in the sink particle’s reference frame as $$\begin{aligned}
\overline{\mathcal{F}}_{r/l}\equiv
\sum_{j,k}\mathcal{F}_{\rho,i+2/i-1,j,k}
{\left({1 - v_{\rm x, sp}\frac{\mathcal{F}_{\rho,i+2/i-1,j,k}}{\mathcal{F}_{\rho v_x,i+2/i-1,j,k}}}\right)},\\
\overline{\mathcal{G}}_{r/l}\equiv
\sum_{i,k}\mathcal{G}_{\rho,i,j+2/j-1,k}
{\left({1 - v_{\rm y, sp}\frac{\mathcal{G}_{\rho,i,j+2/j-1,k}}{\mathcal{G}_{\rho v_y,i,j+2/j-1,k}}}\right)},\\
\overline{\mathcal{H}}_{r/l}\equiv
\sum_{i,j}\mathcal{H}_{\rho,i,j,k+2/k-1}
{\left({1 - v_{\rm z, sp}\frac{\mathcal{H}_{\rho,i,j,k+2/k-1}}{\mathcal{H}_{\rho v_z,i,j,k+2/k-1}}}\right)},\end{aligned}$$ where $\mathcal{F}$, $\mathcal{G}$, and $\mathcal{H}$ stand for fluxes in the $x$-, $y$-, and $z$-directions defined at cell faces, respectively, and $i$, $j$, and $k$ in the summation run from $i-1$ to $i+1$, $j-1$ to $j+1$, and $k-1$ to $k+1$, respectively, for a particle in a cell at $(i,j,k)$. We check the converging flow condition using $\overline{\mathcal{F}}_r<0$ and $\overline{\mathcal{F}}_l>0$, or equivalently, $\overline{\mathcal{F}}_r-\overline{\mathcal{F}}_l<0$ and $\overline{\mathcal{F}}_r\overline{\mathcal{F}}_l<0$, and similarly for $\overline{\mathcal{G}}$ and $\overline{\mathcal{H}}$. Note that these fluxes are calculated at $t^{n+1/2}$ so that we need to know particles’ velocity also at this time, which is what the particle integrator returns (see §\[sec:sp\_move\]).
When the converging-flow condition is satisfied, the particle accretes mass and momentum as in GO13. The accretion rates of mass and momentum to each sink particle are calculated based on the fluxes returned by the Riemann solver at the control volume boundary, combined with the mass and momentum differences within the control volume between the new, step $(n+1)$, and old, step $n$, control volumes if sink particles move across grid zones (see GO13). In order to calculate the accretion rate due to particles’ movement, we need to advance sink particles’ positions before the MHD integrator step, where we calculate the accretion rate based on the fluxes. This is important in preserving Galilean invariance of particle accretion (see test problem in §3.3 of GO13). Note that accretion can occur for a given particle before it hosts its first SN event (see § \[sec:feedback\]); after this time, sink particles become star particles and cease to accrete.
When the distance between two sink particles is smaller than $2r_{\rm ctrl}$, we merge them by creating a new sink particle at the center of mass of the two. All properties for the new sink particle are set by mass-weighted averages.
### Sink/Star Particle Types {#sec:sp_type}
We separate sink/star particles into three categories based on its (mean) age ${t_{\rm m}}$.
- [**“growing” particles**]{}: $0<{t_{\rm m}}<t_{\rm SN}$. This group consists of particles between their birth and their first SN event. The mean SN onset time is $t_{\rm SN}\sim 4{\;{\rm Myr}}$, but for any sink/star particle individual SN events are determined stochastically based on the rate from [STARBURST99]{} (see Figure \[fig:syn\]). “Growing” particles are treated as sinks, and as described above can accrete gas and merge with other “growing” particles. They exert gravity and contribute to the total mean FUV radiation.
- [**“feedback” particles**]{}: $t_{\rm SN}<{t_{\rm m}}<t_{\rm life}$. This group consists of star particles between their first SN event and the adopted feedback lifetime $t_{\rm life}\equiv 40 {\;{\rm Myr}}$. These particles do not accrete and merge; their motion is simply integrated as in Section \[sec:sp\_move\]. These particles exert gravity by contributing to $\rho_{\rm sp}$, and contribute total mean FUV radiation (Section \[sec:sp\_fuv\]) and SN feedback (Section \[sec:snr\]).
- [**“passive” particles**]{}: $t_{\rm life}<{t_{\rm m}}$. This group of particles is no longer active, and affects the gas and other particles only through the gravity they exert.
In addition, we use “runaway” particles to follow the position of runaways (see § \[sec:snr\]). These particles are massless “passive” particles and have no effect on the gravity and the gas. They are ejected from sink/star particles and host one SN event after an assigned delay time $\tau_{\rm run}$.
### Sink/Star Aging {#sec:sp_age}
After their formation, sink/star particles must age in time, in order for feedback to be appropriately applied based on the stellar population of the clusters they represent. To represent birth of a young stellar population from newly accreted gas, we assign individual sink/star particles a mass-weighted mean age: $${t_{\rm m}}= \frac{m_{\rm sp}({t_{\rm m}}+\Delta t)+
\Delta m \Delta t}{m_{\rm sp}+\Delta m},$$ where $\Delta m$ is the mass increment during a hydrodynamic time step $\Delta t$. Note that simple aging ${t_{\rm m}}= {t_{\rm m}}+ \Delta t$ is recovered as $\Delta m \rightarrow 0$. When two particles merge, the age is also calculated by taking a mass-weighted mean.
### Particle Motion Integration {#sec:sp_move}
We integrate particles’ positions and velocities from the equation of motion in a shearing box with gravity from both gas and particles, as well as the fixed gravitational potential from the old stellar disk. Since self-gravity is evaluated at steps $n$ and $n+1$, not at $n+1/2$, it is advantageous to use a “Kick-Drift-Kick (KDK)” form of a leap-frog integrator. The general form of a KDK integrator can be written as $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:kdk}
{\mathbf{v}}^{n+1/2}&=&{\mathbf{v}}^{n-1/2}+ \mathbf{a}(\mathbf{x}^n,{\mathbf{v}})\Delta t,\\
\mathbf{x}^{n+1}&=&\mathbf{x}^n + {\mathbf{v}}^{n+1/2}\Delta t.\end{aligned}$$ The acceleration $\mathbf{a}$ is the same as in the right-hand side of Equation (\[eq:mom\]) divided by $\rho$. It consists of the effective gravity, $-\nabla \Phi_{\rm tot}$, which depends on position, and the Coriolis force, $-2\mathbf{\Omega}\times{\mathbf{v}}$, which depends on velocity. Depending on the choice of velocity in the acceleration term, one can write down KDK integrators in explicit ${\mathbf{v}}\equiv{\mathbf{v}}^{n-1/2}$, implicit ${\mathbf{v}}\equiv{\mathbf{v}}^{n+1/2}$, and semi-implicit ${\mathbf{v}}\equiv({\mathbf{v}}^{n-1/2}+{\mathbf{v}}^{n+1/2})/2$ forms (see @2010ApJS..190..297B for DKD integrators). However, those integrators are not symplectic in a shearing box.
Here, we adopt a symplectic integrator for Hill’s equation suggested by @2010AJ....139..803Q [Q10] with a generalization for an arbitrary rotation profile with shear parameter $q\equiv -d\ln\Omega/d\ln R$. The full set of equations to advance velocity and position of a particle from $t^n$ to $t^{n+1}$ is as follows.
- First Kick: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:kick1x}
v_x^{n+1/2}& =& v_x^{n}+hf_x^{n}+2h\Omega (P_y^n-2\Omega x^{n})\\
\label{eq:kick1y}
v_y^{n+1/2}& =& P_y^{n}-2\Omega x^n-2h\Omega v_x^{n+1/2}\\
\label{eq:kick1z}
v_z^{n+1/2}& =& v_z^{n}+hf_z^{n},\end{aligned}$$ where $h\equiv\Delta t/2$, $P_y^n\equiv v_y^n+hf_y^n+2\Omega x^n$, and $\mathbf{f}=-\nabla \Phi_{\rm tot}^n $;
- Full Drift: $$\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{x}^{n+1} = \mathbf{x}^n + \mathbf{v}^{n+1/2}\Delta t;\end{aligned}$$
- Second Kick: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{eq:kick2x}
v_x^{n+1}& =& v_x^{n+1/2}+hf_x^{n+1}+2h\Omega (P_y^n-2\Omega x^{n+1})\\
\label{eq:kick2y}
v_y^{n+1}& =& P_y^{n}-2\Omega x^{n+1}+hf_y^{n+1}\\
\label{eq:kick2z}
v_z^{n+1}& =& v_z^{n+1/2}+hf_z^{n+1}.\end{aligned}$$
In practice, the self-gravity that enters in the second kick step (through $\mathbf{f}^{n+1}$) is not available until time $t^{n+1}$, because it requires an update of the gas density by the MHD integrator. Thus, while the position can be fully drifted to $t^{n+1}$, the velocity can be kicked only to $t^{n+1/2}$. This means that $v_x^n$ and $v_y^n$ appearing in Equations (\[eq:kick1x\]) and (\[eq:kick1y\]) are not immediately available. We therefore must begin each step by applying the “second kick” to the velocity associated with the previous timestep, i.e. for step $n'$ we would apply Equations (\[eq:kick2x\])-(\[eq:kick2z\]) with $n=n'-1$, which make use of $\mathbf{f}^{n'}$. Having particle velocities at $t^{n+1/2}$ is also useful for computing mass fluxes for evaluating the accretion onto sink particles.
We test our particle integrator using epicyclic orbits. With only the gravitational force that produces the background rotation curve of the galaxy ($\Phi_{\rm tot}=\Phi_{\rm tidal}$), a particle’s motion in a shearing box follows a planar epicyclic orbit described by $$\label{eq:epi_xy}
x(t)=A \cos (\kappa t),\quad y(t)=\frac{2\Omega}{\kappa}A\sin(\kappa t),$$ where $\kappa\equiv\sqrt{2(2-q)}\Omega$ is the epicyclic frequency, and $A$ is the (arbitrary) amplitude of the orbit. For this test, we adopt $(A,q,\Omega)\equiv(0.4,1,1)$, which gives the total energy of the orbit, $$E=\frac{1}{2}(\dot{x}^2+\dot{y}^2)+\Phi_{\rm tidal}= (2-q)\Omega^2 A^2=0.16.$$
Figure \[fig:epicycle\] shows energy (left) and position offset (middle) of the orbit for $\Delta t=10^{-3}/\Omega$, and convergence of position offset as a function of time step (right). For comparison, we also present results from explicit, semi-implicit, and implicit KDK integrators. Both the semi-implicit and the Q10 integrator show good energy conservation, without the secular energy increase of the explicit integrator or decrease of the implicit integrator. Position offsets (consisting of a phase shift, but not a change in the semi-major axis) increase over time for both semi-implicit and Q10 methods, with the Q10 integrator giving better results and more regular fluctuation. The mean phase errors over $t\Omega=40$ (right panel) show second order convergence as the time step gets smaller. For our fiducial model with $\Delta x= 4{\;{\rm pc}}$, typical timesteps have $\Omega \Delta t \sim 10^{-4}$-$10^{-5}$.
Star Formation Feedback {#sec:feedback}
-----------------------
### FUV radiation and photoelectric heating {#sec:sp_fuv}
For warm and cold gas, we implement photoelectric heating on grains. In reality, the heating rate at any location in the ISM depends on the dust density (which we assume is simply proportional to the gas density) and on the angle-averaged FUV intensity $J_{\rm
FUV}$. In the present implementation, we do not attempt direct radiative transfer from the active sink/star particles to compute $J_{\rm
FUV}$ at every spatial location (see note below), but we do vary the heating rate temporally based on the mean FUV radiation that the massive young stellar population would produce at any time. For a sink/star particle with mass $m_{\rm sp}$ and mass-weighted mean age ${t_{\rm m}}$, the FUV luminosity is $L_{\rm FUV,sp}=\Psi_{\rm FUV}({t_{\rm m}})m_{\rm sp}$. Here, we use a tabulated luminosity-to-mass ratio, $\Psi_{\rm FUV}(t)$, for FUV radiation ($6{\;{\rm eV}}< h\nu<13.6{\;{\rm eV}}$) from [STARBURST99]{} with a fully sampled Kroupa IMF (@2001MNRAS.322..231K; see blue solid line and left axis in Figure \[fig:syn\]).
We calculate total FUV luminosity $L_{\rm FUV}$ by summing $L_{\rm FUV,sp}$ from all sink/star particles. We further assume that $4 \pi J_{\rm FUV} \propto \Sigma_{\rm FUV}\equiv L_{\rm FUV}/(L_xL_y)$, where for the optically thin case and a uniform source distribution at the midplane, equality would hold.[^1] We compute the contribution to the photoelectric heating rate from the local disk assuming $\Gamma \propto J_{\rm FUV}$, where $\Sigma_{\rm FUV,0}=6.9 L_\odot/{\rm pc^2}$, corresponding to $J_{\rm FUV,0} = 2.2\times10^{-4}{\; {\rm erg}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}{\;{\rm cm}}^{-2}{\rm \; sr^{-1}}$ (or $G_0=1.7$ in Habing units; @1978ApJS...36..595D), yields $\Gamma_0=2\times10^{-26}{\; {\rm erg}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}$.
Including the temperature dependence of the mean molecular weight (to turn off photoelectric heating at high temperature) and adding a heating floor due to the metagalactic FUV ($4\pi J_{\rm FUV,meta}=6.7\times10^{-6}{\; {\rm erg}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}{\;{\rm cm}}^{-2}$ or $J_{\rm FUV,meta}/J_{\rm FUV,0}=0.0024$, @2002ApJS..143..419S) the adopted heating rate becomes $$\label{eq:heat}
\Gamma=\Gamma_0 {\left({
\frac{\mu(T)- \mu_{\rm ion}}{\mu_{\rm ato}-\mu_{\rm ion}}}\right)}
{\left({\frac{\Sigma_{\rm FUV}}{\Sigma_{\rm FUV,0}}+
0.0024}\right)}.$$
Both “growing” and “feedback” sink/star particles contribute to the FUV luminosity.
### Supernova Rates and Runaways {#sec:snr}
Let ${\xi_{\rm SN}}({t_{\rm m}})\equiv d(\mathcal{N}_{\rm SN}/M_{\rm cl})/dt$ be the specific SN rate, defined as the number of SNe per unit time per star cluster mass for a cluster of mean age in the interval $({t_{\rm m}}, {t_{\rm m}}+dt)$. We adopt results for ${\xi_{\rm SN}}$ tabulated from [STARBURST99]{} [@1999ApJS..123....3L] for a fully sampled Kroupa IMF (see red solid line and right axis in Figure \[fig:syn\]). This gives a total mass of new stars per SN, $m_*$, $$m_* \equiv{\left({\int_0^{t_{\rm life}}{\xi_{\rm SN}}dt}\right)}^{-1}=95.5{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}.$$
For a sink/star particle with mass $m_{\rm sp}$ and mass-weighted mean age ${t_{\rm m}}$, the expected number of SNe during the MHD time step $\Delta t$ is $\mathcal{N}_{\rm SN}=m_{\rm sp} {\xi_{\rm SN}}({t_{\rm m}})\Delta t$. In the simulation, we sample a random number $\mathcal{U}_{\rm SN}$ in (0,1) and a SN event occurs if $\mathcal{N}_{\rm SN} > \mathcal{U}_{\rm SN}$. The mean value of ${\xi_{\rm SN}}$ over the lifetime of a sink/star particle is $\langle {\xi_{\rm SN}}\rangle =(m_* t_{\rm life})^{-1}$ and the SN rate varies by only a factor $\sim 3$, so typically $\mathcal{N}_{\rm SN} \sim m_{\rm sp} \Delta t/(m_* t_{\rm life})$. Note that if $\mathcal{N}_{\rm SN}>1$, more than one SN would be expected in a single epoch. However, considering our typical timestep, $\Delta t\sim 10^{-3}-10^{-5}{\;{\rm Myr}}$, and sink/star particle mass, $m_{\rm
sp}=10^3-10^5{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}$, this never happens in practice.
We include runaway OB stars to represent SN events that occur far from star clusters.[^2] Runaways may occur because of (1) dynamical interactions during birth of a star cluster [e.g., @1967BOTT....4...86P; @2011Sci...334.1380F; @2015ApJ...805...92O] and (2) SNe in OB binary systems [e.g., @1961BAN....15..265B; @2000ApJ...544..437P; @2011MNRAS.414.3501E]. In the current TIGRESS implementation, our treatment of runaways is based on the second mechanism. Whenever there is a SN event ($\mathcal{N}_{\rm SN} > \mathcal{U}_{\rm SN}$), we additionally check whether this event occurs in a single star or a binary system for a given binary fraction of OB stars $f_{\rm bin}$ (2/3 is our standard choice). Here, this binary fraction is defined as $$f_{\rm bin}\equiv\frac{\textrm{Number of OB stars in binaries}}
{\textrm{Number of total OB stars}}
\equiv\frac{N_{\rm bin}}{N_{\rm tot}}=
\frac{N_{\rm bin,p}+N_{\rm bin,s}}{N_{\rm single}+N_{\rm bin}},$$ where the number of primaries and secondaries is $N_{\rm bin,p}=N_{\rm bin,s}=N_{\rm bin}/2$. If the event is not in a binary, we simply assign an SN event at the sink/star particle position following § \[sec:explosion\].
If the event is defined as a SN in a binary, we allow for both an [*in situ*]{} primary SN explosion immediately and a runaway secondary that produces a SN explosion after a time delay. Runaways are massless star particles ejected isotropically with initial velocity distribution consistent with a binary population synthesis model (Fig. 2 of @2011MNRAS.414.3501E). Each runaway is a time bomb with a delay time $\tau_{\rm run}$. In order to have the overall SN rate consistent with ${\xi_{\rm SN}}m_{\rm sp}$, we set the delay time using the probability integral transform, $\tau_{\rm run} = {\Xi_{\rm SN}}^{\rm inv}(\mathcal{U}_{\rm run})$, where $\mathcal{U}_{\rm run}$ is another uniform random number in (0,1), the normalized cumulative distribution of SNe is $${\Xi_{\rm SN}}(t) \equiv\frac{ \int_{0}^{t} {\xi_{\rm SN}}dt}
{\int_0^{t_{\rm life}}{\xi_{\rm SN}}dt}=\int_{0}^{t} {\xi_{\rm SN}}m_* dt,$$ and ${\Xi_{\rm SN}}^{\rm inv}$ is the inverse function of ${\Xi_{\rm SN}}$. We tabulate ${\Xi_{\rm SN}}$ from the tabulated ${\xi_{\rm SN}}$. Once we obtain $\tau_{\rm run}$, we compare it with ${t_{\rm m}}$. When $\tau_{\rm run}>{t_{\rm m}}$, a massless star particle is ejected and will be exploded after $\tau_{\rm run}$. We also explode a SN at the original sink/star particle position, representing the explosion of the primary. Otherwise (if $\tau_{\rm run}<{t_{\rm m}}$), we simply do nothing for this unphysical situation (causality violation).
### Supernova Feedback Treatment {#sec:explosion}
For any SN event, we first determine the feedback prescription that is applied. We use three types of feedback in TIGRESS: [EJ]{} (Ejecta), [ST]{} (Sedov-Taylor), and [MC]{} (Momentum Conserving). Our goals in defining and selecting from among these prescriptions are to assign thermal energy and momentum appropriate for the resolution of the simulation and local properties of the ambient environment, avoiding both numerical “overcooling” and a subsequent time step that is very small. In the [ST]{} and [EJ]{} feedback prescriptions, we reset density, momenta, and thermal energy within a sphere of radius $R_{\rm snr}$. In the [MC]{} feedback prescription, the thermal energy and density are unchanged but velocities are reset within $R_{\rm snr}$. Magnetic fields remain unchanged.
To choose which prescription is applied, we calculate the mean gas properties in cells surrounding the SN with $d_{ijk}<R_{\rm snr}$, where $d_{ijk}$ is the distance of a cell from the SN. We vary $R_{\rm snr}$ starting from $R_{\rm
snr,min}=3 \Delta x$ to $R_{\rm snr,max}$ (the choice of $R_{\rm snr,max}$ is model-dependent) with an increment of $\Delta R=\Delta x/2$. For every $R_{\rm snr}$, we first calculate the total mass within the initial “SN remnant,” $M_{\rm snr}\equiv \sum\rho_{ijk}(d_{ijk}<R_{\rm snr}) \Delta V +M_{\rm ej}$, and the mean density $\rho_{\rm snr}\equiv M_{\rm snr}/\sum_{d_{ijk}<R_{\rm snr}} \Delta V$, where $M_{\rm ej}=10{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}$ represents the mass of ejecta plus circumstellar medium. We then calculate the ratio of the initial remnant mass to the expected shell formation mass, $\mathcal{R}_M\equiv M_{\rm snr}/M_{\rm sf}$, where $M_{\rm sf}=1679{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}(n_H/{\;{\rm cm}^{-3}})^{-0.26}$ can be estimated from numerical simulations of individual expanding SNR with ambient density $n_H$ that include cooling [e.g., @2015ApJ...802...99K KO15a]. Here, we use the mean molecular weight per hydrogen atom $\mu_H\equiv 1.427$ to obtain the hydrogen number density $n_H = \rho_{\rm snr}/(\mu_H m_H)$. Shell formation occurs when post-shock gas at the forward shock of an expanding SN remnant first becomes strongly radiative.
If $\mathcal{R}_M>1$ for $R_{\rm snr,min}$, the Sedov-Taylor stage of this SN is unresolved. This case occurs if resolution is low and/or local density is high, and the SN remnant would become radiative at a scale smaller than that is locally resolved. In this case, our treatment of feedback just injects momentum to the grid using the final radial momentum $p_{\rm snr}=2.8\times10^5{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}{\; {\rm km}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}(n_H/{\;{\rm cm}^{-3}})^{-0.17}$ computed from resolved numerical simulations of a single SN in a two-phase medium (see KO15a); other resolved simulations for an inhomogeneous medium find similar final momenta . We refer to this type of feedback as [MC]{}, as momentum is assumed to be conserved from the unresolved scale at which the remnant would cool to the resolved scale at which momentum is injected to the grid.
If $0.027<\mathcal{R}_M<1$ for given $R_{\rm snr}$, we assign total SN energy $E_{\rm SN}=10^{51}{\; {\rm erg}}$ in both thermal and kinetic forms to the gas within the feedback region, $d_{ijk} < R_{\rm snr}$. The energy ratio is appropriate for the energy conserving phase ($\sim 72\%$ in thermal, and $\sim 28\%$ in kinetic). We refer to this type of feedback as [ST]{}, as it represents a remnant that is in the Sedov-Taylor stage.
Note that as long as $\mathcal{R}_M<1$ and the ambient medium is uniform, KO15a showed that SNRs are sufficiently resolved that either the [ST]{} prescription or pure thermal energy prescription (dumping the total SN energy to thermal energy) will provide correct feedback. However, $\mathcal{R}_M\sim1$ (or $\Delta x/r_{\rm sf}\sim 1/3$) is marginal. Thus, if the density were [*not*]{} uniform within $R_{\rm snr}$, the gas at higher-than-average density would cool faster. Equivalently, the value of $M_{\rm sf}(n_H)$ evaluated using $n_H$ from the overdense portions of the feedback region would be lower than if the mean density were used, and the corresponding $\mathcal{R}_M$ would exceed unity. Therefore, if a thermal dump were applied to [*inhomogeneous*]{} gas with $\mathcal{R}_M\sim1$ it would lead to “overcooling,” and the SNR evolution would not be properly resolved. We conclude that it is unsafe to use a criterion $\mathcal{R}_M\sim1$ unless the material within the feedback region is reset to a uniform density (see below). More generally, to avoid vulnerability to overcooling, we use as small a feedback region as possible so as to make $\mathcal{R}_M$ as close as possible to 0.027. This stricter criterion corresponds to $\Delta x / r_{\rm sf}=1/10$ for $R_{\rm snr,min}=3\Delta x$, the “consistent convergence condition” of KO15a. If a SN event occurs in a very rarefied medium so that $\mathcal{R}_M<0.027$ for $R_{\rm snr,min}$, we increase $R_{\rm snr}$ and recalculate $\mathcal{R}_M$ until $\mathcal{R}_M>0.027$, and assign [ST]{} type feedback as above. Increasing $M_{\rm snr}$ from extremely small values reduces the initial temperture from extremely high values, which would otherwise lead to extremely short time steps.
Finally, in the case that the surrounding medium has density so low that $\mathcal{R}_M < 0.027$ even for $R_{\rm SNR}=R_{\rm snr,max}$, we assign pure kinetic energy within the remnant. We refer to this type of feedback as [EJ]{}, as it represents the effects of ejecta in the free expansion stage.
For [ST]{} and [EJ]{} feedback, the mass density, momentum density, and internal energy of the gas within a SN feedback region are initially set to constant values using the mean density, the mass-weighted mean velocity, and the mean internal energy, respectively, within $R_{\rm snr}$. We then assign additional momentum with a radial velocity profile of $v_r\propto r^2$ and uniform thermal energy within $R_{\rm snr}$. Note that the ejecta mass is already added in prior to calculation of the mean density.
For [MC]{} feedback, we do not reset the gas properties in the feedback region prior to applying the momentum associated with the SN event. When we assign velocity fields, we add corresponding radial momentum to each gas parcel’s momentum in the star particle’s rest frame. In low resolution simulations (used for our convergence test), more than one SN event can be assigned at a given time and position. We then inject momentum and energy additively from multiple SNe.
To demonstrate the results of our SN feedback method, we run test simulations of radiative SNR evolution in a uniform medium with fixed spatial resolution of $\Delta x=4{\;{\rm pc}}$. Figure \[fig:sntest\] plots (a) final radial momentum and (b) the maximum mass of hot gas ($T>10^5{\;{\rm K}}$), both as a function of the number density of the ambient medium ($n_{\rm amb}$; bottom axis) and the enclosed mass of the feedback region ($M_{\rm snr}$; top axis). Results using our fiducial prescription as described above are shown in blue. For comparison, we also show the result of using purely thermal energy injection (green) and purely kinetic energy injection (red) within a radius of $R_{\rm snr,min}=3\Delta x$. For reference, symbols connected with dotted lines indicate the corresponding initial values of (a) radial momentum and (b) hot gas mass, as applied by the different feedback prescriptions. In (b), the dotted blue and green lines coincide for $\Delta x/r_{\rm sf} < 1/3$. The vertical dashed lines denote $\Delta x/r_{\rm sf}=1/10$ and $1/3$, where $r_{\rm sf}=22.6{\;{\rm pc}}(n_{\rm amb}/{\;{\rm cm}^{-3}})^{-0.42}$ is the shell formation radius at the corresponding ambient density (KO15a). The vertical line at $\Delta x/r_{\rm sf}=1/3$ corresponds to the transition from the [ST]{} (at lower density) to the [MC]{} (at higher density) feedback type in our prescription. Note that the transition to [EJ]{} type feedback would occur for $n_{\rm amb}<9\times10^{-4}{\;{\rm cm}^{-3}}(R_{\rm snr,max}/128{\;{\rm pc}})^{-2.38}$, beyond the domain of this figure.
In both panels, if the Sedov-Taylor stage is fully resolved (according to the assessment of KO15a) with $\Delta x/r_{\rm sf}<1/10$, all feedback prescriptions give the same result for both final energy and maximum hot gas mass. As the Sedov-Taylor stage is marginally resolved with $\Delta x/r_{\rm sf}=1/3$, the different prescriptions lead to a factor of a few differences. In particular, Figure \[fig:sntest\](a) indicates that the final momentum is significantly under- and over-estimated for unresolved cases ($\Delta x/r_{\rm sf}>1/3$) when feedback is implemented via purely thermal and kinetic energy, respectively. Our fiducial method injects momentum to the medium within 25% (grey shaded region) of that found by KO15a for all values of the density. We note that the cooling curve and the treatment of the mean molecular weight are slightly different from those of KO15a, so that agreement in the overall trend is more important than absolute values. If $\Delta x/r_{\rm sf} <1/3$, the hot gas mass peaks at around the shell formation time and remains within $\sim 25\%$ of KO15a. If $\Delta x/r_{\rm sf}>1/3$, as the initial SNR size $R_{\rm snr}=R_{\rm sir,min}=3\Delta x$ is larger than the shell formation radius, the hot gas mass peaks initially and drops abruptly for all cases. For these unresolved cases, the hot gas mass is initially overestimated, but at later times is severely underestimated relative to resolved simulations (with smaller $\Delta x$) at the same $n_{\rm amb}$.
Careful inspection of the final momentum for the case where $\Delta x/ r_{\rm sf}=1/3$ and $\mathcal{R}_M=1$ (i.e. $M_{\rm snr}=1000{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}$, near the right vertical dashed line in Figure \[fig:sntest\](a)), shows that both kinetic and thermal prescriptions lead to deviations from the correct solution. Thus, if one wanted to adopt a pure-thermal feedback for resolved regions (i.e. low $M_{\rm snr}$) and [MC]{} feedback for unresolved regions, it would be necessary to choose $M_{\rm snr}\sim 400{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}$ rather than $M_{\rm snr}=1000{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}$ as the transition point. In a clumpy medium, even the lower value of $M_{\rm snr}$ might be risky. We note that @2017MNRAS.466.1903G [see also @2015MNRAS.449.1057G] adopt for their resolved treatment (applied when $\mathcal{R}_M<1$) a pure-thermal prescription with a feedback region size chosen such that $M_{\rm snr}=1000{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}$, which based on our analysis would be marginal. Also, since Gatto et al did not redistribute mass to make the density in the feedback region uniform in the thermal-feedback case, it would make their treatment even more vulnerable to overcooling, as described above. Overcooling may potentially explain why their SN-only model results in quite high SFRs, while our SN-only SFRs are much lower (and consistent with observations). Note that a feedback prescription that transitions from [EJ]{} type (red line in Figure \[fig:sntest\]) to [MC]{} type feedback at $M_{\rm snr}\sim 400{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}$ can also inject the correct momentum (and produce hot gas if resolved). The SN feedback prescriptions described in @2014ApJ...788..121K and @2014MNRAS.445..581H use an [EJ]{}-transitioning-to-[MC]{} approach.
Gas Phases {#sec:phase}
----------
We distinguish the gas in simulations by defining five components: cold ($c$) $T<184{\;{\rm K}}$; unstable ($u$) $184{\;{\rm K}}<T<5050{\;{\rm K}}$; warm ($w$) $5050{\;{\rm K}}<T<2\times10^4{\;{\rm K}}$; ionized ($i$) $2\times10^4{\;{\rm K}}<T<5\times10^5{\;{\rm K}}$; hot ($h$) $T>5\times10^5{\;{\rm K}}$. We use the Heaviside step function $\Theta(C)$ to filter each component, where $C=c,u,w,i,h$. Sometimes we refer to $C=c+u+w$ as warm-cold medium ($wc$) and to $C=i+h$ as hot-ionized medium ($hi$). In the analysis below, we define summation of the quantity $Q$ over each component as $\sum_{C} Q\equiv \sum Q\Theta(C)$.
Fiducial Solar Neighborhood Model {#sec:Fiducial}
=================================
In this section, we begin by describing the evolution of a solar neighborhood model with standard resolution, $\Delta x=4{\;{\rm pc}}$. The simulation domain size is $L_x=L_y=1024{\;{\rm pc}}$ and $L_z=4096{\;{\rm pc}}$. We limit the maximum SN feedback region radius to $R_{\rm snr,max}=128{\;{\rm pc}}$. For the external gravity (Equation \[eq:phi\_ext\]), we use the parameter set determined by @2013ApJ...772..108Z, $\Sigma_*=42{{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}\;{\rm pc^{-2}}}$, $z_*=245{\;{\rm pc}}$, $\rho_{\rm dm}=0.0064{{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}\;{\rm pc^{-3}}}$, and $R_0=8{\;{\rm kpc}}$. In the limit of $|z|\ll z_*$, the external gravity can be approximated by a linear profile $g_{\rm ext}\approx -4\pi G \rho_{\rm sd} z$. In our previous work (e.g., @2013ApJ...776....1K [@2015ApJ...815...67K], which had smaller vertical domain than is required to follow the hot ISM and wind launching), we used $\rho_{\rm sd}=0.05{{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}\;{\rm pc^{-3}}}$ for the volume density of stars and dark matter at the midplane in the Solar neighborhood. The current parameter set gives a larger value of $\rho_{\rm
sd}=\Sigma_*/(2z_*)+\rho_{\rm dm}=0.092{{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}\;{\rm pc^{-3}}}$. We adopt $\Omega = 28{\; {\rm km}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}{\;{\rm kpc}}^{-1}$, which yields ${t_{\rm orb}}=220{\;{\rm Myr}}$, and binary OB fraction $f_{\rm bin}=2/3$.
For the initial vertical gas density profile, we use a double exponential $$\rho(z)=\rho_1(z)+\rho_2(z)=\rho_{10}\exp(-\Phi_{\rm 0,tot}(z)/\sigma_1^2)+
\rho_{20}\exp(-\Phi_{\rm 0,tot}(z)/\sigma_2^2),$$ where $\Phi_{\rm 0,tot}(z)=\Phi_{\rm ext}(z) + 2\pi G \Sigma |z|$ is the total gravitational potential using a thin-disk approximation for gaseous self-gravity. The adopted initial effective sound speeds of two phases are set to $\sigma_1=7{\; {\rm km}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}$ and $\sigma_2=10\sigma_1$, respectively, representing warm and hot media. The midplane density of the warm medium is $\rho_{10}=2.85 m_H{\;{\rm cm}^{-3}}$, while for the hot medium $\rho_{20}=10^{-5}\rho_{10}$ such that it has negligible mass contribution. The total initial gas surface density is $\Sigma=13{{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}\;{\rm pc^{-2}}}$. The initial pressure profile is set to $P=\rho_1\sigma_1^2+\rho_2\sigma_2^2$. The initial magnetic fields have only azimuthal (${\hat{\mathbf{y}} }$) components with constant plasma beta, $\beta\equiv 8\pi P/B^2=10$, everywhere. This yields an initial midplane magnetic field strength of $B = 2.6\mu G$. The initial heating rate is set to $\Gamma_0$.
Our initial conditions are not in thermal equilibrium, and the density near the midplane is higher than the maximum density of the WNM for given cooling and heating rates. As soon as the simulation begins, the gas immediately cools and looses vertical support from thermal pressure. Thermal instability develops rapidly and separates the gas near the midplane into the CNM and WNM. As a consequence, if the system is initiated without any turbulent support, the CNM falls to the midplane and forms a very thin and dense slab [e.g., @2010ApJ...720.1454K]. This leads to very bursty star formation, making the overall evolution converge slowly.
In order to reduce the artificial initial burst of star formation (and subsequent “ringing”), for an initial period we drive turbulence that provides overall vertical support. At the same time, compressions seeded by these initial velocity perturbations enhance thermal instability and promote star formation. We use one-dimensional velocity power spectrum $\mathcal{P}_k\propto k^{-2}$ for $1<kL_x/2\pi<64$, with driving rate $\dot{E}_{\rm turb}=10^4L_\odot$. Turbulence is driven with this full strength for $50{\;{\rm Myr}}$, and then slowly turned off from $50{\;{\rm Myr}}$ to $100{\;{\rm Myr}}$. During the driving phase, we place a minimum on the heating rate of $\Gamma_0$ for the first $50{\;{\rm Myr}}$, and reduce this minimum slowly as the turbulent driving decreases. As stars form, turbulence and heating driven by SN and FUV feedback begin to exceed the imposed turbulent driving and minimum heating rate. All of our quantitative assessments are made after the artificial driving/heating phase has ended, and a quasi-steady saturated state has been reached. We have confirmed that evolution and properties in the saturated state are insensitive to the exact form of initial turbulent driving and heating. The exact initial density and pressure profiles are also not important.
Overall Evolution and Star Formation Cycles
-------------------------------------------
Figure \[fig:tevol1\](a) shows time evolution of the recent SFR surface density calculated using the total mass of young stars; $$\label{eq:sfr}
\Sigma_{\rm SFR} (\Delta t = t_{\rm bin})\equiv\frac{\sum m_{\rm sp} ({t_{\rm m}}<t_{\rm bin})}{L_x L_y t_{\rm bin}}$$ We choose three different bins, $t_{\rm bin}=10$, 40, and 100 Myr, to indicate the way of SFR surface density would vary when traced by different diagnostics of young stars (e.g. the simple burst model adopted in @2012AJ....144....3L would have 95% of H$\alpha$ and FUV emitted within 4.7Myr and 65 Myr, respectively). As the early driven turbulence effectively limits the bursty behavior in the initial star formation, $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$ increases with only a factor of a few variation up to $t\sim 100{\;{\rm Myr}}$. After this early “imposed driving” phase, star formation feedback self-consistently offsets cooling and drives turbulence. Time evolution after $t=100{\;{\rm Myr}}$ reaches a quasi-steady state with self-regulation cycles involving large amplitude temporal fluctuations in $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$. In each cycle, gas falls to the midplane and is collected by self-gravity and large-scale turbulent flows into giant clouds, where collapse occurs in the highest density regions. The massive stars in the newly born clusters that form strongly increase the FUV radiation field and SN rate, which disperses the dense gas and enhances heating and turbulent driving throughout the ISM. Star formation shuts off as the gas disk puffs up and becomes warmer. With the corresponding reduction in star formation feedback, gas can settle back to the midplane and once again collect into large clouds where star formation occurs. The mean duty cycle is $\sim 45 {\;{\rm Myr}}$ for the simulation shown, and there is an order of magnitude variation in $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}(\Delta t = 10 {\;{\rm Myr}})$. For $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}(\Delta t = 40 {\;{\rm Myr}})$ there is less than a factor of two variation, and for $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}(\Delta t = 100 {\;{\rm Myr}})$ it is only tens of percent. It should be kept in mind, however, that the amplitude of variations depend on the horizontal box size because this determines the number of independent star-forming patches. Larger boxes that contain a larger number of independent patches would have reduced variation in $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}(\Delta t = 10 {\;{\rm Myr}})$.
Figure \[fig:tevol1\](b) plots time evolution of the surface density of FUV luminosity $\Sigma_{\rm FUV}=L_{\rm FUV}/L_xL_y$ normalized by $\Sigma_{\rm FUV,0}$ to show the time evolution of the heating rate. As seen in Figure \[fig:syn\], most of FUV comes from very massive stars in star clusters younger than $\sim 10{\;{\rm Myr}}$. Therefore, the temporal variation of the heating rate is very similar to $\Sigma_{\rm SFR} (\Delta t = 10{\;{\rm Myr}})$. Similar to $\Sigma_{\rm SFR} (\Delta t = 10{\;{\rm Myr}})$, there is an order of magnitude temporal fluctuation in the amplitude of $\Sigma_{\rm FUV}$.
Figure Figure \[fig:tevol1\](a) shows a secular decrease of $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$ over time, which is clearest in $40{\;{\rm Myr}}$ and $100{\;{\rm Myr}}$ averages. This reduction is mainly because the total gas mass decreases, as seen in Figure \[fig:tevol1\](c); there we show time evolution of gas, star, and outflow mass fractions compared to the initial gas mass. In this simulation, we convert gas into sink/star particles, but we do not replenish it. Also, a significant amount of the gas flows out through vertical boundaries in the form of hot winds and warm fountains driven by the clustered SN feedback (and SNe from runaways at high-$|z|$). [^3] Considering the secular evolution of the simulation, we limit our analysis of statistical properties to the time range between $t_{11}=1.05{t_{\rm orb}}=231{\;{\rm Myr}}$ and $t_9=2.05{t_{\rm orb}}=450{\;{\rm Myr}}$ (shaded region in Figure \[fig:tevol1\]), corresponding to the times when the gas surface density is $11{{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}\;{\rm pc^{-2}}}$ and $9{{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}\;{\rm pc^{-2}}}$, respectively. This is reduced from an initial gas surface density of $13{{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}\;{\rm pc^{-2}}}$.
Figure \[fig:MHD\_4pc\] displays a series of 5-panel snapshots showing surface density projections and number density and temperature slices at an interval of $0.05t_{\rm orb}\sim11{\;{\rm Myr}}$, starting at $t=1.8{t_{\rm orb}}=395{\;{\rm Myr}}$. Sink and star particles are also shown (see caption for details). For one selected time $t=1.95{t_{\rm orb}}=428{\;{\rm Myr}}$ when a strong outflow driven by SNe is prominent, Figure \[fig:MHD\_4pc\_slices\] shows the distribution of sink/star particles, number density, temperature, vertical velocity, and magnetic field strength.
The series of snapshots in Figure \[fig:MHD\_4pc\] clearly shows the characteristic evolutionary cycle of self-regulated star formation. In the first snapshot (at $t=1.8{t_{\rm orb}}$), a collection of star clusters has formed in a dense cloud complex slightly below the center of the XY plane. These young clusters heat up the gas and evaporate most of the CNM. As a result, the WNM predominates in the midplane (see temperature slice), although the hot gas still fills $\sim 20\%$ of the volume near the midplane. These sink/star particles produce a large number of SN explosions (from $t=1.8{t_{\rm orb}}$ to $t=1.9{t_{\rm orb}}$), and as a result a superbubble forms, clearly evident in the low density and high temperature regions of the XY panels of the $t=1.9{t_{\rm orb}}$ snapshots. At this epoch, the sink/star particles from this burst have aged (see color scale) and emit less FUV radiation. Plenty of the CNM can now form within the WNM, as is evident in the XY temperature panel at $t=1.9{t_{\rm orb}}$. As the hot bubble occupies more than the half of the volume near the midplane, the CNM/WNM is pushed aside and aggregated within a smaller volume outside of the bubble. Within this favorable environment, a massive dense cloud assembles (upper left of XY panel) and promotes a second round of star formation (see snapshots at $t=1.95$ and $2{t_{\rm orb}}$). At $t=2{t_{\rm orb}}$ (last set of snapshots), the first hot bubble has mostly merged with surrounding gas as its interior has cooled off and turbulence redistributes material into the former bubble volume. Meanwhile, the result of new star formation is evident in the upper-left corner of the midplane. The feedback from this collection of sink/star particles will produce another superbubble. This cycle of massive cloud assembly leading to a burst of star formation, followed by a burst of feedback leading to star formation quenching, continues throughout the run.
Breakout of superbubbles from the warm-cold midplane layer drives hot gas to high-$|z|$; e.g. the XZ slices at $t=1.9$ and $1.95{t_{\rm orb}}$ in Figure \[fig:MHD\_4pc\] show this clearly. As shown in Figure \[fig:MHD\_4pc\_slices\], the hot gas has high outward vertical velocity, i.e. large $|v_z|$ at large $|z|$, with $sign(v_z) = sign(z)$. We anticipate that this rapidly expanding hot outflow would escape to the CGM and/or IGM as a galactic wind. From Figures \[fig:MHD\_4pc\] and \[fig:MHD\_4pc\_slices\], substantial WNM is also pushed to high-$|z|$ by superbubble expansion. However, outward vertical velocities of this warm material are insufficient to escape the gravitational potential of the galaxy ($|v_z|>200{\; {\rm km}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}$ would be required). The majority of the WNM falls back towards the midplane (when feedback is at a low state), creating the “return flow” of a galactic fountain. Detailed analysis of the multiphase high-$|z|$ wind and fountain flows is deferred to the companion paper.
Multiphase Structures and Turbulence Properties of the ISM {#sec:4pc_phase}
----------------------------------------------------------
The ISM material in our simulation populates a wide range of temperature, with three distinct phases. Figure \[fig:T-pdf\] plots probability density distributions (PDFs) of gas temperature weighted by mass (blue) and volume (green). Thermal instability and rapid cooling tend to reduce the amount of gas in the unstable (UNM) and ionized components. However, strong turbulence, large temporal fluctuations of the heating rate, and expanding superbubbles in our simulation continuously repopulate these regimes. In addition, since our numerical resolution is not high enough to spatially resolve the transition layer between the WNM and CNM, the CNM (UNM) mass fraction may be numerically reduced (enhanced).[^4] Therefore, for studying numerical convergence we will consider the mass fraction of the CNM plus UNM, rather than their individual fractions. We obtain mean mass fractions between $t_{11}$ and $t_9$ of $f_{c+u}=24\%$ and $f_w=75\%$.
Figure \[fig:nP\] displays gas PDFs at $t=1.95{t_{\rm orb}}=428{\;{\rm Myr}}$ (top row) and averaged over time ranges between $t_{11}=1.05{t_{\rm orb}}=231{\;{\rm Myr}}$ and $t_9=2.05{t_{\rm orb}}=231{\;{\rm Myr}}$ (bottom row) weighted by mass (left column) and volume (right column) in the $n_H$-$P/k_B$ phase plane. We draw as a dashed line the locus $T=1.2\times10^6{\;{\rm K}}$, representing a typical hot gas temperature defined by the peak of the volume PDF (Figure \[fig:T-pdf\]) for the hot-ionized medium. The dotted line in (a) and (b) shows the instantaneous thermal equilibrium curve for $\Gamma=3.8\Gamma_0$. Two dotted lines in (c) and (d) show the thermal equilibrium curves for $\Gamma=\Gamma_0$ and $\Gamma=10\Gamma_0$, which approximately brackets the variation in the heating rate from the varying $\Sigma_{\rm FUV}$ shown in Figure \[fig:tevol1\](b). The mass PDF shows that the CNM, UNM, and WNM components are most populated, while the volume PDF is dominated by the WNM, ionized, and hot components.
The warm-cold medium ($T<2\times10^{4}{\;{\rm K}}$) tends to evolve to a two-phase states with a short cooling time, and the majority of the warm-cold medium indeed follows the instantaneous thermal equilibrium curve and is within the envelope of the two thermal equilibrium curves in Figure \[fig:nP\]. However, due to strong turbulence and the large time variation in the heating rate, the distinction between CNM and UNM is not as clear as expected from the classical theory [@1965ApJ...142..531F; @1969ApJ...155L.149F].
In the volume PDF, the WNM is strongly concentrated around thermal equilibrium, while the hot-ionized medium shows a broader distribution. At early stages of expansion for individual SN remnants or superbubbles, when the temperature of shock heated gas is high enough ($T>10^6{\;{\rm K}}$), adiabatically expanding hot interiors of bubbles forms a sequence in the phase plane with a slope of $5/3$. As shown in Figure \[fig:T-pdf\], the typical hot-ionized medium temperature ranges between $10^6{\;{\rm K}}$ and $10^7{\;{\rm K}}$ [@2017ApJ...834...25K]. As the shock expansion speed drops, the temperature of post-shock gas is lower, and due to the strong cooling peak at $T\sim 10^5{\;{\rm K}}$ (see Figure \[fig:cool\]) this material quickly cools down to join the WNM. The centers of superbubbles remain hot until turbulence causes them to merge with the surrounding ISM. Thus, the volume PDF shows distinct hot and warm phases occupying the majority of the simulation volume. Continuous SN explosions and mixing maintains a non-negligible fraction of gas at intermediate temperature, between $10^4$-$10^6{\;{\rm K}}$.
Figures \[fig:tevol2\](a) and (b) plot time evolution averaged over the warm-cold medium ($T<2\times10^4{\;{\rm K}}$) of various mass-weighted velocities defined by $$\label{eq:veld}
\sigma_i\equiv
{\left({\frac{\sum_{wc} \rho \delta v_i^2 \Delta V}{\sum_{wc} \rho \Delta V}}\right)}^{1/2},
c_s \equiv {\left({\frac{\sum_{wc} P \Delta V}{\sum_{wc} \rho \Delta V}}\right)}^{1/2},
{\delta v_{\rm A}}\equiv {\left({
\frac{\sum_{wc} \delta{\mathbf{B}}\cdot\delta{\mathbf{B}}\Delta V}
{4\pi\sum_{wc} \rho \Delta V}}\right)}^{1/2},
{\overline{v}_{\rm A}}\equiv {\left({
\frac{\sum_{wc} \overline{{\mathbf{B}}}\cdot\overline{{\mathbf{B}}}\Delta V}
{4\pi\sum_{wc} \rho \Delta V}}\right)}^{1/2}.$$ Here, $\sigma_i$ is the turbulent velocity dispersion in each direction, $c_s$ is the sound speed, ${\delta v_{\rm A}}$ is the turbulent Alfvén speed, and ${\overline{v}_{\rm A}}$ is the mean Alfvén speed. The perturbed velocity (removing the background shear flow) is defined by $\delta {\mathbf{v}}\equiv {\mathbf{v}}+q\Omega x{\hat{\mathbf{y}} }$, the mean magnetic field $\overline{{\mathbf{B}}}$ is calculated based on a horizontal average at each $z$, and the turbulent magnetic field is defined by $\delta{{\mathbf{B}}}\equiv{\mathbf{B}}-\overline{{\mathbf{B}}}$.
Turbulent velocity dispersions of the warm-cold medium are about $11{\; {\rm km}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}$ ($\sigma_z\sim5{\; {\rm km}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}$ for the CNM and $12{\; {\rm km}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}$ for the WNM), a factor of 1.5 to 2 higher than those in our previous simulations [e.g., @2013ApJ...776....1K; @2015ApJ...815...67K], where we found $\sigma\sim 5-7{\; {\rm km}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}$. A number of effects could contribute to this increase in $\sigma$, including the correlation of supernovae in superbubbles and the cooling of hot gas that has expanded to large $|z|$. Note that the turbulent velocity dispersions fluctuate with a similar period to, but much lower amplitude than, $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$. Turbulent magnetic fields are generated very quickly by a turbulent dynamo [e.g., @2015ApJ...815...67K], so that the turbulent Alfvén velocity is expected to quickly saturate, and indeed this rapid growth and saturation is seen. The turbulent magnetic field strength depends on both the turbulent kinetic energy and mean magnetic energy. As the mean field keeps growing for $t<400{\;{\rm Myr}}$, the saturation level of the turbulent magnetic energy also gradually increases in time. For $t>400{\;{\rm Myr}}$, the turbulent magnetic energy stays constant as the mean magnetic field strength reaches a certain level.[^5] At this stage, the ratio between turbulent kinetic and magnetic energies is about 7:3 as in @2015ApJ...815...67K. Growth of the mean magnetic field is slow, with the time scale similar to the orbit time, so that mean Alfvén velocity increases throughout the simulation.
In Figure \[fig:tevol2\](c), we show the scale heights of the CNM+UNM and WNM ($C=c+u$, and $w$, respectively) defined by $$\label{eq:scaleH}
H_C\equiv{\left({\frac{\sum_C \rho z^2 \Delta V}
{\sum_C \rho \Delta V}}\right)}^{1/2}.$$ Note that the vertical box size is not large enough to define a meaningful scale height for the ionized and hot components, so we omit these in this Figure. The mean values of the scale heights averaged over $t_{11}$-$t_9$ are $H_{c+u}=76{\;{\rm pc}}$ and $H_w=363{\;{\rm pc}}$, giving a scale height of the warm-cold medium of $H_{wc}=317{\;{\rm pc}}$.
Numerical Convergence {#sec:conv}
=====================
In this section, we compare statistical properties of the same solar neighborhood model run at different numerical grid resolutions, varying from $\Delta x=2{\;{\rm pc}}$ to $64{\;{\rm pc}}$. Hereafter, each model is referred as [MHD-$\Delta x$]{}. Since all simulations secularly evolve due to the decline in gas mass, for fair intercomparison we obtain statistical properties over the range of times ($t_{11}$,$t_{9}$) in each simulation when the gas is in the same gas surface density range of $11>\Sigma/{{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}\;{\rm pc^{-2}}}>9$. Before diving into the detailed quantitative comparison, in Figure \[fig:conv\] we display $\Sigma$, $n_H$, and $T$ snapshots at the respective times when $\Sigma=10{{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}\;{\rm pc^{-2}}}$ (after saturation) for all models. As expected, overdense structures and small-scale thermal variations are more smeared out as the resolution gets poorer. A discernible qualitative change only emerges with Model [[MHD-[64]{}pc]{}]{}, where we observe thermal runaway with highly correlated SNe that is not seen in higher-resolution models. But, as we shall show, Model [[MHD-[32]{}pc]{}]{} also diverges from higher resolution simulations in many aspects, including both SFRs and ISM properties. [^6] In models with higher resolution ($\Delta x \le 8{\;{\rm pc}}$), the WNM is ubiquitous at all $z$, and the hot-ionized medium fills substantial volume even near the midplane.
In the forthcoming subsections, we present SFRs and properties of the ISM measured during $(t_{11}, t_9)$ using box-and-whisker plots to display key statistics as simply as possible. In these plots, the rectangular box extends from the 25th to 75th percentile of temporal fluctuations, and the median and mean are shown as a horizontal bar within the box and a square symbol, respectively. The whiskers extend to 5th and 95th percentiles with caps, and outliers are shown as circles.
Star Formation Rates
--------------------
In Figure \[fig:comp\_sfr\], we first compare $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$ using box-and-whisker plots for time in the interval $(t_{11},t_9)$. Between the 25th and 75th percentile (box) with respect to the median value (horizontal bar in the box), all results except Models [[MHD-[32]{}pc]{}]{} and [[MHD-[64]{}pc]{}]{} are in good agreement. While $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$ in Model [[MHD-[32]{}pc]{}]{} overlaps with the converged results, Model [[MHD-[64]{}pc]{}]{} has $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$ several times larger than in the other models. As resolution gets poorer, the mass of star clusters gets larger, increasing stochasticity of the FUV luminosity. This leads to large temporal fluctuations in $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}(t_{\rm bin}=10{\;{\rm Myr}})$, extending the 5th and 25th percentiles to zero for $\Delta x \ge 16{\;{\rm pc}}$.
Supernova treatment
-------------------
As described in Section \[sec:explosion\], we have three different SN feedback treatments; the treatment that is applied for any given SN event depends on the parameter $\mathcal{R}_M$ that represents the ratio of the mass that can be resolved in the feedback region around the SN compared to the expected SN remnant mass when it becomes radiative. At low numerical resolution, we expect that the Sedov-Taylor stage and shell formation in most SN explosions cannot be resolved (see KO15a), so they would be realized in the simulation with momentum feedback (type [MC]{}). At higher resolution, we instead expect the non-radiative early stage of evolution to be resolved in most cases, so that the [ST]{} type may be applied. In rare cases when the density is very low (mainly for SN events in superbubbles and at high-$|z|$ from runaways), the [EJ]{} type would be applied.
In Figure \[fig:comp\_SN\], panels (a) and (c) plot, for cluster and runaway SNe respectively, the cumulative fraction of SN events that occur with surrounding number density smaller than $n_0$. Panels (b) and (d) plot the fractions of SNe that are realized with each type of feedback, separately considering SNe from cluster and runaway star particles. Models up to $\Delta x =8{\;{\rm pc}}$ have most of their SNe realized with the [ST]{} prescription (panels (b) and (d)), meaning that the resolution is sufficient to follow evolution prior to the radiative stage. The fraction of pure momentum feedback ([MC]{}-type) increases as resolution gets poorer. In lower resolution models, SNe from cluster particles are more correlated and more effective at forming supperbubbles (see Figure \[fig:conv\]). Thus, $n_0$ near SN sites is systemically lower for SNe in clusters when resolution is poor (panel (a) of Figure \[fig:comp\_SN\]). However, $n_0$ near sites of runaway SNe is rather insensitive to the resolution (panel (c)).
Not all SN events are realized with the [ST]{} or [EJ]{} prescriptions even for the highest resolution simulation. However, if there is a cluster in a very high density region, one or two early SNe realized by momentum injection ([MC]{}) open a cavity such that subsequent SN events from the same cluster can be realized with the [ST]{} treatment. Implementation of early feedback such as stellar winds, radiation pressure, and photoionization could also help to open cavities around clusters and to achieve better convergence even for individual SN events at lower resolutions (e.g., runaway SNe in Model [[MHD-[16]{}pc]{}]{}).[^7]
Turbulence and Phase Balance
----------------------------
In this subsection, we investigate the convergence of ISM properties, based on statistics for time in the range $(t_{11}, t_9)$. Figure \[fig:comp\_h\] plots (a) vertical velocity dispersions, (b) turbulent Alfvén velocities, and (c) scale heights of the warm-cold medium using box-and-whisker plots. Models with $\Delta x \le 16{\;{\rm pc}}$ are converged in these quantities, although the temporal fluctuations are much larger in Model [[MHD-[16]{}pc]{}]{} that in higher-resolution simulations. However, Models [[MHD-[32]{}pc]{}]{} and [[MHD-[64]{}pc]{}]{} show substantially larger velocity dispersions (panel (a)) and hence scale heights (panel (c)), in comparison to the resolved results. The spatial and temporal correlations of SNe are exaggerated in these models, with the result that overlapping multiple SNe drive large vertical (ordered) motions. While velocity dispersions and scale heights are large in low resolution models, this is not due to higher amplitude small-scale turbulence but only to very large-scale correlated superbubble expansion. In fact, small-scale turbulence is *weaker* than in the high-resolution models, as can be seen in the in weaker turbulent magnetic fields (panel (b)) from a less-efficient turbulent dynamo [cf, @2015ApJ...815...67K].
To better understand resolution dependence of phase balance, we compare box-and-whisker plot for statistics in the time range $(t_{11}, t_9)$. Figure \[fig:comp\_phase\] shows (a) the volume fraction of the hot gas within the scale height of the warm-cold medium, (b) the volume fraction of the WNM outside of $|z|>1.5{\;{\rm kpc}}$, and (c) the mass fraction of the CNM+UNM. These properties are essentially converged for Models [[MHD-[8]{}pc]{}]{} to [[MHD-[2]{}pc]{}]{}. However, as was previously evident from Figure \[fig:conv\], exaggeration of spatial and temporal correlations of SNe in Models [[MHD-[32]{}pc]{}]{} and [[MHD-[64]{}pc]{}]{} quickly blows everything away from the midplane. Model [[MHD-[64]{}pc]{}]{} effectively suffers “thermal runaway” [e.g., @2015ApJ...814....4L], so the hot gas occupies most of the volume (see Figure \[fig:conv\]).
The total CNM+UNM mass fractions are more or less similar ($f_{M,c+u}\sim 20-30\%$) up to Model [[MHD-[16]{}pc]{}]{} in terms of the mean and median, but we can see a decreasing median and increasing scatter as the resolution gets poorer. We note (not shown) that the mass fraction of the CNM alone keeps increasing at higher resolution, presumably due to a reduction in numerical diffusion that otherwise broadens the phase transition layer between the CNM and WNM (artificially turning CNM into UNM). We also note that in low resolution models, sink/star particles may form at density that is insufficient to guarantee true collapse of the CNM (see Figure \[fig:threshold\]).
Mass Loss Rates
---------------
We measure the areal mass loss rates of each phase at different heights using outgoing fluxes $$\dot{\Sigma}_{{\rm wind},C}(|z|) \equiv
\frac{\sum_{C} [(\rho v_{z,+})_{z_+}-(\rho v_{z,-})_{z_-}]\Delta V}{L_xL_y},$$ where the outgoing velocity $v_{z,\pm}$ denotes positive or negative velocity for positive or negative vertical coordinate $z_{\pm}$, respectively. Figure \[fig:comp\_massloss\] plots the areal mass loss rates measured at $|z|=1{\;{\rm kpc}}$ and $2{\;{\rm kpc}}$ in blue and green boxes and whiskers, respectively. Overall convergence is again seen for Models [[MHD-[2]{}pc]{}]{} to [[MHD-[8]{}pc]{}]{}. Models [[MHD-[32]{}pc]{}]{} and [[MHD-[64]{}pc]{}]{} are inconsistent with the mass fluxes in the resolved models.
As @2016MNRAS.459.2311M pointed out, the full evolution of galactic winds cannot be followed in local Cartesian box simulations. However, local simulations are very useful for investigating the launching condition of winds, especially because they afford very high resolution of multiphase gas and its heating and acceleration in SN remnants and superbubbles. By analyzing the outflowing gas properties for each phase, we are able to understand which material can escape and which cannot. In a companion paper, we shall conduct full analysis using the Bernoulli parameter, also investigating the effect of runaways. Here, we simply consider convergence based on the mass loss rates measured at different $|z|$. If some of the material passing through $|z|=1{\;{\rm kpc}}$ eventually falls back before it reaches the vertical boundaries at $|z|=2{\;{\rm kpc}}$, the mass loss rate is higher at lower $|z|$. This behavior is characteristic of a fountain flow, and is clearly evident for the WNM of the resolved models in Figure \[fig:comp\_massloss\]c. However, the hot (and ionized) gas have high enough velocity to really escape galactic disks as winds, and mass fluxes are nearly the same at $|z|=1{\;{\rm kpc}}$ and $|z|=2{\;{\rm kpc}}$.
From Figure \[fig:comp\_sfr\], the mean SFR surface density for the parameters of the present simulation is $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}\sim 5\times10^{-3}{{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}{\;{\rm kpc}}^{-2} {\; {\rm yr}}^{-1}}$. In comparison, the mass loading factors ($\beta_C\equiv \dot{\Sigma}_{{\rm wind},C}/\Sigma_{\rm SFR}$) of the hot and ionized gas are around $\beta_h\sim \beta_i\sim0.1$. This is consistent with the expected range of hot gas mass loading factor for superbubbles that break out of the disk after shell formation, the typical situation [@2017ApJ...834...25K]. More heavily loaded winds are expected only if (1) the galactic gravitational potential well is shallow enough for the moderate-velocity WNM that is in cooled shells around superbubbles to escape, as may occur in dwarf galaxies, or (2) a very high local SN rate creates a superbubble that breaks out of the ISM before cooling, as may occur in some nuclear starbursts [@2017ApJ...834...25K].
Summary {#sec:summary}
=======
In this paper, we have presented the TIGRESS algorithms, which we have designed and implemented in the [Athena]{} MHD code in order to conduct self-consistent simulations of the three-phase star-forming ISM in a wide range of galactic disk environments. We also demonstrate application of these algorithms to a fiducial model representing conditions in the Solar neighborhood, and conduct a resolution study to assess requirements for convergence. In TIGRESS, the MHD equations are solved in a local frame that includes sheared galactic rotation, and augmented with optically thin cooling and heating, self- and external gravity, and modules to follow star formation and the feedback it engenders. The last two elements are implemented using sink/star particles to form star clusters within gravitationally collapsing gas, and to follow the FUV radiation and SN events that these clusters produce based on an adopted population synthesis model. Our implementation allows for runaway OB stars that may result from a SN in a massive binary system.
A key aspect of TIGRESS is the detailed treatment of sink/star particle formation and evolution. In Section \[sec:sp\] we delineate how we create, age, accrete onto, and move sink/star particles, and present tests for our implementation. Another key aspect is our approach to SN feedback. Our implementation treats SN explosions in three different ways (feedback types [EJ]{}, [ST]{}, and [MC]{}), depending on the mass of gas that is resolved in the immediate vicinity of the SN (see §\[sec:explosion\]). This allows us to properly model creation of the hot ISM when the Sedov-Taylor stage of evolution can be resolved (which is usually possible, one of the main advantages of local simulations). If the Sedov-Taylor stage cannot be resolved, we inject momentum to the warm-cold ISM surrounding a SN based on the results of KO15a for the post-radiative stage. Our SN feedback prescription proves to be quite robust, which has enabled us to run for extended evolution times ($700{\;{\rm Myr}}$, compared to only $\sim 100{\;{\rm Myr}}$ in some other recent simulations with self-gravity and SN feedback).
By carefully treating star formation and feedback, TIGRESS simulations yield realistic, fully self-consistent three-phase ISM models with self-regulated star formation and galactic winds. For the fiducial Solar neighborhood model with gas surface density of $\sim 10{{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}\;{\rm pc^{-2}}}$, we show that a quasi-steady saturated state is reached in our higher resolution simulations. In particular, we show that the SFR, wind mass-loss rate, disk scale height, turbulent and Alfvénic velocity dispersions, and volume fractions of warm and hot phases are converged provided that the numerical resolution is at least $\Delta x =8{\;{\rm pc}}$, such that the Sedov-Taylor stage is resolved for most SN events.
In numerically converged models, the SFR surface density is self-regulated to $\Sigma_{\rm SFR}\sim 5\times10^{-3}{{\; {\rm M}_{\odot}}{\;{\rm kpc}}^{-2} {\; {\rm yr}}^{-1}}$ with large cyclic fluctuations. For gas at $T<2\times10^{4}{\;{\rm K}}$, the mass-weighted velocity dispersions and turbulent Alfvén velocity are each $\sim 10{\; {\rm km}\;{\rm s}^{-1}}$. The scale heights of the CNM+UNM and WNM are $\sim 80{\;{\rm pc}}$ and $\sim 360{\;{\rm pc}}$, respectively. Hot gas fills $\sim 30-40\%$ of the volume near the midplane, while warm gas is mixed within the mostly-hot medium at $|z|> 1 {\;{\rm kpc}}$. High velocity hot (and ionized) gas can escape with a ratio of hot gas outflow rate to SFR (the wind “mass loading factor”) of $\sim0.1$. The WNM cannot achieve high enough velocity to escape the Milky Way’s gravitational potential, and instead creates a fountain flow reaching to a few ${\;{\rm kpc}}$ from the midplane.
At low resolution ($\Delta x \ge 16{\;{\rm pc}}$), the detailed ISM properties as well as the mean SFR cannot be properly captured. Of course, the resolution requirements we report here are particular to the Solar neighborhood model. One may expect more stringent resolution requirements for galactic disk environments where the dynamical space and time scales are shorter (e.g., Jeans length varies inversely with the square root of density, and the SN shell formation radius has similar dependence). Also, different prescriptions from those we describe for feedback and star formation (as well as other physics) may give different convergence trends that are difficult to predict. The quantitative resolution requirements for convergence must be evaluated for any specific parameter set and adopted physics prescriptions.
The TIGRESS algorithms are currently being applied in a suite of numerical simulations systematically exploring SFRs, ISM properties, and galactic winds in diverse galactic environments. Results of these models and analyses will be presented in companion papers.
We are grateful to the referee for a detailed report, which helped us to improve the manuscript. This work was supported by grant AST-1312006 from the National Science Foundation and grant NNX14AB49G from NASA. Simulations were performed on the computational resources supported by the PICSciE TIGRESS High Performance Computing Center at Princeton University, and by the NASA High-End Computing (HEC) Program through the NASA Advanced Supercomputing (NAS) Division at Ames Research Center.
[^1]: The mean FUV intensity, $J_{\rm FUV}$, should be obtained by full radiation transfer. Although computationally expensive, time-dependent transfer can be incorporated with ray-tracing methods provided that the number of active sources is not too large; implementation of this is underway. For present purposes, we note [@2010ApJ...721..975O] that simple slab geometry of gas with UV optical depth of $\tau_\perp = \kappa\Sigma$ gives $4\pi J_{\rm FUV}=\Sigma_{\rm FUV} (1 - E_2(\tau_\perp/2))/\tau_\perp$, where $E_2$ is the second exponential integral. For $\tau_\perp\sim 0.1-1$, the correction term varies from $\sim 1.7$ to $0.7$. Therefore, $4\pi J_{\rm FUV}\approx \Sigma_{\rm FUV}$ is a valid assumption to zeroth order. In forthcoming work, we will investigate the distribution of FUV radiation for simulation snapshots of gas and star particle source distributions.
[^2]: Note that in this work we neglect Type Ia SNe, whose rates are typically 10% to 20% of the SNe rate from massive stars [e.g., @1994ApJS...92..487T]. However, runaway SNe capture the most important effect of Type Ia SNe, namely a broad spatial distribution of SN events far from young star clusters.
[^3]: The driving and properties of winds and fountains are an important aspect of our simulations (as well as real galaxies), and will be carefully analyzed in a forthcoming companion paper.
[^4]: With our adopted numerical resolution, we cannot fully resolve the Field length for realistic thermal conductivity. However, @2008ApJ...681.1148K showed that numerical diffusion caused by translational motion produces an effective “numerical conductivity,” which is much larger than the physical thermal conductivity. The phase transition layer is thicker and the UNM mass fraction increases as the numerical resolution gets poorer (increasing “numerical conductivity”). As a consequence, the CNM mass fraction decreases at low resolution, while the WNM mass fraction remains the same.
[^5]: @2011PhRvL.107k4504F [@2012ApJ...754...99S] have shown that the saturation level of the turbulent magnetic energy is much lower than the turbulent kinetic energy (less than a percent) for a dynamo driven by compressible turbulence, when the initial mean fields were almost negligible. Here, we instead find that turbulent magnetic energy saturates at a level similar to the turbulent kinetic energy. This may in part owe to our the larger initial mean magnetic fields, and in part to the presence of background sheared rotation. Understanding galactic dynamo behavior for realistic ISM turbulence combined with realistic shear, rotation, and vertical stratification is a very interesting question. However, this will require carefully controlled numerical studies and analyses, which we do not attempt here.
[^6]: It is important to note that, with insufficient resolution, the ISM properties fail to converge in unpredictable ways. When we implemented SN feedback without allowing for overlap of SNRs at the same position and time, the result diverged in the opposite sense from what we describe here: Models [[MHD-[32]{}pc]{}]{} and [[MHD-[64]{}pc]{}]{} had no hot gas within the gas scale height. SN overlapping occurs frequently in low-resolution simulations, resulting in unrealistically highly-correlated SNe and unphysical consequences for the ISM state.
[^7]: Based on simulations including stellar winds and/or ionizing radiation [e.g., @2017MNRAS.466.1903G; @2017MNRAS.466.3293P], some have argued that these feedback processes, rather than just SNe, are necessary to obtain accurate SFRs. However, spatial and temporal correlation of SN clustering are at least as important to the outcome as early feedback, so it is necessary to control for these effects (and confirm that they match observations) before reaching any conclusions. Our high-resolution simulations, which have only SN feedback, achieve a realistic SFR.
| {
"pile_set_name": "ArXiv"
} |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.